On 14 January 2011 10:53, Tom Steinberg <[email protected]> wrote: >> I can think of three possible routes this could take, which, from a user's >> perspective, are good, neutral and bad respectively. > > I think Mark is close to the truth here. > > The PDC means genuine change for the big trading funds that have the > most valuable data, and which haven't seen any structural change > despite the big Gordon Brown-era releases of postcodes, maps etc under > Tim Berners-Lee et al. > > This change could be good, or bad - the only way I diasagree with Mark > is that I don't think the changes could be neutral. This is because in > my view the current situation is so crappy that 'no change' would > definitely be bad. > > If you're a natural cynic, you'll just say the government has already > decided to flog everything off to the highest bidder. If you adopt > that position, and give up without a fight, the people in Whitehall > and the trading funds who want to do that will almost certainly win. > > However, if you believe me when I say things are finely balanced, that > either side could win, and enough well-organised external pressure > could really make a difference over the next year, then you won't just > bitch, you'll get stuck in.
What kinds data would a cynic say the government is planning to sell, to whom, and where do trading funds come into it? Thanks, Seb _______________________________________________ developers-public mailing list [email protected] https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public Unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/archive%40mail-archive.com
