zlacker

[return to "Government Digital Service Design Principles"]
1. Nursie+je[view] [source] 2013-06-20 14:03:39
>>obilgi+(OP)
If anyone from gov.uk is reading this, do you fancy answering the question I posed when the site was launched but never received an adequate answer to?

Why does gov.uk, a site all about allowing the British public to interact with the British government, use google analytics?

You are shipping all the data about all my interactions with my government off to a third party in another country. Another country that we know has not got the same legal data protection requirements, and one which has now been exposed as having massive internal spying problems.

And no, telling me "google aren't allowed to use the data" and then opening an outsourced helpdesk ticket with another US based company does not cut it.

◧◩
2. _mulde+sh[view] [source] 2013-06-20 14:36:21
>>Nursie+je
Unfortunately it's attitudes like this that usually end up making Government projects so eye-wateringly expensive.

Assuming they listen to your suggestion and act on it as you suggest, it seems the only option open to them is to design their own in-house (In UK for that matter) version of Google Analytics to do their own analysis. Regardless of the cost and time this would add to the project, it's unlikely that it would be anywhere as good as Google's offering.

The other, more likely, option would be to decide it's too expensive to implement a different, more complicated, solution; so they don't bother. They don't get the feedback and analysis on how to improve their services and the customer experience declines until you're back where you started with a poorly designed product offering hard-to-find information and people are posting angry comments on HackerNews about how bad gov.uk is and how they would never run a start-up like that... I'm almost certain someone would say "Why don't they use google analytics to improve things, like everyone else".

Instead, we need to be applauding a massive operation like Gov.uk for taking a dose of reality and thinking, "we're not doing anything amazingly special here, we're providing people with a quick way to check their council tax, or bin collection dates, or maybe pay their car tax. let's just get the job done as best we can."

◧◩◪
3. lifeis+Vi[view] [source] 2013-06-20 14:50:59
>>_mulde+sh
I cannot upvote you as much as I want.

Yes, yes, yes. The only time we should consider these attitudes is when real keep it from everyone security matters (you know MI5 style security, not pentest security)

And frankly my view on that is now: want to keep a secret? Keep it away from computers.

◧◩◪◨
4. Nursie+hr[view] [source] 2013-06-20 16:12:25
>>lifeis+Vi
What if I don't want everyone in the world to know everything about what I do with a computer?

They're more and more part of everyone's life and not everyone is of the mindset that it doesn't matter if corporations and governments get to look at every little detail of their online interaction. Car tax, criminal law, the weekly shop at tesco.com ... all going to the profilers.

I know this is happening. I know how to stop some of it. But everyone else?

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. lifeis+621[view] [source] 2013-06-20 21:49:50
>>Nursie+hr
yes, I know - but there is a difference between privacy and secrecy.

Privacy is the things anyone can work out by looking at me, secrecy is the stuff I actively hide.

The cost of breaching privacy on mass scale has dropped simply because now everyone publishes everything about themselves.

Breaching secrecy is still a manual intensive effort as it eve has been.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. Nursie+i51[view] [source] 2013-06-20 22:35:27
>>lifeis+621
People are not publishing this data willingly or knowingly.

That's your disconnect with reality.

[go to top]