Skip to main content

Home/ Tic&Travail/ Group items tagged government

Rss Feed Group items tagged

hubert guillaud

Le gouvernement a un modèle pour les données : ce que j'ai appris de l'Estoni... - 0 views

  •  
    Pete Herlihy, du Cabinet numérique du Cabinet Office britannique, revient d'Estonie. Et il est emballé par le modèle de développement numérique de ce petit pays qui permet d'enregistrer une société en ligne en quelques minutes, d'avoir accès à tout service d'état ou municipal en ligne... Qui permet à chaque citoyen d'accéder à ses enregistrements éducatifs, médicaux, d'emploi... et de les corriger. Pour cela, l'Estonie repose sur un registre national (la base de donnée de la population) qui fournit un identifiant unique à chacun et les cartes d'identités de chacun servent d'identifiant pour la plupart des transactions. Mais toutes les informations de chacun ne sont pas conservé à un endroit unique, bien au contraire. Un x-Road, un réseau de partage de données sécurisé, permet aux organismes d'Etat d'échanger leurs données voir à des services privés de les utiliser. Les citoyens peuvent avoir accès facilement à leurs données et peuvent s'en servir pour des actes publics. Certaines banques de données sont librement accessibles comme celle des propriétaires fonciers. Le système fonctionne enfin sur un registre ouvert qui montre qui a accès à quoi et permet à chacun de savoir qui a eut accès à ses données d'une manière très claire. En tout cas, visiblement le cas a été suffisamment inspirant pour que l'un des responsables du numérique britannique se projette dans l'adaptation du mode de fonctionnement estonien au contexte britannique. Voir également l'article de RSLN Mag : http://www.rslnmag.fr/post/2013/11/04/LEstonie-modele-du-171;-gouvernement-de-donnees-187;.aspx
anonymous

Gartner Says That by 2017, 25 Percent of Enterprises Will Have an Enterprise App Store - 0 views

  •  
    "Gartner Says That by 2017, 25 Percent of Enterprises Will Have an Enterprise App Store Growing Number of Enterprise Mobile Devices and Enterprise Adoption of MDM Will Drive Demand and Adoption of Enterprise App Stores Analysts Examine the State of the Industry at Gartner Application Architecture, Development By 2017, 25 percent of enterprises will have an enterprise app store for managing corporate-sanctioned apps on PCs and mobile devices, according to Gartner, Inc. Enterprise app stores promise greater control over the apps used by employees, greater control over software expenditures and greater negotiating leverage with app vendors, but this greater control is only possible if the enterprise app store is widely adopted.  "Apps downloaded from public app stores for mobile devices disrupt IT security, application and procurement strategies," said Ian Finley, research vice president at Gartner. "Bring your own application (BYOA) has become as important as bring your own device (BYOD) in the development of a comprehensive mobile strategy, and the trend toward BYOA has begun to affect desktop and Web applications as well. Enterprise app stores promise at least a partial solution but only if IT security, application, procurement and sourcing professionals can work together to successfully apply the app store concept to their enterprises. When successful, they can increase the value delivered by the application portfolio and reduce the associated risks, license fees and administration expenses."  Gartner has identified three key enterprise app store trends and recommendations of how organizations can benefit from them:  The increasing number of enterprise mobile devices and the adoption of mobile device management (MDM) by enterprises will drive demand and adoption of enterprise app stores. Enterprises already have numerous choices for downloading software onto PCs, but most of them don't include support for smartphones and tablets. Enterprises are beginning to f
Aurialie Jublin

Technology and jobs: Coming to an office near you | The Economist - 0 views

  • Even if new jobs and wonderful products emerge, in the short term income gaps will widen, causing huge social dislocation and perhaps even changing politics. Technology’s impact will feel like a tornado, hitting the rich world first, but eventually sweeping through poorer countries too. No government is prepared for it.
  • Worse, it seems likely that this wave of technological disruption to the job market has only just started. From driverless cars to clever household gadgets (see article), innovations that already exist could destroy swathes of jobs that have hitherto been untouched. The public sector is one obvious target: it has proved singularly resistant to tech-driven reinvention. But the step change in what computers can do will have a powerful effect on middle-class jobs in the private sector too.
  • One recent study by academics at Oxford University suggests that 47% of today’s jobs could be automated in the next two decades.
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • At the same time, the digital revolution is transforming the process of innovation itself, as our special report explains. Thanks to off-the-shelf code from the internet and platforms that host services (such as Amazon’s cloud computing), provide distribution (Apple’s app store) and offer marketing (Facebook), the number of digital startups has exploded. J
  • f this analysis is halfway correct, the social effects will be huge. Many of the jobs most at risk are lower down the ladder (logistics, haulage), whereas the skills that are least vulnerable to automation (creativity, managerial expertise) tend to be higher up, so median wages are likely to remain stagnant for some time and income gaps are likely to widen.
  • The main way in which governments can help their people through this dislocation is through education systems. One of the reasons for the improvement in workers’ fortunes in the latter part of the Industrial Revolution was because schools were built to educate them—a dramatic change at the time. Now those schools themselves need to be changed, to foster the creativity that humans will need to set them apart from computers. There should be less rote-learning and more critical thinking. Technology itself will help, whether through MOOCs (massive open online courses) or even video games that simulate the skills needed for work.
  •  
    "INNOVATION, the elixir of progress, has always cost people their jobs. In the Industrial Revolution artisan weavers were swept aside by the mechanical loom. Over the past 30 years the digital revolution has displaced many of the mid-skill jobs that underpinned 20th-century middle-class life. Typists, ticket agents, bank tellers and many production-line jobs have been dispensed with, just as the weavers were."
Aurialie Jublin

Philadelphia Opens Innovation Lab for City Employees - 2 views

  •  
    "The learning space represents an ongoing strategy by Mayor Michael Nutter to institutionalize a new way of problem solving within city government."
Aurialie Jublin

After Your Job Is Gone | TechCrunch - 1 views

  • If this scenario plays out, the world will divide into a dwindling minority of the very rich — tech workers, finance barons, and those who inherited their wealth, mostly — living in a handful of idyllic cities dripping with wealth, and/or their summer homes on nearby beaches, lakes, and mountains … and the majority who barely get by, doing occasional contract work or odd jobs for a little extra money, too poor to even visit the places where the rich live, work, and play. Aside from those few with government jobs, there’ll be hardly any middle class at all between those two groups.
  •  
    Article complet sur la disparition des emplois, sur la question "la technologie détruit-elle plus d'emploi qu'elle en créé?" et sur la mise en place d'un revenu minimum
Aurialie Jublin

Lessons from converting to no-management company-- in just two days - 1 views

  • According to Aaron Dignan, the CEO of the management consultancy Undercurrent in New York, holacracy's minimization of hierarchies enables companies to react faster in the marketplace. His own company converted to holacracy six months ago, and it now works with companies such as GE and American Express. "It's freed us up to be faster and be more adaptive in the long run," he says.
  • Contrary to popular belief, Holacracy does not eliminate hierarchies altogether. Each circle has a designated leader, who has the authority to appoint others into roles within the circle, but changes to the circle's governing policies must be agreed upon by all of its members. Employees may belong to several circles, but no one--not even Dignan--belongs to them all.
  • Undercurrent's new structure has changed how employees' overall responsibilities are assigned. By defining each role in the company independent of job title, it is easier to bundle roles more logically and ensure that employees aren't juggling an unmanageable number of responsibilities. Most employees at Undercurrent, Dignan says, have five to seven discrete roles in their positions.
  •  
    "Six months ago, a New York-based consulting company named Undercurrent took a dose of its own medicine by becoming a holacracy: the management structure used by GitHub and Zappos. Here's how they did it."
Aurialie Jublin

Uber's Augmented Workers - Uber Screeds - Medium - 0 views

  • Uber has long claimed it’s a technology company, not a transportation company. Uber’s drivers are promoted as entrepreneurs and classified as independent contractors. The company claims to provide only a platform/app that enables drivers to be connected with passengers; as an intermediary, the company relies on the politics of platforms to elude responsibility as a traditional employer, as well as regulatory regimes designed to govern traditional taxi businesses.
  • Drivers must submit to a system that molds their interactions, controls their behavior, sets and changes rates unilaterally, and is generally structured to minimize the power of driver (“partner”) voices. Drivers make inquiries to outsourced community support representatives that work on Uber’s behalf, but their responses are based on templates or FAQs.
  • Uber uses surge pricing to lure drivers to work at a particular place at a particular time, without guaranteeing the validity of the surge incentive if they do follow it. Surge is produced through an algorithmic assessment of supply and demand and is subject to constant dynamism. The rate that drivers are paid is based on the passenger’s location, not their own. Even when they travel to an active surge zone, they risk receiving passengers at lower or higher surge than is initially advertised, or getting fares from outside the surge zone. Drivers will be locked out of the system for varying periods of time, like 10 minutes, 30 minutes, etc. for declining too many rides. They also get warnings for “manipulating” surge.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • Uber drivers are “free” to login or log-out to work at will, but their ability to make choices that benefit their own interests, such as accepting higher-fare passengers, is severely limited.
  • To a significant degree, Uber has successfully automated many of the processes involved in managing a large workforce, comprised of at at least 400 000 active drivers in the U.S. alone, according to Uber’s last public estimate. However, automation is not to be confused with independence. Uber has built a system that leverages significant control over how workers do their jobs, even as that control is structured to be indirect and semi-automated, such as through nudges, algorithmic labor logistics, the rating system, etc.
  •  
    "Summary Uber has done a lot of things to language to communicate a strong message of distance between itself and its relationship to Uber drivers. Uber insists drivers should be classified as independent contractors, labelled driver-partners, and promoted as entrepreneurs, although the company faces legal challenges over issues of worker misclassification. Beyond its attempts to label work as a type of "sharing" in the so-called "sharing economy," Uber's protracted efforts to celebrate the independence and freedom of drivers have evolved into a sophisticated policy push to design a new classification of worker that would accommodate Uber's business model. The emergent classification, "independent worker," does not acknowledge the significant control Uber leverages over how drivers do their job."
Aurialie Jublin

Worker Surveillance and Class Power - « Law and Political Economy - 0 views

  • As a first example, consider how workplace monitoring generates data that companies can use to automate the very tasks workers are being paid to perform. When Uber drivers carry passengers from one location to another, or simply cruise around town waiting for fares, Uber gathers extensive data on routes, driving speed, and driver behavior. That data may prove useful in developing the many algorithms required for autonomous vehicles—for example by illuminating how a reasonable driver would respond to particular traffic or road conditions.
  • with GPS data from millions of trips across town, Uber may be able to predict the best path from point A to point B fairly well, accounting not just for map distance, but also for current traffic, weather, the time of day, etc. In other words, its algorithms can replicate drivers’ subtle, local knowledge. If that knowledge was once relatively rare, then Uber’s algorithms may enable it to push down wages and erode working conditions.
  • By managing drivers’ expectations, the company may be able to maintain a high supply of drivers on the road waiting for fares. The net effect may be to lower wages, since the company only pays drivers when they are ferrying passengers.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • Finally, new monitoring technologies can help firms to shunt workers outside of their legal boundaries through independent contracting, subcontracting, and franchising. Various economic theories suggest that firms tend to bring workers in-house as employees rather than contracting for their services—and therefore tend to accept the legal obligations and financial costs that go along with using employees rather than contractors—when they lack reliable information about workers’ proclivities, or where their work performance is difficult to monitor.
  • This suggests, in my mind, a strategy of worker empowerment and deliberative governance rather than command-and-control regulation. At the firm or workplace level, new forms of unionization and collective bargaining could address the everyday invasions of privacy or erosions of autonomy that arise through technological monitoring. Workers might block new monitoring tools that they feel are unduly intrusive. Or they might accept more extensive monitoring in exchange for greater pay or more reasonable hours.
  •  
    "Companies around the world are dreaming up a new generation of technologies designed to monitor their workers-from Amazon's new employee wristbands, to Uber's recording whether its drivers are holding their phones rather than mounting them, to "Worksmart," a new productivity tool that takes photos of workers every ten minutes via their webcams. Technologies like these can erode workplace privacy and encourage discrimination. Without disregarding the importance of those effects, I want to focus in this post on how employers can use new monitoring technologies to drive down wages or otherwise disempower workers as a class. I'll use examples from Uber, not because Uber is exceptional in this regard - it most certainly is not - but rather because it is exemplary."
Aurialie Jublin

Exploring portable ratings for gig workers - Doteveryone - Medium - 0 views

  • Unlike the traditional economy, the gig economy doesn’t rely on CVs or letters of recommendation. You build your reputation on one platform at a time — and your reputation is often the route to higher earnings (A service user is more likely to choose someone with 100 five-star ratings than just one or two). Platforms don’t want people to leave, so they don’t let workers have ownership over their own ratings. Leaving a service means starting over.
  • More recently, we’ve been exploring the “how” of ratings portability: what technology, data, user experience and investment might be needed to make this real.Our design team, along with our policy intern and developer James Darling, have been conducting user research and prototyping possible technical solutions for ratings portability. Here’s where we’ve got to so far.
  • “Cab” drivers didn’t have visible habits around their ratings, weren’t checking them frequently and when we spoke about them, they told us that this wasn’t something they’d considered before or something they were particularly concerned about. They were confident in their skills and ability to find work outside of their platforms, and viewed ratings more as performance indicators for their platform owners — the main fear being a drop below 3.5 stars, where they might be dropped from the platform completely.
  • ...11 more annotations...
  • This “performance indicator over ratings” feeling was even stronger with food delivery workers. They expressed even less concern about the issue, focussing more on their delivery metrics such as attendance and cancellations. The rider app screens we were shown support this.
  • This makes sense for both food delivery and transit: the customer has little to no ability to use workers’ reputation data to inform their purchase decision. (When we press a button to order a cab or for food to be delivered, speed is the primary factor and platforms emphasise that in their design.)
  • It was a radically different story for tradespeople. Their reputation data feels important to them, and they prefer to keep control over it. They preferred word of mouth reputation and recommendations, as there was no middleman who could take that away from them. Online platforms were seen as something to graduate away from once you had a sufficient “real world” presence.
  • Alongside our user research, James Darling looked at the technical possibilities, drawing on the Resolution Trust’s initial work and the research that our policy intern did. They came up with five possible solutions and gave them names and some logos. They are in increasing order of complexity.
  • Personal referenceThis is the status quo: when approaching a new employer, workers create their own CVs, loosely standardised by convention.
  • Publicly hosted reputationsWhat feels like a technical quick win is to ensure that a platform hosts a publicly accessible web archive of all worker reputation data, including for profiles which have been disabled. This would allow workers to provide a URL to anyone they wish to provide their reputation data. How would this be encouraged/enforced?
  • Profile verificationHow does a worker prove that they are the owner of a publicly hosted reputation profile? There are a few technical solutions that could be explored here, like a public/private key verification or explorations around OAuth. Is it possible to create something that is secure, but also usable?
  • Decentralised open data standardA data standard for reputation data could be created, allowing automated transfer and use of reputation data by competing platforms or external services. Creating the standard would be the trickiest part here: is it possible to translate between both technical differences of different platforms (eg 5 stars versus 80%), but also the values inherent in them.
  • Centralised data holderPerhaps one way to help standardise and enforce this easy transfer of reputation data is to create some sort of legal entity responsible for holding and transferring this reputation data. A lot of discussion would have to be had about the legal framework for this: is it a government department, a charity, a de facto monopoly?
  • We also thought about ways to verify identity (by including an RSA public key), what a best practice data standard might look like (here’s an example in JSON), and what the import process might look like (via a mock competitor site). The code for all this is on Github, and everything above is available in a slide deck here.
  • I worry that the concept of “owning” people’s ratings reflects some deeper, more systemic issues around who “owns” things more generally in society. In the coming months, we’d like to keep working with like minded organisations to explore that idea more, as well as how the cumulative effects of those systems affect us all.
Aurialie Jublin

Automation may require as many as 375 million people to find new jobs by 2030 - Quartz - 0 views

  • y 2030, up to 30% of the hours worked globally could be automated, according to a new report by the McKinsey Global Institute. Analysts in the consultancy’s research arm estimate that between 400 million and 800 million people could find themselves displaced by automation and in need of new jobs, depending on how quickly new technologies are adopted. Of this group, as many as 375 million people—about 14% of the global workforce—may need to completely switch occupational categories and learn a new set of skills to find work.
  • Notably, McKinsey argues that demand for work will increase as automation grows. Technology will drive productivity growth, which will in turn lead to rising incomes and consumption, especially in developing countries. Meanwhile, there will be more jobs in health care to meet the demands of aging societies and more investment in infrastructure and energy.
  • For these benefits to be realised, everyone needs to gain new skills, with governments and private companies taking on the unprecedented task of retraining millions of people in the middle of their careers. “Even if there is enough work to ensure full employment by 2030, major transitions lie ahead that could match or even exceed the scale of historical shifts out of agriculture and manufacturing,” the report says.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • There will be other challenges too. In advanced economies, there is a risk that automation will worsen the trend of income polarization, with demand for high-wage jobs increasing, and demand for medium-wage jobs falling. Also, displaced workers will need to find jobs quickly—preferably within a year—otherwise frictional unemployment (lots of people moving between jobs) could put downward pressure on wages.
  •  
    "Fears that automation and machine learning will cause massive job losses and make people obsolete are starting to wane (well, unless you ask Stephen Hawking). Instead, there's a more optimistic prediction taking hold: that the new technology could actually lead to job gains. But the transition won't be easy."
1 - 11 of 11
Showing 20 items per page