'In digital, data is the only currency' - discuss.
Last night, I attended a debate at the House of Commons organised by The Debating Group and sponsored by the IAB. The motion was 'In digital, data is the only currency'. For the motion were Matt Brittin of Google UK and Louise Ainsworth of Nielsen, and against were Graham Hales of Interbrand and Mark Cridge of Glue.To a packed audience assembled in Committee Room 10 (normally reserved for the discussion of finance bills which seemed rather appropriate), both sides presented eloquent arguments. These included:
For:
- Data is pure, simple and beautiful. It efficiently connects businesses and people
- data makes businesses smarter, faster and more efficient
- data enables ideas to be tested
- data allows people to be safer, healthier - it even saves lives
- data provides granular insights to enable survival
- data allows us all to build reach, frequency and impact - ensuring increased engagement, and enabling an increased, creative world.
Against:
- Data cannot be the 'only' currency online - if we truly believe this, humanity is reduced to the mere binary
- data is the new glut of 'stuff' for us to deal with - wine lakes and butter mountains of data
- digital is about the human and social connections: it is about what we choose to do with the data that makes it valuable
- ideas change lives, not data
- the true currency is what we do with the data
- if we only value data, we risk knowing the cost of everything but the value of nothing
- human intuition is the most important currency online, data is just the canvas.
And then it was the turn of the floor to propose opinions and questions. There was significant, eloquent resistance against the motion. One orator reminded us of the story of Phineas Gage - a 19th century labourer who suffered an appalling brain injury with a pole skewering through his head. Remarkably he survived, able to compute, understand and communicate with intelligence and lucidity. However, he lost his human values, emotional resonance and ability to make rational decisions. Data enables computers to compute, ensure logical results and access to information - however without the human interpretation, it is meaningless - a currency with no value.
I am glad to report that the argument was not carried by the popular vote (approximately 65% voted against the motion) - the flaw was surely in the wording of the motion.
I believe that the true value of digital networks and tools lies in how we interpret the data and what we do with it. But as Alan Patrick cautioned the audience, if data is even being considered as possibly a global currency, then it is one without regulation, laws or governance. This surely must be an challenge that is tackled before too long.
Labels: Digital, digital networks, google, networks
posted by thebluedoor at
10:54
1 Comments:
Data is already a global currency and has been since the day mankind decided to make a note on cave walls of where the Mammoth herds could be found.
All that has really changed is that we have swapped cave walls and paint with harddrives and keyboards.
But without context Data has no practical use. If you were to harvest a list of names and addresses from a server, without knowing who these people are, the Data by itself is useless. Is it a list of terror suspects or is it a list of people who like milk in their coffee? Even knowing the context, what makes this data useful?
Its the human factor that applies value.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home