Google Unveils New Tool for Public Data

Google launched a new search tool yesterday designed to help Web users find public data that is often buried in hard-to-navigate government Web sites.

The tool, called Google Public Data, is the latest in the company’s efforts to make information from federal, state and local governments accessible to citizens. It’s a goal that many Washington public interest groups and government watchdogs share with President Obama, whose technology advisers are pushing to open up federal data to the public.

The company plans to initially make available U.S. population and unemployment data from the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, respectively. Other data sets, such as emissions statistics from the Environmental Protection Agency, will roll out in the coming months.

Google is one of a number of Internet properties, including Wikipedia and Amazon, that has been trying to make it easier to find government information on the Web.

Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has urged agencies to write their own “wikis,” or self-edited entries, that can make government information and processes more accessible to the public. Amazon created an open data repository so developers and researchers can share data and collaborate on sifting through it. Google’s Washington employees have spent the past two years visiting government agencies to urge them to make their Web sites, records and databases more searchable.

The E-Government Act of 2002 required government agencies to make information more accessible electronically, but users have complained that many agencies do not organize their Web sites so they can be easily indexed by search engines. And some agencies, Google has said, embed codes in their sites that make certain pages invisible to search engines.

“Information from government sources has been one of the thornier areas,” said David Girouard, president of Google Enterprise, which includes the federal team. The new tool “is taking data, reformatting it so it’s immediately consumable . . . so people don’t have to go through rows and rows of data.”

With Google’s new tool, a Web user can search for a specific piece of data — unemployment rates in Maryland, for example — and a box appears at the top of the search results displaying the available relevant public data.

Clay Johnson, director of Sunlight Labs, a project within the Sunlight Foundation that uses technology to improve government transparency, said he’s encouraged by Google’s new tool, although he has not yet used it.

He cautioned, however, that there is no guarantee that government data is free of typographical and other errors.

He added that specific pieces of data could be misleading without a full understanding of how it fits with other information that may not be visible. For example, a Google searcher may not know enough about campaign contribution laws to spot inaccurate data entries or statistics.

Data tools should allow user feedback, Johnson said, to alert agencies to flawed data. Sunlight Labs is urging Federal Chief Information Officer Vivek Kundra to implement a feedback loop on Data.gov, a site he has proposed that would catalog public data.

“There’s a lot to be wary about,” Johnson said. “We don’t live in a world free of typos.”

NEW DELHI: US FBI officials will visit India to share information on two men being held in Chicago for alleged links to last year’s Mumbai attacks, reports said Monday.

India claims David Headley and Tahawwur Hussain Rana, both in US custody, were associated with the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba militant outfit, blamed for the deadly attacks in India’s financial capital, which left 166 people dead.

The Indian Express newspaper quoted Indian National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan as saying US President Barack Obama had taken an interest in the case and “a high-level team will be in Delhi soon with all the data collected and share it with us.” Narayanan said the Federal Bureau of Investigation team could arrive in India within a week.

Headley, a Pakistani-born American, and Rana, a Canadian citizen of Pakistani origin, were arrested in October, accused of plotting attacks in India and Denmark. Indian media, citing officials, recently said Headley intended to strike two elite boarding schools and a military academy in India and that he had befriended prominent people from Bollywood.
The Times of India quoted Indian Home Secretary G.K. Pillai as saying: “We hope to have access once both (Headley and Rana) are indicted,” after investigations into their activities are completed within a month. Indian investigators have already visited the US but were not allowed to interview the suspects.

Project Playlist, Playlist.com user login is not working. Playlist.com is an information location tool similar to Google® and Yahoo!® but devoted entirely to the world of music. Our purpose is to help you find and enjoy music legally throughout the web in the same way that other search engines help you find webpages, images, and other media, but we also add a social /community twist.
We make it easy for you to create playlists, share your playlists with friends, and browse playlists of others. We connect you with the coolest music on the web, and we connect people who are passionate about music. Music is burgeoning on the web. Increasingly, artists, record companies, music bloggers, music websites and music critics are uploading music files to websites that they control for promotional or other legal purposes. Our mission at Project Playlist, Inc. is to organize this rapidly growing abundance of legal music on the web for the benefit of the worldwide music community – artists, songwriters, music distributors, and listeners alike.

Our view is that the more people share their individual passion for music by sharing playlists, the more music will be created, and the more the entire music industry will grow.

Playlist.com allows you to discover all of this free music legally because we respect the rights of copyright holders and we insist that you do as well. We pay royalties to songwriters and music publishers, and we respect the performing artist’s choice. Some performing artists make their music freely available on the web, others allow you to listen to only a few freely available songs through a promotional site, and a few would prefer that none of their music be heard on the web at all. If an artist tells us that our search engine is linking to an illegally posted song, we will immediately take down the link to that music file.

We are in the process of building an index of links to music files posted on webpages that meet reasonable criteria as having the legal right to host music files for streaming to end users. Although we cannot control the music files posted on webpages by others, we can and do prohibit uploading or downloading of songs to or from our site. In other words we do not host music files, nor do we make them available. We only enable users to find these files and listen to them. We also require as a condition of the Terms of Use of our site that you not add to our index any links to webpages that you know to host illegally posted music files.

Once you find music tracks that you like through our music search engine (or on another user’s playlist), you can add them to your personal playlist and then share your playlist with others. You can post your playlist on your social networking webpage or any other website, subject to the terms of use of those sites, or you can email your playlist to friends! We are constantly adding features to help you find, play and share the music you love. If you discover a legally posted music file not in our index, you can add the link to that file to our index and to your playlist. We ask that you add links only to songs that you reasonably believe are legally posted on a legitimate promotional site such as an artist website or a music blog.
Music Playlists

Playlists on playlist.com are nothing more than collections of hyperlinks pointing to music files located on websites throughout the Internet. Our music player allows you to stream the data in those music files you have found so that you can listen to the music contained in those files. When you press the “play button” associated with a hyperlink displayed on playlist.com, the remote server hosting the song begins to stream the data allowing you to hear the song. Because you have initiated the linking process from playlist.com, the song appears to play through our site. This procedure of “in-line linking” enables you to build your playlist easily by using the search and linking tools on playlist.com.

You can think of our technology as a process of bookmarking “favorites” just as you bookmark sites with any web browser. Our technology makes it easy for you to find and bookmark your favorite music files anywhere on the Internet, and then to build a series of bookmarks – your playlist. We have then made it easy for you to post and share this series of bookmarks, your playlist, which then makes its easy for your friends to find and hear your favorite music. Streaming the bookmarked files to other sites can be inefficient for you and demanding on the resources of the other site’s owner and operator. In some cases, we cache songs to make streaming the music file more efficient for you and the site actually hosting the music file.
Our Player

Our player is akin to an Internet web browser that renders data stored on a remote server. Using the playlist.com music player, which you can embed in any web page, you can listen to your playlist and thus the remotely located media files wherever and whenever you choose. For example, you can embed our player on your social networking page, and then allow your friends to listen to your playlist. We subscribe to the philosophy of an open system design. Where possible, our technology is compatible with other music players as well.
Our Search Engine

Our search engine like all search engines depends upon a searchable index of public locations on the World Wide Web. We are in the process of building an index of links to music files hosted on websites throughout the Internet for promotional and other legal purposes. We are building that index by “spidering” websites (or where applicable portions of websites) that meet reasonable criteria for having the legal right to post the music files appearing on their webpages. Typical sites that we spider include artist websites and webpages, record label websites, promotional music websites, music blogger websites and music critic websites. In addition, we allow our users to submit URLs to music files they find while browsing the Internet. We expect and ask our users to agree through our Terms of Use Agreement, to add only those hyperlinks to music files that they reasonably believe are hosted legally for promotional or other legal purposes. If you choose to submit URLs to the playlist.com search index, it is important that you first read our Terms of Use and observe your agreement. Failure to do so can result in termination of your membership.

NEW DELHI: The 1998 Pokhran II nuclear tests might have been far from the success they have been claimed to be. The yield of the thermonuclear explosions was actually much below expectations and the tests were perhaps more a fizzle rather than a big bang.

The controversy over the yield of the tests, previously questioned by foreign agencies, has been given a fresh lease of life with K Santhanam, senior scientist and DRDO representative at Pokhran II, admitting for the first time that the only thermonuclear device tested was a “fizzle”. In nuclear parlance, a test is described as a fizzle when it fails to meet the desired yield.

Santhanam, who was director for 1998 test site preparations, told TOI on Monday that the yield for the thermonuclear test, or hydrogen bomb in popular usage, was much lower than what was claimed. Santhanam, who was DRDO’s chief advisor, could well have opened up the debate on whether or not India should sign CTBT as claims that India has all the data required and can manage with simulations is bound to be called into question.

“Based upon the seismic measurements and expert opinion from world over, it is clear that the yield in the thermonuclear device test was much lower than what was claimed. I think it is well documented and that is why I assert that India should not rush into signing the CTBT,” Santhanam told TOI on Wednesday.

He emphasised the need for India to conduct more tests to improve its nuclear weapon programme.

The test was said to have yielded 45 kilotons (KT) but was challenged by western experts who said it was not more than 20 KT.

The exact yield of the thermonuclear explosion is important as during the heated debate on the India- US nuclear deal, it was strenuously argued by the government’s top scientists that no more tests were required for the weapons programme. It was said the disincentives the nuclear deal imposed on testing would not really matter as further tests were not required.

According to security expert Bharat Karnad, Santhanam’s admission is remarkable because this is the first time a nuclear scientist and one closely associated with the 1998 tests has disavowed the government line. “He is not just saying that India should not sign the CTBT, which I believe is completely against India’s interests, but also that the 1998 thermonuclear device test was inadequate.

His saying this means that the government has to do something. Either you don’t have a thermonuclear deterrent or prove that you have it, if you claim to have it, said Karnad.

Sources said that Santhanam had admitted that the test was a fizzle during a discussion on CTBT organised by IDSA. Karnad also participated in the seminar. He told TOI that no country has succeeded in achieving targets with only its first test of a thermonuclear device.

“Two things are clear; that India should not sign CTBT and that it needs more thermonuclear device tests,” said Santhanam.

The yield of the thermonuclear device test in 1998 has led to much debate and while western experts have stated that it was not as claimed, BARC has maintained that it stands by its assessment. Indian scientists had claimed after the test that the thermonuclear device gave a total yield of 45 KT, 15 KT from the fission trigger and 30 KT from the fusion process and that the theoretical yield of the device (200 KT) was reduced to 45 KT in order to minimise seismic damage to villages near the test range.

British experts, however, later challenged the claims saying that the actual combined yield for the fission device and thermonuclear bomb was not more than 20 KT.

Key Pokharan scientist R Chidambaram had described these reports as incorrect. He has also argued that computer simulations would be enough in future design.