ISSUE #02 BIG DATA

TEACHERS NOTES
01 Feature
02 One Degree
03 Spectrum
04 Local Global

01
FEATURE

INTENT
OF
SECTION

Context
This section highlights the trigger (an actual day or event) that started the new momentum or
collective realisation of the change we see today in society. It also examines the extent of this
change.
Main Article
Here we examine the change and its impact on the community and nation whether it is a
current or impending event, and if it is associated with a specific aspect of the Modern World.
Conclusion
This section points the way forward and/or how we can scale the current momentum.
Case Study
This section highlights a specific player (individual, corporation or government) that embodies
the points of argument in the Main Article.

CONTEXT

Obamas Big Data Research and Development Initiative launched in 2012 made the world notice
the increasing importance of Big Data in revitalising the public sector.
Together with the private sector that has been the trailblazer in big data technology but is
failing to harness the full potential that it offers the initiatives financial commitment to
drive advances in healthcare, education, security and the sciences heralds a big push towards
expanding previous boundaries of existing technologies and building up the capacities of data
specialists.

MAIN
ARGUMENT

We believe that Big Data will transform our cities in the following ways:
1.

2.

3.

CASE
STUDY

It will build social interactions based on trust.

Governments and businesses are releasing their data sets to the public. This
transparency builds trust and accountability. In turn, the availability of open data allows
citizens to contribute to the resolution of problems, often through the negotiations of
social currency.

Examples to note: the city of Chicago; businesses such as ZimRide, AirBnB, and
TaskRabbit that relies on mutual trust and reciprocity of users.

It will increase our quality of life.

Big Data supports the decision making process of citizens by helping them make
informed choices and offering guidance on how to weigh possible consequences and
risks.

For Rich countries increase health, security and safety outcomes; conveniences;
better matches between supply and demands.

For Poor countries increase efficiencies in allocating scarce resources, for eg. land
use and healthcare.

However, getting positive results/benefits of the translation of big data analyses into laws/
policies are dependent on intentionality.

All data is neutral; who uses it and for what purpose determines if outcomes are
benevolent or sinister.

Learning curve is steep for ordinary citizens, so more intentionality and security checks
must be tied in to its use to safeguard against misuse and abuses.

The Internet of Things marks the dawn of a new age where our everyday technologies collect data
and communicate with one another without human oversight, making our lives easier.
However there is also the ever-present threat that this interconnectivity will be exploited by
criminal elements. We need greater vigilance by authorities and corporations, and institute
collective standards of responsibility.

CONCLUSION

In our modern world context, rapid urbanisation of the developing world and calamities brought
about by climate change have created an urgent need for cities to be able to respond to these
externalities appropriately. The key factor that can make this happen is people skills and insights
that will determine fair and equitable outcomes for all.

FURTHER
QUESTIONS

Consider how the world was like before the advent of Big Data, or what the status quo was.
Is it a predictable development for us to be at this stage today, or is this an unexpected turn?

RESOURCES

Understanding Big Data

Introductory video on Big Data by NPR:

http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/01/securing-the-internet-of-things/

BBC Horizon Documentary (58 minutes) covers the current use of big data in
society today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsVy28pDsYo

Understanding the Internet of Things (IoT)

Infographic reveals the number of devices connected to the Internet has exceeded the
number of people on Earth:
http://blogs.cisco.com/diversity/the-internet-of-things-infographic/

McKinsey report on how to leverage on the opportunities that IoT offers:

https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/The_Internet_of_Things_2538

Wired article on massive security issues related to the IoT:

http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/01/securing-the-internet-of-things/

02
ONE

INTENT
OF
SECTION

This section aims to pinpoint the agent that propels the trend or momentum forward. It shows
the relationship between players, and which player is exerting power or control over another. We
also evaluate how one party influences the other, and whether the receiver in this relationship is
accepting or rejecting the change in power dynamics.
Our icons help readers identify the 2 players, as well as a specific aspect of the Modern World
context.

DEGREE
PLAYERS
INVOLVED/
DIRECTION
OF CONTROL

We have identified that Corporations are exerting control over Consumers (the individuals) in a
Big Data era.

HOW IS
THIS POWER
DYNAMICS
POSSIBLE

1.

Corporations influence your consumption patterns by comparing and analysing your

personal information, and geotagging.

2.

They determine your vocations with the aid of behavioural profiling programmes.

3.

They shape your perceptions of the world, because consumers are unaware of the filter
bubbles they are in and the extent to which their online actions are monitored and regulated.

FURTHER
QUESTIONS

Knowing that these are the ways by which corporations control their relationship with consumers,
how can consumers wrestle autonomy back for themselves? Is this even possible?

03
SPECTRUM

INTENT
OF
SECTION

This section reveals how context drives perspectives. Three different profiles ranging from
embracing the Big Idea to rejecting it are used to show how the same example can be used to
support different perspectives. We also explore the reasons why the individual adopts a certain
position.

ARGUMENT

Sharing personal data with corporations is the way forward.

EXAMPLES
USED

1.

Credit card company lowers the credit score of clients who like rap music.

2.

Corporate researchers refuse to release source data.

3.

Personal data can be sold for $0.95.

The examples we have chosen are neutral enough such that each individual may use it as a point
of support or to disprove the argument.

PROFILES
USED

1.

[Embrace] The C-Suite Executive: Overconfident in the power of free markets to sort
things out.

2.

[Accept] The Undergraduate: Underestimates the pervasiveness of data mining companies.

3.

[Reject] The Coder: Paranoid over the misuse of personal data.

Note that more than just their professions, their individual backgrounds, age, education and
income level, political ideology or affiliations, etc. also determine where they stand on the
spectrum.

APPLICATIONS

Example 2: Corporate researchers refuse to release source data.

The Executive believes it is unfair that corporations are being held to double standards: praised
when using consumer data for R&D, yet vilified when they wish to protect consumer privacy.
The Coder however argues that there are proper procedures to follow to preserve integrity of
research findings, one of which is making your sources available for 2nd- or 3rd-party verification
purposes.
Example 3: Personal data can be sold for $0.95.
The Coder is indignant that discriminatory practices abound because consumers nowadays are
ignorant or too laissez-faire about how often or to whom they reveal their personal details.
The Undergraduate feels that this is par for the course when we live a majority of our lives online,
and trusts that users are tech-savvy enough to tweak privacy controls to protect their digital
selves.

FURTHER
QUESTIONS

Explore the beliefs of each profile. Notice how welcoming or distrustful each individual is based
on their age, gender, education/income level, country of origin, etc.
Consider where a young Singaporean would be on the spectrum of perspectives, and what factors
contribute to this stand.

04
LOCAL
GLOBAL

INTENT
OF
SECTION

This section examines how Singapore compares against other countries based on a set of criteria, and how country characteristics/context contributes to the current ranking.

ARGUMENT

Just as corporations are transforming their business models to stay relevant, so too must
Singapore leverage on Big Data to maintain our competitive edge.

CRITERIA
USED AND
COMPETITOR
COUNTRY

1.

Privacy protection
Germany scores twice as much as Singapore when it comes to privacy rights. Our small
size and status as an important trading hub in Asia means putting ahead national security
over privacy. Nonetheless, we acknowledge that we also need to demand more rigorous
standards of privacy protection from the government, especially if we see it increasingly as
an economic concern.

2.

Availability of data
The U.K. ranks higher than Singapore both in terms of availability of data and whether the
data we have is put to good use. This is due to the long history of a participatory civil society
in the U.K., as opposed to the passive citizenry used to the efficiency of the government
in addressing daily issues in Singapore. There are signs however that Singaporeans are
beginning to take a more active interest in facilitating ground-up solutions to our urban
problems.

3.

Infrastructure
Japan is the current leader in providing not only the fundamentals of infrastructure to
speed up the growth of the Big Data industry, but also leads in areas of legislation and
awareness. Japans culture of technological investment indicates a readiness to enforce
legislative support, aided by its big corporations that see the economic returns of investing
in cloud computing. Singapore is still too used to introducing downstream solutions instead
of upstream or holistic approaches to business.

FURTHER
QUESTIONS

Review Singapores country characteristics and consider whether they are assets or limitations
according to this theme.
Is Singapore moving in the right direction, or should we be the exception in this case?