I was the co-founder/CTO of ElectNext, and I think we had a great idea with good execution, but we found it extremely hard to monetize. Cyclical elections and lack of public interest are big challenges. I'd happily do more volunteer side projects to improve American government, but I'd be reluctant to try building another business around it.<p>I suspect a successful Open Gov business is mostly about finding a <i>market</i>. The people spending money on elections are mostly campaigns, and open government is not necessarily in their interests. Being in this space seems like studying environmental science: sure you hope to protect the wilderness, but most potential employers want your help getting around the laws. (Pardon my cynicism.) I think Votizen is essentially lead gen for campaigns, and we felt a lot of pressure to go that way. Perhaps one market would be helping big-dollar contributors find the best people to fund?<p>Even if you want to sell to campaigns, you should be aware that most election IT is partisan. Democrats have their solutions and Republicans have theirs. There is too much distrust for a vendor to service both sides.<p>On another note, one of the great things about open government work is that it makes sense for all kinds of political viewpoints. My co-founder worked on the Hillary campaign, while I'm pretty libertarian. Most of the people I met doing Open Government work were very liberal, but in my opinion anything that increases government transparency and accountability is good for reining in state power.<p>EDIT: added 2 paragraphs.
Off-topic: The body text is almost unreadable in Chrome/Windows, with gaps in many of the characters. Note to self: avoid font family Calluna.<p>The GPS example he references is an interesting exception to the norm of public services in the US. GPS infrastructure is made freely available for personal and commercial use at public expense, ostensibly due to its value to the US military. Contrarily, Internet and energy infrastructure is privatized, along with most other basic services we depend on. The correlation between the government putting a bunch of position and time broadcasting satellites into orbit at public expense and maintaining open source repositories as a matter of course seems weak, however. GPS infrastructure has an obvious practical value to the public and few other parties could have undertaken the project; maintaining one more OSS Python/Django inter-office communication tool project at public expense might not make quite as much sense.
Hey HN, Tim O'Reilly came and talked to our tech team at CFPB last Thursday. He had some really interesting points on open government so I wanted to spread them more broadly.
I'd love to start open-sourcing my idea but I got 1 offer to help compared to the hundreds of people I've show it off to:<p>Here's my video from Oct. <a href="http://youtu.be/3m194rui52Q" rel="nofollow">http://youtu.be/3m194rui52Q</a><p>Just finished a small prototype of some features but it's only a fraction of that video
I find that ressources on open source governance is pretty scarce on the Internet and it surprises me that there is no proper "initiative" or "think tank" to develop this idea.