Obama Administration Places $200 Million Bet On Big Data 72
wiredmikey writes "As the Federal Government aims to make use of the massive volume of digital data being generated on a daily basis, the Obama Administration today announced a 'Big Data Research and Development Initiative' backed by more than $200 million in commitments to start. Through the new Big Data initiative and associated monetary investments, the Obama Administration promises to greatly improve the tools and techniques needed to access, organize, and glean discoveries from huge volumes of digital data. Interestingly, as part of a number of government announcements on big data today, The National Institutes of Health announced that the world's largest set of data on human genetic variation – produced by the international 1000 Genomes Project (At 200 terabytes so far) is now freely available on the Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud. Additionally, the Department of Defense (DoD) said it would invest approximately $250 million annually across the Military Departments in a series of programs. 'We also want to challenge industry, research universities, and non-profits to join with the Administration to make the most of the opportunities created by Big Data,' Tom Kalil, Deputy Director for Policy at OSTP noted in a blog post. 'Clearly, the government can't do this on its own. We need what the President calls an 'all hands on deck' effort.'"
Great QOTD (Score:5, Insightful)
All the taxes paid over a lifetime by the average American are spent by the government in less than a second. -- Jim Fiebig
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I understand your joke but in reality there are about 40-50% that pay no federal income tax at all and a decent percentage of that group get back more than they paid during the year (they MAKE money when they file).
On a side note.. I really don't think most people understand the tax refund concept and tax withholdings from your paycheck. They don't realize that they are getting money back that they gave to the government already with the exception of those I mentioned above that get even more back then th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't possible to buy anything without paying taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
It's called Amazon. It was even in TFS!! ;)
Re: (Score:2)
And the thing you get from Amazon? Do you think that no portion of the price of this goes to pay for taxes, even indirectly?
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't possible to buy anything without paying taxes.
Public aid cards are used by people who do not pay taxes with money they earned - the money they use and the money spent on taxes are earned by others.
Ergo, it is possible for people to buy things without actually paying for it themselves - or paying taxes themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
The value of the public aid card belongs to the recipient after he receives it. When he uses the card some of the value of the card goes to pay the taxes on the services he purchases.
He's paying taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it doesn't.
If you are a leech on society, and produce noting - then you cannot claim to have done anything other than being a leech.
The taxes are paid by the people who are forced to allow the leeches to live.
If you are a leech and think you are paying taxes - or trying to convince others that you are doing anything other than being a leech, rest assured, we know better.
Re: (Score:3)
You can buy politicians without paying taxes.
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, the politicians can buy elections easily by manipulating the 40-50% of people that pay no federal taxes at all. The first president or candidate that comes up with an honest sound plan to reduce our national debt would never get re/elected because those 40-50% would never vote for him/her. Politicians can keep claiming that the top 1-5% can fix our economy and support the entire countries budget but the reality is they can't. It gets votes though. The hole is getting deeper and deeper and no on
Re: (Score:2)
Far fewer than 40-50% of people avoid paying Federal taxes. For example when you purchase an alcoholic beverage, gasoline, cigarettes, or have any kind of paying job you are paying some form of Federal tax.
Re: (Score:2)
Politicians aren't a thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Politicians aren't a thing.
Yes, they are.
But who, over 10 years old, still calls it a "thing"?
Strat
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks goodness government is a non-profit enterprise these days.
Harken back to the times of kings!
Re: (Score:2)
Yea but as a percentage the kings took less wealth from a serf than the us tax payer is asked to fork over today, if you look at those who pay some income tax.
Re: (Score:3)
That's kind of a silly statistic to use, since it's sensitive to population size. There are about 310 million Americans, and 1 year contains about 31 million seconds. You'd expect (roughly) 10 years of an average taxpayer's taxes to be spent every 1 second if revenues == expenditures, everything is inflation adjusted, and everyone pays taxes. If the country instead had only 31 million people you'd expect 1 year per second. The implied point--that government spending is out of control and/or hugely wasteful-
Privacy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's an absolutely unfounded concern.
I worked at a Big Data company. About 90% of my job was improving privacy while maintaining the integrity of medical data. The patient's zip code was reduced to 3 digits. Any references to states were removed and forgotten (because there are some zip codes that cross state lines). Any names were removed, as were any user-entered comments (doctor's notes, etc.) that might possibly contain personal information. Any personal information that is necessary for the system bu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's pretty cool. I'm hopefully having my "exome" sequenced soon, as part of a clinical trial. I don't think my data will make it into a public database, but I would be for it, so long as my name etc were removed.
Just some dumb thoughts on TFA: The 1000 Genome project is hosting 200TB of data?!? Haven't these guys ever heard of compression? It seems that an individual's entire genome can be compressed to about 4MB, so the ~2000 genomes produced by the 1000 genome project should easily fit on my micro
Transparency? (Score:1)
When Obama said his administration would be the most transparent, it is apparent it was about how the government would make all of our private details transparent to government while making what the government does totally opaque to us.
Doesn't this bother anyone? (Score:3, Insightful)
So the Obama wants to pick and choose how this will be handled but he wants everyone else to do it? Whatever happened to representation?
Re:Doesn't this bother anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm black, and I think that even if Obama is "my nigga", he cannot be trusted, and he betrayed most of those who voted for him with all his false promises.
I intend to vote against "my nigga" next time.
I guess you can call me an Uncle Tom, but I'd rather be called that than be called a sucker or an idiot.
Posting as AC and talking about trust is an irony in itself. Anyone naive enough to think that the President can drastically change the way a nation works in 4 years is a sucker and an idiot. Government is slow to work and slow to react because it is run by a committee of people who have their own agenda that doesn't always align with the President's agenda. It doesn't matter who is in office, if the kids can't play nice then nothing gets done. Let's set the record straight, a President has the least control on how a nation is run, the body of Congress has most of the power. If you want one man to run the country move to Syria. If you want change, you should be more selective of your Congressional representatives instead of only paying attention to 2 people for ~6 months every 4 years.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Yesterday it took me all of 5 minutes to get the USDA test results for e.coli in beef processing for all of 2011. How long would that have taken in a manual system?
The other day, I searched a database of agency decisions going back to 1970. Being able to narrow the search results meant that I only had to manually go through 15 records instea
Re: (Score:2)
Big Data or Big Pork?
Given it's about a bet, I would think of a race horse. Given the amount to be spent, I'm inclined towards a milking cow.
'know what? Let's settle in between: it is actually a bet placed on a milking race cowrse.
And all over the world (Score:2)
Data mining (Score:2)
With, of course, the certainty that the data mining capabilities will never be used for evil such as monitoring American citizens for the purposes of identifying nonviolent (but loud) political dissidents.
The difference between this and Google is that you can haul Google into court when they do evil.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that Google (and other non-governmental entities) must respond when caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
One of many examples: such as when Congress hauls their butt into a hearing over their privacy practices [huffingtonpost.com].
The government, after all, is jealously seeking a monopoly on invasive privacy violations.
Just another corporate hand-out? (Score:1)
That is what it looks like to me.
I think Obama gave Solendra $500 million about one week before the company declared bankruptcy. The execs refused to tell anybody where the money went, and acted offended that anybody would ask.
Big political contributions are probably about the best investment you make, I figure about a $10 return for every $1 invested.
Right investment, right time (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm a hard science/computer science guy who's livelihood is working on various NIH/NSF projects. A common thread talking to other scientists the past few years has been the theme that the tools for data analysis have not kept pace with the tools for data acquisition. Companies like National Instruments sell sub-$1000 USB DAQ boards with resolution and bandwidth that would make a scientist from the early 1990's weep for joy. But most data analysis is done the same way it's been done since that same era: with a desktop application working with discrete files, and maybe some ad-hoc scripts. (Only now the scripts are Python instead of C...)
The funny thing is, most researchers haven't yet wrapped their brains around the notion of offloading data onto cloud computing solutions like Amazon AWS. I was at an AWS presentation a couple months ago, and the university's office of research gave an intro talking about their new supercomputer that has 2000 cores, only to get upstaged 10 minutes later when the Amazon guys introduced their 17000 core virtual supercomputer (#42 on the top 500 list, IIRC). There's a lot of untapped potential right now for using that infrastructure to crunch big data.
Re: (Score:2)
I was at an AWS presentation a couple months ago, and the university's office of research gave an intro talking about their new supercomputer that has 2000 cores, only to get upstaged 10 minutes later when the Amazon guys introduced their 17000 core virtual supercomputer (#42 on the top 500 list, IIRC). There's a lot of untapped potential right now for using that infrastructure to crunch big data.
Big Data is about I/O not cores... How many GB/sec from disk can that cloud support ?
Re: (Score:2)
If you need GB/sec for downloading data, you are asking wrong questions. AWS can not only store but also compute.
BJI is producing so much data they are going back to shipping hard drives (flashback from 2000 for me)
Re: (Score:2)
I was at an AWS presentation a couple months ago, and the university's office of research gave an intro talking about their new supercomputer that has 2000 cores, only to get upstaged 10 minutes later when the Amazon guys introduced their 17000 core virtual supercomputer (#42 on the top 500 list, IIRC). There's a lot of untapped potential right now for using that infrastructure to crunch big data.
While very cool, some problems require more communication between threads and might not scale well on more distributed VMs. Still, very cool.
And the cost to move the data? (Score:3)
Amazon is using the idle time of their huge cloud when it's not being used for christmas shopping ... so the cost of CPU is relatively cheap. Bandwidth and storage is *not* with most cloud sevices.
So, say I need to calibrate a year's worth of SDO/AIA data ... that'd mean pushing to them somewhere in the range of 500TB of data, and then pulling it back again. They've changed their pricing so the transfer in is now free ... but if I'm doing the math right, that'd cost somewhere on the order of $30k for the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The sequencing data produced is of inferior quality than 10 years ago. Somebody might be weeping with joy, but not the assemblers downstream in this data flow.
Ironically, previously quality did not matter much, when mapping genes was good enough. Nowadays when we are talking SNPs, reads are arguing with each other, MiSeq assemblies in disarray with Ion Torrent. Every sequence variation in alignment is screaming "I am Spartacus".
The problem of opened Pandora boxes is solved by opening hundred more of them. W
Big Data? (Score:2)
Given this administration's record on "investments" and "betting on the future" that's just another $200,000,000 into the pockets of Big Democrats.
The Act needs to be renamed.... (Score:2)
How about we use the data we already have first? (Score:1)
Sure it's great that we can start to analyze lots more data but does anyone else think we should start using the data we've already got? The next time I hear a politician propose a policy that directly contradicts current research on the subject in order to pander to their constituents or Jesus I think my brain will explode.
Military departments? (Score:2)
Also, given the amount of black ops money spent there and the "regular budget", this is nothing. The F22 project alone has budget overruns that make this look like pocket change.
Solyndra The Sequel? (Score:1)
Thanks Barry (Score:1)
Thanks for gambling my $$$.