Jay Hancock at the Baltimore Sun covers the studythat analyzed 30,000+ transcripts from CEOs that made some conclusions about the truthfulness of CEOs.
I will resist making any obvious jokes here, but the conclusions are interesting. And the question is, does this lead to application possibilities if Governments create open data platforms for citizens to drive value from?
Governments have mandated for years public statements be filed in public markets. The SEC has required this in the United States to an extent including machine readable formats, creating the platform upon which the researchers at Stanford no doubt relied. What else could be mined through the combination of data publicly available right now.
Are there other reasonable conclusions that could be drawn from public statements that would allow us to understand the needs for regulation a tad bit deeper? Is there a possibility that we can glean a hint toward truthfulness from companies under regulation? Is there a possibility we could understand if an oil company was truly addressing its safety mandates? Could we discern patterns in public documents in terms of the impact of public comments in other areas? What if we could understand that the public comments from infrastructure vendors suggested a knowing underinvestment? Could we avoid infrastructure failures such as bridge collapses?
With less controversy, could we look to other data stores and do some simple analysis on them? In the world of the Internet of Things, is there the possibility that we could analyze the needs for smart transportation systems, based upon existing sensor data in our public roads? Would a certain number of nuisance complaints ALWAYS lead to increased violent crime?