MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1587157216 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2005v30n1a1519

Terrorism, Trade, and Internet Privacy

2005· article· en· W1587157216 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Criminal Justice and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrorismLegislatureThe InternetInternet privacyState (computer science)Political scienceOrder (exchange)Privacy policyThe Right to PrivacyIntervention (counseling)CybercrimeEconomic JusticeInformation privacyWork (physics)BusinessComputer securityLawHuman rightsEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It became evident that Canada’s ISPs could become party to the work of the Canadian security establishment when the Department of Justice released its consultation document on “lawful access” in August, 2002, proposing unprecedented intervention by the state into citizens’ privacy in order to fight terrorism. Since September 11, 2001, there has been an increase in surveillance within the structure of globalized markets and in information technology. Potentially repressive legislative responses to terrorism and other crime, such as those from the U.S. and European countries, have caused many communities to call for a heightened response to sustain the right to gather and exchange information freely. This essay addresses the potential threat to our communicative privacy posed by increased “lawful access.”

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it