MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2245520477

Deputizing the Private Sector? ISPs as Agents of the State

2009· article· en· W2245520477 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ian R. Kerr

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Criminal Justice and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCybercrimePersonally identifiable informationCharterConstitutionalityLegislatureState (computer science)Internet privacyBusinessConventionService providerService (business)IntermediaryPolitical scienceLawThe InternetComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this chapter, the authors describe the changing role of telecommunications service providers (TSPs) from trusted stewards of clients’ personal information to “agents of the state”, from gatekeepers of privacy to active partners in the fight against cybercrime. It is argued that the legislative approach that has been or will soon be adopted in various jurisdictions around the world, including Canada, will lower the threshold of privacy protection and significantly alter the relationship between TSPs and the individuals who have come to depend on them to manage their personal information and private communications. The chapter begins with an investigation of the role of TSPs as information intermediaries, and then moves to examine a Canadian online search and seizure case, where a TSP acted as an “agent of the state” by sending to the police copies of a client’s personal emails without his knowledge or consent. The Council of Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime is considered next, focusing on the privacy implications of its potential implementation in Canada and the possibility of a challenge to the constitutionality of new cybercrime laws based on the Canadian Charter.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.332
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicEuropean Criminal Justice and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207