MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361762344 · doi:10.1504/ijcc.2023.129773

Legal issues of consumer privacy protection in the cloud computing environment: analytic study in GDPR, and USA legislations

2023· article· en· W4361762344 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cloud Computing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingData Protection Act 1998Information privacyService providerBusinessPrivacy by DesignPrivacy protectionInternet privacyComputer securityPrivacy lawService (business)Data breachConsumer protectionPrivacy policyComputer scienceLawPolitical scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloud computing services are considered among the most important services provided for companies due to the various benefits they confer. However, data privacy is a major concern for users, and laws covering this contain many contradictions and require improvement. This paper discusses the laws governing privacy issues in cloud computing, highlights missing components that could be added to laws, and proposes amendments to laws that may help create a better consumer experience, improved service, and increased protection for personal data. At the end of the paper, a set of recommendations is proposed for governments and private companies that would increase the responsibility held by cloud computing service providers in the event of failing to protect personal data from privacy invasion.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.303 · 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