MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380681256 · doi:10.54097/ehss.v14i.8894

Social Media Changed the Notion of Privacy

2023· article· en· W4380681256 on OpenAlexaff
Wanyi Fang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education Humanities and Social Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternet privacyPersonally identifiable informationAsset (computer security)Privacy by DesignInformation privacyAutonomyPrivacy softwarePerspective (graphical)Social mediaPrivacy policyBusinessComputer sciencePolitical scienceComputer securityWorld Wide WebLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyzes the impact of social media on traditional and contemporary notions of privacy, and discusses how the evolution of the web from 1.0 to 3.0 has influenced privacy trends and applications. With the advent of Web 3.0, users are expected to have greater control and ownership over their digital assets and personal information. While this shift presents opportunities for increased data autonomy and value, it also raises concerns about potential privacy violations. The paper explores both positive and negative consequences of this changing privacy landscape, and highlights the need for privacy protection measures. Moreover, the authors suggest that privacy will continue to evolve in the future, with users potentially viewing privacy as a personal asset. The analysis draws on a range of scholarly sources to offer a nuanced and comprehensive perspective on this complex and rapidly evolving issue.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.042
Scholarly communication0.0150.029
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education Humanities and Social SciencesSame topicPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207