Protecting Privacy Through Quasi-Constitutional Legislation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent years have witnessed a growing awareness of the serious erosion of personal privacy in an increasingly digital world in which the accumulation, aggregation, disclosure, and sale of personal information about individuals has become routine. While there is no constitutional right to privacy in Canada, the recognition of privacy statutes as quasi-constitutional potentially offers the prospect of stronger legal protection for this fundamental right. In this thesis, I assess what quasi-constitutionality means by exploring laws between the constitutional and the ordinary in other jurisdictions and then using this framework to map the broader category of quasi-constitutional statutes in Canada. I argue for a more expansive, dialogic conception of the consequences of quasi-constitutionality based on the fundamental rights protected within such legislation. Following this, I develop a model of quasi-constitutional law reform and then apply this to the proposal to replace privacy legislation governing the private sector at the federal level.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it