Exactly how Store Data for Foreseeable future Data Mining Without Knowing the Questions?

Let’s talk somewhat about “transparency versus open public access” and were really appropriate, and where the idea obviously isn’t. Not long ago, there was an interesting feature in the TELEVISION SET news, a big to-do with regards to nothing, where the First Girl Michelle had travelled to France, and as she was to seduce her vacation, she was on a break as a private citizen. At this point whereas, people want visibility, one has to ask where the level of privacy must take precedent, along with where transparency should be available.

 

Now, you might not think this is a very good example, but when considering online social networks, paparazzi, and level of privacy all these things are really major issues. Recall when Danny Palin’s yahoo email account was hacked by a university student, an Obama supporter in TN? Obviously, that crossed the fishing line, but where do we attract the line online?

 

Okay, therefore, let’s get back to the main issue here; How Do We Store On the internet Data without violating personal items, and how do we protect nationwide security without breaches within data or violations of non-public privacy. And if we anonymize all the data for use in the future time, how need to we store it intended for Future Data Mining Require. and the Future Questions?

 

The information along with data could be stored simply region, time, frequency, along with relevance. It must be stored for a multitude of purposes, and we have to determine who may acquire the data, who will use the files, and what will they use the idea for. You see, there are other ways to store the information categories being displayed in, or a variety of tags to assign the idea to.

 

Perhaps, all the information might be stored, every bit of it, plus a trusted data inquirer who would like to ask the questions, have to explain their inquiry to the artificially intelligent computer, therefore it may act as a Supreme Court docket review on privacy. Basically, if the reason for the information is simply not good enough, access to that particular data will be denied. And indeed it could use constitutional attention, which would be philosophically in line with the same analogy as doctor seizure rules, or 5th Amendment rights of self-determination.

 

As if the data itself will be alive, and the artificial smart computer would be the judge determining if the prosecution would be permitted to ask those questions from the computer data system. In this instance you could just store all the details you could possibly take in, and not be worried about it. Okay so, which is one option; just shop all the data, regardless of what it really is. Or another option is to shop only some data, the information you believe to be important for the near future, but knowing the whole reality of the past is not totally known.

 

This is problematic nevertheless due to “selective prosecution” difficulties. You see, one of my most significant fears would be information consumed in a context and employed to condemn people or persona assassinate them, or incriminate them at a trial, or maybe in the mass media in a court docket of public opinion applying stored data, using a computer system forensic chain of data, selectively gathered.

 

We know that the growing media uses this trick beginning and often, and they do so often ruining people’s existence. We need to be careful with that. Really serious issue. The reality is that people trust humans, they have established throughout history, to be honest, and you don’t have to go really far to find inherent corruptness and individuals of the human being species. This is the primary reason for suggesting a good AI computer system.

 

The other idea might be to not collect the information at all, because you don’t actually need the data, and if you have the information available, we all know that it will become abused. Of course, the evidence of innocence could also very well maintain that same data, you observe that point? But, the chances with regard to abuse are far too excellent when humans are involved. We have had previous Presidential Organizations use IRS data in order to attack their enemies, in addition, to using the FBI to track governmental opponents. State Governors manipulate state police to track men and women with whom they’ve had quarrels or political adversaries as well. The abuse connected with power is quite common.

 

Therefore under the opposite model, you might say; No Data coming from Anyone, Agency, Corporation, or perhaps Organization may be collected period of time; you can’t collect it, you may not have it, and you can’t put it to use. That means you can’t use it forever or for evil. Several might say that would be unlucky because a lot of that info can help prevent crimes, it will also help better solve the problems and problems of our modern society, and it can help artificial brains make the best decisions using the best information.

 

If we constantly make decisions based on not enough information, is this really a sensible way to do planning? If conversely, we have irrelevant information, undesirable information, or information removed from context, we will never have the capacity to make any decisions not having very unfortunate unintended results, which is what is happening now this indicates.

 

At our think reservoir, we talk a lot about this, although we don’t do governmental correctness, and we aren’t on the verge of giving the human species an absolutely free pass on integrity, they don’t ought to get it, they haven’t acquired it, and we all know they can be trusted.

One administration report asks:

How do we explain and compute metrics regarding measuring the utility of anonymized data when; (1) The purpose for which the data to be used ‘IS’ known in advance, and also (2) The purpose for which your data will be used “is NOT” identified in advance”
Yes, very good question indeed, how on the planet do we do that? But first, we must decide if we collect several, all, or none in the data because until we all decide that, we will often be in conflict with our needs, would like, and the real issues of private privacy. Please consider this all.

Read also: