title: A pluralist and interdisciplinary approach to encryption regulation

authors: Dizon, Michael

abstract: The importance of trust in encryption is paramount, influencing user adoption and acceptance of the technology. A pluralist and interdisciplinary approach reveal that trust extends beyond the technology itself to include those who develop, provide, and regulate it. If encryption is perceived as unsafe or insecure, trust is compromised. Mandatory backdoors, allowing unauthorized access, face opposition as they erode trust in the technology, the government, and potential malicious actors. Trust is foundational to encryption, encompassing not only the technology but also providers and regulators.

Proposed encryption regulations must be evaluated based on their impact on trustworthiness. Questions should be raised: Does the regulation strengthen, maintain, or weaken trust in encryption and among relevant parties? Measures that diminish trust should be discarded, while those supporting or building trust should be explored. Trust emerges as a core consideration in crafting encryption laws and policies.

A comprehensive approach considers legal, social, and technical dimensions when addressing the complex task of regulating encryption. Relying solely on legal means is insufficient. Rejecting a legal-centric mindset allows acknowledgment of plural normative orders in a digital networked world. Understanding the critical technical and social principles and values surrounding encryption regulation becomes essential. Therefore, when formulating technology laws and policies, a pluralist and interdisciplinary approach, incorporating fundamental principles and values, is crucial to comprehensively address the legal, technical, and social aspects of the technology at hand.

text: A pluralist and interdisciplinary approach to encryption regulation The importance of trust in encryption is paramount, influencing user adoption and acceptance of the technology. A pluralist and interdisciplinary approach reveal that trust extends beyond the technology itself to include those who develop, provide, and regulate it. If encryption is perceived as unsafe or insecure, trust is compromised. Mandatory backdoors, allowing unauthorized access, face opposition as they erode trust in the technology, the government, and potential malicious actors. Trust is foundational to encryption, encompassing not only the technology but also providers and regulators.

Proposed encryption regulations must be evaluated based on their impact on trustworthiness. Questions should be raised: Does the regulation strengthen, maintain, or weaken trust in encryption and among relevant parties? Measures that diminish trust should be discarded, while those supporting or building trust should be explored. Trust emerges as a core consideration in crafting encryption laws and policies.

A comprehensive approach considers legal, social, and technical dimensions when addressing the complex task of regulating encryption. Relying solely on legal means is insufficient. Rejecting a legal-centric mindset allows acknowledgment of plural normative orders in a digital networked world. Understanding the critical technical and social principles and values surrounding encryption regulation becomes essential. Therefore, when formulating technology laws and policies, a pluralist and interdisciplinary approach, incorporating fundamental principles and values, is crucial to comprehensively address the legal, technical, and social aspects of the technology at hand.

year: 2021-11

title: Improving adaptive bagging methods for evolving data streams

authors: Bifet, Albert

subjects: computer science

abstract: We propose two new improvements for bagging methods on evolving data streams. Recently, two new variants of Bagging were proposed: ADWIN Bagging and Adaptive-Size Hoeffding Tree (ASHT) Bagging. ASHT Bagging uses trees of different sizes, and ADWIN Bagging uses ADWIN as a change detector to decide when to discard underperforming ensemble members. We improve ADWIN Bagging using Hoeffding Adaptive Trees, trees that can adaptively learn from data streams that change over time. To speed up the time for adapting to change of Adaptive-Size Hoeffding Tree (ASHT) Bagging, we add an error change detector for each classifier. We test our improvements by performing an evaluation study on synthetic and real-world datasets comprising up to ten million examples.

text: Improving adaptive bagging methods for evolving data streams We propose two new improvements for bagging methods on evolving data streams. Recently, two new variants of Bagging were proposed: ADWIN Bagging and Adaptive-Size Hoeffding Tree (ASHT) Bagging. ASHT Bagging uses trees of different sizes, and ADWIN Bagging uses ADWIN as a change detector to decide when to discard underperforming ensemble members. We improve ADWIN Bagging using Hoeffding Adaptive Trees, trees that can adaptively learn from data streams that change over time. To speed up the time for adapting to change of Adaptive-Size Hoeffding Tree (ASHT) Bagging, we add an error change detector for each classifier. We test our improvements by performing an evaluation study on synthetic and real-world datasets comprising up to ten million examples.

year: 2009

title: The arguing genre and the explaining genre: A comparison in terms of discourse relational analyses of texts written in English and texts written in Māori

authors: Crombie, Winifred

subjects: Māori linguistics

abstract: There is a commonly held belief that those who are immersed in indigenous cultures have a tendency, when constructing academic texts, to avoid sequential, deductive argumentation. We report here on a comparison of two groups of texts exhibiting two different genres - 'explaining' and 'arguing'. One group of texts was written in Māori by indigenous authors, the other group was written in English by non-indigenous authors. Our findings are that although the percentage use of logico-deductive relationships is roughly equivalent for both groups of texts/ writers in the case of the explaining genre, the Māori texts/ writers use almost twice the percentage of logico-deductive relationships as do the English texts/ writers.

text: The arguing genre and the explaining genre: A comparison in terms of discourse relational analyses of texts written in English and texts written in Māori There is a commonly held belief that those who are immersed in indigenous cultures have a tendency, when constructing academic texts, to avoid sequential, deductive argumentation. We report here on a comparison of two groups of texts exhibiting two different genres - 'explaining' and 'arguing'. One group of texts was written in Māori by indigenous authors, the other group was written in English by non-indigenous authors. Our findings are that although the percentage use of logico-deductive relationships is roughly equivalent for both groups of texts/ writers in the case of the explaining genre, the Māori texts/ writers use almost twice the percentage of logico-deductive relationships as do the English texts/ writers.

year: 2005-02