‘Tis the season

‘Tis the season – let the snow falls (on this website) and be joyous…

For those of us who create applications (apps) or build systems we do so to meet business needs or to make a living or some other reasons. How we use the data subsequently (created by the apps) is generally not build into the apps. We don’t design apps to limit data generation or to identify data with meta data such that we know every bit of data being created. It is like asking for an app that will track every bit of data being created without the app creating data too. Imagine an app for this and guess what will top the chart for next year end ediscovery survey!

Is it the same as uttering or saying less (e-mail or phone) to convey a message without the message being short circuited or miss-interpreted?

I use applications every day. I create data every day too. I make dumb decision some day. Today I make a decision which is dumb due to lack of data being conveyed.
Dumb apps or dumb data or dumb me?

why five principles?

I have not done a search for the original article or press statements on ‘the Commission’s concept for the future EU data privacy framework’ as mentioned in Development and revision of global data privacy and security laws
on lexology.

Why five principles?

This principle – Privacy by design -  sounds great with the 3 words title which is rather arty and catchy like a company’s business motto.

The description – ‘New technical developments have to observe data privacy requirements at an early development stage, thus permitting the introduction of data protecting hardware and software’.

Only ‘new’ technical developments and at an ‘early’ development stage?

Just another play with words for my own amusement.

In terms of designing hardware and software for data privacy and/or protection, the play with words will not help software folks.

to do with technology or not?

Is everything I do, to do with technology?

When I am asleep, I guess I have nothing to do with technology unless I am in a technological related dream. This will probably be the end of my spirited being.

Here is an interesting question (or a dream question?) raised by someone at the Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development (sociotech) Group. I see nothing wrong in raising the question in my blog here. Any objections and concerns, please post here or contact cher at iedisc.com

Gosh! has technology got me to be so so cautious?!

The question coming from the sociotech group:

What do we really mean by technology?

This question sound similar to several questions raised by law/policy makers during an ediscovery conference I attended in 2009 in Barcelona.

Substitute the word ‘technology’ with ‘processing’ or ‘privacy’ or ‘consent’ (as in data protection), we end up with more dreamy questions with little common understanding or agreement, especially when discussing on ‘what are the real issues with cross border ediscovery?’.

The questions were based on this statement (or an opinion?):

There is no legal basis (or justification) for ‘processing’ which includes transferring, viewing, accessing etc, of data in ediscovery across the Atlantic (i.e. the Europe & US divide). What? No viewing, i.e. I can’t even open-view the file/data !

I guess the answers were not in the questions being raised, as the only answer that the policy makers were seeking to get assurance is: ‘how safe is my (personal) data’?

So, ‘What do we really mean by technology?

My dreamy reply: ‘technology’ is a beast and also a non beast, a thing and also a thingy.

What is your view(s)?

interoperability agreements

Blogging from the UK and using a neat Toshiba Notebook – just for my personal record.

Interoperability agreements with competitors in European Clearing, a new chapter in the security industry and a host of interesting developments in the making.

e-discovery process in SoLoMo

The new order of data -  SoLoMo for social, local, mobile data. Now this is what I call  ‘ediscovery rhyme’ !

Does this mean that Cloud Computing is now passé?

To quote Paknad in the news at law.com: “There’s no easy button, there’s just complex and more complex buttons.”

Complex buttons leading to more sore fingers and eyes ( even with predictive coding! ).

An early alert – come and join the dialogue

The British Computer Society

Information Risk Management & Assurance

Specialist Group

Have you heard of Electronic Discovery/Disclosure?

Tuesday 8th November 2011

18:00 Registration & buffet

18:30 Presentation

19:30 Networking Session

Venue: The British Computer Society

First Floor, The Davidson Building, 5 Southampton Street, London, WC2E 7HA

Speaker:  Cher Devey

Event Details

Have you heard of Electronic Discovery/Disclosure? If not, come and be enlightened, and if already an expert, do please come and share your stories and enlighten us all.

The format of the evening will be driven by dialogue with attendees with a short opening talk on what is Electronic Discovery/Disclosure and why IT folks need to know this.

predictive coding technology – In the name of cost cutting or/and competition?

The ediscovery space is no longer just driven by ediscovery vendors but also by predictive coding technology which is being heralded as a ‘game-changing’ capability as highlighted by OrcaTec. Excellent posting by the author, Herbert L. Roitblat.

Please note that I have not included the trademark symbol in this blog & in the blog’s title as I am not referring to Recommind’s patented  ‘predictive coding’.

Embracing technology, including predictive coding, is ultimately a game-changing  ‘war’ (Predictive Coding war breaks out in US ediscovery sector? ).

Let’s hope more predictive coding technology will be deployed for cost cutting the ediscovery costs and not be locked in competition mode.

More Collaboration coming from Open Source

Couple of interesting remarks/statements from this article, Open Source Could Change the Future of E-Discovery;

Even for customers who can afford commercial e-discovery, “There is no tool that fits what lawyers want. The only one you like is the one you’ve never seen and don’t use, because they are just all bad.”
..one of the cyncial things the [commercial] e-discovery people have done for quite a while is they will charge the lawyers a lot of money for all the message files they could construct from all those database entries. You’ve created all these duplicates that the database existed to manage in the first place. Then they’ll turn around and charge you to de-duplicate it…

Another news – Nuxeo and Hippo Team Up to Provide Seamless ECM / WCM Solution – coming from Open Source folks which could potentially change the way enterprises, big and small, deal with E-Discovery challenges.

Magic Quadrant – Competition only?

I guess ediscovery folks have discovered the Gartner’s Magic Quadrant for E-Discovery Software. Nothing to comment here except to note that it’s done for competition purposes not for collaboration.

Gartner Magic Quadrant E-Discovery SW

Why are Google, Bing and Yahoo! collaborating? Aren’t you competitors?

Interesting development in the web space which most likely will attract other willing collaborators (or competitors) to join in.

This development is also interesting for the ediscovery space as we now have ‘microdata’ .

For my own record – schema.org