Hi Friends,

Even as I launch this today ( my 80th Birthday ), I realize that there is yet so much to say and do.

There is just no time to look back, no time to wonder,"Will anyone read these pages?"

With regards,
Hemen Parekh
27 June 2013

Monday, 31 July 2017

THE DIE IS CAST


Privacy :  Not  Right ?
===============

Here is why :

Attorney General , KK Venugopal submitted to the 9 judge bench:

There is no fundamental right to privacy , and even if it is assumed as a fundamental right , it is multifaceted

Every facet can’t be ipso facto considered a fundamental right

Informational privacy could not be a right to privacy, and it could not ever be a fundamental right
    ( source : DNA / 28 July )


The bench drew Sundaram’s attention to present day reality, when rapid technological advance is making individual privacy increasingly vulnerable

“ Do we have a robust data protection regime to protect and secure personal information ? “ it asked, indicating its willingness to look at privacy afresh without being burdened by past rulings

“ If we accept privacy as a constitutional right , it will have to be part of personal liberty and right to life guaranteed under article 21 of the constitution” , it said


   ( source : Times of India / 28 July )


Senior advocate Sundaram, representing Maharashtra government told the court that,

“ Privacy can mean a lot of things . Moreover , right to privacy was considered by the constitution makers but they decided to drop it as a fundamental right

    ( source : Hindustan Times / 28 July )


All of this sounds so much rational !

Especially , the recognition that the “ March of Technology “ , will render futile , all arguments re: “ Right to Privacy

What could have brought about this changed perception on the part of Hon Judges ?



    #   Following news ?



Artificial intelligence ' Judge ' developed by UCL computer scientists



Artificial intelligence software that can find patterns in highly complex decisions is being used to predict our taste in films, TV shows and music with ever-increasing accuracy. And now, after a breakthrough study by a group of British scientists, it could be used to predict the outcome of trials.

Software that is able to weigh up legal evidence and moral questions of right and wrong has been devised by computer scientists at University College London, and used to accurately predict the result in hundreds of real life cases.


The AI “judge” has reached the same verdicts as judges at the European court of human rights in almost four in five cases involving torture, degrading treatment and privacy.

The algorithm examined English language data sets for 584 cases relating to torture and degrading treatment, fair trials and privacy.

In each case, the software analysed the information and made its own judicial decision. In 79% of those assessed, the AI verdict was the same as the one delivered by the court.


Dr Nikolaos Aletras, the lead researcher from UCL’s department of computer science, said: “We don’t see AI replacing judges or lawyers, but we think they’d find it useful for rapidly identifying patterns in cases that lead to certain outcomes.

“It could also be a valuable tool for highlighting which cases are most likely to be violations of the European convention on human rights.” An equal number of “violation” and “non-violation” cases were chosen for the study.


In the course of developing the programme the team found that judgments of the European court of human rights depends more on non-legal facts than purely legal arguments.

This suggests that the court’s judges are more legal theory “realists” than “formalists”.


The same is true of other high level courts, such as the US supreme court, according to previous studies.


The most reliable factors for predicting European court of human rights decisions were found to be the language used as well as the topics and circumstances mentioned in the case texts.

One of these days , expect some Indian Start-up in the LEGAL DOMAIN to upload all the past Orders / Judgements of Hon Judges ( of 9 member bench ) into this algorithm
{  They may want to first look up : https://peerj.com/articles/cs-93/  }
Will the outcome read  ?
PRIVACY  LEFT  :  NO MORE  RIGHT

31  July  2017







A SOLOMON COME TO JUDGEMENT ?


Privacy :  Not  Right ?
============

Here is why :

Attorney General , KK Venugopal submitted to the 9 judge bench:

There is no fundamental right to privacy , and even if it is assumed as a fundamental right , it is multifaceted

Every facet can’t be ipso facto considered a fundamental right

Informational privacy could not be a right to privacy, and it could not ever be a fundamental right
    ( source : DNA / 28 July )


The bench drew Sundaram’s attention to present day reality, when rapid technological advance is making individual privacy increasingly vulnerable

“ Do we have a robust data protection regime to protect and secure personal information ? “ it asked, indicating its willingness to look at privacy afresh without being burdened by past rulings

“ If we accept privacy as a constitutional right , it will have to be part of personal liberty and right to life guaranteed under article 21 of the constitution” , it said


   ( source : Times of India / 28 July )


Senior advocate Sundaram, representing Maharashtra government told the court that,

“ Privacy can mean a lot of things . Moreover , right to privacy was considered by the constitution makers but they decided to drop it as a fundamental right

    ( source : Hindustan Times / 28 July )


All of this sounds so much rational !

Especially , the recognition that the “ March of Technology “ , will render futile , all arguments re: “ Right to Privacy

What could have brought about this changed perception on the part of Hon Judges ?



    #   Following news ?



Artificial intelligence ' Judge ' developed by UCL computer scientists



Artificial intelligence software that can find patterns in highly complex decisions is being used to predict our taste in films, TV shows and music with ever-increasing accuracy. And now, after a breakthrough study by a group of British scientists, it could be used to predict the outcome of trials.

Software that is able to weigh up legal evidence and moral questions of right and wrong has been devised by computer scientists at University College London, and used to accurately predict the result in hundreds of real life cases.


The AI “judge” has reached the same verdicts as judges at the European court of human rights in almost four in five cases involving torture, degrading treatment and privacy.

The algorithm examined English language data sets for 584 cases relating to torture and degrading treatment, fair trials and privacy.

In each case, the software analysed the information and made its own judicial decision. In 79% of those assessed, the AI verdict was the same as the one delivered by the court.


Dr Nikolaos Aletras, the lead researcher from UCL’s department of computer science, said: “We don’t see AI replacing judges or lawyers, but we think they’d find it useful for rapidly identifying patterns in cases that lead to certain outcomes.

“It could also be a valuable tool for highlighting which cases are most likely to be violations of the European convention on human rights.” An equal number of “violation” and “non-violation” cases were chosen for the study.


In the course of developing the programme the team found that judgments of the European court of human rights depends more on non-legal facts than purely legal arguments.

This suggests that the court’s judges are more legal theory “realists” than “formalists”.


The same is true of other high level courts, such as the US supreme court, according to previous studies.


The most reliable factors for predicting European court of human rights decisions were found to be the language used as well as the topics and circumstances mentioned in the case texts.

One of these days , expect some Indian Start-up in the LEGAL DOMAIN to upload all the past Orders / Judgements of Hon Judges ( of 9 member bench ) into this algorithm
{  They may want to first look up : https://peerj.com/articles/cs-93/  }
Will the outcome read  ?
PRIVACY  LEFT  :  NO MORE  RIGHT

31  July  2017







May be of use


FYI


Warm Regards,

Hemen Parekh
+91 98675 50808

From: Kenils Online [mailto:biz@kenils.co]
Sent: 31 July 2017 13:28
To: STUDENT group
Subject: New Files of Student

Hello


www.kenils.biz/student/



New Files as below details



Student Database

2017 Student Data
Count
Sample’s
Coming Soon ……
Click Here
IBPS new file 2016
DAVV UG Entrance
10162
DAVV PG Entrance
5883
IP Btech
20500
Bangalore Graduates
B.COM/BBA/B.SC
10K
Tamil Nadu Science
1.63 L
JEE (market file not reliable)
11.0 L
Click Here
Neet (market file not reliable)
1138890
Click Here
IP bcom
13000
Click Here
IP law
8500
Click Here
ATMA
5933
IP bjmc
3000
IP mba
2600
IP mca
2500
CLAT
36000
IP bba
15700
IP bca
6600
ip 2017 bba entrance
10k to 25k rank
Jee Students (MF)
2.16 L (1.4 L)
Gujarat B Group Biology
70K
May Mat
2950
Rajasthan CBSE 12th (16-17)
21382
Karnataka CET (Engi and Medi)
186754
Mumbai 12th Science (16-17)
58915
Nagpur 12th Science (16-17)
16074
Andhra Pradesh ICET
69777
Gujarat 12th Biology (16-17)
58073
Gujarat 12th Maths (16-17)
63490
Andhra Pradesh ECET
35249
Maharashtra NTSE
81503
AP Medical EAMCET
81078
AP Engineering EAMCET
198205
Medical Coaching Institute (16-17)
58248
Engineering Coaching Institute (16-17)
58209
Foundation Course Institute (upto 10)
25094
Maharashtra MBA CET
88227
Tamil Nadu 12th Std (16-17)
861392
Odisha 12th Science (16-17)
73062
Madhya Pradesh 10th Std (16-17)
269081
Punjab 12th Science Student
Punjab 12th Commerce Student
Punjab 12th Arts & Vocational Student
64353
41372
186779
Bihar 12th Biology
Bihar 12th Non Biology
Bihar 12th CBSE
209998
212554
39942
Bihar 10th Students
1047679
Jee Coaching
90000
Pg Neet
12400
Click Here
Feb Mat
29371
Click Here
Cmat
59181
Click Here
DAVV Uni. Indore, Final Y Graduates BBA, B.COM, BHM
27074
DAVV Uni. Indore, Final Y Graduates – BCA – B.Sc
16342
DAVV Uni. Indore, Final Y Graduates- Arts
15911
Kerala Final Year Graduation (16-17)
27153
Himachal Pradesh 12th (Science – Medical) (16-17)
6041
Himachal Pradesh 12th (Science – Non Medical) (16-17)
11489
Himachal Pradesh 12th (Commerce) (16-17)
8273
Himachal Pradesh 12th (Arts) (16-17)
26622
Telangana 12th MPC-Narayana Institute (16-17)
25521
Telangana 12th BPC-Narayana Institute (16-17)
2725
Andhra Pradesh 12th MPC-Narayana Institute (16-17)
37352
Andhra Pradesh -12th BPC-Narayana Institute (16-17)
3964
Madhya Pradesh 12th-Non Comm. & Sci.
100590
Madhya Pradesh 12th-Commerce
48588
Madhya Pradesh 12th-Maths
64205
Madhya Pradesh 12th-Biology
74639
XAT
66000
Madhya P. 12th
Madhya P. 10th
3.2 L
3.5 L
Karnataka 10th
7.5 L