Eric's Computer Applications Blog

After this computer applications blog is finished this blog will be transforming into a nba/eric related blog. all the comp appy stuff can still be found in the october and september archives at the bottom of the page.

it may still contain tidbits on wikis/legal/computer based stuff as well but its also going to be put to good use chronicling the struggles of yahoo nba league 1536 which can be viewed here:

http://basketball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/nba/1536

The first week in our fantasy league sees a matchup between myself and fellow class blogger jeffrey kim. stay tuned to see how this battle turns out.

and to my fellow comp app'ers enjoy the rest of your law degrees and have a good summer.

Wikipedia is a great source of information. I go there all the time to check out anything from nba players to random topics. So I decided to check out the other wikis out there as well, starting with www.citizendium.com. Like wikipedia apprarently this one is also open to public collaboration but it is guided by expert editors and people must use their own names to publish - i guess it is kind of like our class wiki. Unfortunately th site isnt quite up yet and the public launch is about a month away from release but it seems pretty cool. I wouldn't mind contributing an article or two - perhaps our class could even offer to put up some of our own material that we have.

For fellow class members who may have been inspired to contribute to another wiki such as citizendium they are actually calling for volunteers and you can mail them at personnel@citizendium.org

On a off-topic for the nba inclined:

jeff put up a link to givemetherock.com and somehow the author managed to pick up the link on jeffs blog. thats awesome. so i will do my own shoutout to www.fantasybasketballcafe.com which is another favourite of mine. although for you fantasy bballers out there looking for some cheat sheets rotofreak.com and givemetherock.com are the go as well.

5 days until nba season starts! yahoo boxscores at 5am in the morning woohoo

Wow, we have almost finished our comp apps course. Now while this blog may live on I can't help but think what will happen to all those hours of effort which went into our class Wiki. I mean I wonder if Russell compiles all of his class Wikis and then they become a giant mega-Wiki. I say so because I was reading some articles on how Wikipedia has grown and what is in stor for it in the future. Similarly has our class laid the foundation for a geeky niche wiki for cyber-lawyers. Maybe it is destined to become one of the other great wiki spin-offs such as wikiality.com or citizendium.org.

Or perhaps share the ill-fate of other wikis such as friendster.com. One thing I guess we have in our favour is that one of the largest problems for existing Wikis is stabilisation. They are worried about the quality of articles since anyone can contribute. The big advantage of ours is that most of us can be classified as semi-experts in the area after studying the topic.

If you like you can read more about the future of Wikis here:

http://www.cornellsun.com/node/19063

On another note, another Wiki, Ruben Wiki (Captain of the New Zealand Rugby team) just released an "explosive" new biogrpahy which reveals he almost killed his mate in a drink driving accident when he was 19. Kind of sobering thoughts especially in the midst of Oktoberfest.

I came across an interesting article which describes an inferencing system which is hopefully going to be used against terrrorists. The project is called "Tangram" and you can read about it here.

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1006/102006nj1.htm

It is called tangram because its like an old chinese jigsaw puzzle - put the pieces into place and bang you've found osama's hidey hole. Basically it is a program that goes through stores of information, hoping to pick out what be patterns in terrorist planning. How exactly do they plan to do this?

Well pieces of the puzzle include credit card transactions, phone records etc. While to some (inlcuding myself) it seems like a bit of an optimistic approach, it is nowhere near as hopeless as some of the old techniques which were being used. e.g. "guilt by association models" --> if you are not my friend then you must be my enemy OR "collective inferencing" where the program computes a "suspicion score" for an entire network of people

Whats the damage to American taxpayers? $49 million.
I wonder if Aide is getting that much

While working and putting the finishing touches on my Aide project I stumbled across the Aide website which can be found here ---->

http://aide.austlii.edu.au/

It is interesting to note that Aide is in fact replacing another inferencing system named Wysh for use by Austlii.

I was stuck before on how to put "and" and "or" into the same rule in Aide, and having a bit of a whinge to myself. For instance how do you make a rule that is only satisifed if "you are a man" AND "you are green" OR "you are not a man" AND "you are blue." I finally figured it out, using extra sets of [] brackets and additional (i)s and (ii)s even though this may not be the best way to do it.

Neverthless I soon realized when browsing through the Wysh webpage how easy we actually have it. As I was scrolling through some of the sample rulebases for Wysh (such as the copyright and privacy rulebases which can also be found on site) I was greeted with pages of "techie talk" that made no sense to me at all. Click here (http://aide.austlii.edu.au/wysh/privacy.html) and see if you can make any headway into it.

So I'm just glad we are using the Aide program instead of Wysh to do our databases.

I've decided to make the topic of my Aide project hairdressing.

Interestingly there is a whole NSW statute on hairdressing, which you can have a look at on www.austlii.edu.au

Basically the gist of it is to prohibit the act of hairdressing for a fee by unauthorised people. This is pretty interesting actually considering many of my local hairdressers near Ashfield (there is like 7 of them) and perhaps many local barbers may not actually be authorised.

It may seem like a silly topic, but there are forums on the internet which pose the question: can we sue our hairdresser.

http://www.thescene.com.au/forum/index.php?showtopic=56768

Anyways its looking pretty good so far, because the legislation is fairly straightforward and translates fairly well to Aide.

I'm going over to Hong Kong soon. I think I will book these things online. Interesting to see if there are any rule base systems which may assist in helping find the best tickets etc. and associated legal issues.

Anyways there turns out that there is. Rule bases are everywhere e.g. the when you go to book/renew your passport online, there is an electronic rulebase:

Are you an Australian citizen?

Are you residing in Australia?

Do you wish to renew your Australian passport?

Is this application for an adult or child

This rulebase is just used to determine which application form you will use though to apply for a passport.

We also ended up booking our hotels online through octopustravel - i guess it counts as a sort of rule base - it asks for dates and price range and all of that. All in all its going to cost me $2200 to go for 12 days because its Christmas season. argh!

As it turned out I didn't include some of the more focused issues in the comp apps essay. I thought I might post them up on our wiki instead but the site is down at the moment so I will try and share some fo the ideas before they disappear.

Firstly it is interesting to consider the legislative authority for rule-based systems. (by the way the information is from the ARC in their automated assistance issues paper which can be accessed here: http://www.ag.gov.au/agd/WWW/arcHome.nsf/Page/Publications_Reports_Downloads_Automated_Assistance_in_Administrative_Decision-making)

As I understand it, there is actually no authority for expert systems to be the decision makers themselves. The Electronic Transactions Act only authorises communications via electronic systems. Plus the ADJR Act etc implicitly imply that a decision maker must be human. So what agencies tend to do is deem any decision make by a computer to have been made by the Secretary of the relevant department, and thus a human. Pretty tricky

Plus there is the whole shemozzle about whether rule-based systems fetter discretion etc. Is this a good argument? I came across the work of KC Davis and Robert Baldwin who discuss in depth the operation/role of discretion in rulemaking and law. Much of it applies directly to rule-based legal systems as well, but it was a bit off-topic for the essay.

Hopefully I can put up a quick summary and some links on the Wiki when it is back up

OK just thinking about question 3 of our essay questions about legal inferencing. I think the second part about examining Moles' criticisms is straightforward enough. However the last part on nour criticisms is a bit more troubling. Since the essay is limited to only 3000 words I'm wondering which issues Russell intedns us to focus on since there are so many with rule-base systems.

Firstly there is the bunch on the supposed advantages of rule bases: cost, efficiency. consistency, you can probably write about 500 words itself just discussing the benefits. Then there are the traditional arguments against such as de-skilling, privacy concerns, views of the applicants, the potential for human manipulation etc.

Thirdly, there are so many legal and administrative issues - such as is there any legislative authorisation to even employ rule base systems in Australia (I think they have to resort to loopholes where they deem the computer is merely a tool for the decision maker to get around legislation), the death of discretion and other discretionary debates, improper exercise of power as well as other natural justice concerns. Or maybe these concerns are alittle off topic?