It is important, as a society, that we look to the law, not as a form of tyranny, but as a source of peace in our daily lives.
There are already in place an array of telecommunications related laws that support the means for a law-enforcement agency to gain access to data relating to the commission of crime. Whilst these laws need to be amended and updated overtime, the lens through which they’ve been produced today; does not take into account, the opportunities brought about by a ‘knowledge banking industry’.
As it is the case today; a great deal of the software we use is made available by way of licensing terms, based upon international law, through which a foreign choice of law is elected for the governance of disputes of any kind. These terms do not only apply to the applications being provided, but moreover, the users information stored on those systems and related services.
Through the establishment of a knowledge banking industry, a great deal can be changed. The means to protect the privacy of users is enhanced greatly; whilst the means to ensure the industry can act as a guardian and advocacy instrument for rule of law, is in-turn brought about.
It is currently the case that a great deal of information exists about persons already, but this is most-often not easily available to Law-enforcement agencies when it could be made most-useful to them, in investigating a crime.
Furthermore; it is the role of the law-enforcement agency relating to the jurisdiction of the person, that is able to be made most-important, through a knowledge banking industry. Whilst alternatives do exist via centralised methods, often requiring radical tools to assist them, when no available alternative otherwise exists; such as has recently been declared locally by the Department of Home Affairs; the means to change the nature through which these sorts of decisions need to be considered, can be brought to bare through the establishment of a knowledge banking industry; that helps to ensure the protection of our sovereignty as a nation, is considerate of its people; as the fundamental stakeholders to which their role is duty bound by instruments such as the charter of the commonwealth, amongst the many.
Equally and most importantly; Those who work as law-enforcement professionals are indeed human too. They require for themselves, their own inforgs, their own ‘knowledge banking accounts’ and due to the role they play in our society it would be considered particularly important to them, their data is safe. This is the same for any politically exposed person alongside the many others. The means to ensure accountability within these systems, are in-turn a fundamental tenant of how any such system would need to be made to operate. The principle consideration made, when making a query with Noam Chomsky with respect to personhood, was responded by him in the following way
the fact that there are pressures and costs does not absolve people of their moral responsibility. The primary custodian of one’s actions is oneself. 3rd of April 2018.
Whilst i debate the considerations of how it is our systems currently work as to disseminate ‘fake news’ amongst its many attributable problems; and that upon the basis of persons having been provided false and misleading information or otherwise placed in a position where their actions are based upon false beliefs made to be engendered upon them by others,
That unless we address these issues on a fundamental basis, the means to ensure the primary custodianship of ones actions to be ones self, is in-turn diminished and therein were the considerations made of personhood and AI.