Rights Protection for Relational Data Using Least Significant Bit Method

A solution for computer database content rights protection through watermarking. Rights protection for relative information is of ever-increasing interest, particularly considering areas wherever sensitive, valuable content is to be outsourced. A decent example could be a data processing application, wherever, information is sold in items to parties specialized in mining it. Totally different avenues are on the market, every with its own benefits and disadvantages. Social control by legal suggests that is sometimes ineffective in preventing thievery of proprietary works, unless increased by a digital counterpart, for instance, watermarking. Whereas, having the ability to handle higher level linguistics constraints, like classification preservation, our resolution additionally addresses necessary attacks, like set choice and random and linear information changes. We introduce wmdb.*, a proof-of-concept implementation and its application to real-life information, namely, in watermarking the outsourced Wal-Mart sales information that we have on the market at our institute

Editorial: Supporting children and young people in a changing world.

The editorial describes how the papers in the special issue engage with the views and experiences of children, as well as adults, to analyse the impact of social protection and social mobility through education and employment on their well-being. It takes a slightly critical approach to concepts such as well-being and agency—acknowledging that these frequently embrace their opposites—and highlights the value of mixed methods in exploring themes such as ‘voice and visibility’, schooling and work, and child poverty and outcomes. Finally, it draws out common conclusions and discusses their implications for policy and programme design

Privacy in Public and the contextual conditions of agency

Current technology and surveillance practices make behaviors traceable to persons in unprecedented ways. This causes a loss of anonymity and of many privacy measures relied on in the past. These de facto privacy losses are by many seen as problematic for individual psychology, intimate relations and democratic practices such as free speech and free assembly. I share most of these concerns but propose that an even more fundamental problem might be that our very ability to act as autonomous and purposive agents relies on some degree of privacy, perhaps particularly as we act in public and semi-public spaces. I suggest that basic issues concerning action choices have been left largely unexplored, due to a series of problematic theoretical assumptions at the heart of privacy debates. One such assumption has to do with the influential conceptualization of privacy as pertaining to personal intimate facts belonging to a private sphere as opposed to a public sphere of public facts. As Helen Nissenbaum has pointed out, the notion of privacy in public sounds almost like an oxymoron given this traditional private-public dichotomy. I discuss her important attempt to defend privacy in public through her concept of ‘contextual integrity.’ Context is crucial, but Nissenbaum’s descriptive notion of existing norms seems to fall short of a solution. I here agree with Joel Reidenberg’s recent worries regarding any approach that relies on ‘reasonable expectations’ . The problem is that in many current contexts we have no such expectations. Our contexts have already lost their integrity, so to speak. By way of a functional and more biologically inspired account, I analyze the relational and contextual dynamics of both privacy needs and harms. Through an understanding of action choice as situated and options and capabilities as relational, a more consequence-oriented notion of privacy begins to appear. I suggest that privacy needs, harms and protections are relational. Privacy might have less to do with seclusion and absolute transactional control than hitherto thought. It might instead hinge on capacities to limit the social consequences of our actions through knowing and shaping our perceptible agency and social contexts of action. To act with intent we generally need the ability to conceal during exposure. If this analysis is correct then relational privacy is an important condition for autonomic purposive and responsible agency—particularly in public space. Overall, this chapter offers a first stab at a reconceptualization of our privacy needs as relational to contexts of action. In terms of ‘rights to privacy’ this means that we should expand our view from the regulation and protection of the information of individuals to questions of the kind of contexts we are creating. I am here particularly interested in what I call ‘unbounded contexts’, i.e. cases of context collapses, hidden audiences and even unknowable future agents

Rethinking Visitation: From a Parental to a Relational Right

[...] visitation rights are considered to arise from the very fact of parenthood, so that parents are entitled to this right simply by being legally recognized as parents. [...] visitation rights are subject to the general rule of parental exclusivity: only a child\u27s legal parents have rights considered parental, and non-parents cannot acquire them

Stories Told By, For, and About Women Refugees: Engendering Resistance

In this paper I discuss some of the ways women’s narratives reflect how they make sense of seeking asylum[1] and how narratives can become a means of resistance. The interview data comes from a qualitative study[2] looking at the in-depth narratives of seventeen women who had all made a claim for asylum in the United Kingdom (UK). The women who participated had been living in the UK for different periods of time, ranging from a couple of months to seven years. Aged between early twenties to mid-fifties, they came from fourteen different countries of origin. I utilised an in-depth narrative approach to interviewing women which offered a number of distinct advantages: allowing for women’s narratives to be the focus of the study; capturing the particularity, complexity and richness of each woman’s story; and highlighting women’s agency in storytelling (Mauthner and Doucet, 1998, 2003). Interviews lasted between one and a half to three hours and were conducted in a wide range of different locations in the UK