Search

The development and implementation of smart infrastructure raises legitimate security and privacy concerns for both the specific users of these systems as well as the public at large. The consolidation of big data through smart applications within smart infrastructure systems allows large tech companies and government entities to gather and potentially exploit the personal information of consumers. These powerful organizations collect consumer data in order to perform analysis on it, trade or sell it, or simply store it for later use. The gathering of big data or metadata, data about data, provides an opportunity for the collector to observe or predict the behaviors of specific individuals or groups. Those holding this information could use it to promote their own agendas or to otherwise exploit those from whom it has been collected without their knowledge or consent. Additionally, the current lack of legislation and policies concerning the security of smart applications or IoT devices makes the possibility of security and privacy breaches more prevalent. A breach would allow access to sensitive information which would be a threat to security and privacy at an individual and/or national scale. Due to the dynamic nature of smart infrastructure, we employed a systems analysis of this problem as a methodological approach leading to three solutions. We recommend a three-part solution-based analysis, consisting of 1.) Financial Backing 2.) Creation of Policies and Regulations and 3.) Technical Integration. This solution addresses market mitigation, data privacy for consumers, and data authentication between smart technologies and critical infrastructure. Preliminary results of this research suggest that these components are necessary for a sustainable smart infrastructure.

In this paper, we describe our three submissions to the SIGMORPHON 2020 shared task 1 on grapheme-to-phoneme conversion for 15 languages. We experimented with a single multilingual transformer model. We observed that the multilingual model achieves results on par with our separately trained monolingual models and is even able to avoid a few of the errors made by the monolingual models.

This article gives an overview of the legal system of Switzerland and then compares the judiciaries of Switzerland and New Zealand. As far as Switzerland is concerned, it covers both the system of the Swiss Federation and the systems in the cantons. After analysing the powers enjoyed by the judiciary via the legislature, the article examines the appointment of judges in detail. The author explains how, in Switzerland, openly political and other considerations are weighed in the course of electing judges and how the appointment of lay judges is balanced with an active role of law clerks. In contrast, New Zealand has a proud tradition of apolitical judicial appointments that are made solely based on merit. The author criticises that Swiss judges are elected for a term of office, whereas New Zealand judges enjoy the security of tenure and thus, a greater judicial independence. Lastly, the article covers the removal and discipline of judges, where the author, while he commends the recent reform in New Zealand, he advocates for a system where the ultimate decision is given to an independent judicial body rather than a parliament.