Schnoor/Taproot Could Improve Bitcoin Privacy and Scaling – CoinDesk

If the privacy and scaling upgrade Schnorr/Taproot makes it into bitcoin (BTC), it could pave the way for advanced and heretofore impossible projects. That is, as they say, good for bitcoin.

Schnorr/Taproot has made a great deal of progress recently, moving from a theoretical privacy and scaling idea into actual code. But while the community is very excited about its future, the change is rather confusing. Why? Because it bundles together several different technologies proposed over the years and each one is technically and conceptually unique.

First, there are Merklized Abstract Syntax Trees (MASTs), a smart contract technology developers have been talking about since 2013. Then we add Schnorr signatures, a scaling change first proposed in 2015 by Pieter Wuille, and finally Taproot, a privacy technology built on top of both, proposed in 2018 by Greg Maxwell.

Privacy and scaling are two things bitcoin still lacks. But as badly as these changes are needed, massive updates like this one are hard and, as such, are few and far between in bitcoin.

One thorny issue is simply deciding what would go into the upgrade.

"I think the biggest struggle in the process was to come up with the exact set of features to deploy at the same time," Blockstream researcher Tim Ruffing told CoinDesk.

Here's a rundown of what changes made the cut, and what didn't.

How big is this update?

First, we must remember this update is helpful but it's not a magic pill that instantly morphs bitcoin into a super-scalable and private currency, as experts debated on Twitter recently.

"It's the right thing to do these improvements but they won't suddenly make bitcoin a private currency," Ruffing said.

There will be some clear improvements. First, more complex types of transactions will be easier to use. In the most typical transaction, one person "signs" a transaction, proving he or she owns the bitcoin and can send it. "Multi-signature" (multi-sig) transactions, on the other hand, require more than one person to sign a transaction. This update will make it easier for multi-sig users.

"It's likely that more wallets will support multi-sig because it's cheaper and more private with BIP-taproot," Blockstream researcher Jonas Nick told CoinDesk.

Multi-signature has many important use cases. First, the multi-sig dependent lightning network could potentially speed up and scale payments for bitcoin, solving massive issues with the digital currency. If lightning proves to be the future of bitcoin, this improvement could have a large impact by making these transactions smaller in size and cheaper to process.

Further, multi-sig transactions using the new technology will look the same as normal transactions. So even though the bitcoin blockchain is public and anyone can easily look up a particular transaction, with this technology viewers will have no idea that these transactions actually represent lightning channels.

"Lightning channel openings and cooperatives are indistinguishable on the blockchain from normal payments. This also means that opening a lightning channel is just as expensive as a normal payment," Nick said.

Finally, the change would pave the way for other improvements that weren't possible before. One such possible next step is the addition of "cross-input aggregation," another way of scaling bitcoin by as much as 25 to 30 percent.

Schnorr for more efficient signatures

Understanding these upgrades requires some understanding of how bitcoin works. Only with the right "private key" (like an access code) can someone "sign" a transaction, thereby sending bitcoin to someone else. This process produces a "signature" that is attached to the transaction. The beauty is that anyone in the world can verify that this signature was produced by the right key

We touched on a more complicated version of this, multi-signature transactions, where more than one person is required to sign a transaction. When such a transaction is signed using ECDSA (bitcoin's current signature algorithm), it produces a separate signature for each person.

But this might be unnecessary. With the help of Schnorr signatures, it is possible to squash all of this data into a single signature using key aggregation.

The biggest struggle in the process was to come up with the exact set of features to deploy at the same time.

This makes the special type of bitcoin transaction smaller in size -- to the tune of 30 to 75 percent, according to Bitcoin Optech, an organization that helps bitcoin businesses adopt new scaling technologies like Schnorr/Taproot.

These sorts of scaling technologies are important because downloading the full bitcoin blockchain is the most secure and trust-minimizing way of using bitcoin. But that process requires more than 300 gigabytes of storage space.

Schnorr signatures also allow for something called "batch validation," making it possible to verify that multiple signatures are valid, saving time.

But just as important is what this upgrade leaves out in terms of Schnorr.

Developers have long proposed using "cross-input signature aggregation" to build Schnorr signatures into bitcoin transactions. Usually, each transaction requires more than one signature, one for each "input," which is roughly equivalent to one bill out of a handful of them passed over to a cashier.

But what if we could squash all these signatures for every transaction together?

Schnorr signatures theoretically allow for this. But this feature will have to wait for another time, as developers are still working through some security problems with adding this to bitcoin. Though with Schnorr added as a signature option in bitcoin, this kind of functionality will be one step closer.

"This could be done in a future upgrade," Ruffing said.

MASTs: better smart contracts

Merkelized Abstract Syntax Trees (MASTs) aren't in the name of the upcoming bitcoin upgrade, but it's still a cool technology that developers have been talking about for a long time.

MASTs improve smart contracts in bitcoin, making it easier for users to set more complicated conditions for a transaction.

Think back to the multi-signature option we talked about earlier, where two people instead of just one need to sign a transaction. Then imagine a situation in which you want to say a bitcoin can't be retrieved until after a certain date. A user might want to combine these conditions at once. That's where MASTs come in.

Right now, when one of these scripts is "redeemed" the full script is squashed into a transaction, taking up a lot of room and showing the whole world what conditions the user used to lock up the bitcoin.

MASTs arrange these conditions in a new way that looks like a tree. Each branch of the tree holds a different condition a user could meet to spend the bitcoin. Then, only a hash of the tip of the tree is included in the bitcoin blockchain instead of all the script conditions.

This is more private because only the script used will hit the blockchain. All in all, MASTs make it much easier and cheaper to lock up bitcoin with these more complicated rulesets.

Taproot gives a privacy boost

Taproot builds on MASTs and Schnorr to create smart contracts with better privacy.

Generally, right now, transactions with complex scripts using MAST would really stand out on the blockchain. Even if MAST itself is more privacy-preserving, the format is a bit different for these transactions so it's easy to tell if someone is using a script or not.

Using the magic of signature aggregation Schnorr provides, Taproot would make these transactions look just like normal transactions.

But it doesn't work for every MAST contract, only for cooperative spends, where one branch of the Merkle tree is a multi-sig transaction, which is successfully used. If any of the other branches are used, then this privacy benefit disappears.

That said, developers expect the cooperative spend use case will be the most common use.

Then there's Tapscript, which could make it easier to make further improvements to the scripts we've talked about in the future. "While the BIP-tapscript changes don't immediately benefit the average bitcoin user, they are designed to make updates to the script system easier in the future," Nick said.

Right now, developers are battle testing this bundle of new technologies. So far no major problems have been found, but developers are making it the best they can before they try to add it to bitcoin with a soft fork.

"Just recently we've suggested a few minor changes to make the Schnorr signing algorithm more resistant to implementation mistakes and physical attacks," Nick said. As developers grow and expand bitcoin's technology, its changes like these that will truly make the platform usable for developers and financial professionals alike.

View post:
Schnoor/Taproot Could Improve Bitcoin Privacy and Scaling - CoinDesk

Bitcoin Price Rejected Again at the 50-Day Moving Average – InvestingCube

Bitcoin price trades higher but off the daily highs as the crypto pair rejected for the second day in a row at the 50-day moving average. Bitcoin retreated yesterday after failed to break above $7,421. Bitcoin makes a second attempt to break above the 50-day moving average that might initiate another leg higher to $8,000 mark.

The South Korea central bank has begun a pilot program to test its national digital currency WON. The central banks pilot program will run till the end of 2021 to check the technical and legal issues of CBDC. China expected to launch its centralized digital currency sometime in 2020. Many analysts believe that might be an increase in demand for digital currencies a people fear that physical cash is helping the spread of coronavirus.

Bitcoin price is 1.52% higher at $7,319 as the rebound from the recent lows is keep pushing higher as the sentiment improves. The critical resistance for the short term trend is the 50-day moving average where the bears guard and looking for a correction.

On the upside, the first resistance for Bitcoin stands at $7,428 the 50-day moving average and the daily top. More offers will be met at $7,975 the high from March 12. The next hurdle for BTCUSD stands at $8,148 the 100-day moving average.

On the other side, first support for Bitcoin will be met at $7,152 the daily low. If Bitcoin breaks below, the next support stands at $6,792 the low from April 6. Next support area stands at $6,556 the low from April 2.

Originally posted here:
Bitcoin Price Rejected Again at the 50-Day Moving Average - InvestingCube

Bitcoin price predicted to reach highs of $15k before end of year despite Pandemic effects – ZyCrypto

Financial markets, both crypto and traditional, have not been as bullish as hoped for, because of the coronavirus pandemic. Less than a month ago, Bitcoin crashed quite terribly and was trading at levels around $3,700, effectively dampening investors appetite. In a few days, however, it began to rise and has since regained most of its loss. This rise, according to a recent report, is expected to continue until the king coin crosses $15,000 later this year.

The Finder.com report is bullish on Bitcoins chances, derived from forecasts made by 10 industry leaders. These people agree that Bitcoin does not have immunity against the coronavirus pandemic and all of its negative effects. However, they believe that Bitcoin will still spike.

The report arrives at an average price of $15,499 before the end of the year, pulled from individual predictions. However, Finder co-founder Fred Schebesta believes that $35,000 is possible if the world pools resources together.

We have a wave of discomfort rapidly approaching us. Depending on how proactive we are as a collective will dramatically change the possibility of seeing a $35K BitcoinIf the world works together to push past this virus in coming months, I can see the market returning to Bitcoin as it does what it does best: recovers and grows.

While Schebesta remained bullish, Rouge International Managing Director Desmond Marshall believes Bitcoin will plunge later this year because it cant function either as money or as an investment tool.

The virus will drag on. Peoples jobs and businesses are at peril. You cant buy bread or masks with Bitcoin. So as a currency, it couldnt work. As an investment asset, people would most likely buy precious metals or stocks that are well below their value.

Even worse is the University of Canberras Dr. John Hawkins, who believes Bitcoin will crash to $2,000 by the end of 2020. Canberra believes Bitcoin is a failed experiment which is only valuable in the eyes of speculators as it has no worth of its own.

The report also touches on whether or not Bitcoin is a safe-haven asset. Only 40% of the panelists in this report believe that Bitcoin really is a safe-haven asset, and its reaction to recent events does not affect this status.

According to Marshall, Bitcoins safe-haven viability is largely predicated on people who hold the asset. He believes that Bitcoin is held back because it is not commonly tradable and is hard to liquidate. Marshall compares it to gold, which he says can be liquidated aggressively because it has a lot more buyers.

Get Daily Crypto News On Facebook | Twitter | Telegram | Instagram

The views expressed in the article are wholly those of the author and do not represent those of, nor should they be attributed to, ZyCrypto.This article is not meant to give financial advice. Please carry out your own research before investing in any of the various cryptocurrencies available.

Read the original post:
Bitcoin price predicted to reach highs of $15k before end of year despite Pandemic effects - ZyCrypto

Julian Assange still held on remand as coronavirus spreads through UK prisons – World Socialist Web Site

By Thomas Scripps 3 April 2020

Just one week after Julian Assanges request for bail in recognition of the threat posed to his life by COVID-19 was denied, the spread of the coronavirus through the prison system is escalating alarmingly.

The WikiLeaks founder, held in Belmarsh prison facing extradition to the US for exposing war crimes, has a chronic lung condition and has had his health destroyed by a decade of mistreatment by the British state, amounting to psychological torture.

Already on Monday, 55 inmates were reported infected across 21 different prisons in the UK, plus 18 prison staff and four escort staff. The number of prisoners testing positive was double the total just three days before. By Tuesday, the number had risen again to 65, across 23 prisons. According to the Mirror, around 6,000 prison and probation staff are currently in self-isolation12 percent of the workforce. Two prisoners have already been killed by the virus, the first on March 22 and the second on March 26.

The direction of travel is indicated by Rikers Jail in New York city. On March 31 there were 180 reported cases in the prison out of a population of 4,604, meaning an infection rate eight times higher than the already severely affected city itself.

In the UK, the barbaric response of the authorities has been to cohort prisoners who display coronavirus-type symptoms, like a fever or cough, with confirmed cases of COVID-19.

The Guardian reports that last week in Wandsworth prison in South West London, 12 coronavirus patients were kept with another 40 inmates with coughs and respiratory problems in the same isolation wing and in shared cells. This is in line with Ministry of Justice (MoJ) virus guidelines which read, If facing multiple cases of those displaying symptoms, cohorting, or the gathering of potentially infected cases into a designated area, may be necessary. There are apparently no plans for more tests at the prison and one wing has had no hot water supply for a week.

Unsanitary conditions are commonplace throughout the prisons system. A report from the National Audit Office earlier this year revealed a general state of chronic disrepair, including leaking rooms, broken heating systems and rat infestations. Last year, prison inspectors found that ten out of the thirty-five institutions they inspected did not meet minimum standards of cleanliness and infection-control compliance.

Belmarsh prison has a poor record on infection control. Noting that Assange has previously had significant dental problems, the Daily Maverick writes that a 2007 report by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons discovered that infection control was inadequate, citing a lack of infection control measures in the dental suite.

The Daily Maverick article also references inspections from 2009 and 2011 which concluded that infection control and decontamination standards were still not sufficiently good and that the dental surgery should be refurbished to meet infection control guidelines. In 2013, another report found that this recommendation was not achieved. Last year, the Independent Monitoring Boards reported that major safety and decency concerns remain, while the state of the showers and many of the toilets across the prison is appalling.

Given these appalling conditions, prisoners rights groups have called for the release of older, non-violent and vulnerable inmates.

Deborah Coles, director of the charity Inquest, sent an open letter to Prime Minister Boris Johnson saying, People in prison are already dying. Many detention settings already have the virus within their walls, with thousands of frontline staff self-isolating the prison service is making plans to store the bodies of prisoners who will die in the coming months The government has a legal and moral obligation to protect the lives of detained persons from a foreseeable danger to their health.

Emily Bolton, legal director of advocacy group Appeal, stated, For the government to leave prisoners to die of Covid-19 behind bars when these deaths could be avoided is like leaving prisoners to drown in Orleans parish prison when the waters rose after Hurricane Katrina time is running out to avoid minor offences becoming capital crimes, and life sentences from becoming death sentences.

Faced with a catastrophe, the government is making a few very limited moves to release some prisoners.

Around 200 inmates in Northern Irelandroughly 7 percent of the totalwho are currently in the last three months of their sentence for non-violent offences will be released soon, under curfew and conditions which restrict their contacts with others. Scottish prisons are considering similar plans, with Scottish Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf saying, We are actively looking at options to do that. It could happen as early as next week. The situation is increasingly alarming.

In England and Wales, the Ministry of Justice has said pregnant women not considered a high risk to the public will be temporarily issued with an electronic tag within days.

Any additional releases are understood to have been ruled out. The Justice department insists that robust contingency plans have been put in place. No consideration whatsoever will be given to Assangeone of only two prisoners held on remand, as an innocent man, in Belmarsh maximum security prison.

In a video released on Wednesday, WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Kristinn Hrafnsson said, A week ago, Magistrates Court Judge Vanessa Baraitser denied the request to set Julian Assange free on bail because of the extraordinary circumstances of Covid-19. She did so by citing that there were no known cases of Covid-19 in Belmarsh prison and that she had full faith in the prison authorities.

Only a few hours later that same day those authorities had to admit that there were numerous cases of Covid-19 in the UK prisons. And those numbers have been going up day by day. Last week we knew that more than a hundred guards in Belmarsh were staying at home in self-isolation, and those numbers have now escalated. We have learned now that they doubled over the weekend

The media reports today that prisoners with flu-like symptoms are forced to share cells with other inmates. This is outrageous if not criminal. This cannot go on. No one knows how widespread the virus is at the prison. No one is testing

It doesnt take an expert to understand that the prison environment is the worst environment for illnesses such as Covid-19. The parliamentary group of the Council of Europe has said that theres only one journalist in a UK prison. That journalist is Julian Assange. He has to be released immediately. Do not forget that he is on remand. He is innocent according to the law. Release Julian Assange right now.

Doctors for Assange have released a statement saying, [District Judge] Baraitser did not address the increased risk to Mr Assange relative to the general UK prison population, let alone prisoners at HMP Belmarsh where Assange is incarcerated. Nor did she address the rapidly emerging medical and legal consensus that vulnerable and low-risk prisoners should be released, immediately

Baraitsers assurance that government measures were adequate to protect Mr Assange rang hollow on the very day the UK government announced that Prince Charles tested positive for Covid-19. If the UK government cannot protect its own royal family from the disease, how can it adequately protect its most vulnerable prisoners in prisons, which have been described as breeding grounds for coronavirus?

The British ruling class are using one monstrous crime to achieve another. Their inaction in response to the pandemic has created a time-bomb in UK prisons whose consequences they now intend Assange to suffer. They would be happy to see him die. More than ever, his life depends on the defence of WikiLeaks and democratic rights becoming a mass issue in the international working class. We encourage everyone to join the Global Defence Campaign and publicise its work and material widely.

' ]; var html = htmlArray.join(''); $('body').prepend(html); $('#popupfundappeal > .wrapper > .text > .button').click(function() { _paq.push(['trackGoal', 22]); }); $('#popupfundappeal > .wrapper > .text > .link').click(function() { $('#popupfundappeal').remove(); _paq.push(['trackGoal', 23]); return false; }); var expireDate = new Date(); var minutes = 180; expireDate.setTime(expireDate.getTime() + (minutes * 60 * 1000)); $.cookie('popupfundappeal', 'seen', { expires: expireDate, path: '/', domain: 'wsws.org', secure: false }); setTimeout(function() { $('#popupfundappeal').addClass('active'); }, 2000); } } /* if (!$.cookie('popupfundappeal')) { var expireDate = new Date();var minutes = 180;expireDate.setTime(expireDate.getTime() + (minutes * 60 * 1000));$.cookie('popupfundappeal', 'unseen', {expires: expireDate,path: '/',domain: 'wsws.org',secure: false}); } */ }function appendInlineChart() {if (window.location.href.indexOf('/en/articles/2019/04/20/chic-a20.html') != -1) {var htmlArray = ['

'];var html = htmlArray.join('');$('#content > p').slice(-5,-4).before(html);}if (window.location.href.indexOf('/en/articles/2018/12/20/kil1-d20.html') != -1) {var htmlArray = ['

'];var html = htmlArray.join('');$('#content > p').slice(-5,-4).before(html);}if (window.location.href.indexOf('/en/articles/2018/12/21/kil2-d21.html') != -1) {var htmlArray = ['

'];var html = htmlArray.join('');$('#content > p').slice(1,2).before(html);htmlArray = ['

'];html = htmlArray.join('');$('#content > p').slice(9,10).before(html);htmlArray = ['

'];html = htmlArray.join('');$('#content > p').slice(9,10).before(html);}if (window.location.href.indexOf('/en/articles/2018/12/22/kil3-d22.html') != -1) {var htmlArray = ['

'];var html = htmlArray.join('');$('#content > p').slice(1,2).after(html);htmlArray = ['

'];html = htmlArray.join('');$('#content > p').slice(2,3).after(html);}}function appendInlineHeritageAd() {var htmlArray = ['

'];var html = htmlArray.join('');$('#content > p').slice(-25,-24).before(html);}function appendInlineNewsletterAd() {var htmlArray = ['

'];var html = htmlArray.join(''); var pos = $('#content > p').length / 2;$('#content > p').slice(-(pos+1),-(pos)).before(html);}function appendInlineSepjoinAd() {var htmlArray = ['

'];var html = htmlArray.join(''); var pos = $('#content > p').length / 2;$('#content > p').slice(-pos,-(pos-1)).before(html);}function appendCookieBar() { if ($.cookie('cookies') != 'accepted_20181101') {var htmlArray = [ '

'];var html = htmlArray.join('');$('body').append(html);$('#cookies > p > .button-accept').click(function() {var expireDate = new Date(); var days = 365; expireDate.setTime(expireDate.getTime() + (days * 1440 * 60 * 1000)); $.cookie('cookies', 'accepted_20181101', { expires: expireDate, path: '/', domain: 'wsws.org', secure: false });$('#cookies').remove();return false; });}} function callSidebarFunctions() { //appendTopAppeal(); //appendInlineAppeal(); //appendInlineAppeal2(); //appendBottomAppeal(); //appendBottomAppeal2(); if (window.location.href.indexOf('demo=topbar') != -1) { appendFundAppeal2015(); } if (window.location.href.indexOf('demo=bottombar') != -1) { appendFundAppeal2016(); } // appendCookieBar(); if (window.location.href.indexOf('demo=mayday') != -1) { popupMaydayAd(); } if (window.location.href.indexOf('demo=popup') != -1) { popupFundAppeal(); } //popupEventAd(); appendInlineChart(); if (window.location.href.indexOf('/en/articles/2017/06/23/pref-j23.html') != -1) { appendInlineHeritageAd(); } if (window.location.href.indexOf('/en/articles/2017/06/29/pers-j29.html') != -1) { appendInlineSepjoinAd(); } if (window.location.href.indexOf('/en/articles/2017/09/09/irma-s09.html') != -1) { appendInlineNewsletterAd(); } if (window.location.href.indexOf('/en/articles/2019/02/19/lett-f19.html') != -1) { $('#content').children('h5').remove(); }};

See the original post:
Julian Assange still held on remand as coronavirus spreads through UK prisons - World Socialist Web Site

Freedom from fear: John Pilger on coronavirus, Assange, propaganda and human rights – Green Left Weekly

World-renowned journalist and filmmaker John Pilger speaks to TJ Coles about the coronavirus crisis in the context of propaganda, imperialism, and human rights.

People are being told to self-isolate because of coronavirus, but Julian Assange has been isolated by successive British governments for years. Can you tell us whats going on with his case and how he was doing last time you saw him?

On March 25, a London court refused Julian Assange bail even though he was convicted of nothing and charged with nothing in Britain.

The Donald Trump administration wants to extradite him on a concocted indictment of espionage so ludicrous in law it should have been thrown out on the first day of the extradition hearing in February.

It wasnt thrown out because the magistrate, Vanessa Baraitser (she is described as a judge but is actually a magistrate) has made it clear she is acting on behalf of the British and US governments. Her bias has shocked those of us who have sat in courtrooms all over the world.

At the bail hearing, she added cruelty to her repertoire. Julian was not allowed to attend, not even by video link; instead he sat alone in a cell.

His barrister, Edward Fitzgerald QC, described how he was at risk of contracting coronavirus.He has a chronic lung condition and is in a prison with people who are likely to be carriers of the disease.

The UK Prison Governors Association has warned there will be deaths unless the vulnerable are released. The Prison Officers Association agrees; the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights, the WHO, the Prison Advisory Service all have said the virus is set to spread like wildfire through Britains congested, unsanitary prisons.

Even Boris Johnsons Justice Secretary, Robert Buckland, says: The virus could take over the prisons ... and put more lives at risk. At the time of writing, nine prisoners have died from COVID-19 in British prisons, including one at Belmarsh.

These are the numbers the authorities admit to; there are very likely more. Some vulnerable prisoners are to be released, but not Julian: not in the land of Magna Carta. How shaming.

When I last saw Julian in prison, he had lost between 10 and 15 kilos; his arm was a stick. He is as sharp as ever; his black humour is intact. His resilience astonishes me.

But how long can this resilience last? He is a political prisoner of the most ruthless forces, whose goal is to break him.

In your filmThe Dirty Waron the NHSyou expose the British National Health Services creeping privatisation and hollowing out, both by the Tories and New Labour. Whats the link between the coronavirus and the fragmentation of the NHS?

That the virus has been allowed to sweep through modern, developed societies is a crime against humanity. This applies especially to Britain.

In 2016, the Department of Health in London conducted a full-scale pandemic drill, known as Exercise Cygnus. The National Health Service was overwhelmed. There werent enough ventilators, emergency beds, ICU beds, protective kits and much else. In other words, it accurately predicted the crisis we face today.

The Chief Medical Officer at the time appealed to the Conservative government to heed the warning and begin to restore and prepare the NHS. This was ignored; the documents describing the conclusions of the drill were suppressed.

Why? By 2016, the Department of Health had been reduced to a revolving door of Thatcherite ideologues: privatisers, management consultants, asset strippers, many of them besotted with the American model of healthcare, where the current head of NHS England, Simon Stevens, had spent 10 years promoting the private health industry as a senior executive of United Health, a company that exemplifies an infamous system which effectively disbars some 87 million Americans from medical treatment.

In Britain, the Americanising of health care has been accelerating year upon year since a Tory bill, theHealth and Social Care Act, welcomed privateers such as Richard Branson and his Virgin Care.

In 2019, more of the NHS was sold to private companies than ever before. By last November, the number of public beds had been cut to 127,000, the lowest bed capacity since the NHS was founded in 1948 and the lowest in Europe.

Mental health beds were down to a mere 18,000 and most mental health services were now in private hands, mostly American.

This subversion of the worlds first public health service, established to give all people, regardless of income and class, freedom from fear, is surely a crime in what is now a state of fear.

Alas, my film foretold much of this. With the NHS and its clinicians prepared and ready with a national testing program not unlike Germanys, I believe Britain could have avoided the worst of the virus and the draconian measures that followed.

Your 2016 film,The Coming War on China, documents US encirclement and demonisation of China. Can you talk about the propaganda of the coronavirus as a Chinese virus?

Lets take one example. When the coronavirus emerged in China and Australian tourists of mainly Chinese descent flew home, they were quarantinedin a remote mining camp and an offshore detention centre.

When a cruise ship, the Ruby Princess, docked in Sydney with mostly white Australians and infested with the virus, the passengers were allowed to disembark without so much as a temperature check, let alone quarantine. As a result, 662 people linked to the ship have fallen ill and at least 11 have died.

The difference here is race and racist propaganda. A virulent anti-China campaign has consumed the Australian media in a country whose biggest trading partner is China and the universities depend largely on Chinese students.

At the same time, no country is as integrated with the US as Australia: its military and national security agencies and bases; its politics and media.

The current US propaganda war on China began in Australia when then-US president Barack Obama addressed federal parliament in 2011 and announced Americas pivot to Asia. This launched the biggest peacetime build-up of US naval forces in the Pacific since World War II, all of it aimed at China.

Today, more than 400 US bases surround China, from northern Australia, to the Marshall Islands, throughout south-east Asia, Japan and Korea. Such intimidation of China, a nuclear power, is seldom mentioned when China is attacked for building its defences on islands in the South China Sea.

As part of the pivot, a barrage of China-is-a-threat propaganda is dispensed by travelling Pentagon admirals and generals, who describe the Pacific Ocean as if it is theirs.

In a WikiLeaks disclosure, Hillary Clinton, secretary of state under Obama, demanded of a senior Chinese official that his government agree to re-name the Pacific the American Sea. She later claimed she was joking.

What are your thoughts on the US and British elites treating coronavirus as a war to be won, even though they cut back on public institutions that might have pre-empted the spread?

A pandemic described as a war to be won is in keeping with the language of permanent war.

The disabling or lock down of populations is routinely described as a wartime measure. This is meant to evoke The Blitz in 1940 when the Luftwaffe attacked England. Of course, to compare the current crisis with the carnage and struggle of World War II is profane.

The central issue is the ideological destruction of a health service that has been a beacon of a lost world of equity and fairness. How ironic and appropriate that the NHS is currently saving British Prime Minister Boris Johnsons life.

If there is a war, the weapons ought to be mass testing and tracing the pathways and pattern of the virus, treating people quickly and comprehensively, protecting front line health workers, social distancing and transparency but most of this is missing.

As for locking down the population and the forced isolation of those over 70, to quote one of the British government's favourite journalists, Robert Peston, there is a salutary lesson to be learned.

In 2012, a landmark study on the disease of isolation was published in Britain and the US. Researchers from University College, London, revealed that isolation was killing the elderly not loneliness, but isolation forced on people by circumstances beyond their control. More than pre-existing health conditions, isolation was the silent killer.

In my own reporting in Britain in the age of austerity, I have seen underfunded voluntary services trying to cope with this killer disease for example, in the northern city of Durham, devastated by Conservative policies, one volunteer attempted to care for 21,000 people and to save many of them.

This is occasionally a local media story, usually when a privatised care home is caught mistreating its elderly occupants, a common abuse. Once a humane extension of the NHS, Britains social care of the vulnerable was privatised by both Tory and Labour governments.

Many of the care homes are cash cows for ruthless individuals and their precarious companies. The people of Britain deserve better, at the very least their freedom from fear.

[TJColes is a postdoctoral researcher at Plymouth University's Cognition Institute in the UK and the author of several books, includingVoices for Peace(with Noam Chomsky and John Pilger) andPrivatized Planet.]

Read this article:
Freedom from fear: John Pilger on coronavirus, Assange, propaganda and human rights - Green Left Weekly

The First Book About The Coronavirus Is Here, And It’s Terrible – BuzzFeed News

The journalists at BuzzFeed News are proud to bring you trustworthy and relevant reporting about the coronavirus. To help keep this news free, become a member and sign up for our newsletter, Outbreak Today.

The Slovenian Marxist Slavoj iek is one of the most prominent (and prolific) writers in the world of contemporary philosophy, author of groundbreaking studies like Less Than Nothing and The Sublime Object of Ideology. He is also, I regret to inform you, at it again.

In Pandemic! COVID-19 Shakes the World, a short book to be published in April, iek casts his gaze on the coronavirus pandemic. The book has been produced at a breathless pace for the publishing world, in part because it recapitulates material from his weekly columns in RT, the government-funded publication formerly known as Russia Today. (iek will receive no royalties from this book, donating them instead to Doctors Without Borders.)

There are some passages of beauty, as when he remarks that, "It is only now, when I have to avoid many of those who are close to me, that I fully experience their presence, their importance to me." But those thoughts jostle with undigested chunks of film dialogue, complaints about political correctness, footnotes that mostly point to articles in the Guardian or to Wikipedia, and suggestions that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, whom Swedish authorities were investigating on the basis of rape and sexual assault allegations until last year, is "Christ on the cross." In other words, about what you'd expect if you've read one of his 47 other single-authored books written in English: a hire-wire juxtaposition of far-left political theory and pop culture, held together by the force of his rumpled charm.

Although the pieces collected here are scattered, iek does have, more or less, a central argument: Because of the coronavirus, the worlds capitalist systems will necessarily need to be replaced. He writes, "measures that appear to most of us today as Communist will have to be considered on a global level: coordination of production and distribution will have to take place outside the coordinates of the market."

iek takes pains to make his proposals seem reasonable to a less-than-communist reader, painting his approach as an outgrowth of various responses that have been floated to the pandemic and the economic collapse it has triggered: an expanded role for international groups like the World Health Organization, a universal basic income, and governments organizing health care across national borders producing and distributing masks, requisitioning hotel rooms for the sick all outside of the free market. No more cruise ships, Disneyland, or cars. Sounds great.

That all seems like pretty straight-ahead and sound advice, really, even if ieks vernacular laden with slogans from French student protesters and psychoanalysis doesnt seem to have been updated since the late 60s. And iek is at his best when he reminds us to "resist the temptation to treat the ongoing epidemic as something that has a deeper meaning." We're not being punished for our sins or being sent a message from the natural world to respect the limits of the environment. The virus that has no way of knowing us just lucked into a pattern of replication that turns out to be really, really bad for humans. "The really difficult thing to accept is the fact that the ongoing epidemic is a result of natural contingency at its purest, that it just happened."

Sadly, iek fails to follow his own advice.

In many places, iek is asking the right questions Why are so many people OK with exploiting blue-collar workers while the privileged sit at home taking conference calls? How did the distrust between the state and people make the outbreak worse in China? Are governments using the pandemic as an excuse to declare a state of emergency that might never be lifted? And iek does provide a novel metaphor for the revolution he thinks will bring down capitalism, comparing the pandemic to the finishing move that Uma Thurman's character uses at the end of Kill Bill: Volume 2: "the coronavirus epidemic is a kind of 'Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique' on the global capitalist system."

But then he arrives at Wuhan. Or, at least, his dream version of the Chinese city in which the pandemic originated, where iek finds "an unexpected emancipatory prospect," in an exoticized version of the city in China where the virus is thought to have begun. There, he finds what he thinks is a silver lining in all of the deaths and chaos.

"The abandoned streets in a megalopolis the usually bustling urban centers looking like ghost towns, stores with open doors and no customers, just a lone walker or a single car here and there, provide a glimpse of what a non-consumerist world might look like," iek writes of the version of Wuhan that he sees in his mind, a city in which he is able to roam without the pressure to constantly work, consume, and engage. (This passage may have been written before other cities around the world entered lockdown.)

The pandemic has given him a chance to withdraw from the hustle of everyday life, and for that iek is...grateful?

"Perhaps, one can hope that one of the unintended consequences of the coronavirus quarantines in cities around the world will be that some people at least will use their time released from hectic activity and think about the (non)sense of their predicament."

There seems to be a part of iek that recognizes that even if he dresses it up in language borrowed from the philosopher Martin Heidegger, there is something unspeakably crude about taking such a Pollyannaish position. He quickly backs off, adding, "When a masked citizen of Wuhan walks around searching for medicine or food, there are definitely no anti-consumerist thoughts on his or her mind, just panic, anger and fear."

But it's too late. iek has declared a wildly lopsided ledger to be balanced: On one side, thousands dead in Wuhan (not counting the rest of the world); on the other, a respite from speaking tours and daily errands for iek. (But not, of course, so much of a break that he can't still churn out a book.) Who's to say the universe has not maintained its balance in some mysterious way? "My plea is just that even horrible events can have unpredictable positive consequences."

My suggestion: Take a meditation class there are plenty free online. Read a book. Have a cup of coffee. Take a (socially distanced) walk. What a monstrous suggestion that in Wuhan's more than 2,500 deaths (a likely under-counted figure that could be as high as 42,000 deaths, according to an estimate made last month by Radio Free Asia) he can find solace, because the machinery of everyday banality has temporarily ground to a halt.

Otherwise, iek is left with quite a dream. But as one of Quentin Tarantino's other characters, Mr. White, says in Reservoir Dogs, "You shoot me in a dream, you better wake up and apologize."

Go here to read the rest:
The First Book About The Coronavirus Is Here, And It's Terrible - BuzzFeed News

At IYSSE (Australia) online lecture, Nick Beams exposes Socialist Alternative and the pseudo-left – World Socialist Web Site

By Oscar Grenfell 9 April 2020

At an online lecture organised by the International Youth and Students for Social Equality last Tuesday, leading WSWS writer Nick Beams exposed the bankrupt politics of Socialist Alternative and the pseudo-left, documenting their role in seeking to subordinate the working class to the capitalist political establishment amid growing social opposition.

The event was the third in a series of online lectures delivered by Beams under the title Capitalisms war on society: Why you need to fight for socialism. The speaker stressed that the differentiation from the pseudo-left was not separate from the struggle for socialism, but was at the cutting edge of defining the independent interests and tasks of the working class.

The lecture was well-received by an audience of over 190 people. Participants included workers, students and young people from most Australian states and territories, along with international attendees from Sri Lanka, New Zealand, the Philippines and a number of other countries.

A video of the lecture by Beams

Beams began by explaining that the coronavirus pandemic had triggered the greatest crisis of the capitalist system seen in our lifetimes, opening up a period of political radicalisation and socialist revolution.

The decisive question, the speaker said, was arming the emerging movement of the international working class with the lessons of history and the socialist and internationalist program of the Trotskyist movement developed in a struggle against all forms of national-opportunism.

Beams explained that the key issue is this: the working class cannot overthrow the bourgeoisie if it remains politically and ideologically subordinated to it. This required a political offensive against all those tendencies that sought to prevent the working class from striking out on an independent path, including the pseudo-left.

This had been demonstrated by the experience of the 1917 Russian Revolution. The fight waged by Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky and the Bolsheviks against the Mensheviks and other tendencies that supported the liberal Russian bourgeoisie played the decisive role in politically preparing the conquest of power by the working class.

The coming to office in Greece of Syriza, the Coalition of the Radical Left, in 2015 was a confirmation of the same truth in the negative. Syriza won elections by appealing to mass hostility to the austerity measures that had led to the collapse in support for PASOK, the countrys social democratic party.

Syriza immediately formed a coalition government with the Independent Greeks, an extreme right-wing nationalist formation. Within six weeks, it was imposing sweeping cuts to social services.

Socialist Alternative and the pseudo-left internationally had hailed Syriza as a model to be emulated. In May, 2015, Beams stated, Socialist Alternative had declared that Syriza cannot be transformed into an austerity party, even as it was clear that the organisation was committed to carrying out the demands of European finance capital.

Syrizas betrayal, and Socialist Alternatives support for it, were a product of the class character of both organisations, Beams explained.

This was also evident in Socialist Alternatives support for US regime-change operations, including the CIA-instigated civil war in Syria. Leading Socialist Alternative member Corey Oakley had infamously declared in 2012 that it was necessary to end knee-jerk anti-imperialism, i.e., to dispense with opposition to the predatory wars waged by the major powers.

Hand in hand with its pro-imperialist standpoint, Socialist Alternative had refused to defend Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks publisher who is currently imprisoned in Britain and faces extradition to the US, where he would be jailed for life for exposing American war crimes.

In 2012, Socialist Alternative had lent succor to the attempts to frame Assange on bogus allegations of sexual misconduct. The organisation declared that he should go to Sweden, where the allegations were concocted, to answer the charges. It is now clear that the warnings of WikiLeaks and the WSWS that the attempt to extradite Assange to Sweden was a pretext to carry out his forced rendition to the US were entirely accurate. For years afterwards, the organisation had not mentioned the WikiLeaks founder.

Only last year, following his illegal expulsion from the Ecuadorian Embassy and arrest by British police, did Socialist Alternative publish a handful of articles condemning the attempt to railroad Assange to a US prison. However, the organisation did not repudiate its previous attack on him and boycotted all events held in his defence.

Beams explained that these positions were inextricably tied to Socialist Alternatives attempts to subordinate the working class to Labor, a party of big business, and the unions, which have suppressed every major social and industrial struggle of the past four decades.

Pointing to the relevance of these issues in the present coronavirus crisis, Beams noted that Socialist Alternative had enthusiastically welcomed the installation of Sally McManus as secretary of the Australian Council of Trade Unions in 2017. A year later, Socialist Alternative wrote that McManus ascension had been greeted as a breath of fresh air by many unionists, declaring that she had struck a defiant tone in contrast to her grey predecessors.

McManus is currently collaborating with the Liberal-National Coalition government on a daily basis, as it responds to the pandemic by providing billions of dollars to the major corporations that are laying off thousands of workers.

Beams explained: It is necessary to deal not only with the McManuses of the world but even more importantly with tendencies within the pseudo-left that work to prop them up.

He concluded by declaring: The immune system of the working class is developed above all through the theoretical political struggle conducted by the revolutionary party, basing itself on the great strategic lessons of struggle for socialism going back more than a century.

There is only one party which conducts such a struggle, the SEP and the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI). I urge that you apply to join it tonight.

The lecture prompted a series of questions. One attendee asked the SEP to elaborate on its role in the events surrounding the coming to power of Syriza in Greece.

Beams explained that the WSWS and the ICFI had been alone in warning that Syriza would inevitably betray the working class, as a result of its history as an unprincipled amalgamation of various Stalinist and reformist tendencies, and its pro-capitalist program.

Others noted that Socialist Alternative occasionally criticises union officials. Did this, some asked, invalidate Beams analysis. In reply, he said that the pseudo-left organisations would sometimes condemn the actions of particular union bureaucrats. But they insisted that workers had to remain trapped within these thoroughly corporatised organisations.

All of them rejected the position of the ICFI, which was that the globalisation of production had rendered the nationalist and reformist program of the unions completely bankrupt. The unions had been transformed into open instruments of big business, necessitating the creation of genuine organisations of struggle, including independent rank and file committees.

Some participants asked why it was that Socialist Alternative played the role that it did. Beams said that like other pseudo-left organisations, they were descended from groups that had broken from the Fourth International amid the post-World War Two boom of global capitalism, rejecting its insistence on the revolutionary role of the working class.

The pseudo-left, Beams stated, spoke for affluent sections of the upper middle-class in academia, the public sector and the union officialdom, whose wealth had increased as a result of soaring share values. They had a material stake in defending the status quo by preventing the working class from turning to a genuine socialist perspective, and sought to advance their own interests through various forms of identity politics based on gender, race and sexual orientation.

Throughout the meeting, a small group of individuals, clearly opposed to Beams exposure of Socialist Alternative, sought to disrupt the event, playing music while he was speaking and shouting incoherently. The unsuccessful attempt to block the discussion underscored the pseudo-lefts concern over the growing support won by the SEP, and its inability to respond with substantive political arguments.

Next Tuesdays lecture will be on the role of identity politics. The fifth meeting will feature an interview and discussion with SEP (US) Presidential candidate Joseph Kishore. The details will be posted on the WSWS and on social media over the coming days.

Featured statements on the coronavirus pandemic

Donate today.

';var pos = Math.floor($('#content > p').length / 2);$('#content > p').slice(pos,pos+1).before(html); };

See the rest here:
At IYSSE (Australia) online lecture, Nick Beams exposes Socialist Alternative and the pseudo-left - World Socialist Web Site

Machine Learning: Making Sense of Unstructured Data and Automation in Alt Investments – Traders Magazine

The following was written byHarald Collet, CEO at Alkymi andHugues Chabanis, Product Portfolio Manager,Alternative Investments at SimCorp

Institutional investors are buckling under the operational constraint of processing hundreds of data streams from unstructured data sources such as email, PDF documents, and spreadsheets. These data formats bury employees in low-value copy-paste workflows andblockfirms from capturing valuable data. Here, we explore how Machine Learning(ML)paired with a better operational workflow, can enable firms to more quickly extract insights for informed decision-making, and help governthe value of data.

According to McKinsey, the average professional spends 28% of the workday reading and answering an average of 120 emails on top ofthe19% spent on searching and processing data.The issue is even more pronouncedininformation-intensive industries such as financial services,asvaluable employees are also required to spendneedlesshoursevery dayprocessing and synthesizing unstructured data. Transformational change, however,is finally on the horizon. Gartner research estimates thatby 2022, one in five workers engaged in mostly non-routine tasks will rely on artificial intelligence (AI) to do their jobs. And embracing ML will be a necessity for digital transformation demanded both by the market and the changing expectations of the workforce.

For institutional investors that are operating in an environment of ongoing volatility, tighter competition, and economic uncertainty, using ML to transform operations and back-office processes offers a unique opportunity. In fact, institutional investors can capture up to 15-30% efficiency gains by applying ML and intelligent process automation (Boston Consulting Group, 2019)inoperations,which in turn creates operational alpha withimproved customer service and redesigning agile processes front-to-back.

Operationalizingmachine learningworkflows

ML has finally reached the point of maturity where it can deliver on these promises. In fact, AI has flourished for decades, but the deep learning breakthroughs of the last decade has played a major role in the current AI boom. When it comes to understanding and processing unstructured data, deep learning solutions provide much higher levels of potential automation than traditional machine learning or rule-based solutions. Rapid advances in open source ML frameworks and tools including natural language processing (NLP) and computer vision have made ML solutions more widely available for data extraction.

Asset class deep-dive: Machine learning applied toAlternative investments

In a 2019 industry survey conducted byInvestOps, data collection (46%) and efficient processing of unstructured data (41%) were cited as the top two challenges European investment firms faced when supportingAlternatives.

This is no surprise as Alternatives assets present an acute data management challenge and are costly, difficult, and complex to manage, largely due to the unstructured nature ofAlternatives data. This data is typically received by investment managers in the form of email with a variety of PDF documents or Excel templates that require significant operational effort and human understanding to interpret, capture,and utilize. For example, transaction data istypicallyreceived by investment managers as a PDF document via email oran online portal. In order to make use of this mission critical data, the investment firm has to manually retrieve, interpret, and process documents in a multi-level workflow involving 3-5 employees on average.

The exceptionally low straight-through-processing (STP) rates already suffered by investment managers working with alternative investments is a problem that will further deteriorate asAlternatives investments become an increasingly important asset class,predictedbyPrequinto rise to $14 trillion AUM by 2023 from $10 trillion today.

Specific challenges faced by investment managers dealing with manual Alternatives workflows are:

WithintheAlternatives industry, variousattempts have been madeto use templatesorstandardize the exchange ofdata. However,these attempts have so far failed,or are progressing very slowly.

Applying ML to process the unstructured data will enable workflow automation and real-time insights for institutional investment managers today, without needing to wait for a wholesale industry adoption of a standardized document type like the ILPA template.

To date, the lack of straight-through-processing (STP) in Alternatives has either resulted in investment firms putting in significant operational effort to build out an internal data processing function,or reluctantly going down the path of adopting an outsourcing workaround.

However, applyinga digital approach,more specificallyML, to workflows in the front, middle and back office can drive a number of improved outcomes for investment managers, including:

Trust and control are critical when automating critical data processingworkflows.This is achieved witha human-in-the-loopdesign that puts the employee squarely in the drivers seat with features such as confidence scoring thresholds, randomized sampling of the output, and second-line verification of all STP data extractions. Validation rules on every data element can ensure that high quality output data is generated and normalized to a specific data taxonomy, making data immediately available for action. In addition, processing documents with computer vision can allow all extracted data to be traced to the exact source location in the document (such as a footnote in a long quarterly report).

Reverse outsourcing to govern the value of your data

Big data is often considered the new oil or super power, and there are, of course, many third-party service providers standing at the ready, offering to help institutional investors extract and organize the ever-increasing amount of unstructured, big data which is not easily accessible, either because of the format (emails, PDFs, etc.) or location (web traffic, satellite images, etc.). To overcome this, some turn to outsourcing, but while this removes the heavy manual burden of data processing for investment firms, it generates other challenges, including governance and lack of control.

Embracing ML and unleashing its potential

Investment managers should think of ML as an in-house co-pilot that can help its employees in various ways: First, it is fast, documents are processed instantly and when confidence levels are high, processed data only requires minimum review. Second, ML is used as an initial set of eyes, to initiate proper workflows based on documents that have been received. Third, instead of just collecting the minimum data required, ML can collect everything, providing users with options to further gather and reconcile data, that may have been ignored and lost due to a lack of resources. Finally, ML will not forget the format of any historical document from yesterday or 10 years ago safeguarding institutional knowledge that is commonly lost during cyclical employee turnover.

ML has reached the maturity where it can be applied to automate narrow and well-defined cognitive tasks and can help transform how employees workin financial services. However many early adopters have paid a price for focusing too much on the ML technology and not enough on the end-to-end business process and workflow.

The critical gap has been in planning for how to operationalize ML for specific workflows. ML solutions should be designed collaboratively with business owners and target narrow and well-defined use cases that can successfully be put into production.

Alternatives assets are costly, difficult, and complex to manage, largely due to the unstructured nature of Alternatives data. Processing unstructured data with ML is a use case that generates high levels of STP through the automation of manual data extraction and data processing tasks in operations.

Using ML to automatically process unstructured data for institutional investors will generate operational alpha; a level of automation necessary to make data-driven decisions, reduce costs, and become more agile.

The views represented in this commentary are those of its author and do not reflect the opinion of Traders Magazine, Markets Media Group or its staff. Traders Magazine welcomes reader feedback on this column and on all issues relevant to the institutional trading community.

Read more:
Machine Learning: Making Sense of Unstructured Data and Automation in Alt Investments - Traders Magazine

The impact of machine learning on the legal industry – ITProPortal

The legal profession, the technology industry and the relationship between the two are in a state of transition. Computer processing power has doubled every year for decades, leading to an explosion in corporate data and increasing pressure on lawyers entrusted with reviewing all of this information.

Now, the legal industry is undergoing significant change, with the advent of machine learning technology fundamentally reshaping the way lawyers conduct their day-to-day practice. Indeed, whilst technological gains might once have had lawyers sighing at the ever-increasing stack of documents in the review pile, technology is now helping where it once hindered. For the first time ever, advanced algorithms allow lawyers to review entire document sets at a glance, releasing them from wading through documents and other repetitive tasks. This means legal professionals can conduct their legal review with more insight and speed than ever before, allowing them to return to the higher-value, more enjoyable aspect of their job: providing counsel to their clients.

In this article, we take a look at how this has been made possible.

Practicing law has always been a document and paper-heavy task, but manually reading huge volumes of documentation is no longer feasible, or even sustainable, for advisors. Even conservatively, it is estimated that we create 2.5 quintillion bytes of data every day, propelled by the usage of computers, the growth of the Internet of Things (IoT) and the digitalisation of documents. Many lawyers have had no choice but resort to sampling only 10 per cent of documents, or, alternatively, rely on third-party outsourcing to meet tight deadlines and resource constraints. Whilst this was the most practical response to tackle these pressures, these methods risked jeopardising the quality of legal advice lawyers could give to their clients.

Legal technology was first developed in the early 1970s to take some of the pressure off lawyers. Most commonly, these platforms were grounded on Boolean search technology, requiring months and even years building the complex sets of rules. As well as being expensive and time-intensive, these systems were also unable to cope with the unpredictable, complex and ever-changing nature of the profession, requiring significant time investment and bespoke configuration for every new challenge that arose. Not only did this mean lawyers were investing a lot of valuable time and resources training a machine, but the rigidity of these systems limited the advice they could give to their clients. For instance, trying to configure these systems to recognise bespoke clauses or subtle discrepancies in language was a near impossibility.

Today, machine learning has become advanced enough that it has many practical applications, a key one being legal document review.

Machine learning can be broadly categorised into two types: supervised and unsupervised machine learning. Supervised machine learning occurs when a human interacts with the system in the case of the legal profession, this might be tagging a document, or categorising certain types of documents, for example. The machine then builds its understanding to generate insights to the user based on this human interaction.

Unsupervised machine learning is where the technology forms an understanding of a certain subject without any input from a human. For legal document review, the unsupervised machine learning will cluster similar documents and clauses, along with clear outliers from those standards. Because the machine requires no a priori knowledge of what the user is looking for, the system may indicate anomalies or unknown unknowns- data which no one had set out to identify because they didnt know what to look for. This allows lawyers to uncover critical hidden risks in real time.

It is the interplay between supervised and unsupervised machine learning that makes technology like Luminance so powerful. Whilst the unsupervised part can provide lawyers with an immediate insight into huge document sets, these insights only increase with every further interaction, with the technology becoming increasingly bespoke to the nuances and specialities of a firm.

This goes far beyond more simplistic contract review platforms. Machine learning algorithms, such as those developed by Luminance, are able to identify patterns and anomalies in a matter of minutes and can form an understanding of documents both on a singular level and in their relationship to each another. Gone are the days of implicit bias being built into search criteria, since the machine surfaces all relevant information, it remains the responsibility of the lawyer to draw the all-important conclusions. But crucially, by using machine learning technology, lawyers are able to make decisions fully appraised of what is contained within their document sets; they no longer need to rely on methods such as sampling, where critical risk can lay undetected. Indeed, this technology is designed to complement the lawyers natural patterns of working, for example, providing results to a clause search within the document set rather than simply extracting lists of clauses out of context. This allows lawyers to deliver faster and more informed results to their clients, but crucially, the lawyer is still the one driving the review.

With the right technology, lawyers can cut out the lower-value, repetitive work and focus on complex, higher-value analysis to solve their clients legal and business problems, resulting in time-savings of at least 50 per cent from day one of the technology being deployed. This redefines the scope of what lawyers and firms can achieve, allowing them to take on cases which would have been too time-consuming or too expensive for the client if they were conducted manually.

Machine learning is offering lawyers more insight, control and speed in their day-to-day legal work than ever before, surfacing key patterns and outliers in huge volumes of data which would normally be impossible for a single lawyer to review. Whether it be for a due diligence review, a regulatory compliance review, a contract negotiation or an eDiscovery exercise, machine learning can relieve lawyers from the burdens of time-consuming, lower value tasks and instead frees them to spend more time solving the problems they have been extensively trained to do.

In the years to come, we predict a real shift in these processes, with the latest machine learning technology advancing and growing exponentially, and lawyers spending more time providing valuable advice and building client relationships. Machine learning is bringing lawyers back to the purpose of their jobs, the reason they came into the profession and the reason their clients value their advice.

James Loxam, CTO, Luminance

See original here:
The impact of machine learning on the legal industry - ITProPortal

Machine learning: the not-so-secret way of boosting the public sector – ITProPortal

Machine learning is by no means a new phenomenon. It has been used in various forms for decades, but it is very much a technology of the present due to the massive increase in the data upon which it thrives. It has been widely adopted by businesses, reducing the time and improving the value of the insight they can distil from large volumes of customer data.

However, in the public sector there is a different story. Despite being championed by some in government, machine learning has often faced a reaction of concern and confusion. This is not intended as general criticism and in many cases it reflects the greater value that civil servants place on being ethical and fair, than do some commercial sectors.

One fear is that, if the technology is used in place of humans, unfair judgements might not be noticed or costly mistakes in the process might occur. Furthermore, as many decisions being made by government can dramatically affect peoples lives and livelihood then often decisions become highly subjective and discretionary judgment is required. There are also those still scarred by films such as iRobot, but thats a discussion for another time.

Fear of the unknown is human nature, so fear of unfamiliar technology is thus common. But fears are often unfounded and providing an understanding of what the technology does is an essential first step in overcoming this wariness. So for successful digital transformation not only do the civil servants who are considering such technologies need to become comfortable with its use but the general public need to be reassured that the technology is there to assist, not replace, human decisions affecting their future health and well-being.

Theres a strong case to be made for greater adoption of machine learning across a diverse range of activities. The basic premise of machine learning is that a computer can derive a formula from looking at lots of historical data that enables the prediction of certain things the data describes. This formula is often termed an algorithm or a model. We use this algorithm with new data to make decisions for a specific task, or we use the additional insight that the algorithm provides to enrich our understanding and drive better decisions.

For example, machine learning can analyse patients interactions in the healthcare system and highlight which combinations of therapies in what sequence offer the highest success rates for patients; and maybe how this regime is different for different age ranges. When combined with some decisioning logic that incorporates resources (availability, effectiveness, budget, etc.) its possible to use the computers to model how scarce resources could be deployed with maximum efficiency to get the best tailored regime for patients.

When we then automate some of this, machine learning can even identify areas for improvement in real time and far faster than humans and it can do so without bias, ulterior motives or fatigue-driven error. So, rather than being a threat, it should perhaps be viewed as a reinforcement for human effort in creating fairer and more consistent service delivery.

Machine learning is an iterative process; as the machine is exposed to new data and information, it adapts through a continuous feedback loop, which in turn provides continuous improvement. As a result, it produces more reliable results over time and evermore finely tuned and improved decision-making. Ultimately, its a tool for driving better outcomes.

The opportunities for AI to enhance service delivery are many. Another example in healthcare is Computer Vision (another branch of AI), which is being used in cancer screening and diagnosis. Were already at the stage where AI, trained from huge libraries of images of cancerous growths, is better at detecting cancer than human radiologists. This application of AI has numerous examples, such as work being done at Amsterdam UMC to increase the speed and accuracy of tumour evaluations.

But lets not get this picture wrong. Here, the true value is in giving the clinician more accurate insight or a second opinion that informs their diagnosis and, ultimately, the patients final decision regarding treatment. A machine is there to do the legwork, but the human decision to start a programme for cancer treatment, remains with the humans.

Acting with this enhanced insight enables doctors to become more efficient as well as effective. Combining the results of CT scans with advanced genomics using analytics, the technology can assess how patients will respond to certain treatments. This means clinicians avoid the stress, side effects and cost of putting patients through procedures with limited efficacy, while reducing waiting times for those patients whose condition would respond well. Yet, full-scale automation could run the risk of creating a lot more VOMIT.

Victims Of Modern Imaging Technology (VOMIT) is a new phenomenon where a condition such as a malignant tumour is detected by imaging and thus at first glance it would seem wise to remove it. However, medical procedures to remove it carry a morbidity risk which may be greater than the risk the tumour presents during the patients likely lifespan. Here, ignorance could be bliss for the patient and doctors would examine the patient holistically, including mental health, emotional state, family support and many other factors that remain well beyond the grasp of AI to assimilate into an ethical decision.

All decisions like these have a direct impact on peoples health and wellbeing. With cancer, the faster and more accurate these decisions are, the better. However, whenever cost and effectiveness are combined there is an imperative for ethical judgement rather than financial arithmetic.

Healthcare is a rich seam for AI but its application is far wider. For instance, machine learning could also support policymakers in planning housebuilding and social housing allocation initiatives, where they could both reduce the time for the decision but also make it more robust. Using AI in infrastructural departments could allow road surface inspections to be continuously updated via cheap sensors or cameras in all council vehicles (or cloud-sourced in some way). The AI could not only optimise repair work (human or robot) but also potentially identify causes and then determine where strengthened roadways would cost less in whole-life costs versus regular repairs or perhaps a different road layout would reduce wear.

In the US, government researchers are already using machine learning to help officials make quick and informed policy decisions on housing. Using analytics, they analyse the impact of housing programmes on millions of lower-income citizens, drilling down into factors such as quality of life, education, health and employment. This instantly generates insightful, accessible reports for the government officials making the decisions. Now they can enact policy decisions as soon as possible for the benefit of residents.

While some of the fears about AI are fanciful, there is a genuine cause for concern about the ethical deployment of such technology. In our healthcare example, allocation of resources based on gender, sexuality, race or income wouldnt be appropriate unless these specifically had an impact on the prescribed treatment or its potential side-effects. This is self-evident to a human, but a machine would need this to be explicitly defined. Logically, a machine would likely display bias to those groups whose historical data gave better resultant outcomes, thus perpetuating any human equality gap present in the training data.

The recent review by the Committee on Standards in Public Life into AI and its ethical use by government and other public bodies concluded that there are serious deficiencies in regulation relating to the issue, although it stopped short of recommending the establishment of a new regulator.

The review was chaired by crossbench peer Lord Jonathan Evans, who commented:

Explaining AI decisions will be the key to accountability but many have warned of the prevalence of Black Box AI. However our review found that explainable AI is a realistic and attainable goal for the public sector, so long as government and private companies prioritise public standards when designing and building AI systems.

Fears of machine learning replacing all human decision-making need to be debunked as myth: this is not the purpose of the technology. Instead, it must be used to augment human decision-making, unburdening them from the time-consuming job of managing and analysing huge volumes of data. Once its role can be made clear to all those with responsibility for implementing it, machine learning can be applied across the public sector, contributing to life-changing decisions in the process.

Find out more on the use of AI and machine learning in government.

Simon Dennis, Director of AI & Analytics Innovation, SAS UK

Excerpt from:
Machine learning: the not-so-secret way of boosting the public sector - ITProPortal