Kuri

@ES_Wickham My photo on the other app is less cool than the one here, I think.

I'm not sure what is driving this paradigm shift regarding anonymized/de-identified data, unless the thinking is that with AI scrubbing every piece of information, no amount of obfuscation can eliminate the risk of re-identification.

It also appears to restrict disclosure of anonymized (i.e. "non-personal data") information to limited purposes. This could have huge implications for #opendata, #proactivedisclosure and other transparency initiatives.

As I read through Bill 33 (Protection of #privacy Act), I'm starting to see how it could distrupt a very fundamental things it regulates "non-personal data". Unlike #gdpr, which expressly said anonymizing PI is always allowed, Bill 33 restricts that operation.

@BrentColman So happy my LAPP is managed by this organization.

UCP to Teachers 2021: AIMCo is vastly superior to ATRF and we are taking your pensions and giving it to them. UCP to Albertan's 2023: AIMCo is vastly superior to CPP and we'll be taking your pensions to them. UCP 2024: AimCo is vastly incompetent and we need to fire them all.

@journo_dale @Emilie_Ni Emilie is a gem.

Bravo to @Emilie_Ni for calling out the identity politics on the right that are being made invisible by the dismissal of the term when it applies to the left. #PnPCBC

But, also, good job security for me, I guess as privacy management is about to get much more labour intensive than it was.

Anyway, my access colleagues seem overall pretty happy with the new Act. I'm still very much on the fence about the new privacy legislation. Smaller public bodies especially will really struggle with it.

Finally seeing people talking about this, but #access is taking up all oxygen. Poor #privacy, always the neglected child of the #foip world.

@imminentventure @DrewYewchuk I think it was a deliberate choice to not have the OIPC (who have "adjudicators" that are not judges) overruling an already established process in the legal profession. If you believe an affidavit asserting privilege is fraudulent, there's a process to deal with it.

Actually not, though. That's simply not how this works anywhere in the world, including Alberta where courts will appoint someone to check if solicitor client privilege applies, called a "Referee". "In the result, however, given the volume of materials over which Suncor claimed privilege, the Court directed the Court of Queen’s Bench Case Management Counsel to act as referee (“Referee”). The Referee would determine and set the process for conducting the initial assessment and identification of the records, documents and information regarding the Accident. Following such assessment, the Referee would make recommendations for the Court to consider and approve as to which of the records, documents and information regarding the Accident were covered by litigation or solicitor-client privilege." lexology.com/library/detail… All across common law jurisdictions a referee, in a third party position, evaluates if solicitor client privilege actually applies. Additionally, Justice Cromwell, the OIPC, and I all agree that's not acceptable. It's all inconsistent with other provinces that did explicitly include the language solicitor client privilege to empower their version of the OIPC to check. "Per Cromwell J.: The express language and the full context of s. 56(3) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act demonstrate that the legislature intended to abrogate solicitor‑client privilege to the extent of permitting the Commissioner to order production of records over which solicitor‑client privilege is asserted when necessary to adjudicate the validity of that claim. Section 56(3) explicitly grants that authority “[d]espite . . . any privilege of the law of evidence”, and to hold that solicitor‑client privilege is a legal privilege but not a “privilege of the law of evidence” in FOIPP is not justified."

New 'access to information act' for Alberta. It will need a full line by line review, but first glance - looks like a nightmare. Any request a public body doesn't like is going to get classed as taking unreasonable time and effort under the new section 7, and then dismissed (1/2)

@DrewYewchuk @charlesrusnell @thenarwhal This seems to me to be another tool (in addition to fee estimates to limit extremely broad requests), splitting requests into multiples would be a good strategy for applicants to not hit this barrier.

@charlesrusnell @thenarwhal Sort of. They currently refuse requests for lack of detail, now they will also refuse them for taking unreasonably' long to process.

@imminentventure @DrewYewchuk Oh, I don't see that as a flaw. Legal privilege is always confirmed by a lawyer of the public body and a lawyer incorrectly claiming privilege can lose their license to practice.

My comment was with respect to section 56(3). Right now, public bodies in Alberta can misrepresent whether documents are protected by solicitor client privilege and the OIPC lacks authority to investigate and remedy that because the majority at the SCC interpreted "any legal privilege" to not include solicitor client privilege.

@imminentventure @DrewYewchuk This is in section 27 of the previous Act.

@DrewYewchuk Of all things to amend 🤦‍♀️ They couldn’t amend the act to explicitly note “any legal privilege” includes solicitor client or litigation privilege, as it obviously was originally intended—like in other comparable provincial enactments? Adding protection for that privilege?

@UbakaOgbogu This is also the ABNDP stratregy. With about the same results.

@Sean_B_taketwo @veryloudwoman I'm a poli sci major. I've never considered politics a game and I think at least 50% of the people in my classes didn't either. Maybe this proportion changed after I graduated, but I don't think it's a universal thing at all.

@veryloudwoman This is a very interesting observation, and my experience very much mirrors yours. In uni most of my friends majored in polisci, and they always drove me absolutely nuts because to them it was all just a fucking game with no human element.

As horrific as it is, the genocide in Gaza will be drop in the bucket compared to mass dying our planet will experience as pretty any pretense to stop climate change ends. We're recreating the condidtions of the Permian extinction and I see no hope of preventing that.

@Tori_TLCR The correction needed at the bottom really tracks, too.

According to Liberal identity politics they should be pleased if someone like Leslyn Lewis ever ran for Prime Minister and won. Hey, she's a woman. Woman of colour too. Progressive!

See stuff about paywalls for newspapers. Periodic reminder to check out the electronic resources of your local public library if you want to check out an occasional paywalled article but don't see value in a whole subscription. I love @EPLdotCA for this.

What are the odd there will be any consequences for this murderer?