Having done large scale document review for massive scale litigation it is now even easier than you have stated, as AI does a lot of the heavy lifting and humans are used to check and confirm in random batches the relevancy, privilege issues or for DOJ in the USA security issues with documents and peoples names. The redactions are usually done by humans as initials or some names can look benign to algorithms. But you are right, it’s all OCR’d, algorithms go through millions and millions of documents, checked by humans then rerun the algorithm for typos and other things picked up by humans. Relativity is one of the most used software. But - our min of Justice refuses to upgrade tech so that nothing works as it should. - police have a discovery unit and investigation tools to transcribe text messages, which is then used to seek warrants to further phone records to investigate so they do use tech- this is therefore a choice not to provide open information. They want obfuscation. Bureaucrats shouldn’t be checked on- don’t you know they are unbiased as they don’t have to answer to constituents and be voted in and then out.
MBIE uses manual systems to check on us oldies when overseas. With a 6-monthly checkup with proof of life form.
Up until post-COVID? They insisted on forms being sent snail mail back to the ministry!!!!
Won't bore you with my correspondence re this. That insisted they needed the postmark to prove where I was overseas.!!!!!!!!!
The form has been emailed to me for some years.
Each form is identical...so fraud is easy. IF one is of a mind to leave a stack of pre-signed forms for descendanrs to san and email in to to keep super payments coming.
I have a friendship with an internationally recognised IT security expert.
With my background in systems design. We came up with an automated solution.
A full and detailed description then how it would work. laid out step by step.
I sent this to two ministers. One Labor, one National
Unfortunately the cardy wearers gave the same response.
The Minister has reviewed your correspondence, and it has been passed to the IT department.
No further correspondence.
Ie we dont do change. It might reduce the headcount.
Thank you very much for this information. I just stated to a friend today that some of us are spending a great deal of our time and lives challenging government on what are our very rights and ultimately our future survival. Therefore, government in its current form is not fit for purpose. Has it always been that way and we didn't realise or is it a relatively recent thing.
Why am I not surprised? I have worked in government or quasi-government entities for close to 50 years. The war story I mention is of the cost of repairs needed for a series 1 Landrover still on the books in the late 1980s, but MAF could not replace a ~30 year old vehicle. As someone who has been subject to OIAs, I suspect the underlying problem is that the wider IT infrastructure is also not really fit for purpose, bearing a remarkable resemblance to a modern version of that Series 1 Land Rover, with your article complaining it has no air conditioning.
Having done large scale document review for massive scale litigation it is now even easier than you have stated, as AI does a lot of the heavy lifting and humans are used to check and confirm in random batches the relevancy, privilege issues or for DOJ in the USA security issues with documents and peoples names. The redactions are usually done by humans as initials or some names can look benign to algorithms. But you are right, it’s all OCR’d, algorithms go through millions and millions of documents, checked by humans then rerun the algorithm for typos and other things picked up by humans. Relativity is one of the most used software. But - our min of Justice refuses to upgrade tech so that nothing works as it should. - police have a discovery unit and investigation tools to transcribe text messages, which is then used to seek warrants to further phone records to investigate so they do use tech- this is therefore a choice not to provide open information. They want obfuscation. Bureaucrats shouldn’t be checked on- don’t you know they are unbiased as they don’t have to answer to constituents and be voted in and then out.
Yes I experienced this with Porirua City Council... deliberate obfuscation is the correct description!
Very revealing, would make a great election policy - complete overhaul and upgrade of OIA tools and guidelines.
Its not only OIA.
MBIE uses manual systems to check on us oldies when overseas. With a 6-monthly checkup with proof of life form.
Up until post-COVID? They insisted on forms being sent snail mail back to the ministry!!!!
Won't bore you with my correspondence re this. That insisted they needed the postmark to prove where I was overseas.!!!!!!!!!
The form has been emailed to me for some years.
Each form is identical...so fraud is easy. IF one is of a mind to leave a stack of pre-signed forms for descendanrs to san and email in to to keep super payments coming.
I have a friendship with an internationally recognised IT security expert.
With my background in systems design. We came up with an automated solution.
A full and detailed description then how it would work. laid out step by step.
I sent this to two ministers. One Labor, one National
Unfortunately the cardy wearers gave the same response.
The Minister has reviewed your correspondence, and it has been passed to the IT department.
No further correspondence.
Ie we dont do change. It might reduce the headcount.
I wonder if this is on the radar of any of the coalition parties?
I'm sure some bright young thing could overhaul the system in a matter of days, making it efficient and user-friendly for everyone.
I follow a few interesting OIAers on FYI.
The most common responses to requests do seem to be:
"Please clarify..."
"Not our department, try someone else"
"This will take too much time, we request an extension"
and "This will take too much time, we can't be bothered" (only slightly paraphrasing there)
Thank you very much for this information. I just stated to a friend today that some of us are spending a great deal of our time and lives challenging government on what are our very rights and ultimately our future survival. Therefore, government in its current form is not fit for purpose. Has it always been that way and we didn't realise or is it a relatively recent thing.
Why am I not surprised? I have worked in government or quasi-government entities for close to 50 years. The war story I mention is of the cost of repairs needed for a series 1 Landrover still on the books in the late 1980s, but MAF could not replace a ~30 year old vehicle. As someone who has been subject to OIAs, I suspect the underlying problem is that the wider IT infrastructure is also not really fit for purpose, bearing a remarkable resemblance to a modern version of that Series 1 Land Rover, with your article complaining it has no air conditioning.
Ever wonder what our public servants do all day??
Work out the myriad different ways they can say “O Minister, you can’t do that” using “Yes Minister” and “Utopia” as playbooks.
Work out ways by which they can delay and frustrate answers to OIA requests
And that is the work plan for before morning tea.