Academic literature on the topic 'Cloud Custodian'

Ophthalmology researchers are becoming increasingly reliant on protected data sets to find new trends and enhance patient care. However, there is an inherent lack of trust in the current healthcare community ecosystem between the data custodians (i.e., health care organizations and hospitals) and data consumers (i.e., researchers and clinicians). This typically results in a manual governance approach that causes slow data accessibility for researchers due to concerns such as ensuring auditability for any authorization of data consumers, and assurance to ensure compliance with health data security standards. In this paper, we address this issue of long-drawn data accessibility by proposing a semi-automated “honest broker” framework that can be implemented in an online health application. The framework establishes trust between the data consumers and the custodians by: 1. improving the eiciency in compliance checking for data consumer requests using a risk assessment technique; 2. incorporating auditability for consumers to access protected data by including a custodian-in-the-loop only when essential; and 3. increasing the speed of large-volume data actions (such as view, copy, modify, and delete) using a popular common data model. Via an ophthalmology case study involving an age-related cataract research use case in a community cloud testbed, we demonstrate how our solution approach can be implemented in practice to improve timely data access and secure computation of protected data for ultimately achieving data-driven eye health insights.

As the technology changing every year so, there has been an attempt to apply the new technology in numerous areas to increase the quality of human life. One of the main fields of research that has seen an implementation of the technology is the healthcare sector. Consequently, our paper is an effort to solve a healthcare problem currently people are facing. Main objective of our paper is to enterprise a remote healthcare system. It covers of three key parts. The first part is, detection of patient’s condition with the proposed system, second is to storing data on cloud storage and the last part is to provide the data for isolated viewing. Remote observing of the data empowers a doctor or custodian to television a patient’s health advancement from anywhere. In this project, we have obtainable an IoT architecture personalized for healthcare applications. The main motive of this scheme is to come up with a Remote Health Monitoring System that will completed with locally available sensors with a view to manufacture it reasonable for everybody

Background The linking of administrative data across agencies provides the capability to investigate many health and social issues with the potential to deliver significant public benefit. Despite its advantages, the use of cloud computing resources for linkage purposes is scarce, with the storage of identifiable information on cloud infrastructure assessed as high risk by data custodians. Objective This study aims to present a model for record linkage that utilizes cloud computing capabilities while assuring custodians that identifiable data sets remain secure and local. Methods A new hybrid cloud model was developed, including privacy-preserving record linkage techniques and container-based batch processing. An evaluation of this model was conducted with a prototype implementation using large synthetic data sets representative of administrative health data. Results The cloud model kept identifiers on premises and uses privacy-preserved identifiers to run all linkage computations on cloud infrastructure. Our prototype used a managed container cluster in Amazon Web Services to distribute the computation using existing linkage software. Although the cost of computation was relatively low, the use of existing software resulted in an overhead of processing of 35.7% (149/417 min execution time). Conclusions The result of our experimental evaluation shows the operational feasibility of such a model and the exciting opportunities for advancing the analysis of linkage outputs.

<p><strong>Abstract.</strong> Collaborative custodianship refers to an arrangement where a number of custodians work together to produce integrated datasets for a spatial data infrastructure (SDI), e.g. local authorities contributing address or street data to a national SDI dataset. Collaborative cloud mapping allows for ubiquitous, convenient, on-demand, configured and tailor-made mapping with resources shared between various entities collaborating on a specific initiative, such as an SDI or for disaster management. This paper presents the results of a workshop in South Africa during which case studies from the Netherlands, Belgium and Austria of collaborative custodianship of address data were presented, and OpenStreetMap as a case study of collaborative cloud mapping. Subsequently, challenges and opportunities for implementing similar initiatives in the context of the South African SDI were debated in break-away sessions. The results from these sessions were analysed using the PESTEL framework.</p>

The study shows how information society is reflected in e-records (volatility, dynamism, mixed private and public spheres), how it transformed the records themselves (no physical aspect, complicated structure, separated elements), and how it conquered the human memory. The basic dilemma of long term preservation is that erecords are dependent upon hardware and software which change rapidly, therefore we are unable to preserve them unchanged. The study talks shortly about integrity and authenticity of e-records which are basic requirements, and then outlines the major preservation strategies (migration, emulation, technology preservation, post-custodial archives, cloud computing) used by archives. In the digital world archival science adopted a lot from information science which caused that standards (ISADg, EAD, OAIS) are the new milestones of archival science. The greatest „yield” of this cooperation is that the data management and procedures are automatable. However, archivists must keep their classical synthetic work in digital world, too: to know and describe the record creator agency, its economic, political and societal environment, to build the system of fonds, etc.

IntroductionWhile linkage units perform population data linkage with high efficiency, other parts of the workflow from custodians to researchers remain largely outside the control of linkage operators. Most importantly, resource constraints at data custodians often limit quality control (QC) efforts and lead to delays in the data delivery to researchers. Objectives and Approachovercome these challenges, we have created the Data integration Unit (DIU) to undertake content data management and delivery in conjunction with the custodians who remain the principal data curators. Data is managed in the Custodian-Controlled Data Repository (CDDR) a highly secure virtual repository for data storage, analysis and access, established and operated by the DIU. Stringent controls for user access and data flows ensure that data is provided safely by custodians. Overseen by the custodians, DIU staff undertake QC activities, and integrate and deliver multiple datasets for approved linkage projects. ResultsLong-term data storage in the CCDR decreases data custodian workloads by reducing the frequency of content data provision to periodic updates. Feedback loops built into the QC process allow custodians to improve their datasets by learning from data issues identified by the DIU. Extensive QC undertaken by DIU staff on individual datasets and data validation across multiple datasets held in the CCDR ensure that the quality of data provided to researchers is improved. Moreover, DIU staff dedicated to data integration provide faster content data delivery to researchers. Lastly, the CCDR reduces the number of custodians researchers need to liaise with for data provision. Conclusion/ImplicationsOperational since February 2018, the DIU has delivered content data for several linkage projects, based on key datasets stored in the CCDR. The incorporation of additional datasets is currently negotiated. Recognising recent developments in secure analytics infrastructure, the further evolution of the CCDR towards a cloud-based model is anticipated.

IntroductionUsers of linked data require access to an increasing number of heterogeneous datasets from diverse domains, often held in different secure research data environments, especially for multi-jurisdictional projects. Under the traditional model of data access, projects are required to transfer and harmonise the necessary datasets in one central location before analysis can be undertaken, increasing the time required for data acquisition and preparation. Objectives and ApproachIn a federated data environment, analysts query distributed datasets held in a network of multiple secure data environments via a central virtual database, without requiring the data to move. Instead, the data is analysed as close as possible to its storage location, minimising the amount of data transfers and giving data custodians more control over their data. This symposium explores the challenges and opportunities of establishing and operating a distributed network of federated secure research data environments. Leading organisations operating data platforms in various jurisdictions present for 15 minutes each the current capabilities of their platforms, the landscape of data environments in their jurisdictions and potential approaches to key questions such as: Harmonising/federating data sources Data security Data governance Discoverability/metadata Performance The audience is the then invited to participate in discussing the topic for the remaining 30 minutes. The following individuals have been approached to represent their organisations in this symposium: Professor David Ford, Swansea University: UK Secure eResearch Platform (UK SErP) Charles Victor, Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES): ICES Data & Analytic Virtual Environment (IDAVE) Professor Louisa Jorm, Centre for Big Data Research in Health, University of New South Wales: E-Research Institutional Cloud Architecture (ERICA) Professor Kimberlyn McGrail, Population Data BC: Secure Research Environment (SRE) Results / Conclusion / ImplicationsThis symposium will help formulate requirements for and barriers to distributed networks of federated secure research data environments, and create a foundation for data analytics across multiple platforms.

Abstract Background The ubiquity of mobile devices promises to address the need for continuous management of chronic conditions at lower costs. Its rapid expansion, particularly in public health, is currently largely consumer-driven and lacking in acceptable frameworks for its wider adoption into the healthcare systems. The aim of this study is to identify the key parameters to consider in developing a governance framework for a Parkinson’s Disease Management MHealth platform. The Parkinson’s Disease Manager (PDM) system was developed to gather symptom information from patients with PD via wearable devices and a specially designed app and stored securely in a cloud, for use by clinicians, health researchers and policy makers. Methodology Twelve stakeholders were interviewed in the UK including clinicians, data managers, the public. First, the participants’ existing views about sharing personal and then specifically health data online were explored. Secondly, participants were introduced to PDM via a diagram and encouraged to explore the risks and benefits of the system with a minimum of guidance. Finally, they were asked what risks they thought might be posed by a series of specific scenarios presented through vignettes and how such issues might be addressed. Results Thematic analysis identified eight emerging themes which clustered around two overarching categories: 1. The key challenges of the system identified included: Establishing appropriate governance; Protecting the data; Ensuring sustainability; Building trust; 2. The proposed solutions included: Ethically informed governance; Embedded data custodians; Sustainable funding and engagement; Trust through transparency. Conclusions The patient’s heuristic assessment of risks and benefits is mediated by trust, which can be initially gained by association with individuals and organisations already deemed trustworthy and then consolidated and sustained through transparency and delivering on promises. Key messages The effective system design, must ensure that standards of transparency, data protection and informed consent are upheld if the coming eHealth revolution is ever to realise its true potential. The use of diagrams and vignettes to support qualitative interviews helped elucidate the importance of balancing protection, utility and sustainability to build and maintain trust.

Overall objectives or goalMany health data linkage ecosystems across the world have designed and implemented secure data analysis environments as one of their controls to protect patient privacy and confidentiality. These have been shaped by local legislation and data governance policies, available IT infrastructure and resources, and the skills and imagination of their architects. However, at present their various features and functionalities have not been reviewed, synthesised or contrasted. Burton et al [1] have proposed 12 criteria for Data Safe Havens in health and healthcare, which they conceptualise broadly as encompassing data governance and ethics, quality and curation of data repositories, and data security. Under this definition, secure analysis environments, which may or may not be integrated with data repositories, are a component of a Data Safe Haven, addressing the criterion “Appropriate secure access to individually identifying data”. To guide those building and operating these environments, and data custodians and stewards who need to assess their fitness-for-purpose, it would be of great value to discuss and agree an aggregate term (e.g. “Secure Data Lab”) that describes them, and to develop a more detailed set of criteria for what entails “Appropriate secure access” to linked health data. The goal of this session is to describe and document the approaches that have been taken by flagship secure data analysis environments internationally, including their approaches to authentication, assigning permissions, managing the ingress and egress of files and auditing transactions, and their responses to emerging opportunities, including cloud computing and national and international data sharing. We will explore how the interplay of physical, technical and procedural controls have been combined to create existing models, and the extent to which these can balance each other and be applied with flexibility depending on perceived risk and regimes. Session structurePrior to the session, we will develop a draft set of criteria for “Appropriate secure access” to linked health data. The session will comprise presentations describing existing secure analysis environments against the draft criteria, followed by a facilitated discussion. The secure data analysis environments that will be presented include: UNSW Sydney E-Research Institutional Cloud Architecture (ERICA) PopData BC Secure Research Environment (SRE) Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES) Data and Analytic Virtual Environment (IDAVE) Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Gateway Intended output or outcomeWe will write up the outcomes of the session as a scientific paper that proposes an aggregate term for secure data analysis environments for linked health data and a set of criteria for what entails “Appropriate secure access” to linked health data. Presenters and Facilitators Professor Louisa Jorm, Centre for Big Data Research in Health, UNSW Sydney, Australia Dr Tim Churches, South Western Sydney Clinical School, UNSW Sydney, Australia Professor Kim McGrail, Population Data BC, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada J. Charles Victor, Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Canada Dr Kerina Jones, Swansea University Medical School, Wales, United Kingdom Professor David Ford, Swansea University Medical School, Wales, United Kingdom 1. Burton PR, Murtagh MJ, Boyd A, et al. Data Safe Havens in health research and healthcare. Bioinformatics 2015; 31(20): 3241–3248

This story not for myself … all over Australia story.No matter Aborigine, White-European, secret before,Didn’t like im before White-European…This time White-European must come to Aborigine,Listen Aborigine and understand it.Understand that culture, secret, what dreaming.— Senior Lawman Neidjie, Story about Feeling (78)IntroductionIn Senior Lawman Neidjie’s beautiful little book, with big knowledge, Story about Feeling (1989), he shares with us, his readers, the importance of feeling our connectedness with the land around us. We have heard his words and this is our effort to articulate our respect and responsibility in return. We are a small group of undergraduate students and a lecturer at the University of Newcastle (a mixed “mob” with non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal heritages) participating in an English course designed around listening to the knowledge stories of Country, in the context of Country as the energy and agency of the lands around us and not just a physical setting, as shared by those who know it best. We are a diverse group of people. We have different, individual, purposes for taking this course, but with a common willingness to listen which has been strengthened through our exposure to Aboriginal literature. This paper is the result of our lived experience of practice-led research. We have written this paper as a collective group and therefore we use “we” to represent and encompass our distinct voices in this shared learning journey. We write this paper within the walls, physically and psychologically, of western academia, built on the lands of the Darkinjung peoples. Our hope is to rethink the limits of epistemic boundaries in western discourses of education; to engage with Aboriginal ways of knowing predominantly through the pedagogical and personal act of listening. We aspire to reimagine our understanding of, and complicity with, public memory while simultaneously shifting our engagement with the land on which we stand, learn, and live. We ask ourselves: can we re-imagine the institutionalised space of our classroom through a dialogic pedagogy? To attempt to do this we have employed intersubjective dialogues, where our role is mostly that of listeners (readers) of stories of Country shared by Aboriginal voices and knowledges such as Neidjie’s. This paper is an articulation of our learning journey to re-imagine the tertiary classroom, re-imagine the relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australian knowledges, perspectives and peoples, re-imagine our collective consciousness on Aboriginal lands and, ultimately, to re-imagine ourselves. Re-imagining the Tertiary English Literature Classroom Our intersubjective dialogues have been built around listening to the stories (reading a book) from Aboriginal Elders who share the surface knowledge of stories from their Countries. These have been the voices of Neidjie, Max Dulumunmun Harrison in My People’s Dreaming (2013), and Laklak Burarrwanga et al. in Welcome to My Country (2013). Using a talking circle format, a traditional method of communication based upon equality and respect, within the confines of the four-walled institute of Western education, our learning journey moved through linear time, meeting once a week for two hours for 13 weeks. Throughout this time we employed Joshua Guilar’s notion of an intersubjective dialogue in the classroom to re-imagine our tertiary journey. Guilar emphasises the actions of “listening and respect, direction, character building and authority” (para 1). He argues that a dialogic classroom builds an educative community that engages both learners and teachers “where all parties are open to learning” (para 3). To re-imagine the tertiary classroom via talking circles, the lecturer drew from dialogic instruction which privileges content as:the major emphasis of the instructional conversation. Dialogic instruction includes a sharing of power. The actions of a dialogic instructor can be understood on a continuum with an autocratic instructional style at one end and an overly permissive style on the other. In the middle of the continuum are dialogic-enabling behaviors, which make possible a radical pedagogy. (para 1) Re-imaging the lecturer’s facilitating role has not been without its drawbacks and issues. In particular, she had to examine her own subjectivity and role as teacher while also adhering to the expectations of her job as an academic employee in the University. Assessing students, their developing awareness of Aboriginal ways of knowing, was not without worry. Advocating a paradigm shift from dominant ways of teaching and learning, while also adhering to expected tertiary discourses and procedures (such as developing marking rubrics and providing expectations regarding the format of an essay, referencing information, word limits, writing in standard Australian English and being assessed according to marks out of 100 that are categorised as Fails, Passes, Credits, Distinctions, or High Distinctions) required constant self-reflexivity and attempts at pedagogical transparency, for instance, the rubrics for assessing assignments were designed around the course objectives and then shared with the students to gauge understanding of, and support for, the criteria. Ultimately it was acknowledged that the lecturer’s position within the hierarchy of western learning carried with it an imbalance of power, that is, as much as she desired to create a shared and equal learning space, she decided and awarded final grades. In an effort to continually and consciously work through this, the work of Gayatri Spivak on self-reflexivity was employed: she, the lecturer, has “attempted to foreground the precariousness of [her] position throughout” although she knows “such gestures can never suffice” (271). Spivak’s work on the tendency of dominant discourses and institutions to ignore or deny the validity of non-western knowledges continues to be influential. We acknowledge the limits of our ability to engage in such a radical dialogical pedagogy: there are limits to the creativity and innovativeness that can be produced within a dominant Eurocentric academic framework. Sharing knowledge and stories cannot be a one-way process; all parties have to willingly engage in order to create meaningful exchange. This then, requires that the classroom, and this paper, reflect a space of heterogeneous voices (or “ears” required for listening) that are self-sufficiently open to hearing the stories of knowledge from the traditional custodians. Listening becomes a mode of thought where we are also aware of the impediments in our ability to hear: to hear across cultures, across histories, across generations, and across time and space. The intersubjective dialogues taking place, between us and the stories and also between each other in the classroom, allow us to deepen our understanding of the literature of Country by listening to each other’s voices. Even if they offer different opinions from our own they still contribute to our broader conception of what Country is and can mean to people. By extension, this causes us to re-evaluate the lands upon which we stand, entering a dialogue with place to reinterpret/negotiate our position within the “story” of Country. This learning and listening was re-emphasised with the words of Miriam-Rose Ungunmerr-Baumann’s explanation of “Dadirri”: an inner, deep, contemplative listening and awareness (para 4). To be able to hear these stories has required a radical shift in the way we are listening. To create a space for an intersubjective dialogue to occur between the knowledge stories of Aboriginal peoples who know their Country, and us as individual and distinct listeners, Marcia Langton’s third category of an intersubjective dialogue was used. This type of dialogue involves an exchange between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians where both are positioned as subjects rather than, as historically has been the case, non-Aboriginal peoples speaking about Aboriginality positioned as “object” and “other” (81). Langton states that: ‘Aboriginality’ arises from the subjective experience of both Aboriginal people and non-Aboriginal people who engage in any intercultural dialogue, whether in actual lived experience or through a mediated experience such as a white person watching a program about Aboriginal people on television or reading a book. Moreover, the creation of ‘Aboriginality’ is not a fixed thing. It is created from out histories. It arises from the intersubjectivity of black and white in dialogue. (31)Langton states that historically the ways Aboriginality has been represented by the ethnographic gaze has meant that “Aboriginality” and what it means is a result of colonisation: Aboriginal peoples did not refer to themselves or think of themselves in such ways before colonisation. Therefore, we respectfully tried to listen to the knowledge stories shared by Aboriginal people through Aboriginal ways of knowing Country. Listening to Stories of Country We use the word “stories” to represent the knowledge of a place that traditional custodians of their land know and willingly share through the public publication of literature. Stories, in our understanding, are not “made-up” fictional narratives but knowledge documents of and from specific places that are physically manifested in the land while embodying metaphysical meaning as well. Stories are connected to the land and therefore they are connected to its people. We use the phrase “surface (public) knowledge” to distinguish between knowledges that anyone can hear and have access to in comparison with more private, deeper layered, secret/sacred knowledge that is not within our rights to possess or even within our ability to understand. We are, however, cognisant that this knowledge is there and respect those who know it. Finally, we employ the word Country, which, as noted above means the energy and agency of the lands around us. As Burarrwanga et al. share:Country has many layers of meaning. It incorporates people, animals, plants, water and land. But Country is more than just people and things, it is also what connects them to each other and to multiple spiritual and symbolic realms. It relates to laws, customs, movement, song, knowledges, relationships, histories, presents, future and spirits. Country can be talked to, it can be known, it can itself communicate, feel and take action. Country for us is alive with story, Law, power and kinship relations that join not only people to each other but link people, ancestors, place, animals, rocks, plants, stories and songs within land and sea. So you see, knowledge about Country is important because it’s about how and where you fit in the world and how you connect to others and to place. (129) Many colonists denied, and many people continue to deny today, the complexity of Aboriginal cultures and ways of knowing: “native traditions” are recorded according to Western epistemology and perceptions. Roslyn Carnes has argued that colonisation has created a situation in Australia, “where Aboriginal voices are white noise to the ears of many non-Indigenous people. […] white privilege and the resulting white noise can be minimised and greater clarity given to Aboriginal voices by privileging Indigenous knowledge and ways of working when addressing Indigenous issues. To minimise the interference of white noise, non-Indigenous people would do well to adopt a position that recognises, acknowledges and utilises some of the strengths that can be learned from Aboriginal culture and Indigenous authors” (2). To negotiate through this “white noise”, to hear the stories of Country beneath it and attempt to decolonise both our minds and the institutional discourses we work and study in (Langton calls for an undermining of the “colonial hegemony” [8]) and we have had to acknowledge and position our subjectivity as Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal peoples and try to situate ourselves as “allied listeners” (Carnes 184). Through allied listening in intersubjective dialogues, we are re-learning (re-imagining) history, reviewing dominant ideas about the world and ways of existing in it and re-situating our own positions of Aboriginality and non-Aboriginality. Rereading the Signs Welcome to My Country by Burarrwanga et al. emphasises that knowledge is embedded in Country, in everything on, in, above, and moving through country. While every rock, tree, waterhole, hill, and animal has a story (stories), so do the winds, clouds, tides, and stars. These stories are layered, they overlap, they interconnect and they remain. A physical representation such as a tree or rock, is a manifestation of a metaphysical moment, event, ancestor. The book encourages us (the readers) to listen to the knowledge that is willingly being shared, thus initiating a layer of intersubjectivity between Yolngu ways of knowing and the intended reader; the book itself is a result of an intersubjective relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal women and embedded in both of these intersubjective layers is the relationship between us and this land. The book itself offers a way of engaging with the physical environment that combines western processes (standard Australian written English for instance) with Aboriginal ways of knowing, in this instance, Yolngu ways. It is an immediate way of placing oneself in time and space, for instance it was August when we first read the book so it was the dry season and time for hunting. Reading the environment in such a way means that we need to be aware of what is happening around us, allowing us to see the “rules” of a place and “feel” it (Neidjie). We now attempt to listen more closely to our own environments, extending our understanding of place and reconsidering our engagement with Darkinjung land. Neidjie, Harrison, and Burarrwanga et al. share knowledge that helps us re-imagine our way of reading the signs around us—the physical clues (when certain plants flower it might signal the time to catch certain fish or animals; when certain winds blow it might signal the time to perform certain duties) that the land provides but there is also another layer of meaning—explanations for certain animal behaviours, for certain sites, for certain rights. Beneath these layers are other layers that may or may not be spoken of, some of them are hinted at in the text and others, it is explained, are not allowed to be spoken of or shared at this point in time. “We use different language for different levels: surface, middle and hidden. Hidden languages are not known to everyone and are used for specific occasions” (Burarrwanga et al. 131). “Through language we learn about country, about boundaries, inside and outside knowledge” (Burarrwanga et al. 132). Many of the esoteric (knowledge for a certain few) stories are too different from our dominant discourses for us to understand even if they could be shared with us. Laklak Burarrwanga happily shares the surface layer though, and like Neidjie, refers to the reader as “you”. So this was where we began our intersubjective dialogue with Aboriginality, non-Aboriginality and Country. In Harrison’s My People’s Dreaming he explains how Aboriginal ways of knowing are built on watching, listening, and seeing. “If we don’t follow these principles then we don’t learn anything” (59). Engaging with Aboriginal knowledges such as Harrison’s three principles, Neidjie’s encouragement to listen, and Burarrwanga et al.’s welcoming into wetj (sharing and responsibility) has impacted on our own ideas and practices regarding how we learn. We have had to shelve our usual method of deconstructing or analysing a text and instead focus on simply hearing and feeling the stories. If we (as a collective, and individually) perceive “gaps” in the stories or in our understanding, that is, the sense that there is more information embodied in Country than what we are receiving, rather than attempting to find out more, we have respected the act of the surface story being shared, realising that perhaps deeper knowledge is not meant for us (as outsiders, as non-Aboriginal peoples or even as men or as women). This is at odds with how we are generally expected to function as tertiary students (that is, as independent researchers/analytical scholars). We have identified this as a space in which we can listen to Aboriginal ways of knowing to develop our understanding of Aboriginal epistemologies, within a university setting that is governed by western ideologies. Neidjie reminds us that a story might be, “forty-two thousand [years]” old but in sharing a dialogue with each other, we keep it alive (101). Kwaymullina and Kwaymullina argue that in contrast, “the British valued the wheel, but they did not value its connection to the tree” (197), that is, western ways of knowing and being often favour the end result, disregarding the process, the story and the cycle where the learning occurs. Re-imagining Our Roles and Responsibility in Discourses of ReconciliationSuch a space we see as an alternative concept of spatial politics: “one that is rooted not solely in a politics of the nation, but instead reflects the diverse spaces that construct the postcolonial experience” (Upstone 1). We have almost envisioned this as fragmented and compartmentalised palimpsestic layers of different spaces (colonial, western, national, historical, political, topographical, social, educational) constructed on Aboriginal lands and knowledges. In this re-imagined learning space we are trying to negotiate through the white noise to listen to the voices of Aboriginal peoples. The transformative power of these voices—voices that invite us, welcome us, into their knowledge of Country—provide powerful messages for the possibility of change, “It is they who not only present the horrors of current circumstances but, gesturing towards the future, also offer the possibility of a way to move forward” (Upstone 184). In Harrison’s My People’s Dreaming, his chapter on Forgiveness both welcomes the reader into his Country while acknowledging that Australia’s shared history of colonisation is painful to confront, but only by confronting it, can we begin to heal and move forward. While notions of social reconciliation revolve around rebuilding social relations between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians, “ecological reconciliation involves restoring ecological connectivity, sustaining ecological services, sustaining biodiversity, and making tough decisions from an eco-centric point of view that will not always prioritise human desire” (Rose 7). Deborah Bird Rose identifies four reasons why ecological reconciliation must occur simultaneously with social reconciliation. First, “without an imaginable world for the future, there is no point even to imagining a future for ourselves” (Rose 2). Second, for us to genuinely embrace reconciliation we must work to respond to land rights, environmental restoration and the protection of sacred sites. Third, we must recognise that “society and environment are inextricably connected” (Rose 2) and that this is especially so for Aboriginal Australians. Finally, Aboriginal ways of knowing could provide answers to postcolonial environmental degradation. By employing Guilar’s notion of the dialogic classroom as a method of critical pedagogy designed to promote social justice, we recognise our own responsibilities when it comes to issues such as ecology due to these stories being shared with us about and from Country via the literature we read. We write this paper in the hope of articulating our experience of re-imagining and enacting an embodied cognisance (understood as response and responsibility) tuned towards these ways of knowing. We have re-imagined the classroom as a new space of learning where Aboriginal ways of knowing are respected alongside dominant educational discourses. That is, our reimagined classroom includes: the substance of [...] a transactive public memory [...] informed by the reflexive attentiveness to the retelling or representation of a complex of emotionally evocative narratives and images which define not necessarily agreement but points of connection between people in regard to a past that they both might acknowledge the touch of. (Simon 63) Through an intersubjective dialogic classroom we have attempted to reimagine our relationships with the creators of these texts and the ways of knowing they represent. In doing so, we move beyond dominant paradigms of the land around us, re-assessing our roles and responsibilities in ways that are both practical and manageable in our own lives (within and outside of the classroom). Making conscious our awareness of Aboriginal ways of knowing, we create a collective consciousness in our little circle within the dominant western space of academic discourse to, wilfully and hopefully, contribute to transformative social and educational change outside of it. Because we have heard and listened to the stories of Country: We know White-European got different story.But our story, everything dream,Dreaming, secret, ‘business’…You can’t lose im.This story you got to hang on for you,Children, new children, no-matter new generationAnd how much new generation.You got to hang on this old story because the earth, This ground, earth where you brought up, This earth e grow, you growing little by little, Tree growing with you too, grass…I speaking storyAnd this story you got to hang on, no matter who you, No-matter what country you.You got to understand…this world for us.We came for this world. (Neidjie 166) Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge the traditional custodians of the lands upon which this paper was researched and written. References Burarrwanga, Laklak, Ritjilili Ganambarr, Merrkiyawuy Ganambarr-Stubbs, Banbapuy Ganambarr, Djawundil Maymuru, Sarah Wright, Sandie Suchet-Pearson, and Kate Lloyd. Welcome to My Country. Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 2013. Carnes, Roslyn. “Changing Listening Frequency to Minimise White Noise and Hear Indigenous Voices.” Journal of Australian Indigenous Issues 14.2-3 (2011): 170-84. Guilar, Joshua D. “Intersubjectivity and Dialogic Instruction.” Radical Pedagogy 8.1 (2006): 1. Harrison, Max D. My People’s Dreaming: An Aboriginal Elder Speaks on Life, Land, Spirit and Forgiveness. Sydney: HarperCollins Australia, 2013. Kwaymullina, Ambelin, and Blaze Kwaymullina. “Learning to Read the Signs: Law in an Indigenous Reality.” Journal of Australian Studies 34.2 (2010): 195-208.Langton, Marcia. Well, I Saw It on the Television and I Heard It on the Radio. Sydney: Australian Film Commission, 1993. Neidjie, Bill. Story about Feeling. Broome: Magabala Books, 1989. Rose, Deborah Bird. “The Ecological Power and Promise of Reconciliation.” National Institute of the Environment Public Lecture Series, 20 Nov. 2002. Speech. Parliament House. Simon, Roger. “The Touch of the Past: The Pedagogical Significance of a Transactional Sphere of Public Memory.” Revolutionary Pedagogies: Cultural Politics, Instituting Education, and the Discourse of Theory (2000): 61-80. Spivak, Gayatri. C. “'Can the Subaltern Speak?' Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture.” Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. Eds. Nelson, Cary and Lawrence Grossberg. Urbana, IL: U of Illinois P, 1988. 271-313. Ungunmerr-Baumann, Miriam-Rose. Dadirri: Inner Deep Listening and Quiet Still Awareness. Emmaus Productions, 2002. 14 June 2015 ‹http://nextwave.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Dadirri-Inner-Deep-Listening-M-R-Ungunmerr-Bauman-Refl.pdf›.Upstone, Sara. Spatial Politics in the Postcolonial Novel. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, 2013.

Метою доповіді є аналіз безпеки використання хмарної інфраструктури. В роботі описано загальні принципи безпеки хмарних технологій та сервісів, а також визначено напрями реалізації цих питань зі сторони провайдера та користувача.

Der Computer ersetzt in den letzten Jahrzehnten zunehmend analoge Schreibwerkzeuge und Kommunikationsmittel. Das hat auch Auswirkungen auf den Schaffensprozess von Schriftstellern, die ihre Aufzeichnungen immer häufiger als digitale Objekte hinterlassen. Für Literaturarchive stellt sich folglich die Aufgabe, zukünftig auch digitale Schriftstellernachlässe zu übernehmen und zu archivieren und hierfür eine Langzeitzeitarchivierungs-Strategie zu entwickeln. Die vorliegende Arbeit beschäftigt sich mit dem Zeitraum vor der Übernahme eines Nachlasses durch ein Literaturarchiv und stellt die Frage, welche Maßnahmen Nachlasskuratoren in Zusammenarbeit mit Schriftstellern ergreifen können, um die Langzeitarchivierung zu ermöglichen. Nachlässe sind in diesem Zeitraum noch die persönlichen Archive von Schriftstellern. Der Eingriff von Seiten der Kuratoren in persönliche Archive wird in dieser Arbeit als präkustodiale Intervention bezeichnet. Die Arbeit erörtert zunächst die theoretischen Grundlagen dieser Fragestellung und arbeitet die Notwendigkeit der präkustodialen Intervention in Schriftstellerarchive heraus. Anhand eines Literaturberichtes zeigt sie, dass der Forschungsstand in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz im Vergleich zu den englischsprachigen Ländern defizitär ist und identifiziert Ursachen für diesen Befund. Zudem werden aus der Literatur mögliche Maßnahmen der präkustodialen Intervention entnommen und weiterentwickelt. Daraufhin überprüfen Experteninterviews in ausgewählten Literaturarchiven sowie eine Schriftsteller-Befragung diesen Befund und reichern ihn mit weiteren Daten an. Basierend auf den Ergebnissen der Literaturrecherche und des empirischen Teils wird die Einrichtung einer Cloud-basierten Arbeits- und Archivierungsumgebung für Schriftsteller als Hauptbestandteil einer Interventions-Strategie für Literaturarchive vorgeschlagen.
In recent decades, the computer has been displacing increasingly analogue writing tools and means of communication. This has an impact on the creative process of writers as well who leave their records more and more as digital objects. Therefore, special collections are being confronted with the task to acquire and archive digital papers in the future and to develop a digital preservation strategy for them. The present thesis deals with the period before the acquisition of papers and manuscripts by a special collection and brings up the question what kind of measures curators could take in cooperation with writers in order to make digital preservation possible. During this period, papers are still the personal archives of writers. The intervention in personal archives on the part of the curators is referred to as pre-custodial intervention. The work initially discusses the theoretical foundations of this question and exposes the need of pre-custodial intervention in writers archives. By means of a literature review the thesis shows that the state of research in Germany, Austria and Switzerland compared to English-speaking countries is deficient and identifies reasons for this finding. In addition, possible actions of pre-custodial intervention are taken from the literature and developed further. Thereupon, expert interviews in selected special collections as well as an online survey of writers review this findings and fill them with other data. Based on the results of the literature review and the empirical part, a cloud-based archiving and working environment for writers is proposed as the main component of an intervention strategy for special collections.

Abstract Engineering Asset Management(EAM) is management of engineering assets and it provides guidelines on the effective usage of all the physical engineered assets within the organization. Similarly, Non-Destructive Testing [NDT] is used as a handy tool for integrity assessment of Assets in scheduled maintenance & inspection program. Though Asset Inspection in Oil & Gas Industry were using conventional NDT methods, now ASME, API and others came up with inspection procedures based on fracture mechanics, where each user to ascertain how their tool/regional operating condition deviate from the assumptions herein, then employ their engineering and technical judgment in deciding how and when to employ any part of these standard. Till recent past, there were no regular validation for these procedures being performed as presumed; benchmark for Severity of failure in North Sea offshore and that in MENA Onshore are set as same. Integration of Operations Management System [OMS] based in Asset Inspection with the EAM allows the Asset Owner/Custodian to consistently monitor each Asset, Acquire monitoring / measurement data in common platform using standardized operating procedures, Measure / Analyze Longevity of each Asset and enable the end user to validate their Service Quality Plan and inspection procedures, as per applicable operating limits and risks. The purpose of this paper to emphasize the importance of optimizing the Asset utilization and serviceability to enhance overall efficiency by integrating; (1)EAM software that manages Assets, (2)OMS controlling the process and (3)Asset Inspection Management System[AIMS]. Case study refer our AIMS, a tool to track all Equipment data [Images, OEM/CoC Document, Inspection Reports/Certificates, track analysis of major attributes] through a single channel - Master Asset [Inspection] Register. Uniquely numbered Assets in each category Drilling Tubulars, Hosting &Handling Equipment and/or Lifting Equipment Item is captured in respective Master Asset Inspection Register with all related Equipment data & Inspection records. Inspection records provides all its inspection related history since its commissioning and manufacturing OEM/CoC Documents. Our cloud based AIMS-App's compliance to API Q2, ISO9001:2015 and ISO17020:2012 ensures its certifying requirements to, (1)relevant Industry standard and bench mark (2)Competence of Inspection Personnel and (3)Compliance of Measuring Devices & Equipment. In last two years [2016-2018] by ensuring Acceptance Benchmark only, more than 70% reduction in premature failure [Crack in Thread Connection; where 50% of those are potential NPT cases] in drilling Tools achieved. Our App provide the user to analyze Inspection data. The trend analysis of tools helps in its planning and utilization plus the data can be directly input to modify Service Quality Plan to optimizing the asset utilization & serviceability. The above are some of the immediate befit to Oil Company and Drilling Contractor by AIMS. This paper also discusses one more dimension of it, Reliability in Service Quality. As this AIMS Tool is synchronized with our, (1)EAM software that manages company's all assets and resources, and (2)OMS controlling the process, the integration of all three increase the overall efficiency of the service and results in profitability of a business.