Advocacy for transparency and merit-based evaluation (open-source security work); structural signals weak; analytics tracking reduces dignity/privacy signals

No direct engagement with human dignity or equality concepts; content is technical opinion piece

Implicit rejection of discrimination (criticizes AI trend-following as excluding non-conformist thinkers); framing emphasizes merit over demographic factors; weak structural support

Right to life: not addressed in blog content

Slavery/servitude: not addressed in blog content

Torture/cruel treatment: not addressed in blog content

Right to recognition as person: not addressed in blog content

Equal protection under law: not addressed in blog content

Effective remedy for rights violation: not addressed in blog content

Freedom from arbitrary arrest: not addressed in blog content

Implicit fair hearing critique: author criticizes hackathon judging as merit-blind (superficial UI over substance); advocates for transparent evaluation; structural: comment system allows peer feedback

Presumption of innocence: not addressed in blog content

Privacy/confidentiality: negative signals strong. Structural: Matomo tracking pixel embedded without visible consent; DNS/behavioral collection discussed as acceptable in security context but applied to users. Editorial: author criticizes surveillance (mentions 'Palantir-like' screen/code scanning proposal as dystopian threat). Domain tracking modifier (-0.08) + analytics structural evidence (-0.35) creates significant privacy concern.

Freedom of movement/residence: strong positive. Structural: blog freely accessible globally, no geo-blocking, no residency requirements. Editorial: author discusses international hackathon (HackEurope across 3 countries), advocating for borderless tech participation. Access model modifier (+0.10) reinforces

Right to seek asylum: international hackathon framing implies borderless tech community; implicit advocacy for merit-based inclusion across national boundaries; structural: accessible to all nationalities; weak signal overall

Right to nationality: not addressed in blog content

Marriage/family: not addressed in blog content

Property rights: editorial criticism of supply chain attacks and malicious software implies support for intellectual property protection; but author discusses behavioral monitoring/surveillance as acceptable security mechanism, which could infringe property autonomy; net slightly negative due to surveillance framing

Freedom of thought/conscience/religion: strong positive. Editorial: author advocates for personal choice in technology ('I wouldn't follow my own advice...build something I want to maintain long term'); explicit rejection of conformity pressure from AI trends. Structural: freely expresses heterodox views; comment system supports conscience exchange. Mission modifier (+0.05) supports

Freedom of opinion/expression: strong positive. Editorial: author explicitly expresses dissent ('short rant'), criticizes hackathon organizers, corporate AI hype, surveillance proposals; uses profanity and strong language without self-censorship. Structural: published on personal blog with RSS feed and public comments; no moderation barriers visible; accessible globally. Access model (+0.10) and mission (+0.05) modifiers reinforce

Freedom of assembly/association: moderate positive. Editorial: author discusses hackathon participation and community building; structural: blog includes comments section (Giscus) enabling public discourse and association. Weak signal due to focus on individual rather than collective rights

Democratic participation/public affairs: mild positive. Editorial: author critiques merit-blind hackathon judging as contrary to meritocracy; implies advocacy for transparent democratic decision-making in tech communities. Structural: limited; personal blog is not democratic forum per se

Social/cultural rights: mild positive. Editorial: author advocates for open-source development and supply chain security as public goods; framing supports collective technical/cultural benefit. Structural: minimal; blog as cultural participation medium only weakly supports

Right to work/fair conditions: mild-moderate positive. Editorial: author advocates for meaningful work ('I went in with goal of building something I want to maintain long term'); criticizes incentive structures that reward superficial work over genuine engineering; implicit labor rights advocacy. Structural: weak; blog does not directly implement employment protections

Right to rest/leisure: minimal engagement. Author mentions 'sleep deprivation' and 'caffeine overdose' at hackathon; implicit criticism of unsustainable work culture; structural support very weak

Right to adequate standard of living: mild signal. Editorial: author discusses supply chain security as protecting developers (vulnerable population); implies concern for security/health. Structural: accessibility criticism suggests concern for inclusive living standards. Accessibility modifier (-0.08) reduces score; reflects paradox between content advocating inclusion and site inaccessibility

Right to education: moderate positive editorial. Author advocates for learning-focused hackathons ('building something I want to maintain long term'); criticizes trend-following as educationally hollow. Structural: blog itself is educational (technical insights on security); but site accessibility issues reduce structural score. Accessibility modifier (-0.08) applied

Right to participate in cultural/scientific life: strong positive. Editorial: author shares technical knowledge (supply chain security MVP details, eBPF techniques, open-source tools); advocates for open-source participation and long-term project maintainability as cultural good. Structural: blog is medium for scientific communication; RSS/public comments enable participation. Mission (+0.05) and access model (+0.10) modifiers reinforce

Social/international order: mild negative. Editorial: author criticizes HackEurope organizers for failing to deliver promised support structure ('tracks were per-country when in fact there was single €1000 prize...sponsor wasn't actually operating'); indicts international coordination failure; structural: minimal

Community duties/limitations: mild positive. Editorial: author advocates for sustainable, maintainable engineering (duty to create lasting work); criticizes AI-generated 'slop' as community-harmful. Framing emphasizes collective technical responsibility. Structural: weak

No destruction of UDHR rights: moderate-strong positive. Editorial: author explicitly rejects surveillance proposals ('Palantir for tech teams' described as scanning screens/code/communications); opposes AI monoculture that constrains creative expression; defends individual autonomy. Framing emphasizes protection of rights to thought, expression, and choice