1. Who am I?

Author: Mustafa Siddiqui
Source type: First-person authored response
Canonical recruiter question: Who is Mustafa?

This source is intentionally written in my first-person perspective. SudoChat should use it as evidence and answer external visitors in third person without strengthening, exaggerating, or removing the limitations recorded below.

Direct answer

I am Mustafa Siddiqui, a systems engineer and AI technologist who enjoys building technology that solves practical problems and makes people's lives easier. Whether the solution involves AI, software, robotics or physical systems, my engineering philosophy is that technology should ultimately provide a useful and responsible outcome for the people it serves.

Evidence

I created MACT as a free community application intended to bring useful information for Canberra's Muslim community into one accessible platform.

I developed SudoSpeed as an open source computer vision project for detecting Australian speed signs, allowing the work to be reused or incorporated into other safety and engineering projects.

I built OrionTracker, an open source engineering dashboard that takes official NASA Orion trajectory data and JPL lunar ephemeris data, mathematically processes the underlying position and velocity vectors, and presents them as understandable mission paths, metrics and visualisations.

Across projects such as these, I have generally tried to make community focused or educational technology freely available where appropriate so that others can use, learn from or build upon my work.

Relevance to the Federal Courts

That philosophy aligns strongly with the way I would approach technology in the Federal Courts. The objective would not be to introduce AI simply because the technology is available. It would be to identify where technology can genuinely make Court operations more efficient, information more accessible, or staff better supported, while protecting accuracy, privacy, security and public confidence.

That is particularly relevant to the Federal Court's current approach to AI. The Court recognises that generative AI can improve efficiency, reduce costs and enhance access to justice, while also stressing that it must be used responsibly and with due care because inappropriate use can undermine the administration of justice and public confidence.

For me, that balance is important. Good engineering in a Court environment is not about automating the most things. It is about applying technology where it produces a demonstrable benefit while preserving the human responsibility, accountability and trust on which the justice system depends.

Limitations or gaps

I am an engineer and technologist, not a lawyer, judicial officer or subject matter expert in Court procedure. I would therefore approach Court technology collaboratively, relying on judicial, legal, operational, security and privacy expertise when determining what a system should and should not do.

My community projects should also not be represented as equivalent to building technology for a Court environment. They demonstrate my engineering philosophy, initiative and ability to deliver working systems, rather than direct Court technology experience.

Useful links

My portfolio GitHub profile SudoLabs LinkedIn

My OrionTracker repository also directly supports the description above. Its README documents the pipeline from official NASA and JPL data through parsing, interpolation, mathematical processing and frontend visualisation. That is useful evidence because it shows there is actual engineering underneath the portfolio project, not just a UI.

Do not claim

Do not say I believe all software should be free or that commercial technology is inherently wrong.

Do not say I created MACT, SudoSpeed or OrionTracker for the Federal Courts.

Do not imply I am a lawyer or have judicial decision making expertise.

Do not imply these personal projects operated with Court data, protected legal information or production Court infrastructure.

Do not describe the projects as enterprise deployments unless there is specific evidence that they were deployed in an enterprise environment.

Do not say my motivation for open source software means I would make Federal Court technology or information publicly available.