You're probably up to no good!

meglome · 06-04-2009 4:45pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Yes... and isn't a government made up of individuals?

Funny I've been making that point for ages. It's not some faceless monster it's just ordinary people.

When people just had filing cabinets they could go in a check a record without anyone knowing now all access to these databases is tracked. Which is why, for example, there have been sackings for inappropriate use, we never would have known before.

robtri · 06-04-2009 4:47pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Yes... and isn't a government made up of individuals?

yes it is, but its not the government absuing your info for there own needs its individuals doing it... so the principles of the data collection are sound... the practise is good.. the security of the data may be questionable, but no more than any data on the net, ....

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 4:51pm

meglome wrote: »

Funny I've been making that point for ages. It's not some faceless monster it's just ordinary people.

When people just had filing cabinets they could go in a check a record without anyone knowing now all access to these databases is tracked. Which is why, for example, there have been sackings for inappropriate use, we never would have known before.

Well the government is a collection of individuals... I think we all know that.

It's funny a friend of mine works in the health service and he was defending the national health database today saying it makes his job easier... and all I could think of was 'he has access to my medical records now'. Doesn't mean he WILL look at them but he can if he wants but I'd rather he didn't... since any time I've gone to the doctor, I assumed (wrongly obviously) that there was such a thing as doctor patient confidentiality. If I'd known that all my friends in the health service could access it, I may have reconsidered GOING to the doctor in the first place. It's a joke.

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 4:52pm

robtri wrote: »

yes it is, but its not the government absuing your info for there own needs its individuals doing it... so the principles of the data collection are sound... the practise is good.. the security of the data may be questionable, but no more than any data on the net, ....

Oh no, that was an example of how the system can be abused by individuals in the government... there's no way of knowing how it can be abused by the COLLECTIVE individuals, i.e. the government or what plans there are to do so. They have no right to be collecting every grain of information on everybody.

meglome · 06-04-2009 6:41pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Well the government is a collection of individuals... I think we all know that.

It's funny a friend of mine works in the health service and he was defending the national health database today saying it makes his job easier... and all I could think of was 'he has access to my medical records now'. Doesn't mean he WILL look at them but he can if he wants but I'd rather he didn't... since any time I've gone to the doctor, I assumed (wrongly obviously) that there was such a thing as doctor patient confidentiality. If I'd known that all my friends in the health service could access it, I may have reconsidered GOING to the doctor in the first place. It's a joke.

But you missed my point, our records were always accessible by others. There are more people able to access these records now but all access is logged now which wasn't the case before. So in theory the records are more safe.

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 8:03pm

meglome wrote: »

But you missed my point, our records were always accessible by others. There are more people able to access these records now but all access is logged now which wasn't the case before. So in theory the records are more safe.

where does it say those people were caught cos they were tracked? It simply says they were caught. And where does it say that now all access is logged? WE may be logged... but I didn't see where it said all access will also be logged.

meglome · 06-04-2009 10:24pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

where does it say those people were caught cos they were tracked? It simply says they were caught. And where does it say that now all access is logged? WE may be logged... but I didn't see where it said all access will also be logged.

Our company manages educational information for the Irish government (amongst others). OMG WE HE KNEW WAS A SHILL etc. We do that through use of the web so I'm very familiar with these issues. Now you're correct there is a risk with these databases that some unauthorised person will get access or some individual user will use the information illegally. But as I keep saying all access and access attempts whether legal or illegal are logged. This was never the case in the past so the system could be more secure not less. Logging is standard practice but I can't say for sure it's used here, although I'd very very surprised if it wasn't.

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 10:27pm

meglome wrote: »

Our company manages educational information for the Irish government (amongst others). OMG WE KNEW WAS A SHILL etc. We do that through use of the web so I'm very familiar with these issues. Now you're correct there is a risk with these databases that some unauthorised person will get access or some individual user will use the information illegally. But as I keep saying all access and access attempts whether legal or illegal are logged. This was never the case in the past so the system could be more secure not less. Logging is standard practice but I can't say for sure it's used here, although I'd very very surprised if it wasn't.

well, until we know, there's not much point speculating. Although the logs, does that mean my friends in the health service can check my records for me and find out who's been looking at it?:)

Sofa_King Good · 06-04-2009 10:45pm

I may or may not have known these people.

Friend in the DPP telling me about cases, including ones that never made it to court.

Friend in revenue telling me what people we know earn, and celebrities and stuff.

A friend who was dumped by his girlfriend. He was che<ting and she worked for the mobile phone company.

Garda friends talking about investigations etc

robtri · 07-04-2009 7:58am

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Oh no, that was an example of how the system can be abused by individuals in the government... there's no way of knowing how it can be abused by the COLLECTIVE individuals, i.e. the government or what plans there are to do so. They have no right to be collecting every grain of information on everybody.

are you just speculating then??? Do you have any proof of the government mis-using records, or abusing the power they have with them... or is it just idle speculation???

robtri · 07-04-2009 8:04am

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

Friend in the DPP telling me about cases, including ones that never made it to court.

if there was a database or not, they still would be able to tell you this sort of stuff as they work there and can read the written files..

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

Friend in revenue telling me what people we know earn, and celebrities and stuff.

exact same as above, they work there either they or a collegue gets a juicy name celeb, income return in and blab it arouind the office... makes no difference if a data base exsists..

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

A friend who was dumped by his girlfriend. He was che<ting and she worked for the mobile phone company.

I hope he sued her and the mobile phone companies ass for breach of the data protection act...

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

Garda friends talking about investigations etc

and as above, what the hell has this to do with central databases... they are talking about cases in the job, whether a database exsisted or not, this still woudl happen

Heineken Helen · 07-04-2009 12:35pm

robtri wrote: »

are you just speculating then??? Do you have any proof of the government mis-using records, or abusing the power they have with them... or is it just idle speculation???

I said there's no way of knowing how it CAN be abused by the government. I guess it could be considered speculation but it's also observing what's happened in other countries in the past and trying to learn from history, even in our own country where government officials have sometimes been proven to be working in their own best interests first. If you give government unlimited power, you've no idea who's going to be in power in 5 or 10 years time and what they can do with that. We need to protect ourselves by giving them as little as possible access to our personal information.

meglome · 07-04-2009 2:40pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

I said there's no way of knowing how it CAN be abused by the government. I guess it could be considered speculation but it's also observing what's happened in other countries in the past and trying to learn from history, even in our own country where government officials have sometimes been proven to be working in their own best interests first. If you give government unlimited power, you've no idea who's going to be in power in 5 or 10 years time and what they can do with that. We need to protect ourselves by giving them as little as possible access to our personal information.

Look rocket cars can be abused, almost anything can be abused in some way. The question is will they be abused. You're assuming they will as if that's the only possible outcome.

Heineken Helen · 07-04-2009 8:40pm

meglome wrote: »

Look rocket cars can be abused, almost anything can be abused in some way. The question is will they be abused. You're assuming they will as if that's the only possible outcome.

It's not the ONLY possible option... doesn't mean it's not A possible option. The less info they have on a person the less they can abuse this data.

robtri · 08-04-2009 7:55am

Heineken Helen wrote: »

It's not the ONLY possible option... doesn't mean it's not A possible option. The less info they have on a person the less they can abuse this data.

so this just is idle speculation, not a conspriarcy theory then....

seanybiker · 08-04-2009 8:01am

honestly I wouldnt be bothered if people wanted to look in me window at me. If I'm doing nothing they will just get bored and feck off. I would talk to anyone so I'd probably end up just asking em in for a cup of tea. Seriously .

Heineken Helen · 08-04-2009 8:53am

robtri wrote: »

so this just is idle speculation, not a conspriarcy theory then....

So we can all expect Fianna Fail to be UNcorrupt with our details? Or the labour government over here?:D

To be honest, I'd consider this to be more truth than anything.

robtri · 08-04-2009 10:11am

Heineken Helen wrote: »

So we can all expect Fianna Fail to be UNcorrupt with our details? Or the labour government over here?:D

To be honest, I'd consider this to be more truth than anything.

they have virtually all your details,
but as I said you are just speculating here, you have no proof, no links to any misuse of your or anybodies details by the government...
therefore this is not a CT...

Heineken Helen · 08-04-2009 12:07pm

robtri wrote: »

they have virtually all your details,
but as I said you are just speculating here, you have no proof, no links to any misuse of your or anybodies details by the government...
therefore this is not a CT...

What about when the HSE sent out a mailshot... with everybody's national insurance number on the envelope :eek:

Or all those health records that were found in a dump in Cork.

http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2009/03/sunshine

For example, when California's Proposition 8 passed last November banning gay marriage, an opponent of the measure created a website to expose donors who financed the ban. The site culled donor names, ZIP codes and, in some cases, employer names, from data the state collects under campaign finance disclosure laws. Then it combined that data with Google Maps to show donors' approximate locations, and in some cases identify their employers. Gay marriage opponents were appalled and complained that they received harassment and death threats

At the root of these anti-disclosure rulings is a 1989 Supreme Court case that pitted the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press against the Justice Department. The RCFP sought the rap sheet for a businessman suspected of mob ties and an improper relationship with a congressman. Much of the information was already accessible in bits and pieces in various public records, but the reporters wanted the data as it was compiled in the FBI's NCIC database. The Supreme Court unanimously held that adding computers to the mix made the privacy risks greater.

"Plainly there is a vast difference between the public records that might be found after a diligent search of courthouse files, county archives and local police stations throughout the country and a computerized summary located in a single clearinghouse of information," wrote Justice John Paul Stevens for the court.

As a result, Davis says, it's inordinately hard to get access to public records that might prove government wrongdoing when privacy exemptions protect a private citizen mentioned in the file. That is, unless there's already proof of the wrongdoing before the records are sought.

"Then you might be able to overcome the privacy protection," Davis says. "If you have proof of the conspiracy, then we'll give you access to the records that might prove your conspiracy."

robtri · 08-04-2009 12:28pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

What about when the HSE sent out a mailshot... with everybody's national insurance number on the envelope :eek:

Or all those health records that were found in a dump in Cork.

that was an error, not abuse.... and how would not having a central datbase stop that????

I will ignore the rest as its doesn't apply to us here....

humanji · 08-04-2009 12:32pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

What about when the HSE sent out a mailshot... with everybody's national insurance number on the envelope :eek:

Or all those health records that were found in a dump in Cork.

http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2009/03/sunshine

For example, when California's Proposition 8 passed last November banning gay marriage, an opponent of the measure created a website to expose donors who financed the ban. The site culled donor names, ZIP codes and, in some cases, employer names, from data the state collects under campaign finance disclosure laws. Then it combined that data with Google Maps to show donors' approximate locations, and in some cases identify their employers. Gay marriage opponents were appalled and complained that they received harassment and death threats

At the root of these anti-disclosure rulings is a 1989 Supreme Court case that pitted the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press against the Justice Department. The RCFP sought the rap sheet for a businessman suspected of mob ties and an improper relationship with a congressman. Much of the information was already accessible in bits and pieces in various public records, but the reporters wanted the data as it was compiled in the FBI's NCIC database. The Supreme Court unanimously held that adding computers to the mix made the privacy risks greater.

"Plainly there is a vast difference between the public records that might be found after a diligent search of courthouse files, county archives and local police stations throughout the country and a computerized summary located in a single clearinghouse of information," wrote Justice John Paul Stevens for the court.

As a result, Davis says, it's inordinately hard to get access to public records that might prove government wrongdoing when privacy exemptions protect a private citizen mentioned in the file. That is, unless there's already proof of the wrongdoing before the records are sought.

"Then you might be able to overcome the privacy protection," Davis says. "If you have proof of the conspiracy, then we'll give you access to the records that might prove your conspiracy."

That would be a good argument not to have everybodies details stored on random computers and files all over the country, but rather have them in a centralised location where access can be monitored and controlled.

Heineken Helen · 08-04-2009 1:37pm

humanji wrote: »

That would be a good argument not to have everybodies details stored on random computers and files all over the country, but rather have them in a centralised location where access can be monitored and controlled.

but it will be accessed from random computers all over the country

6th · 08-04-2009 2:55pm

I'd hardly say random.

humanji · 08-04-2009 3:19pm

As 6th says, it's not random. And it's controlled. the admins would know who is accessing what information and what they are doing with it. It'd be a hell of a lot safer than the current systems companies are using where they seem the best thing to do is leave all the info on park benches and trains.

Heineken Helen · 09-04-2009 6:33pm

humanji wrote: »

As 6th says, it's not random. And it's controlled. the admins would know who is accessing what information and what they are doing with it. It'd be a hell of a lot safer than the current systems companies are using where they seem the best thing to do is leave all the info on park benches and trains.

good point... anyway we're derailing a bit... I'm still not up to no good

K-9 · 10-04-2009 4:30am

Heineken Helen wrote: »

It's not the ONLY possible option... doesn't mean it's not A possible option. The less info they have on a person the less they can abuse this data.

Stop posting on the Conspiracy forum on Boards.ie. They'll track you down and log it.

Flippant? Yes.

However Boards have said if the Guards request info of them in relation to illegal activity they will pass on the info.

Very relevant to this thread.
Boards.ie can track your activity and what you post and if requested, pass it on to the Guards.

1,000's still post.

Heineken Helen · 10-04-2009 1:28pm

K-9 wrote: »

Stop posting on the Conspiracy forum on Boards.ie. They'll track you down and log it.

Flippant? Yes.

However Boards have said if the Guards request info of them in relation to illegal activity they will pass on the info.

Very relevant to this thread.
Boards.ie can track your activity and what you post and if requested, pass it on to the Guards.

1,000's still post.

I know all that... and thanks for the heads up... but I haven't said anything wrong have I?:o

I haven't done anything illegal!!!!!!!!!!!!! Which brings us back to the topic... why stop posting here when I'm doing nothing wrong and just discussing my opinions?

K-9 · 10-04-2009 4:08pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

I haven't done anything illegal!!!!!!!!!!!!! Which brings us back to the topic... why stop posting here when I'm doing nothing wrong and just discussing my opinions?

Exactly. You haven't done anything illegal so you've nothing to worry about.

Does the same not apply to CCTV etc.?

meglome · 10-04-2009 4:18pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

I know all that... and thanks for the heads up... but I haven't said anything wrong have I?:o

I haven't done anything illegal!!!!!!!!!!!!! Which brings us back to the topic... why stop posting here when I'm doing nothing wrong and just discussing my opinions?

How many people on boards.ie do we know have been tracked down and hassled for what they've said? Well as far I can say it's a total of zero. Sure people have been stopped for saying certain things as boards.ie could be held liable for it.

How many people in the UK have been wrongly convicted using these new technologies? Is there any proof at all?

Many of these new technologies would stop someone being wrongly convicted not the other way around.

Heineken Helen · 10-04-2009 4:26pm

meglome wrote: »

How many people on boards.ie do we know have been tracked down and hassled for what they've said? Well as far I can say it's a total of zero. Sure people have been stopped for saying certain things as boards.ie could be held liable for it.

How many people in the UK have been wrongly convicted using these new technologies? Is there any proof at all?

Many of these new technologies would stop someone being wrongly convicted not the other way around.

ahhh, I can see the defense:

'so as you can see your honour, I couldn't possibly have committed the crime as I was throwing a sheep at my sister and then went on to make a few lists of the 5 best everything and then proceeded to kill 5 zombies and slay 3 vampires, when the crime was allegedly committed'.

You're probably up to no good!

Comments