National Postcodes to be introduced

Sam Russell

Trick of the Tail wrote: »

With all the millions spent on consultants, you'd think one if them would have covered the data protection issue.

Yet another indication of the mismanagement and wastage of the code process.

However the govt will simply legislate our data protection rights away, as they have done before, to get around this.


Malfeasance and ineptitude. That's how things are done in Irish government.

.. or not done.

We are still waiting for the postcodes after decades, and now it is a mess. The Broadcasting charge was to replace the TV licence from the begining of last year. The new secure card for FreeTravel. Look how long the Leap card took. Plus many more that I have lost interest in following.

Elmo

Sam Russell wrote: »

The new secure card for FreeTravel. Look how long the Leap card took. Plus many more that I have lost interest in following.

Joined up thinking would be test the Leap card with the free travel pass, and roll both out together. :rolleyes::mad:

Sam Russell

Elmo wrote: »

Joined up thinking would be test the Leap card with the free travel pass, and roll both out together. :rolleyes::mad:

or even allow the FTP to ""purchase'" tickets from the IR vending machines.

TheBustedFlush

Sam Russell wrote: »

or even allow the FTP to ""purchase'" tickets from the IR vending machines.

Or even have a website that made sense and worked all the time.

Sam Russell

TheBustedFlush wrote: »

Or even have a website that made sense and worked all the time.

Now you're having a laugh! Do you think they are some kind of service organisation that cares about customers?

Sam Russell

Back to postcodes - the ruling about Google having to comply with requests to take down unwanted (by the subject), though true, information from their search engine could have implications for the Eircode.

TheBustedFlush

Sam Russell wrote: »

Back to postcodes - the ruling about Google having to comply with requests to take down unwanted (by the subject), though true, information from their search engine could have implications for the Eircode.

Interesting - their search engine includes their mapping facilities and its database?

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

Back to postcodes - the ruling about Google having to comply with requests to take down unwanted (by the subject), though true, information from their search engine could have implications for the Eircode.

I reckon that this ruling will get challenged, otherwise Google's business model is screwed.

ozmo

Sam Russell wrote: »

Back to postcodes - the ruling about Google having to comply with requests to take down unwanted (by the subject), though true, information from their search engine could have implications for the Eircode.

The Data protection guys are right to be concerned.

Two short examples that are worth considering:

1. You go to a random site you just found to get a holiday insurance quote - it wants a postcode to prove Im Irish? Just 7 characters - no problem.
Quote is bad you navigate away and forget it.

Result: they know your Full address and when you house is likely to be empty.



2. You go browsing random sites - the adverts (doubleclick - google analytics etc) are tracking you and recording your movements across all sites - as they do. You are just another anon browser so doesnt matter much to most.

But... Now you go to get the weather - enter your postcode and the site does a postback with your postcode in the url (many UK sites currently do this) - bam -

Result: suddenly the advert tracking code on the site can see the url - and it now knows exactly who you are, it already knows a vast amount about you from your browser history and now they know where you live. Sample code for flash to read url here.

Not everyone in country is going to have addblock/flashblock/javascript disabled/no-track - so that is Not a security solution for Ireland to mitigate against this.

Who needs NSA when you have Eircode.

Leonard Shelby

ozmo wrote: »

The Data protection guys are right to be concerned.

Two short examples that are worth considering:

1. You go to a random site you just found to get a holiday insurance quote - it wants a postcode to prove Im Irish? Just 7 characters - no problem.
Quote is bad you navigate away and forget it.

Result: they know your Full address and when you house is likely to be empty.



2. You go browsing random sites - the adverts (doubleclick - google analytics etc) are tracking you and recording your movements across all sites - as they do. You are just another anon browser so doesnt matter much to most.

But... Now you go to get the weather - enter your postcode and the site does a postback with your postcode in the url (many UK sites currently do this) - bam -

Result: suddenly the advert tracking code on the site can see the url - and it now knows exactly who you are, it already knows a vast amount about you from your browser history and now they know where you live. Sample code for flash to read url here.

Not everyone in country is going to have addblock/flashblock/javascript disabled/no-track - so that is Not a security solution for Ireland to mitigate against this.

Who needs NSA when you have Eircode.

Scaremongering nonsense. Everyone getting an insurance quote already enters their full address.

Carawaystick

Leonard Shelby wrote: »

Scaremongering nonsense. Everyone getting an insurance quote already enters their full address.

No they don't,
many insurance sites will quote on minimal details and only need full details to sell insurance. FBD for example quote based on your age,sex,license type, ncb, county you live in, engine size and car value.

Sam Russell

If AnPost reckon they have no need for a post code as they manage OK as it is, then could you opt out of using your Eircode and ask for it to be excluded from the location part? So my neighbours Eircode (D04 AB60) points to his house, but my one (D04 CZ42) points to a location 500 metres away, but otherwise works to identify my house - the database identifies my code as approximate.

By the way, I called Vodafone about my internet installation, and I spoke to a nice person in Egypt and she was able to compliment me on how nice she thought my house looked (thanks th Google Streetview) and that was without the benefit of Eircode!

So the problem is Google.

Javan

Sam Russell wrote: »

If AnPost reckon they have no need for a post code as they manage OK as it is, then could you opt out of using your Eircode and ask for it to be excluded from the location part? So my neighbours Eircode (D04 AB60) points to his house, but my one (D04 CZ42) points to a location 500 metres away, but otherwise works to identify my house - the database identifies my code as approximate.

The Eircode is supposed to be useful to deliveries, emergency services and the like; where the point of the postcode is to accurately describe the location.
Adding an ability to opt-out of the location database lookup would defeat that purpose. That would make it even less useful that it currently appears to be.

Sam Russell

Javan wrote: »

The Eircode is supposed to be useful to deliveries, emergency services and the like; where the point of the postcode is to accurately describe the location.
Adding an ability to opt-out of the location database lookup would defeat that purpose. That would make it even less useful that it currently appears to be.

The point I was making was to allow people to retain an element of privacy. If the location pointed to was a distance away, but not miles, then the effect would not be a problem for deliveries, because I still have a street address.

The main problem is that for a lot of premises they do not have a proper address. That should be solved first. The Eircode attempts to be the sole address for premises without a proper street address. That would require a person looking for a particular building having access to the database, presumably at a charge. The same applies to PO Box addresses. If I wish to return a faulty item to a PO Box I have to post it.

If the last 2 digits of the 7 digit code were allowed to be omited while still allowing location to within 100 metres, then there would be a level of privacy retained. As I understand it, the whole code gives you exact location, but less than that is nothing.

L1011

Carawaystick wrote: »

No they don't,
many insurance sites will quote on minimal details and only need full details to sell insurance. FBD for example quote based on your age,sex,license type, ncb, county you live in, engine size and car value.

Holiday insurance doesn't vary on where you live, unlike car insurance.

Elmo

MYOB wrote: »

Holiday insurance doesn't vary on where you live, unlike car insurance.

Big annoyance of mine is the car insurance industry. Why can't I have an Estimate? It has to be a quote.

TheBustedFlush

Getting quotes from insurance companies who base it on your postcode is presumably based on where you live and how the company perceives that area. But unlike the UK which groups houses/buildings using its postcode structure, how possible would this be with an eircode since it doesn't have one apparently?

larchill

Sam Russell wrote: »

If the last 2 digits of the 7 digit code were allowed to be omited while still allowing location to within 100 metres, then there would be a level of privacy retained. As I understand it, the whole code gives you exact location, but less than that is nothing.

Yes, eircode will be based upon the 'Routing code' followed by the 'Unique identifier'. eg: A01 B2CD - A01 will be the district or area (in Dublin the existing postal areas will be used: D01, D02, etc), but the B2CD part will be random & will not follow any pattern. Adjacent properties will therefore have totally different unique identifiers, eg: B2CD & W7XR. From eircode.ie:

"The second part (Unique Identifier) will be different and unique to your home or premises. It will not be in sequence. This is to avoid the situation where a new building is created between two existing ones, and the code sequence would be broken, requiring all Eircodes in the area to be changed. This would be very disruptive."

Sam Russell

larchill wrote: »

Yes, eircode will be based upon the 'Routing code' followed by the 'Unique identifier'. eg: A01 B2CD - A01 will be the district or area (in Dublin the existing postal areas will be used: D01, D02, etc), but the B2CD part will be random & will not follow any pattern. Adjacent properties will therefore have totally different unique identifiers, eg: B2CD & W7XR. From eircode.ie:

"The second part (Unique Identifier) will be different and unique to your home or premises. It will not be in sequence. This is to avoid the situation where a new building is created between two existing ones, and the code sequence would be broken, requiring all Eircodes in the area to be changed. This would be very disruptive."

They do not need to reserve the whole of the last four digits to accomplish the insertion of new codes. The last two would be sufficient.

It is badly thought out and is not going to be fit for purpose. It will be expensive to create and maintain. It bears no relation to the proper address.

larchill

Sam Russell wrote: »

It is badly thought out and is not going to be fit for purpose. It will be expensive to create and maintain. It bears no relation to the proper address.

Maybe thats to ensure privacy? If it bears no relation to the address then it'll not be possible to 'guessimate' the location apart from the !st part (Routing indicator) that is. Consider 141-D-1234, 141-D tells us that a car is 2014, & in Dublin. 1234 merely follows 1233, & comes before 1235. The car can be anywhere though :P

TheBustedFlush

Sam Russell wrote: »

They do not need to reserve the whole of the last four digits to accomplish the insertion of new codes. The last two would be sufficient.

It is badly thought out and is not going to be fit for purpose. It will be expensive to create and maintain. It bears no relation to the proper address.

What exactly does "fit for purpose" mean - whose purpose?

Putting a complex structure and order in place and maintaining it would be more costly than not having to surely. and there's plenty of good reasons/societal benefits not to have a code that identifies groups of houses together as other countries have found.

a65b2cd

recedite wrote: »

Rabbitte later assured us that he had a letter from the EU to say they had investigated the tendering process and found no abuses of the normal process had occurred.
We are still waiting for him to produce this letter.

The European Parliament has clarified the matter in a reply to a Parliamentary Question this week:

The Commission has received a complaint regarding the tendering procedure in question. It conducted an investigation into the matter.

After having received the requested clarifications from the Irish authorities, the Commission closed the file. Based on the available information, the Commission departments could not establish any violation of EU public procurement law that would justify the opening of an infringement procedure.

The above findings were communicated to the complainant on 11 November 2013 via an administrative letter. The same findings were communicated to the Irish authorities on 20 November 2013 via the online information exchange platform for infringement procedures (‘EU Pilot’).

recedite

Sam Russell wrote: »

If the last 2 digits of the 7 digit code were allowed to be omited while still allowing location to within 100 metres, then there would be a level of privacy retained. As I understand it, the whole code gives you exact location, but less than that is nothing.

This works for a proper code like Loc8 in the same way as it works for co-ordinates of the National Grid. If you choose to leave out the last few digits, you can give your location roughly within a square block of a kilometre or so. If you want to give the exact location to within a few metres, you can do that too.

Eircode is not a code, its only a reference number. Its like giving the page number of a telephone book. Give the wrong reference number and its useless.

recedite

a65b2cd wrote: »

Based on the available information, the Commission departments could not establish any violation of EU public procurement law that would justify the opening of an infringement procedure.

The above findings were communicated to the complainant on 11 November 2013 via an administrative letter. The same findings were communicated to the Irish authorities on 20 November 2013 via the online information exchange platform for infringement procedures (‘EU Pilot’).

1. That is quite a roll back from saying no infringements were found.
Infringement "procedures" are a very big deal, and would presumably involve the EU slapping a large fine onto the Irish State, as they did when we completely ignored the water directive for several years. EU will only take such drastic action against a member state in exceptional cases.

2. AFAIK the findings that were communicated to the complainant and to the Taoiseach's office directly, listed the errors and omissions in the tendering process and required the minister to take action and report back to the EU when that action was taken.
Anyway we will see.

D Trent

Elmo wrote: »

Big annoyance of mine is the car insurance industry. Why can't I have an Estimate? It has to be a quote.

What's the difference?

ozmo

So - whats been posted here has been pretty much whats on their website and analysis of it- but has anyone got any new info from the big open day Capita held in Dublin today?

larchill

That was the opening of their new HQ @ Grand Canal Square

Elmo

D Trent wrote: »

What's the difference?

An Estimate is where a sales person gives you a very very general educated guess as to the cost of your insurance but clearly states that they can not give you that as a price. (loosely based on age, experience and at most county).

A Quote is the price being offered given all of the details about your circumstances.

I'd like to get an estimate from insurance companies, then go back to the best estimate and ask for a quote.

TheBustedFlush

Sam Russell wrote: »

The point I was making was to allow people to retain an element of privacy. If the location pointed to was a distance away, but not miles, then the effect would not be a problem for deliveries, because I still have a street address.

The main problem is that for a lot of premises they do not have a proper address. That should be solved first. The Eircode attempts to be the sole address for premises without a proper street address. That would require a person looking for a particular building having access to the database, presumably at a charge. The same applies to PO Box addresses. If I wish to return a faulty item to a PO Box I have to post it.

If the last 2 digits of the 7 digit code were allowed to be omited while still allowing location to within 100 metres, then there would be a level of privacy retained. As I understand it, the whole code gives you exact location, but less than that is nothing.

If everyone had a "proper" address then the need for a unique identifier code would be reduced. But 600k houses don't have a proper address, hence the use of a unique code and people get to keep the address they have.

recedite wrote: »

This works for a proper code like Loc8 in the same way as it works for co-ordinates of the National Grid. If you choose to leave out the last few digits, you can give your location roughly within a square block of a kilometre or so. .

I don't think that's accurate about the loc8 code, recedite. It doesn't have a last few digits, it has characters. And if you leave out the last few characters of a Loc8 code it's pretty much useless.

Impetus

larchill wrote: »

Yes, eircode will be based upon the 'Routing code' followed by the 'Unique identifier'. eg: A01 B2CD - A01 will be the district or area (in Dublin the existing postal areas will be used: D01, D02, etc), but the B2CD part will be random & will not follow any pattern. Adjacent properties will therefore have totally different unique identifiers, eg: B2CD & W7XR. From eircode.ie:

The norm virtually everywhere else in the world is an all numeric code where one can relate the numbering plan to different geographic areas. eg in Germany: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:German_postcode_information.png

D is the country code for Germany. So using D02 in Ireland could easily be mistaken to be D02 in Germany which is in Saxony eg D02708 is the town of Lawalde. This system of information display has been the norm in Europe for more than 30 years. It is a standard.

Certain insular, dumb people involved with the code structure in Ireland have decided to break with the system. In Germany as in much of elsewhere there is a numerical hierarchy which allows one to point to an area by its significant postcode digits. eg 8 broadly means Bavaria. At a lower level within Bavaria 80 and 81 are assigned to Munich. http://www.plz-postleitzahl.de/land.bayern/21179/index.html. 80333 points to a postal district within Munich.

larchill wrote: »

"The second part (Unique Identifier) will be different and unique to your home or premises. It will not be in sequence. This is to avoid the situation where a new building is created between two existing ones, and the code sequence would be broken, requiring all Eircodes in the area to be changed. This would be very disruptive."

Not only do they create an incompatible illogical coding system to point to individual postal zones or districts, the ill-conceived so called "unique identifier" is an absolute mess.

(1) It will have to be allocated and maintained with changes to the databases (master database and the database of every company that uses postcodes in their business process, virtually every time a new construction is completed).

(2) There is no relationship between house A and its neighbouring houses B and C - making it impossible to use postcodes to schedule logistical exercises (eg delivery of goods, market research, etc).

(3) The logical way to define a street address is a house number, and any decent addressing infrastructure requires a number to be allocated to each building along a road/street. Where numbers do not exist they can be allocated metrically as I have pointed out earlier in this discussion. Metric building numbers - eg house number 200 is 100 metres from house number 300 on the same road. This leaves plenty of numbering space for new buildings to be constructed between 200 and 300. It is also easy to find when attempting to make a delivery or visit someone.

Whereas W2XE is absolutely sub-optimal - ie total rubbish. Furthermore when a new building goes up next to W2XE, a bureaucracy is going to have to allocate a new "random" code to the new building. Unless you update the maps on your GPS once a week with all the new codes (typically a 6 GB download for Europe), you will still not be able to find a new address. And that is assuming Garmin & Co will find the resources to keep the Irish map database up to date and published. Which is another big if.

Eircode is a cluelessly designed waste of public money and will probably lead to innumerable breaches of personal privacy. The only other country that has assigned building by building postcodes is Iran.
http://www.post.ir/DesktopModules/Articles/ArticlesView.aspx?TabID=1&Site=postportal&Lang=en-US&ItemID=10337&mid=10768

The third world theocracy/police state of Iran leads the way and Ireland follows. Every Iranian national must have an ID number and a 10 digit postcode presumably to assist with tracking his movements and his correspondence. At least the Iranians had the intelligence to use all digit codes which are legible in most cultures (eg Japan, China, Arabic, Western etc) and far more machine readable (eg in mail sorting applications). eg Japan uses a 7 digit postcode eg 160 0005 rather than 愛住町.