FrancieBrady wrote: » FFS, will you guys read threads? I have said repeatedly that if SF have broken regs here they desreve to be fined for it. The discussion has quickly widened out to what are they all up to with regard to data. We have seen websites taken down and we have an all party investigation. The topic is GDPR and Irish politics. If you wish to confine it to SF there is a thread for that too.
StupidLikeAFox wrote: » In your post (that I quoted) you were talking about an article titled - "Data harvesting: Is it worse when Sinn Féin do it?". If it would help, I was wondering of you drew a distinction between a local rep with an opinion and a centralised national database? You (and gene kerrigan) seem to be saying they are the same thing
blanch152 wrote: » I haven't read his column as it is behind a paywall, but are you seriously suggesting that Gene Kerrigan is comparing the computerising of anonymised tally records without any personal information with the Abu database which was building a personal individualised profile of every voter in the country???
FrancieBrady wrote: » If they have. Some have decided they have.
jmcc wrote: » To explain it simply for you, it was a clip from 1996. FF was collecting tally data. It also purchased a copy of the marked electoral register. There's even a quote about how this could be used for canvassing even down to a road level. The electora register contains the name of the voter, their address and their polling station/box. This kind of data, even with 1996 database software and hardware, would put a party like FF well ahead of the other parties if they were not doing the same thing. It would have allowed FF to focus their canvassing on areas more effectively. There was no GDPR then. GDPR the product of people of intellects more suited to the 16th century trying to make legislation for a 21st century problem. What FF did then is, apparently, not that different to what SF did with the Abu database. I did outline a simplified structure for one of these databases. While the data might have required some decent servers in 1996, the whole Irish electoral register and other data could easily be dealt on a mid-range laptop today. Regards...jmcc
blanch152 wrote: » Think it was Mary-Lou who admitted on TV to two breaches of GDPR and accepted that there may be more, depending on the DPC outcome. Might as well start with those breaches.
FrancieBrady wrote: » FFS, will you guys read threads? I have said repeatedly that if SF have broken regs here they desreve to be fined for it.The discussion has quickly widened out to what are they all up to with regard to data. We have seen websites taken down and we have an all party investigation. The topic is GDPR and Irish politics. If you wish to confine it to SF there is a thread for that too.
FrancieBrady wrote: » They weren't compliant in two respects.
blanch152 wrote: » Sorry, Francie, the only people who have widened it are yourself and Gene Kerrigan (hopefully he isn't doing an Eoghan Harris on this). There is no issue with what tallyman do. The issue is Sinn Fein inputting information they glean from Facebook and the doorstep into a national electronic database accessible to any member of Sinn Fein (including hardened criminals like Dowdall) without the consent of the individual. There is no legal basis for them to do that. Every GDPR expert in the country says they are in big trouble. No point in us going down sidetracks when the real issue is the Abu database.
FrancieBrady wrote: » We know that most of them are not compliant according to expert testimony in the Irish Examiner and attested to by websites being taken down. You are handwaving away significant information again.
blanch152 wrote: » You are contradicting yourself. Only a few minutes ago you questioned whether SF had broken regulations. Now you are admitting they had.
blanch152 wrote: » Again, like Kerrigan, you don't seem to understand GDPR or tallies.
Firstly, it would be a long road to be the only one in a ballot box.
It would be more a housing estate per ballot box. Secondly, identifying that FF got 100 votes from a ballot box containing 300 voters is not a breach of GDPR. It does not and cannot identify individuals.
Thirdly, there is a vast difference between that practice and the creation of a national electronic database accessible to all members of Sinn Fein and containing more information than the voting register.
The difference is huge.
I suspect that those trying to conflate it (including Kerrigan) are aware that there is big trouble for Sinn Fein coming with this and want to drag others into trouble no matter the cost.
jmcc wrote: » I understand GDPR. I have to deal with the mess that it created every day. I've even read the legislation. This is simply a data problem where a process of reducing the error would be applied and it could also use external data sources to do that. It comes down to probabilities and local intelligence. The local canvassers would provide that local intelligence and it would not be difficult to produce an estimate of support based on the data. It would be far better than that Numerology of opinion polls. No there is not. The problem with non-experts talking about databases and their creation is that they haven't a clue about how to do it and don't know how it is done. The dataset for a national voter database using the electoral register is small. The term you might hear if you spoke to database designers and developers about it is "trivial". This is a word used to describe problems that could be solved over the duration of a coffee break. Perhaps to you, and the average web developer, a few million rows of information might sound massive. It is not. It would only take a few minutes to load that data into a well designed database table. Multiple tables could be used depending on the complexity required. However, the main target of such a design would be simplicity and it is a relatively simple dataset. No it is not. The point that Kerrigan was making was that this kind of data usage has been ongoing for decades. Regards...jmcc
blanch152 wrote: » If you don't believe me, look up the words of Helen Dixon before the Dail committee where she specificially referenced the creation of a national electronic database as being a bigger issue.
jmcc wrote: » She was non-committal in her evidence as it was a hypothetical question and there were no hard details. Regards...jmcc
jmcc wrote: » Looks like the DPC is going to investigate all parties. Not quite what the Sindo/Indo expected with its non-story about SF's Abu database.https://www.thejournal.ie/dpc-audit-political-parties-5442385-May2021/ Regards...jmcc
beakerjoe wrote: » All parties have had weeks to prepare for this, so it will be interesting to see if anything huge pops up. Im not expecting a whole lot of issues cropping up, but sure I'll wait n see.
jmcc wrote: » The audit dates back to 2018 (the implementation of GDPR). It doesn't just cover the present handling of voter data. Regards...jmcc
beakerjoe wrote: » What do you believe they could find that would be backdated to 2018.
Surely if any data was unlawfully shared, they would have just deleted those emails or destroyed any evidence last week. ..... or now.
jmcc wrote: » The audit covers the period from the present to back to 25th May 2018 (the implementation of GDPR). It doesn't just cover the present handling of voter data. Regards...jmcc
Floppybits wrote: » The problem is that they have had plenty of notice of this now would have been much better if the data commissioner just arrived unannounced to do the audit.
beakerjoe wrote: » He loves the sound of his own voice. Cant stand the bloke.
elperello wrote: » Confident, authoritative and well spoken. I can see how that sort of person gets up some peoples noses. It's more like him we need.
jmcc wrote: » Seems that only SF, the Greens and Labour are storing their data within the EU. FG and FF are storing data outside the EU. Who would have thunk it. https://twitter.com/MarkAgitprop/status/1395328737177124864 Regards...jmcc
