nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Government introduces Postcodes in Ireland..?

rinnin

"Dempsey announces programme to introduce postcodes in Ireland by 1st January 2008"
See the article at:
http://www.dcmnr.gov.ie/Press+Releases/Dempsey+announces+programme+to+introduce+postcodes+in+Ireland+by+1st+January+2008.htm

So Mr Dempsey,
Where the hell are they?! :mad:
Its absolutely rediculous that we dont have them here. If it was feckin Africa or something I'd understand but trying to order anything online or use Sat Nav or anything that a modern society takes for granted is a pain in the hoo ha.
What do people think about this?
Is there any decent reason Ireland shouldnt have postcodes?

Find more posts tagged with

postcodes

Quick Links

Comments

brianwalshcork

goudystout wrote: »

We should have postcodes too i agree, but surely they should be able to lead Emergency services to a house using a GPS and the same for couriers delivering goods ordered off the web anywhere in the country and allow tourists find tourist features which may be outside cities...

It seems to me that there is not much point in introducing a postcode system after 5 years of consultants' reports which has the same addressing capability as an Irish townland i.e. you will just have to write a 6 character code instead of the townland name and no other additional benefits??

+1, what a waste of time.

Ah well, in a couple of years, we can look forward to an expensive investigation into why the implentation of the postcode system v1.0 failed and why uptake was so poor - then wait another couple of years for v2.0, which will come with free backward compatibility headaches.

WTF?? Is this the best the consultants could come up with after 5 years? They should have started a boards thread, and would have it thrashed out in a week.

lol_leo

Where can I see the current Government proposals?

Surely we can draw on the experiences of those that have gone before us to come up with the best system possible or as someone else mentioned are we going to reinvent the wheel...at a cost!

seamus

goudystout wrote: »

Eamonn Ryan is also on record as saying that it cannot be used on GPS for Data Protection resaons.

I'm sorry, but that has to be a misquote or something that was misheard.

An post already maintain a proprietary postcode system of their own for locating houses and townlands. They charge massive money for access to this system. Any company who is willing to pay, gets access. So I don't see how data protection comes into play here. Addresses nor any form of post code are not private personal information.

It's probably more likely that the government is going to take the idiot decision and make the post code system private and charge through the nose for a licence to access it. This is why it can't be opened up for GPS use unless the GPS user (not the manufacturer) is willing to pay €100,000 for every post code in Dublin and €500,000 for every postcode in the country.

goudystout

seamus wrote: »

I'm sorry, but that has to be a misquote or something that was misheard.

26 June 2006
2/22/10

Mr John Tierney
Chairman
National Postcodes Project Board

POSTCODES AND DATA PROTECTION

Dear John
Following my presentation to the Board last April, I have recently had discussions with the Board’s consultants on the privacy/data protection implications of various postcodes options which are under consideration.
I very much welcome the opportunity to have these exchanges at this stage. My approach is to help the Board to arrive at a set of proposals which meet the public good objectives of the postcodes project without giving rise to privacy/data protection issues.
I have been asked to put in writing for the Board some of the key points that were raised in our discussions. I am happy to do so in this letter.
BACKGROUND
Personal privacy is important to Irish people. This was confirmed in a survey which this Office carried out last year, where it came second only to crime prevention in its relative importance to individuals.
Data Protection legislation is part of the overall legal framework in Ireland (and the EU) for the protection of personal privacy. The central theme of data protection legislation is that the individual, as part of their right to privacy, should control the use of information that is personal to them.
“Personal data” is defined in our legislation as data relating to a living individual who is or can be identified either from the data or from the data in conjunction with other information that is in, or is likely to come into, the possession of the data controller (a person who, either alone or with others, controls the contents and use of personal data). This definition of “personal data” is very broad and mirrors a similar broad definition in the EU Data Privacy Directive. Its precise meaning has to be considered in context and is not subject to any hard-and-fast rules.
In the Irish context, a person’s home address is an important part of their identity. In the case of a single-occupancy, owner-occupied dwelling, it is, in practice, a unique identifier. In the case of a family home, it typically identifies a small group of related individuals.
I suggest therefore that, for the purposes of postcodes planning, a single-unit residential address should be considered as being part of the “personal data” of the occupant(s). This would not apply to a commercial address. Neither would it apply to a typical apartment blockface containing many individual residential units.
POSTCODE MODELS
‘One-to-One’ Model
Based on the considerations above, a postcode model which provided, in most cases, a 1 to 1 match between a postcode and a dwelling would raise significant privacy/data protection issues. It is a model I would have serious reservations about, if it were to be put forward as a formal policy proposal. In expressing such reservations, I would have regard to issues such as the potential for ready identification of sensitive information about individuals where postcodes were used for purposes other than mail delivery. Examples could include use of postcodes to identify patterns of crime or illness.
Area Model
A postcode model that matched a postcode (with geo-location coordinates) to an area normally including say 20 – 50 dwellings should not give rise to privacy/data protection issues. Such an area could be a street, a district etc. It would not normally be possible to identify an individual from such a postcode without significant additional details. The risk to privacy therefore would be proportionate to what I assume are the public good aspects associated with a postcodes model.
I understand that, in the case of sparsely populated areas, it might be difficult to avoid a situation where a postcode area would in practice include only a small number of residential dwellings. Provided planning were based on keeping such cases to a minimum, I would also see this as a proportionate solution.
POSTCODE DATABASE
For the reasons outlined above, a public database of one-to-one postcodes would, in my opinion, give rise to serious privacy/data protection issues. Such issues should not arise in relation to a public database of area postcodes (with geo-location coordinates) typically covering 20-50 individual but unspecified addresses.
Such a public database of area postcodes would facilitate existing holders of customer databases (utilities, financial institutions, public authorities etc) who wished to apply the postcodes to these databases. It could also be available more generally (e.g. on a website) as a ‘look-up’ facility to allow individuals to enter an address known to them and be provided with the corresponding postcode. It would not be desirable that the public database be designed on an individual address basis, but rather on a street, district etc basis.
I have been asked to comment specifically on a scenario where a comprehensive national database, containing the addresses and geo-coordinates of individual properties, was developed under the aegis of a Postcode Authority on the basis that the database was not publicly available. My answer from a data protection/privacy perspective is that the manner in which such a database was developed, and the conditions of its use, should preferably be set out in law. This would facilitate a full debate on the public good that would be served by such a comprehensive database and the degree to which this would outweigh concerns about the threat to privacy that could result.
I should add, for the sake of completeness, that data protection issues only arise where the individual is not in control of the use etc of their personal data. If an individual were to consent to their address being put on a public database, in the full knowledge of how such a database would be used, then data protection/privacy issues would not arise.
I hope this information is helpful. I would be very happy to engage further with the Board if that would be helpful.

Yours sincerely

Billy Hawkes
Data Protection Commissioner
(note the highlighted bit above - opostcodes can contain up to 50 properties nut the addresses of those properties are to have "unspecified addresses" - this means that nobody will know what addresses are in the postcode ..........confused??? - so will the courier be when he is trying to deliver your new google phone!!!)

Read the full report here

see para7.4.3 re paying An Post €37 million

see para 3.3 bullet point 4 re adding a GPS coordinate to the code as an addition - this coordinate is to be the centre of the area of the code - i.e the centre of up to 50 properties - in non urban areas this could be the centre of a townland - probably in the middle of a field somewhere and absolutely of no benfit for GPS navigation. The coordinate will take a SatNav to the centre of up to 50 houses and then you have to work out which one is the one you want - i.e. the same as putting a townland name into your satnav now - that is of cousre if the SatNav manuafturers will bother paying the Dept of Communications for supporting the postcode in the first place.

see page 5-3 re the benefits to the CSO for statistics - a Small Area Code has already been created by the OSI and NUIM for Statistical Analysis instead of DED's and their recommendation that areas for statistics should not contain any less that 65 properties for privacy reasons and they recommend an additional GPS based postcode for navigation.

see para 7.4.1 re the proposed postcode being unable to solve the non unique addressing problem in Ireland which was one of the stated aims of the system to solve and it further goes on to say that the only way to solve this is to add road names and properties in non urban areas - thereby changing people's addresses and this also was clearly stated as something to be avoided in implementing the code.

See page D-1 where it states that in non urban areas a single postcode will cover a complete townland except in ceratin minimum circumstances - it seems to have been forgotten that 40% of our population lives in townland addressed areas. This therefore proposes to cover every property in a single townland with the same postcode - i.e. in the address the townland could then be omitted in favour of a six character code. Seems that they have taken no guidance from what happened in Northern Ireland since they introduced the Royal Mail Code there in the 70's and are trying to recover from it now - see here

It is clear that we are now to have a postcode which was designed on the single opinion of a Data Commissioner above.. even though the Geodirectory, the telephone book, the register of electors and the UK postcode already do without any repercussions what he says breaches EU privacy and data proetction laws - seems like a classic case of a second opinion would have been useful if it suited politically .........and perhaps it didn't suit as the Data Commissioner's opinion might have kept An Post onboard as new competition arriving with the deregualtion of the postal market would gain no advantage from the resulting postcode - this and a planned €37 million payment of course.

And then the Minister stood up in the Seanad and quoted a postcode with 10-20 houses, 20-40 properties and 20-50 properties - smoke screens why can't he just state the facts? (there is a difference between houses and properties and using houses as the reference allows a smaller figure to be quoted. However, if you are delivering mail you have to find the right one amongst all properties not just houses)

He also talked about developing a "data system" that is just as effective as GPS - so the consultants to the Minister for Communications in Ireland has developed an alternative to GPS - just as good and capable of guiding an ambulance to a field in the centre of a townland anywhere in Ireland - useful new technology to take over from GPS on the global markets!!!! (The not-so-smart economy perhaps)

Then he refers to the time taken to implement the code as being associated with "allocating addresses to houses" which seems to suggest putting names on roads and numbers on properties in rural areas. You can spot all the contradictions and the lack of understanding in the exchanges here and not to mention the first official mention of an alternative to GPS - currently known as a "Data System" - and which does not breach people's privacy rights.

So now do you believe that what we are going to get as a postcode is worth 5 years of consultants reports and a minimum of €15 million to implement plus the €37 million peace offering to An Post???

Don't forget that in 2006 after the report referred to here, the then Minister stated that the recommended Postcode would be implemented by Jan 2008. In September last Year, Eamon Ryan said that it would be in place by 2011. But nothing has happend since and the latest statement was by the end of 2011 - if it happened then it would only be almost 4 years late!!!!

Thought people should see the full picture...............too much misinformed speculation!!!!

antoinolachtnai

Billy Hawkes is mistaken in fact, law and logic. In fact, not having a postcode will not avoid houses having unique addresses. If you give houses numbers and streets names you are making addresses unique. In law, having a unique code for every house would not per se result in a breach of data protection principles in and of itself. In logic, it does not follow that because a house forms part of a person's identity, that therefore it would be a breach of privacy to uniquely identify that house.

bangersandmash

jaffa20 wrote: »

is it ever gonna happpen How old is this thread now. Shows how the government don't put a lot of effort into enforcing things other than tax, and new laws on drinking or driving.

Funny you should say that. Interesting post here speculating that the main motivating reason for the government to introduce a new post code system may be to facilitate the introduction of a site valuation tax. Since the current government is fond of methods for raising tax that are couched in altruism, this idea doesn't sound implausible.

http://www.mortgagebrokers.ie/blog/index.php/2010/01/04/postcodes-a-prelude-to-property-tax/

lol_leo

Just got a call off a courier this morning wanting to know what house I live in. Its the same story every time...I will end up standing outside on the road waiting for him. I can imagine the mobile phone companies are quite happy to leave things as they are.

byrnefm

I think it will be a lot easier when trying to give information over the phone or even through online ordering with postcodes - in the UK, all you have to usually do is give your house number and post code and the rest of the information gets filled in automatically for you.

So many times I have received incorrectly addressed post because either of a misspelled address or leaving out something small like the town name!

My sister lived in Carlow many years ago and there were THREE number 7's on the same street. I can't remember how they were each individually addressed on numbers but one I heard was "No. 7 (beside the butcher's)"!

monument

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Billy Hawkes is mistaken in fact, law and logic. In fact, not having a postcode will not avoid houses having unique addresses. If you give houses numbers and streets names you are making addresses unique. In law, having a unique code for every house would not per se result in a breach of data protection principles in and of itself. In logic, it does not follow that because a house forms part of a person's identity, that therefore it would be a breach of privacy to uniquely identify that house.

The Office of the Data Protection Commissioner is known to take the strictest possible meaning of everything.

thebman

monument wrote: »

The Office of the Data Protection Commissioner is known to take the strictest possible meaning of everything.

lol you sure about that.:pac:

number10a

lol_leo wrote: »

Just got a call off a courier this morning wanting to know what house I live in. Its the same story every time...I will end up standing outside on the road waiting for him. I can imagine the mobile phone companies are quite happy to leave things as they are.

This problem will keep going on even with the introduction of postcodes. The best that postcodes can ever do is guide a delivery man to the right area. They will never bring him to the correct house. Regardless of what happens, we're still going to be getting those phone calls for many years to come.

thebman

number10a wrote: »

This problem will keep going on even with the introduction of postcodes. The best that postcodes can ever do is guide a delivery man to the right area. They will never bring him to the correct house. Regardless of what happens, we're still going to be getting those phone calls for many years to come.

aye and thank Eamon Ryan and his department of crap decisions for that and whatever muppet wrote the report

Funny how postcodes to the home are an invasion of privacy but its important our ISP's log everything we do online :-/

Hypocrites.

baalthor

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Billy Hawkes is mistaken in fact, law and logic. In fact, not having a postcode will not avoid houses having unique addresses. If you give houses numbers and streets names you are making addresses unique. In law, having a unique code for every house would not per se result in a breach of data protection principles in and of itself. In logic, it does not follow that because a house forms part of a person's identity, that therefore it would be a breach of privacy to uniquely identify that house.

Many houses already have unique addresses but that's not the point.
Having a unique post-code will make it easy to identify people in houses from any data submitted with the post code. It will also make it easy for anyone to visit the house where the person in question is located.

For example, if I fill in an on-line form for a health insurance quote and as part of the application have to state that I have a particular disease or condition, let's say Tourettes's Syndrome. The form also asks for my (individual) post-code.
With this information an unscrupulous person could turn up outside my house and start asking me to shout obscenities at them!
On the other hand, with an area based code all they can say is: "A guy with Tourette's lives in this townland/on this street"

Now of course the same thing could happen if I give my address (house number, steeet, etc) but the point is: I know I'm giving them my address; some users of the individual post code may not realise it uniquely identifies their house, those that do realise this may be reluctant to enter the code, thus limiting its usage.

To conclude, I agree with the reservations of the data commissioner; an area code with separate local address/house number is the way to go.

thebman

baalthor wrote: »

Many houses already have unique addresses but that's not the point.
Having a unique post-code will make it easy to identify people in houses from any data submitted with the post code. It will also make it easy for anyone to visit the house where the person in question is located.

For example, if I fill in an on-line form for a health insurance quote and as part of the application have to state that I have a particular disease or condition, let's say Tourettes's Syndrome. The form also asks for my (individual) post-code.
With this information an unscrupulous person could turn up outside my house and start asking me to shout obscenities at them!
On the other hand, with an area based code all they can say is: "A guy with Tourette's lives in this townland/on this street"

Now of course the same thing could happen if I give my address (house number, steeet, etc) but the point is: I know I'm giving them my address; some users of the individual post code may not realise it uniquely identifies their house, those that do realise this may be reluctant to enter the code, thus limiting its usage.

To conclude, I agree with the reservations of the data commissioner; an area code with separate local address/house number is the way to go.

No if we have unique addresses already then it is the same as a postcode. Your just reducing the information required to identify a location. Where has this magically abuse shouting happened that has unique postcodes? They don't allow you to identify a person, it is a location where many people will most likely reside.

Your also ignoring that the health insurer shouldn't be sharing that information with anyone. That would be the data protection breach.

View

thebman wrote: »

No if we have unique addresses already ...

Whatever about the merits of postcodes, we don't have unique addresses.

I knew someone who lived in a small midland town on a street/road that went from the town centre straight out in the direction of another neighbouring town. Her address was - 3 "Neighbouring Town" Street. There were two other houses on that street/road with the exact same postal address. It was only local knowledge by the postman that ensured people got their mail.

Likewise, there was a case around 5 years ago near Blackrock in Dublin where a developer built an apartment development called "The Elms". 3 streets away was a long-time road called - "The Elms" where all the locals suddenly got bombarded with junk mail offers for carpets, curtains etc for their "new home". The local Council asked the developer to change the name but he basically said: a) you (the council) approved the name, and, b) it'll cost me money to change all my brochures, advertising etc.

Contrast this with many other countries where addresses are unique to a locality and can usually be fitted on 2 lines.

thebman

View wrote: »

Whatever about the merits of postcodes, we don't have unique addresses.

I knew someone who lived in a small midland town on a street/road that went from the town centre straight out in the direction of another neighbouring town. Her address was - 3 "Neighbouring Town" Street. There were two other houses on that street/road with the exact same postal address. It was only local knowledge by the postman that ensured people got their mail.

Likewise, there was a case around 5 years ago near Blackrock in Dublin where a developer built an apartment development called "The Elms". 3 streets away was a long-time road called - "The Elms" where all the locals suddenly got bombarded with junk mail offers for carpets, curtains etc for their "new home". The local Council asked the developer to change the name but he basically said: a) you (the council) approved the name, and, b) it'll cost me money to change all my brochures, advertising etc.

Contrast this with many other countries where addresses are unique to a locality and can usually be fitted on 2 lines.

We do in many areas which was my point. I know we don't overall but that just further strengthens the need for individual post codes.

Area post coes are as useful so useless, we might as well drink the money although I suspect half of the money for the reporting went to some fool that has done exactly that with the money

antoinolachtnai

baalthor wrote: »

For example, if I fill in an on-line form for a health insurance quote and as part of the application have to state that I have a particular disease or condition, let's say Tourettes's Syndrome. The form also asks for my (individual) post-code.
With this information an unscrupulous person could turn up outside my house and start asking me to shout obscenities at them!
On the other hand, with an area based code all they can say is: "A guy with Tourette's lives in this townland/on this street"

First of all, I would say that is extremely unlikely that this sort of information would go back and forth for getting a health insurance quotation.

Maybe a more likely scenario might be that you were looking for insurance for your high-performance car, or for parts for your high-end stereo, and the information is used to rob you.

There are two things here:

1. Abuse of sales/prospecting information. There is no difference between a prospective customer and an actual customer in data protection law. You simply cannot deal with sales/prospect lists in the way you describe. It is illegal. Now, I am not saying it does not happen, but it is against the law and anywhere it happens it should be cracked down on. It is already an issue where there is a unique address. The obvious example of concern would be dunhumby/tesco.

2. A code should be hierarchical, i.e., you don't have to give the full code. For instance, the first five digits could be down to the local small area of a 100 or so houses, and a further three digits could narrow this to the street and then to the house.

Most of the time, the 5-digit code would be enough.

For most addresses, where there are unique street addresses, maybe a 5 digit code would always be enough? There is no compelling need for a unique code for each house. It might be nice, but it is not absolutely necessary.

For rural addresses, there is a need to make addresses unique, sooner or later, by hook or by crook. In a rural area, this is an issue of personal safety when it comes to things like emergency services, not just convenience and cost-saving. Surely it makes sense to do this according to a national scheme rather than making up a different scheme in every different county or townland?

There is little point in trying to impose a code on people in Ireland, especially a per-house scheme. That won't work. People have to be gradually convinced to embrace the system.

thebman

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

There is little point in trying to impose a code on people in Ireland, especially a per-house scheme. That won't work. People have to be gradually convinced to embrace the system.

I don't see why it needs to be gradual TBH. My neighbour who is in her 60's came over at Xmas to my parents to talk about great it was that we are going to get post codes and they won't have problems with post anymore in her rural area.

My parents thought the same and both of them are in their 50's. Who needs convincing exactly? The system works elsewhere and people want it from what I can see except people that think there are data protection issues which I don't believe there are. Either you want people to know where you live or you don't. If you want to get post/mail then people are going to need to know where you live and everyone wants/needs post so you need people to know where you live.

I don't see what is so difficult to understand why post code addressing would be a good thing. If anything this silly system they seem to be introducing will turn people against postcodes once they realise it won't help mail get to their house, only to their townland/general area.

antoinolachtnai

I am not questioning the ability to embrace change. It's just that (and maybe this is my opinion) is that Irish people don't react well to having things imposed upon them.

I agree with you that a system that does not at least have the possibility of dealing with the issue of non-unique addresses is going to leave itself open to obvious criticism.

Noobsaibot21

I like the idea of postcodes for additional identification purposes. But I think it should be based on the N. Ireland one's as their's seems easier to remember than a US style bunch of numbers for ZIP codes.

For example:

Heatons Store,
Unit 1
Retail Park 2
Blanchardstown
DB15 2BC

DB15 2BC could be Dublin 15, Second cluster of houses (or maybe Apts/Buildings/relevent address type - probably buildings in this case), Blanchardstown Centre. Such a system allows many unique postcodes for even the most built up of areas. Would have to split up the other counties into a few regions similar to Dublin's current system.

As for a remote area like.... (Opens Google Earth)..... Lehid in Galway maybe could use something like GW61 1ML - This would be similar to N. Ireland postcodes where the number after the first two letters is higher the further you are away from Belfast. There are some places in Wales whereby one solitary house gets it's own postcode

Far better that the proposed system they are looking at with 3 "relevant" letters and three numbers. What will all the RAT's and BAL's do

*BTW, No idea if that is the exact address - I just remember a heatons in Blanchardstown but NOT part of the main shopping centre. :P

antoinolachtnai

The research goes against this type of code being more memorable than an all- or mostly-numbers code.

Schraagen and Van Dongen, Designing a licence plate for memorability, Ergonomics, Vol. 48, No. 7, 10 June2005, 796–806

http://www.k-report.eu/diskuse/archiv2008/54342/Design_a_license_plate_for_memorability_ERGONOMICS_2005-141335.pdf

There are obvious practical problems. Some letters sound or look like one another and are liable to be confused.

Sulmac

Gone to tender now:

Tender process for postal codes launched

MARIE O'HALLORAN

Mon, Feb 01, 2010

MINISTER FOR Communications Eamon Ryan has announced the launch of a tender competition on the implementation of a national post codes system.

Ireland is the only EU country not to have such a system in place and the Minister has set the end of 2011 as the target date for the introduction of the new post codes.

Tenders are invited from consultants, who are expected to begin work at the end of March.

They will advise on the establishment of the system, which is estimated to cost €10-15 million.

Mr Ryan has said the future economy “depends on a national system which can access and collate spatial data”. “A national post code system will deliver benefits not only in terms of postal delivery but across the economy and in Government planning.”

If targets are met, “a national post code system will be assigned and in use throughout the country by the end of next year”.

The Government has approved an alpha-numeric postal code model which will identify groups of properties, with the first letters based on the city or town.

Each postcode will have a geo- co-ordinate at its centre and thus would be compatible with global positioning or navigation systems, allowing integration with GPS and other global navigation satellite technologies, according to the Department of Communications.

In the Dáil last week, Fine Gael criticised the Minister’s plans.

Communications spokesman Simon Coveney said that if the proposed system were introduced to rural Ireland, it would be “no better than what currently exists with the use of local districts or townlands”, because the system would only have the ability to narrow down to between 20 and 50 properties.

Mr Ryan dismissed the claim and insisted: “It will be up to the competitive tendering process to decide on which system.” He said that the tendering process “should deliver quickly in terms of the exact system we introduce”.

The Minister continued: “Post codes are right for this country and, as well as providing an effective postal code system, they should have capability to provide location code facilities for a range of applications that will develop as the smart economy evolves.”

© 2010 The Irish Times

Berwick

themarcus wrote: »

Not 100% sure, but I think most African countries actually do have postal codes!

I think so, too.

simonj

Oilrig wrote: »

Spam Mail is the postal provider (An Post) making money as a "sideline" As long as there is an opt out on being included in these I see no problem. The opt out should be all inclusive, ie all mailshots. That means restrictions on An Post selling our details to private companies who do their own mailshots.

Totally, but it can be funny sometimes. A guy from Singapore who was at Uni with my sister once wrote Mairead - her UK mobile number, and Connemara Ireland on an envelope and it got to her.

I was being sent a cheque by a UK magazine, and was told that they needed a post code to process, being from Connemara if you wrote my name and connemara on a letter, it would probably get to me - but they insisted on a postcode. I told them to use G4 - and it worked

amhrannua.com

Shea O'Meara

The Luas, Port Tunnel, M50, e-voting machines, the PULSE system.....
This will be funny as f***.

byrnefm

One week until the invitation for tenders close...

http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/Communications/Postal/Postcodes.htm

I wonder how many have replied?

SeanW

thebman wrote: »

aye and thank Eamon Ryan and his department of crap decisions for that and whatever muppet wrote the report

Funny how postcodes to the home are an invasion of privacy but its important our ISP's log everything we do online :-/

Hypocrites.

Just to expand on this point, hopefully the post code system will be like the U.S. where there is a ZIP code, and and ZIP+4 option, (the ZIP code plus a (possibly unique) 4 digit detail). This means that a dwelling or business can be identified with absolute precision, and would be useful for people in rural areas getting courier deliveries, directing emergency services and whatever else.

Oh wait, I just read the above posts ...
:mad:

Berwick

byrnefm wrote: »

One week until the invitation for tenders close...

And what will happen after that week?

Overheal

SeanW wrote: »

Just to expand on this point, hopefully the post code system will be like the U.S. where there is a ZIP code, and and ZIP+4 option, (the ZIP code plus a (possibly unique) 4 digit detail). This means that a dwelling or business can be identified with absolute precision, and would be useful for people in rural areas getting courier deliveries, directing emergency services and whatever else.

Oh wait, I just read the above posts ...
:mad:

Nobody uses +4 except the post office itself. No website, or insurance quote, or Mother in Law, will ever ask you for your +4. Because nobody remembers their +4, and nobody cares. The +4 is for the Postman himself.

My zip, 29483, is nowhere near enough information to identify my location with. It covers a broad area of several square miles.

But see also 29484. 84 is actually closer to me. But doesnt mean im part of that zip. Thats actually Linconville which kind of exists in a zoning bubble attached and enveloped by Summerville. And then I work in 29485.

And look! Nothing personally identifiable! WOW!

But it still helps me get my mail, get a quote, find out how much shipping costs, etc.

But heres confidence: 29483-5398. Do your worst. The fact is you'll find nothing. Because as I've said, +4 is used internally by the Post Office. Henceforth nobody will ask you for your +4 because it means SFA to anybody but your mail maid.

theg81der

These f*ckers will make a f*ck of it anyway, they should have a "lets think of all the ways we can waste taxpayers money day" and just get it over with, at least we know what to expect "moving forward".