Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
06-01-2010, 18:59   #391
goudystout
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: D 3
Posts: 12
Is it a psotcode or a new ay of writing a townland name?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alcatel View Post
Delivery of services and fraud protection, being two.

Do most other major countries have postcodes for the craic?
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??

Last edited by goudystout; 06-01-2010 at 19:01. Reason: spell
goudystout is offline  
Advertisement
06-01-2010, 21:00   #392
brianwalshcork
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by goudystout View Post
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.
brianwalshcork is offline  
07-01-2010, 09:44   #393
lol_leo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 51
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!

Last edited by lol_leo; 07-01-2010 at 09:54.
lol_leo is offline  
07-01-2010, 10:05   #394
seamus
Dental Plan!
 
seamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: :getName()
Posts: 59,085
Send a message via MSN to seamus
Quote:
Originally Posted by goudystout View Post
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.
seamus is offline  
07-01-2010, 22:38   #395
goudystout
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: D 3
Posts: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by seamus View Post
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 ANDDATA 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!!!!
goudystout is offline  
Advertisement
07-01-2010, 23:29   #396
antoinolachtnai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Outer Space
Posts: 8,009
Send a message via AIM to antoinolachtnai Send a message via Yahoo to 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.
antoinolachtnai is offline  
07-01-2010, 23:43   #397
bangersandmash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: South Dublin
Posts: 671
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaffa20 View Post
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/i...-property-tax/
bangersandmash is offline  
08-01-2010, 09:51   #398
lol_leo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 51
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.
lol_leo is offline  
08-01-2010, 19:29   #399
byrnefm
Registered User
 
byrnefm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Letterkenny, Ireland
Posts: 809
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)"!
byrnefm is offline  
Advertisement
13-01-2010, 05:55   #400
monument
Moderator
 
monument's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 13,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by antoinolachtnai View Post
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.
monument is offline  
13-01-2010, 11:07   #401
thebman
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,946
Quote:
Originally Posted by monument View Post
The Office of the Data Protection Commissioner is known to take the strictest possible meaning of everything.
lol you sure about that.
thebman is offline  
17-01-2010, 09:12   #402
number10a
Registered User
 
number10a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wrocław
Posts: 1,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by lol_leo View Post
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.
number10a is offline  
17-01-2010, 15:11   #403
thebman
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,946
Quote:
Originally Posted by number10a View Post
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.
thebman is offline  
17-01-2010, 23:08   #404
baalthor
Registered User
 
baalthor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by antoinolachtnai View Post
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.
baalthor is offline  
18-01-2010, 00:09   #405
thebman
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,946
Quote:
Originally Posted by baalthor View Post
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.
thebman is offline  
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet