"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
Mary Fisher wrote:

Yup just like now, only without the safguards of multiple incompatible
distributed and non connected databases that limit the scope of an error,
and provide alternative routes to perform sanity checks and consistency
checks on the data when something goes wrong.


Can you put that into Plain English please?

Seemed plain enough as it was... which bit are you having difficulty with?

It was like a Russian novel, I turned off at the first line. Communication
is about getting across your message, if it doesn't do that, no matter how
fancy the language, it's worthless.

As for my having difficulty with it, do you honestly think that everyone
else reading this thread would havean instant understanding? The
underwhelming response doesn't sugges tthat.

"Multiple / distributed" - there are lots of places where data are stored
about us. These databases are not centralised. E.g. the information held
on the passport database is not in the same place as that relating to your
drivers license or your birth certificate.

No, but in Our Glorious Leader's Joined up Thinking every gets going it
could be.

"non connected" - a change made to information in one place does not
automatically propagate through to all the others.

You sound like a politician.

"incompatible" - data are held on various systems ranging from paper to
electronic. Since this is not a monoculture, it impossible for a single
type of activity / error to compromise all these systems in one go.

Ah - I understand 'monoculture'. But I can'tsee what OSR has to do with this
thread ...

Hence if an error were made (or someone tampered) with your passport
details, you would have several options available to you to correct the
error. The fallibility of the information systems is understood and
abilities to deal with it are built into the processes. The database is
not always right.

And there isn't always a reluctance to investigate the reported error and a
refusal to correct it.

Also don't forget the new scope for data mining exercises correlating
your innocent behaviour to that of a known problem groups.


And that.

Data mining, is the process of running statistical analysis and AI/fuzzy
logic pattern recognition techniques against large data sets with the
intention of discovering previously unknown relationships and causalities
within the data.

Oh, I see! Crystal clear :-)

More detailed descriptions he

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_mining

One novel example would be the suicide predictor used in some underground
stations via their CCTV systems. By performing data mining exercises
against CCTV footage of people who threw themselves in front of trains,
they have produced algorithms that can detect patterns of behaviour the
frequently preceded a suicide attempt of this nature. The computer system
attempts to give early warning to staff that this may be about to happen.

However the process can be used against any large data set to attempt to
find a predicate for all sorts of behaviours or outcomes. Hence armed with
your national ID register and its collected data of everyone's movements
and transactions (financial or otherwise) you can set about identifying
the predicates for all sorts of unwanted behaviour like benefit fraud or
terrorism for example.

You can see the tantalising prospects for the powers that be. The
technology vendors will only help to encourage them in this line of
thought.

The difficulty however is this is not an exact science. Even if you do
find a way of identifying some individuals who will go on to commit a
crime (or have escaped detection in the past), you can't help but sweep
many innocents into the net in the same action. You are also into the
rather questionable process of arresting people for what your think they
might be about to do (football hooliganism legislation anyone?).

Sorry, you switched me off several paras ago ... Pity really because I do
respect a lot of your knowledge and opinion.

Mary

--
Cheers,