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


snip

transactions, if you need to? If you have a business surely you have to
have evidence if only for your accountant?

Personally I keep a fair amount of information, but there comes a point
where a twelve year old bank statement has little value. So when the
filing cabinet will accept no more I get all ruthless on it and shred the
old stuff ;-)

I also keep plenty of computerised information - but it is simpler to keep
adding storage to deal with that one ;-)

For business and tax purposes then one obviously needs to keep everything
for at least six years anyway.


With the exception of records that legally have to be retained for longer
than 6 years, there is an argument that it is wise to destroy retained
financial records on the 6 year anniversary, especially if you are in the IT
business at the moment. The IR can investigate you going back 6 years.
However, if you have older records and any anomolies are found in the
initial investigation (and the IR, along with HMC&E, don't have a concept of
"materiality" - ie records should be exact, not "true and fair") then they
can go back a further 6 years if the records exist, and so on.


But data mining can tell someone who's interested an awful lot about you
just from Usenet ...

Very true - especially after ten years of posting to it. All those little
bits of information added together probably divulge a fair amount.


There is, however, a world of difference from mining structured data from
relational systems and mining it from unstructured Usenet text.


Then you and your highly able colleagues must make sure that the
defences you design and implement must be secure.

Nice idea, but alas it does not work like that.


Why not?

Are you saying that you're incapable of designing a secure system?

Yes! (blunt enough?)


Godel would tend to prove you right on this.

snip

No, I expect most have not given the issue any serious consideration and
are more interested in what happens next on Eastenders....


Yes. But so what?

Don't you think it is a great shame that in the past people have fought
and died to win the freedoms and the choices we have now, and yet a good
majority seem prepared to let some of them slip away simply due to apathy?



Quite. I have enough difficulty persuading those around me to vote - they
don't abstain from any convictions (ie wanting a "none of the above" option)
but rather that they just don't see that it has any relevance to them or
effect on their lives. Worrying.

--
Richard Sampson

mail me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk