[LINK] US-AMA far too complacent about human RFID tags
Marghanita da Cruz
marghanita at ramin.com.au
Tue Jul 3 13:40:48 EST 2007
Geoffrey Ramadan wrote:
> Roger Clarke wrote:
>> At 12:27 +1000 3/7/07, Geoffrey Ramadan wrote:
>>> As I have already commented before, I see it as inevitable. To manage
>>> our growing sophisticated, complex and mobile society and risks, more
>>> automated identification will become essential. It will be impossible
>>> to remain anonymous.
>> There are willing automatons in this world who genuinely believe in
>> the idea of control reducing risks, and new threats demanding ever
>> more control; just as there were people who actually enjoyed living
>> in East Germany.
>> Okay, *you* may not suffer from your capitulation to technological
>> determinism, Geoffrey, but some of us would like a future for our kids
>> that avoids putting such power in the hands of whichever bastards are
>> in control from time to time.
> 1) I am only stating what I think is the obvious trend. This is not new.
> 2) To link a previous thread, maybe you should look at using the
> technology to "shift the balance of power" so the "bastards" are NOT in
> control. Universal access to broadband I suspect will be a key
> ingredient in this.
> 4) Finally, I think people will use this technology voluntarily anyway,
> because THEY want to use it as they see VALUE in it. Just like many
> other new technologies over the years.
Why go to East Germany, check out Australia, this millenium.
> Major issues identified in the report
> * The report concludes that DIAC’s data recording practices were flawed and that officers failed to check and collect reliable data. In most of the cases the detention of a person was inexcusable: the Department already held sufficient information that established the person’s lawful status.
> * The data errors in these cases appeared to be caused by human error, insufficient guidance and training for officers, and inconsistent and uncoordinated communication between DIAC and the tribunals.
> * The Ombudsman concluded that, in most cases, at the time a person was detained, DIAC already held sufficient information either confirming the person’s lawful status or creating doubt that the person was an unlawful non-citizen.
> * There were various reasons contributing to the errors in these cases including:
> o officers did not appear to understand fully their obligations under s 189 of the Migration Act to form and continue to hold a reasonable suspicion to justify a person’s detention
> o officers did not take proper personal responsibility for decision making and for ensuring that errors were corrected
> o there was inadequate quality checking, control and timely review of compliance and detention activity
> o data collection, analysis and management was degraded by ad hoc processes and poor coordination
> o there was inadequate training and policy guidance for officers.
Marghanita da Cruz
Phone: 0414 869202
More information about the Link