warning the edge of the world is here Re: [LINK] Airport to tag passengers

Deus Ex Machina vicc at cia.com.au
Tue Oct 17 10:15:34 AEST 2006

back to the old lets challenge the facts based on the source of the
facts. clearly anything that isnt written by a pig dog unionist must not
taken into any consideration. the lefty must live in a tightly controled
world, with the edges clearly defined, anyone venturing past these edges
will fall off or go insane or float off into space. its a bit like craigs
memetic engineering, except self imposed realy isnt it?

a kind of group think in action.

the follow on of course it to link the goal or motive back to profit which we
know the lefty defines as inherently evil, (unless of course its her
own fees or salaries) thereby completing a nice tautology. 

the goal is evil therefore there is no way that in principle in the use
of rfid can  be just, and when in doubt fall back to a position of abuse
of privacy or some other such meaningless twatle which is so vague that
it cant be challenged. other lefties can join the fray with the straw men 
that clearly privacy is the most important condition of humans as
evidenced by the amount of effort lefty puts into the topic.


Jan Whitaker [jwhit at melbpc.org.au] wrote:
> At 12:01 AM 17/10/2006, Geoffrey Ramadan wrote:
> >Apologies, I should have quoted the first rule verbatim:
> >"RFID tags should only be linked to personal 
> >information or used to profile customers if 
> >there is no other way of achieving the goal sought;"
> >http://www.privacy.gov.au/news/media/03_17.html
> whose goal? And does the person (not customer, 
> this is about More than customers now) have the 
> opportunity to define or influence that goal in 
> any way, particularly when the imposer of the 
> goal, the final decider, is a monopoly - either a govt or a business ?
> I think it's important to read this full media 
> release for context. It was issued in 2003 under 
> a different Privacy Commissioner. In fact, as of 
> now, the three hosting commissioners at the time are no longer in those 
> roles.
> Media Release: World's Privacy Regulators call for privacy friendly RFID 
> tags
> 9/12/03
> "Radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags have 
> great potential. They can help companies greatly 
> improve the way they manage the supply of their 
> products and so save consumers a lot of money. 
> But they also have equal potential to invade 
> personal privacy if deployed wrongly." The 
> Australian Privacy Commissioner, Malcolm 
> Crompton, made these remarks when he released the 
> last of five resolutions adopted by the world's 
> data protection and privacy commissioners after their 2003 conference.
> The resolution calls for all the basic principles 
> of privacy law to be adopted when designing, 
> implementing and using RFID technology.
> [note the word ALL, not just the four below as 
> Geoff presented - that means all aspects of the 
> NPPs - and fyi, the retail code is doing that in 
> its draft code which should be out for public 
> review very soon now and I'll send the info to Link for comment]
> In summary, the resolution says that:
>    * RFID tags should only be linked to personal 
> information or used to profile customers if there 
> is no other way of achieving the goal sought;  [repeating: whose goal?]
>    * individuals should be fully informed if 
> personal information is collected using RFID 
> tags; [informed is good, but refusal to 
> participate is more important - choice, remember? John Howard's mantra.]
>    * personal information collected using RFID 
> tags should only be used for the specific purpose 
> for which it is first collected and destroyed 
> after that purpose is achieved, and; [again, the 
> person who is subject to this collection must be 
> provided input to determining the purpose or a 
> choice to not participate based on personal 
> circumstances that the data collector may not 
> have any knowledge about for the safety and 
> well-being of the individual or their family as 
> determined by that individual, NOT the data collector]
>    * individuals should be able to delete 
> information, or disable or destroy any RFID tag 
> that they have in their possession. [deletion is 
> not being afforded as far as I've heard, and 
> Geoff's comment about destruction or removal may 
> not be possible if the chip is integrated in the 
> internal design of the object. Cartons are OK and 
> easy, but removing something that is inherent to 
> the device - say some medical device inside the 
> body - may not be possible and yet the person 
> should have the right to turn these off - in the 
> future as well as at time of acquisition.
> [Here is the official language as the above is a 
> restatement in the media release:
> The Conference highlights the need to consider 
> data protection principles if RFID tags linked to 
> personal information are to be introduced.  All 
> the basic principles of data protection and 
> privacy law have to be observed when designing, 
> implementing and using RFID technology.  In particular
> a) any controller ? before introducing RFID tags 
> linked to personal information or leading to 
> customer profiles ? should first consider 
> alternatives which achieve the same goal without 
> collecting personal information or profiling customers;
> b) if the controller can show that personal data 
> are indispensable, they must be collected in an open and transparent way ;
> c) personal data may only be used for the 
> specific purpose for which they were first 
> collected and only retained for as long as is 
> necessary to achieve (or carry out) this purpose, and
> d) whenever RFID tags are in the possession of 
> individuals, they should have the possibility to 
> delete data and to disable or destroy the tags.
> ]
> [key phrases:
> consider alternatives to achieve the same goal 
> WITHOUT collecting personal info or profiling
> collect personal info in open and transparent way 
> - has nothing to do with the rfid part of the method]
> [return to press release]
> "Designers and users of RFID tags risk alienating 
> customers if they do not take these privacy 
> principles seriously. If they ignore them, 
> implementation of RFID tags could be stopped in 
> its tracks. Both business and consumers would be the losers," said Mr 
> Crompton.
> [see even Malcolm pointed out that the public may 
> not stand for this if it's not done right and 
> will turn the whole exercise into a commercial fiasco]
> The first four resolutions were adopted in Sydney 
> during the 2003 International Conference of Data 
> Protection and Privacy Commissioners which was 
> hosted by the Federal, NSW and Victorian Privacy 
> Commissioners. The fifth resolution was recently 
> adopted as a result of follow up work by 
> Commissioners. [The fifth resolutions is about 
> RFID and includes these principles. The points 
> above are NOT resolutions, they are summary statements within the ]
> The other resolutions [not RFID specific] adopted by the Conference include:
>    * 
> <http://www.privacyconference2003.org/resolutions/RESOLUTION_ON_PRIVACY_INFOR.DOC>a 
> call for improved communication of data protection and privacy information 
> practices;
>    * 
> <http://www.privacyconference2003.org/resolutions/RESOLUTION_CONCERNING_THE_T.DOC>a 
> call for the transfer of passenger's data internationally to be undertaken 
> within a recognised data protection framework;
>    * 
> <http://www.privacyconference2003.org/resolutions/RESOLUTION_NEW_ZEALAND.DOC>a 
> call to international organisations to observe and recognise privacy 
> principles ; and
>    * 
> <http://www.privacyconference2003.org/resolutions/RESOLUTION_GERMANY__AMENDED.DOC>a 
> call to software companies to ensure processes for automatic software 
> updates are transparent and that alternative update options are available.
> All resolutions are published on the conference 
> website, 
> <http://www.privacyconference2003.org/commissioners.asp>www.privacyconference2003.org/commissioners.asp. 
> <http://www.privacy.gov.au/news/media/03_17_print.html>Return
> Apologies if the mix up above is too stream of 
> consciousness. But I thought the original info 
> and dating was important to point out.
> Jan
> Jan Whitaker
> JLWhitaker Associates, Melbourne Victoria
> jwhit at janwhitaker.com
> business: http://www.janwhitaker.com
> personal: http://www.janwhitaker.com/personal/
> commentary: http://janwhitaker.com/jansblog/
> 'Seed planting is often the most important step. 
> Without the seed, there is no plant.' - JW, April 2005
> _ __________________ _
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

More information about the Link mailing list