You *are* being watched...
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Ret. on 24 Mar 2010 12:42 Norman Wells wrote: > Ret. wrote: > >> Do you see what I am getting at? The data is there - but the >> overwhelming mass of it will never be looked at by anyone for any >> purpose. > > Then, to cull from the thread about your being asked to provide a DNA > sample and refusing, the database will be pointlessly cluttered up > with irrelevant information. I didn't refuse - I simply did not volunteer. Having my dna on a database created specifically to eliminate contamination from a crime scene left by attending officers, would indeed be irrelevant because I would not be attending crime scenes. Your reasoning there was that you > didn't want that to happen so you declined. > > Why don't you be consistent here and say (a) that the information > should not be collected or (b) that it should not be retained if it > is? ANPR information could well be relevant if, for example, a terrorist incident occurred in a specific location and they wanted to check on vehicles that had been travelling in or near that location at the relevant times. Just as with CCTV recordings. Kev
From: steve robinson on 24 Mar 2010 12:50 Ret. wrote: > Norman Wells wrote: > > Ret. wrote: > > > > > Do you see what I am getting at? The data is there - but the > > > overwhelming mass of it will never be looked at by anyone for > > > any purpose. > > > > Then, to cull from the thread about your being asked to provide a > > DNA sample and refusing, the database will be pointlessly > > cluttered up with irrelevant information. > > I didn't refuse - I simply did not volunteer. Having my dna on a > database created specifically to eliminate contamination from a > crime scene left by attending officers, would indeed be irrelevant > because I would not be attending crime scenes. > > Your reasoning there was that you > > didn't want that to happen so you declined. > > > > Why don't you be consistent here and say (a) that the information > > should not be collected or (b) that it should not be retained if > > it is? > > ANPR information could well be relevant if, for example, a > terrorist incident occurred in a specific location and they wanted > to check on vehicles that had been travelling in or near that > location at the relevant times. Just as with CCTV recordings. > > Kev Only if the terrorist if a bit thick , any half wit would clone a plate
From: Cynic on 24 Mar 2010 12:53 On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:36:51 +0000, Conor <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: >>> Just to add, Kev... >>> How did Social Services find out about this incident? >Did you notice the lack of a response by Kev? He possibly doesn't know because the policy may not have been in force when he was a copper. It is nowadays policy that any incident in which (in the opinion of the officer) a child was put at risk is reported to a special unit on which social services is represented. That unit will decide what followup, if any, is required. A car with a child passenger that the officer believes was being driven carelessly or dangerously would probably qualify. -- Cynic
From: Cynic on 24 Mar 2010 13:14 On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:49:02 +0000, "steve robinson" <steve(a)colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote: >Products (some running into millions of items ) all accessable within >a few seconds A few *seconds* ? See if you can time how quickly the till at your local supermarket is able to index a central database containing at least hundreds of thousands of items and extract the description and price of an item from its barcode number. I'm pretty certain that you will not notice any discernable delay between the beep of the scanner and the item description and price appearing on the till display. If it took as long as a few seconds the supermarket queues would be miles long! -- Cynic
From: Brimstone on 24 Mar 2010 13:59
"Phil Stovell" <phil(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk> wrote in message news:pan.2010.03.24.14.45.24.536727(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk... > On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 14:36:57 +0000, Kim Bolton wrote: > > >> Phil Stovell wrote: >> >>>On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:09:25 +0000, Ret. wrote: >> >>>> Even if you could do such a thing - it would be pointless without a >>>> 'person' looking at it for some reason. The system I have described is >>>> on North West motorways only - and yet there is a projected 'read' of >>>> 560,000 vehicles *per day*. >>> >>>Data volume: >>> >>>RegNo 8 bytes >>>location 8 bytes (at most) >>>date/time 8 bytes (in microseconds) >>> >>>24 * 560,000 = 13MB. Next to nothing. A CD (700MB) would hold nearly 2 >>>months worth of data to be left on a train. An 8GB memory stick would >>>hold around 2 years worth. >> >> I said further up the thread that it would be the equivalent of storing >> a handful of digital photos per day - that'll be two photos per day data >> equivalence. >> >> The tools are already available to data mine this for anything that can >> be thought of. >> >> Kev seems to think that this is so difficult as to be unrealistic. > > Also Kev seems to miss the point that the current Government may be benign > (arguable), but suppose the BNP, or other extremists, win the election. > With all that data at their fingertips, could we trust them not to abuse > it? It's not "the government" that the issue. The people likely to misuse the data are in the police, security services, local authorities and the myriad of other bodies supposedly there to serve the public. |