Shame that Stanley Johnson wasn't an Onomastist.
Or did I spell it wrongly?
The UK's ruling Conservative Party has been using personal data in a way that spots an individual's likely county of origin, ethnic origin and religion based on their first and last name. According to an ICO report, the Tory party purchased so-called "estimated onomastic data" and appended it to the records of 10 million …
It says here that Boris is Bulgarian or Russian so will he be under special surveillance?
I'm sure I read somewhere, and I can't remember where off the top of my head, that some of Spaffer's ancestry is Turkish.
As for Farage The Frog-Faced Fuckstick, I'd quite happily see him fuck off to somewhere like Mars, it looks like since his attempt to become Don Cheeto's fluffer has failed so he'll probably piss off to Germany, from whence came his missus.
This being the case, all I can offer our German friends is sincere apologies on behalf of those of us who have measurable cognitive function and see him for the xenophobic bullshitter he actually is.
You, Sir, are half right... Is an upvote worth 5 quid for partial credit?
And one of these-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------^
Does knowing half of the answer send you down the rabbit hole? See you on the other side!
I think the ultimate purpose of this kind of profiling is to tell different lies to different people about the party's policies.
I think I saw this covered in Private Eye at the level of election campaign leaflets - but they had got their Hindus muddled with their Muslims and I think promised to send voters back where they came from or something like that.
The explanation is that generally, the Lib Dems want what's good for the public. As opposed to the "me first, party next and the country last, the least transparency the better, and it's not wrong unless you caught" philosophies of the two main parties.
Labour are not "progressive liberals", they are just red Tories. They are simply the other side of the Tory coin. And they certainly don't represent the working class.
Here in Scotland the FibDems are polling at less than the 5% required to play on the List, the only way they are likely to get seats next May. Sadly since the Lists are regional they may squeak in in the Northern Isles at least but possibly not over in Fife which would mean Wee Willie Rennie their anonymous leader will not get in. Oh dear, what a pity, never mind.
I love in Rennie's constituency. If nothing else, the close voting in North-east Fife means we actually get canvassers! Rennie isn't a particularly good constituency MSP, and the MP we have down in Westminster is utterly anonymous. Come May, my vote is going SNP1, other indy party for the list (we use the D'Hondt system for Scottish elections) - I hope the ISP stand a candidate, since they seem a sensible bunch.
"It definitely is personal. But given that it's the output of more-or-less-random guesswork, maybe there's an argument that it's not actually data."
Yes, this. Creating inferences based on personal data such as a name can be wildly inaccurate and therefore not data as such. eg "Patrick", who phoned me earlier today claiming to be from an Essex based telecoms company with a Sheffield dialling code and a Bangalore accent. Clearly he was Irish!!
According to the article, the SNP along with others listed, don't buy in commercial data at all, let alone of that type; there was no mention of what data they may or may not use from non-commercial sources though.
"The Scottish Nationalist Party, Democratic Unionist Party, Plaid Cymru and UKIP "did not source any commercially available data," the report added."
Sorry to spoil your joke.
'" If [...] processors only receive advice when they are found to be acting unlawfully, then they have no incentive to get it right the first time. The ICO must regulate. It is not a consultancy"'
I had a case based on lack of transparency in a privacy notice rejected by the ICO, on the ground that "we consider examples of processing in the basis of legitimate interest to be sufficient". When I challenged this on the basis that a data subject is entitled to object to specific instances of legitimate interest processing, but can't object to something they haven't been told about, the ICO responded that it had only provided "an opinion". What could be more like a consultancy than that?
Odd you should mention him. I'm sure it's one of those coincidences which happen all the time that he should be sacked, and Cummings announce his resignation, shortly after this story comes out.
(And so close to when a former adviser to Chancellor Sajid Javid, Sonia Khan, received a five-figure confidential payment from the government to settle a wrongful-dismissal lawsuit. You remember Javid. He quit because he wouldn't accept Cummings-supplied advisers, and wanted his own.)
Ads are constantly being displayed with far, far greater granularity.
Unpopular (with the powers at $corporation$) ideas are squelched, while popular ones are amplified.
I'm not saying that the law should be ignored, I just find it weird that this barely-better-than-amature effort is being called out.