Re: Big if
So when will there be a system upgrade available for home users (without games) to go from Windows 10 to, say, Ubuntu?
56 publicly visible posts • joined 15 Mar 2013
But why redact it anywhere? Unless Docusign will give you the document if you can quote it, what information does it or could it give away? Perhaps it's just someone told to redact the signature and not quite understanding that a digital signature is not the same as a scan of a wet one.
Can anyone explain why the DocuSign Identifier is redacted on most (but not all) pages, e.g. page 9 or page 40? Although not simply black on black, this redaction seems to have been done manually given that it does appear where large amounts of the body text are missing and there's also one case in Doc1 on page 64 where the final E of the header is not redacted.
Why is the page number 26 redacted? (It comes between 25 and 27.)
More generally, how do you verify the digital signature on a redacted document?
The reports of sloppy development also mentioned that finding this in the equipment they had looked at did not mean it wasn't in that of other suppliers. Note also that the UK was not in the vanguard of bans (just a limit on coverage), indeed HMG only acted when the US export controls on China made it impossible to get repairs, upgrades and fixes.
Alongside these opportunities, AI also poses significant risks, including in those domains of daily life. To that end,.... (i.e. posing significant risks?)
we resolve to intensify and sustain our cooperation, (i.e. be seen to do something, but not sure what)
All actors have a role to play... (yes, Equity rules. Surprisingly Euro-English)
development-orientated approaches (makes a change from customer)
We encourage all relevant actors to provide context-appropriate transparency and accountability on their plans to measure, monitor and mitigate potentially harmful capabilities and the associated effects that may emerge, in particular to prevent misuse and issues of control, and the amplification of other risks. (The light peppering of commas is always interesting in international paperwork, and a pain for translators. That last comma means amplification doesn't go with prevent - it seems to be provide... accountability...but is certainly unreadable on first pass)
scientific and evidence-based (tautology?)
The countries represented were:
Australia
....
European Union (no, it's not a country, but the footnote indicates
international organisations acting in accordance with their legislative or executive competences.
So which is the other such organisation?)
The focus on just a single technology remains a bad idea, although cards could be part of the mix as the Irish have deftly done: allowing one of the two forms for the passport allows that travel document to look and feel like an ID card and offers the functionality without igniting panic. A compulsory unique physical token offers scope blackmail and control (e.g. over wives and daughters) that may not have been a significant issue when the German Ausweis was introduced (in the same year the UK wartime ID card was scrapped).
Instead of adopting the Australian system of ensuring that everyone gets a chance to vote, our politicians have been keen to increase the participation rate in elections. So instead of the ‘head of household’ registering everyone, the onus was on people to do it themselves; those with no intention of voting would not bother, so the rate would go up. Not appearing can be a problem for credit reference, but still it was optional until the House of Lords (with unusual ignorance) stepped in with an amendment to put a civil penalty (i.e. fine that couldn’t turn you into a news item by being jailed for failure to pay) for those not registering when asked to by a registration officer.
If there was any thinking behind this it may have been in relation to jury service, where you stand a chance of being called for each place in which you appear on the register. Some small business owners would rather not take this risk and thus be encouraged not to vote. (They might also not want to walk near the court to avoid “praying a tales”.) It’s time we threw out the electoral roll, with all its accumulated out of date but explicit data protection oddities, and had a jury status list for all residents, with uniqueness, preferably by extending the settled status register to include everyone.
Meanwhile what will happen if what is being called ID is needed for postal vote? Getting a civil penalty for not having it is not acceptable.
Whilst not remotely surprised by the attack, and just waiting for the same on one.login, the response that we should "remain vigilant for unauthorised use or release of [their] personal data" is spectacularly unhelpful. What, exactly, should we do, especialy now we can't play the trick of adjusting the postcode (before they were used - last two digits showed where it was copied from it you were careful to note which digits you gave to whom)?
GCHQ's early published comments on Huawei kit gave specific examples of very sloppy and insecure programming, but also noted that this did not mean it was worse than that from any other source since the others had not been scrutinised to the same level of detail. For more recent see https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/information/hcsec-ob-report
It's worth recalling that the UK ban came in response to the US/Trump controls which would make it impossible to repair the infrastructure.
At least under the Australian definition of publishing this would sound like libel - and should start a lawyer feeding frenzy over 'intent'.
(To first approximation the dead do not have data protection rights either, so maybe missing evidence for 7 years counts as a presumption of decease?)
Once upon a time the Swedish lights had amber+green before green, but they had to change to comply with the Common Market. For a really clever system, badly implemented, look to Quebec, where the shape of the light can be used by the colour-blind: Square red, triangle amber, circle green. It would have been much safer to have a red circle to avoid the rest of the world's red circles being mistaken for go. Presumably zero engineers involved in that choice of light change.
It was the EEC long before the EU that made special provision for 'dollar' bananas. This bit of history shouldn't be assumed to be a lie just because it was pre-internet:
https://www.cvce.eu/en/obj/treaty_establishing_the_eec_protocol_on_the_tariff_quota_for_imports_of_bananas_rome_25_march_1957-en-3bcfd762-ac40-422d-90a3-1bef6b69d255.html
Since half the people who try can't get in, how would compulsory help? Those are a cumulative 5m accounts, not people; whatever the position on fraud (which we are told is both out of control and none detected), it's designed so one person can have many, and no doubt some of those with providers who have gone will have taken out a second one, not to mention those who try to put in a tax return 366 days after the previous one.
Australia has lots of good ideas, like compulsory opportunity to vote so there's no intimidation to keep people away and no opportunity to masquerade as someone who will not turn up. (They even invented the secret ballot.) In this case, better to look to NZ or Canada. 'Platforms', we are told, have canonical registers; Verify doesn't. Much better either to have a proper distributed Jury service status register or to make the compulsory EU resident's database optionally available for UK citizens.
The 50th was on a Monday, and what would have been the first May 1 bank holiday to be on May 1 was switched to Monday 8th. Perhaps you should put 100th in the diary now; banks may be a thing of the past by then, but I imagine we'll still want the holidays.
It was obvious from when this was turned on that it was not being done with consent or any other legal basis, so how in their world of agile development did the issue not get noted, considered, and resolved rather than needing such effort to accept it was a mistake? It's not as if there's some political mandate like Universal credit under which jobsworths can hide. Of course most of us only need to phone then because we have a slightly more complicated case than the simplified big-font online information covers; this enforced attempt at enrolment came after the usual annoying exhortation to use w w w dot gov dot uk forward slash ... which not only adds to the delay and frustration of the caller but makes it harder for those answering the pre-grumpified 'customers'. I don't see any costings for taxpayer's wasted time, but, like a quarter of an hour each for 6 million failed attempts to use Verify , it starts to add up.
The help finding next of kin is an interesting digression, but this whole system only works for those with a criminal record or non-EU immigrants. Any idea what proportion of the population of West Yorkshire that is?
I never carry ID - the grey beard says over 18, but then it's rare to even see police in rural Gloucestershire; What powers are being used to demand it?
This seems unlike GDS. Have they come up with an app in their first 7 years? The IPS prototype passport checking app wasn't theirs, but has gone and HMPO doesn't seem to have anything expected soon. There are NHS apps, but lo, so does gov.uk: First published:
27 March 2017 Asian Hornet Watch - new app launched to help people quickly and easily report sightings of this invasive species.
'Citizen' does not appear in GDPR; it is about "data subjects who are in the Union" or any processing done within the Union. Unlike the citizen's rights in the US, Europe including UK takes a starting point under human rather than citizen's rights. Knowing someone's citizenship(s) is not very easy (so hardly surprising NSA is having trouble answering a question). Long may it remain irrelevant for almost everything.
Since UK companies will want to provide services into the EU, it's hardly unreasonable for them to comply with the law where the customers are, so getting an agreement is clearly important, but it would seem rash to assume that the EU-US Privacy Shield will still be in its current form in two years. And there will presumably be the need for a UK-US agreement as well.
No, there was a threat about Calais, until someone checked and found it was a bilateral and not EU agreement, similar to the position on the border between US and Canada.
Just because we can now do stupid things doesn't mean that we will stop seasonal workers or make it harder for tourists. Our current mess is partly because of the refusal by the head of the civil service to allow it to consider plan B on the grounds that it wasn't government policy - ignoring the point that the government had, for better or worse, pushed this one over to the people. Of course we now hear that the Bank of England and Treasury have been working on it. But the last budget should have had in and out options.
Surely there comes a point at which it is fair to say that we have been trying to reform the EU from within, but have not managed to do so and have no new ideas on how we might? Even the (dubious) changes agreed are conditional on the UK staying, .i.e. were not accepted as worth doing anyway. We gave it a good try, and, as Churchill said, we wish it well.
Those who lead saying it's the wrong time chose the time. Gus OD thinks two years is not long enough, but what was his job when the Lisbon treaty was signed? People could do silly things and over-react; some of the threats have been quite creative, but the EEC banana problem dates from 1956.
GDPR is called a Regulation, but to get it though in the time given it has at least 40 places where national variation is allowed (e.g. an age threshold somewhere between 13-16), and presumably in each case there's at least one state that will have a variant (otherwise they could have agreed a common line), so those expecting a single set of rules will be sorely disappointed.
How hard is it to have a 999 app: Here's a picture of what's just happened, and my phone will tell you exactly where I am? Call back if you want more details, but you can probably already tell that we need a fire engine, or whatever. If twenty people call you can tell from the location it's the same incident.(Meanwhile, I'm trying to help the victims rather than waiting for an incident number.)
We aren't talking confidentiality here, just integrity, so the data (picture and a few attributes) is 'secured' with a good 1970's digital signature which any fool can check is from DVLA. Small market for trusted checkers, but the data has to be available in a convenient form: read from NFC phone, your website, on a plastic card, a QRC tattoo (but please don't) or any other method of your choice, so that it can be offered to the checker.
(Likewise, power of attorney needs a pdf digitally signed by the OPG, not an online system of any sort.)
The DVLA policy in 2009 as presented on the No2ID threads was impeccable; presumably someone has quietly changed it.
A4? If it doesn't fit on a POST-IT they aren't interested.
https://www.gov.uk/personal-tax-account makes it clear that the deadline-missing award-winning open but never-explain-delays Verify is insufficient for some of the 'services'.
They already manage a billion stamp duty transactions per year, and many other surprisingly large volumes https://www.gov.uk/performance/services
Privacy is not absolute but about balance, at least as defined in the ECHR, but would these clauses be the ones including:
Clause 5: the data importer agrees and warrants.. that he has no reason to believe that the legislation applicable to him prevents him from fulfilling his obligations...?
Those who needed the Safe Harbor rather than any of the other exemptions can no longer do so, but presumably can now sue the Commission for any costs in relocating to Bulgaria or Argentina and losses during the transition that are directly attributable to not correctly implementing a directive. That sounds like a large bill for the Commission, or rather for EU taxpayers.