Interesting Links for 11-2-2011

[andrewducker]

• Protection of Freedoms bill announced. All sorts of authoritarian nonsense to be rolled back.
  (tags: liberal rights government uk)
• GMail announces 2-factor authentication
  (tags: google security authentication)
• Vatican Bans iOS Confessional App
  (tags: catholicism apple)
• Nokia switches to being a microsoft phone provider. What the fucking fuck?
  (tags: nokia phones mobile_phones wtf)
• Even the elite of society can engage in flamewars
  (tags: feminism women usa uk)
• Possibly the ugliest commercial website in existence
  (tags: shopping uk usability awful webdesign EpicFail)
• Some People (a graphic short story)
  (tags: art comic writing society)
• How to drink heavily (without it ruining your night/life).
  (tags: drinking alcohol advice)
• Why you aren't seeing updates from all of your FB friends (a new Facebook setting)
  (tags: facebook)
• The Cthulhu Mythos, As Imagined By Kids
  (tags: art lovecraft cthulhu children)
• Why HP’s take on WebOS could be a very big deal
  (tags: technology hp tablet webos)
• The Reindeer of St Matthew Island. A story that brings a lesson for all of us.
  (tags: environment science earth population reindeer comic)
• Interim Apple Chief Under Fire After Unveiling Grotesque New MacBook
  (tags: computer funny apple)
• Marvel in talks with Shane Black to helm Iron Man 3. Awesome choice.
  (tags: marvel comics IronMan movies)
• Dispelling the myth that because AV isn't most people's idea of the best system it isn't worth voting for.
  (tags: av voting)
• Nourishing a Culture of Failure
  (tags: innovation creativity business people)

Comments

[zz]

systems that tie individuals to their purchases are creepy. more so if they're done by the state. in this case, it's entirely conceivable for a council having a fit of "won't someone think of the children" and start threatening parents if their kids happen to buy chips every day, for example.

[communicator.livejournal.com]

'systems that tie individuals to their purchases are creepy' so I assume you only pay cash for everything?

[zz]

perhaps ideally.
a middle ground might be a requirment for anonymisation of data as a minimum, not that that's entirely possible given people can be identified by their habits.

to address the logical fallacy in your question (assuming you're not just a dick, I don't know you), one can find something creepy while still going along with it. people do it every day. doesn't mean one might not want to change (sorry, reform) the system.
personally, i don't have loyalty cards, while knowing that my debit/credit card numbers are likely still leaking information about me.

biometrics have a special creepiness, as they're part of your body rather than a bit of plastic that isn't really you, and are problematic in that you can't easily fix data theft/loss/corruption/etc.

[communicator.livejournal.com]

The bill in no way limits the use of biometric systems in schools, it increases the power of the state by legally imposing what was previously a voluntary code of practice, and data corruption or loss are unrelated to the use of biometric systems.

I think it's telling that the horror you imagine (councils writing to parents about chips) has never occurred, and has nothing to do with biometrics anyway, while tracking of purchases by private companies really happens but falls into the category of things you 'go along with'.

So - in short - there's an illogical fantasy here about local councils having massive power, and global companies being innocuous. And this urban myth is having serious consequences in our society. So this isn't just me being a dick. Though I am proud to be one.

[zz]

my point was "systems that tie individuals to their purchases are creepy", not "this bill is a panacea". in fact, I wasn't even commenting on the bill.

the chips example was imo a similar-severity abuse of power scenario to councils' well publicised abuse of RIPA.

power isn't one dimensional. a global supermarket chain has vast power over the environment, workforces, suppliers, local economies, yes, but very little power over individuals. councils run schools and collect rubbish reasonably well, but seem to be experts at shafting individuals.