Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 08:46:21 +0100 From: J <johsnopsamsafish.com> Subject: Re: Ominously standard OnStar
OK Four Weis, just a hint. I would never lie on applications where factual information is countersigned. However, data are collected by many businesses directly or through the web for commercial non-official purposes for whatever reason which is not always apparent and hence I cannot be responsible for. If I supply bogus information in such cases, then I always make it plain, at least to a human reader, that it is bogus. Example name: Xxxxx, Micky Mouse,... Tel no: 0 , Email address: zzzzznopsamz.com and such like. Data base systems are often rigid such that linking of different schemas causes problems. Normalization breaks down by the process. An example: I wanted to prevent my bank sending a new checkbook by postal delivery to my address but to keep it the branch so I could pick it up there. "OK", said the assistant, "we tick here you as having shared address, this should do the trick". This did the job as far as the bank was concerned, but now I am sharing my property in case the council should take interest in my bank records. This is just one of many examples I have come across where database linking would break down. It is never that simple. Fingerprint for credit cards. Some retailers have started this since credit card fraud is increasing alarmingly. Other retailers are extremely lax and don't even look at the signature. Again, it is a free choice whether you enter into this or carry cash. The retailer also have to consider possible objections and consequential lack of trade. Johannes Four Weis wrote: > > The only problem with providing misleading information is that it is like lying. > Once you start, you must remember what lies you told in the past because you > must repeat them consistently to avoid problems. For example, if you said one > thing on your military records and then changed the story on a security > clearance form, this will raise a big red flag. Likewise with credit > applications - this information does not disappear. In the INS projects I > worked on, we looked specifically for these discrepancies and flagged these > cases for special attention. > > Just one last thing. It is pretty hard to provide misleading fingerprints. > > J wrote: > > > Four Weis wrote: > > > > > > You may be too little and too late. I worked on IT projects that linked > > > FBI, SSN, INS, DMV and Welfare databases together. If you went to get a > > > driver's license, or applied for a job or for benefits - all the databases > > > were searched to verify your identity, as well as other facts. On-Star > > > should be the least of your worries. If you were ever in the military, > > > police/fire department, held a security clearance, or arrested, your > > > fingerprints are on file. There are computer systems that read your thumb > > > print online to verify your identity. Rumor has it, the car rental > > > companies are starting to use this system. > > > > > > Privacy as we once knew it is long gone - all in the name of security. > > > > > > > Not entirely. Computer systems are not intelligent, they can be fooled if > > necessary. 99% of the time computer tracking and database linking does not > > matter the slightest, but what if you have a mistress, planning to surprise > > someone or perhaps you do not like people to indulge into your medial, > > employment or educational history for the wrong reasons ? In many > > circumstances you have a choice to provide the computer with misleading > > information without actually doing anything illegal. Just to keep the > > busybodies busy. > > > > In conclusion: It is not all one-sided big brother, don't just accept it > > if you don't like IT. > > > > Johannes
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
