Comments on: Bigging up the database state

By: guy herbert

guy herbert — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 07:56:52 +0000

NO point in taking retrospective revenge on sheeplike MPs with no power to influence the matter further. If someone is going to be exposed for data breaches, it should be the senior civil servants and contractors involved in selling the scheme to Blair & Co., building, and inevitably extending it.

By: SBR7: Racism and Statism « Scottish Blogging Roundup

SBR7: Racism and Statism « Scottish Blogging Roundup — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 15:42:27 +0000

[…] Shuggy takes issue with Polly’s defence of the Surveillance State as does Mr Eugenides. Both are in fine form. On a similar topic, Jarndyce, writing at the Sharpener, has an idea for an incentive scheme for all those MPs who voted for the National Identity Register and ID Crud scheme. Over at Freedom and Whisky, David spots an SNP politician proposing a whole new level of state surveillance. She doesn’t appear to be joking. Oh my. On a related issue, Angry Steve is angry about a Dundee academic. […]

By: Dunc

Dunc — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 15:11:21 +0000

Major companies have a vested interest in keeping your data secure.

Why yes, of course they do. Are they successful? No. So if, say, a major international bank can't keep its core business data secure despite extreme commercial pressures to do so, what makes you think you can keep the NIR secure? Especially considering that the bank's systems have limited exposure and have been carefully designed by the best in the business, whereas the NIR is proposed to have very wide exposure and seems to have been designed by a bunch of idiots? I mean, there's a pretty good incentive to develop a Free Energy device, but that doesn't make it possible.