Citizens central database ....

[slinkydevil]

...that computer would have to be the size of the known universe.

 

Do they deliver to the Isle of Man and will it have a headphone jack?

[JackCarter]

I see that tin-foil wearing, there's-a-snooper-under-your-bed, Llewellyn-Wotsit is banging on about it too...yawn.

His comments are pretty funny and he's clearly a complete fruit loop. There doesn't seem to be that many people interested in this petition outside of a hardcore of loonies.

[sarahc]

Needed to enable means testing. Can't have it both ways. Simples

My child benefit is means tested. I signed one piece of paper permitting the benefit people to access my tax records. It doesn't need to be any more complicated than that.

[joeyconcrete]

Despite various attention grabbing press releases aimed at potential investors, the reality is that practical quantum computing is a remote possibility. Same as nuclear fusion outside of the lab.

 

You may be surprised. There are a few companies, notably D-Wave, that are making real advances in this space. Google has trailed their platform. Its not as ubiquitous as a Dell server, but they reckon by 2020 it'll be more mainstream.

 

Take a look:

https://youtu.be/6zUrUjxfpjw?t=947

[Albert Tatlock]

Quantum computing is indeed a coming.

[Lisenchuk]

Quantum computing is indeed a coming.

Soon to be followed by nuclear fusion microwave ovens.

[Albert Tatlock]

Research it yourself. Otherwise, you're missing an exponential growth in human civilisation.

[John Wright]

So, I have a tax number, a National insurance number, a passport number, a driving licence number, a health service number, a hospital number, a number for my FSA registration, a number to search companies on line with DED, a number to transact business with government on line ( renew car tax), a number for electoral registration ( that changes every year ) - there are several more too arcane and infrequently used to mention or even remember. Most demand a different formula for password configuration. I have to notify each one separately of change address, e-mail or phone, even status.

 

I'm in favour of a portal which allows one notification and enables all to be linked. Yes there have to be safeguards but this was all designed for a paper age, simpler. We need to move on. It doesn't need to be complicated, or intrusive.

 

It mustn't include an ID card concept, i.e. Being required to produce and identify, but maybe a card that shows entitlement to services, benefits, health care, to vote etc?

 

I suggested this in my report on the 2006 general election and electoral registration

[Roger Mexico]

This is all pretty naive. The idea that an organisation that can't even manage to get a simple headcount Census correct, will somehow be able to produce, maintain and operate a complex, interlocking system to cover everything, is a little, shall we say, hopeful. It sounds more like a recipe for wasting long millions and ending up in a worse situation than you started with. But even if a miracle occurred there are other structural objections.

 

If a system has to cover everything, then everyone has to have access[1]. Any security system is only as strong as the weakest component and if those components comprise every publicly employed person, then information leaking is guaranteed[2]. But the problem of access is added to by that of context. Those looking at parts of the system not in their professional experience are also likely to misunderstand exactly what is being recorded[3].

 

And there's also the problem of accuracy. The more information recorded, the more likely it is to be wrong or assigned to the wrong person. And the more people who can enter or change this information, the more likely that will happen as well.

 

 

[1] You can propose all sorts of complex access protocols and restrictions, but that is usually one of the things that dooms the development of such systems and of course it also means that you lose the benefits of integration that is supposed to be the reason for it in the first place. Also the more complicated such things become, the more those operating the system will try to get round them, purely to be able to do their job in a reasonably quick manner. The more passwords there are, the more likely they will be on a Post-it note stuck to the screen.

 

[2] It will certainly make for an interesting High Nett Worth Individual strategy. "Come and live in the Isle of Man where everyone will know all your business!".

 

[3] This is a big downgrade on the usual Manx approach where you just ring up another Government worker who knows about it and get the skeet (and context). We should probably call the The Internet of People and charge big bucks for the idea.

[Loombucket]

This is all pretty naive. The idea that an organisation that can't even manage to get a simple headcount Census correct, will somehow be able to produce, maintain and operate a complex, interlocking system to cover everything, is a little, shall we say, hopeful. It sounds more like a recipe for wasting long millions and ending up in a worse situation than you started with. But even if a miracle occurred there are other structural objections.

 

If a system has to cover everything, then everyone has to have access[1]. Any security system is only as strong as the weakest component and if those components comprise every publicly employed person, then information leaking is guaranteed[2]. But the problem of access is added to by that of context. Those looking at parts of the system not in their professional experience are also likely to misunderstand exactly what is being recorded[3].

 

And there's also the problem of accuracy. The more information recorded, the more likely it is to be wrong or assigned to the wrong person. And the more people who can enter or change this information, the more likely that will happen as well.

 

 

[1] You can propose all sorts of complex access protocols and restrictions, but that is usually one of the things that dooms the development of such systems and of course it also means that you lose the benefits of integration that is supposed to be the reason for it in the first place. Also the more complicated such things become, the more those operating the system will try to get round them, purely to be able to do their job in a reasonably quick manner. The more passwords there are, the more likely they will be on a Post-it note stuck to the screen.

 

[2] It will certainly make for an interesting High Nett Worth Individual strategy. "Come and live in the Isle of Man where everyone will know all your business!".

 

[3] This is a big downgrade on the usual Manx approach where you just ring up another Government worker who knows about it and get the skeet (and context). We should probably call the The Internet of People and charge big bucks for the idea.

Good points well made.

[Tarne]

There's no need for the stuff to be separate and in different departments, just link it all together. I want to be able to look my stuff up online, and I'm so pleased I can do my (admittedly very easy) tax returns online too. I'd love it if everything was in one place

[Donald Trumps]

I think there's a new business arm of the state broadcaster that's making tons of cash hoovering up personal data on the interweb & selling it to Isle of Man government

[ManxTaxPayer]

I think there's a new business arm of the state broadcaster that's making tons of cash hoovering up personal data on the interweb & selling it to Isle of Man government

 

 

What do you mean? What sort of personal data?

[english zloty]

 

I think there's a new business arm of the state broadcaster that's making tons of cash hoovering up personal data on the interweb & selling it to Isle of Man government

 

 

What do you mean? What sort of personal data?

Whether or not you listen to Alex Brindley, which is informing the mental health strategy for the island.

[woolley]

Storm in a teacup. Like someone said, it's that bloke whipping it up again. Everyone gotta have a hobby though.