National Postcodes to be introduced

ukoda

plodder wrote: »

It's not the act of publishing someone's Eircode or address that is the problem. It would be publishing the Eircode with some other piece of information.

For example, if it emerges that two people residing at W12 8QT in the UK voted for UKIP in the next election, it wouldn't reveal very much. But, if it emerges that two people from D04 XP21 (in Ireland) voted for Fianna Fail, then you know exactly who it was.

That's not the same thing as saying 'there is no privacy issue' and the previous DP commissioner was a lot more leery about it.

yeah and today right now. The same leak could happen, you could find out 2 people from 1 Unique House, Unique Road, County unquie voted for Fianna Fáil. What's your point? Where is the additional risk from eircode? Another prime example of a pre existing risk that's being shoehorned on to eircode. Absolutely ridiculous.

plodder

ukoda wrote: »

yeah and today right now. The same leak could happen, you could find out 2 people from 1 Unique House, Unique Road, County unquie voted for Fianna Fáil. What's your point? Where is the additional risk from eircode? Another prime example of a pre existing risk that's being shoehorned on to eircode. Absolutely ridiculous.

Why do I get sucked into this ... ?

It's a question of what is more likely to happen, not what could or couldn't happen. If there is a general belief that postcodes are anonymous, then organisations, particularly outside the jurisdiction will treat Eircodes as anonymous and will share/sell/buy information like the above regardless of people's privacy settings. It could be market research about product purchases or from the change.org example previously information about political views or preferences.

It's probably fair to speculate that companies and organisations in this country will treat Eircodes as personal information, and this shouldn't happen, but it's not reasonable to assume for foreign based organisations.

ukoda

plodder wrote: »

Why do I get sucked into this ... ?

It's a question of what is more likely to happen, not what could or couldn't happen. If there is a general belief that postcodes are anonymous, then organisations, particularly outside the jurisdiction will treat Eircodes as anonymous and will share/sell/buy information like the above regardless of people's privacy settings. It could be market research about product purchases or from the change.org example previously information about political views or preferences.

It's probably fair to speculate that companies and organisations in this country will treat Eircodes as personal information, and this shouldn't happen, but it's not reasonable to assume for foreign based organisations.

You've yet to come up with a concrete example that could cause me genuine concern.

Sam Russell

ukoda wrote: »

This is 2015, we navigate with smartphones and sat navs these days. Not a map and compass so much anymore.

And no one in the UK would have a notion where a postcode that wasn't their own is. There is no working out done. Same goes for US zip codes.

OK, so you put the Eircode into your satnav and follow the instructions and end up in a cul-de-sac of seven houses. Which one is it?

plodder

ukoda wrote: »

You've yet to come up with a concrete example that could cause me genuine concern.

Take the change.org example. They are funded by selling anonymised information from the opinions that people express on their website. They comply with data protection law. So, they aren't going to do what you suggest above, and deliberately release personal information. They might inadvertently do it though, if someone comes looking to buy a list of postcodes where people have expressed a particular opinion, and that list includes some postcodes from this country.

ukoda

Sam Russell wrote: »

OK, so you put the Eircode into your satnav and follow the instructions and end up in a cul-de-sac of seven houses. Which one is it?

It's the one your navigation device took you to. The geos used point to the centre on the building. So it's the one with the dot on it. Or the google maps pin on it.

Here is your exact scenario. Do you really need my help to figure out which house you should go in to?





Granted the blue line doesn't actually go all the way to the front door, and that pin is slightly off centre...but id be confident you'd figure it out none the less

ukoda

plodder wrote: »

Take the change.org example. They are funded by selling anonymised information from the opinions that people express on their website. They comply with data protection law. So, they aren't going to do what you suggest above, and deliberately release personal information. They might inadvertently do it though, if someone comes looking to buy a list of postcodes where people have expressed a particular opinion, and that list includes some postcodes from this country.

We've discussed that one. I've had my say on it already. Not going to rehash old arguments

spacetweek

When will the postcodes be launched?

SpaceTime

plodder wrote: »

It's not the act of publishing someone's Eircode or address that is the problem. It would be publishing the Eircode with some other piece of information.

For example, if it emerges that two people residing at W12 8QT in the UK voted for UKIP in the next election, it wouldn't reveal very much. But, if it emerges that two people from D04 XP21 (in Ireland) voted for Fianna Fail, then you know exactly who it was.

That's not the same thing as saying 'there is no privacy issue' and the previous DP commissioner was a lot more leery about it.

That would be a massive problem with the electoral voting system security, not a symptom of the post code problem.

The ballot is private, secret and the boxes of ballot papers aren't see through, are jumbled up and kept under secure conditions and shouldn't be in anyway tampered with.

The most you can tell from the electors register is that person X of address Y cast a vote. You've no way of telling how they voted or if they spoiled their vote either.

Having unique IDs on the electoral register such as a PPS would be highly useful in preventing people having multiple registrations at different addresses. The current system isn't very good at avoiding duplicate registrations.

The postal code would not really make any difference though as you need to identify where the same person is on multiple constituency registers.

ukoda

plodder wrote: »

Take the change.org example. They are funded by selling anonymised information from the opinions that people express on their website. They comply with data protection law. So, they aren't going to do what you suggest above, and deliberately release personal information. They might inadvertently do it though, if someone comes looking to buy a list of postcodes where people have expressed a particular opinion, and that list includes some postcodes from this country.

But just to say. Under data protection someone's opinion is NOT classified as thier private data. If their opinion revealed their religious beliefs however it is private data and they couldnt sell that. It's a watery example of nothingness

plodder

SpaceTime wrote: »

That would be a massive problem with the electoral voting system security, not a symptom of the post code problem.

The ballot is private, secret and the boxes of ballot papers aren't see through, are jumbled up and kept under secure conditions and shouldn't be in anyway tampered with.

The most you can tell from the electors register is that person X of address Y cast a vote. You've no way of telling how they voted or if they spoiled their vote either.

Having unique IDs on the electoral register such as a PPS would be highly useful in preventing people having multiple registrations at different addresses. The current system isn't very good at avoiding duplicate registrations.

The postal code would not really make any difference though as you need to identify where the same person is on multiple constituency registers.

Sure, it was only an illustration of how an Eircode combined with some other piece of information is privacy sensitive. It couldn't come out of our election system itself. Maybe some kind of exit poll possibly, if at all.

ukoda

spacetweek wrote: »

When will the postcodes be launched?

They said May, subject to the data protection amendment going ahead. They published thier prices recently so looks like they are gearing up for launch

ukoda

plodder wrote: »

Sure, it was only an illustration of how an Eircode combined with some other piece of information is privacy sensitive. It couldn't come out of our election system itself. Maybe some kind of exit poll possibly, if at all.

It's also an illustration of how someone's address combined with some other personal data is sensitive. Again my point....pre existing risk not linked to eircode.

plodder

ukoda wrote: »

It's also an illustration of how someone's address combined with some other personal data is sensitive. Again my point....pre existing risk not linked to eircode.

No.

Address = understood as personal information universally, therefore not a problem

Postcode = anonymous everywhere except Ireland, therefore potential problem.

I think that's the least number of words it can be expressed in.

What about the change to DP law? Why is that needed if there are no privacy issues?

ukoda

plodder wrote: »

What about the change to DP law? Why is that needed if there are no privacy issues?

as far as I'm aware there is no change to DP law, the amendment is purely to make reference to eircode, i.e. add it in to where it already references someone address in the legislation. thats my understanding of it, but we don't know for sure as it hasn't been published.

murpho999

Sam Russell wrote: »

Because we have in our infinite stupidity devised a system of unique random postcodes to go with our unique random non-addresses, how is anyone to be certain they have arrived at the correct address? It is not related to the one next door, nor is it related to any other in the street. In other parts of the world (all other parts of the world) you can ask a neighbour where is this address and they can deduce from their own postcode where a nearby one is likely to be. Furthermore, the street names and numbers help.

But not here. We do not have street names or numbers on most addresses, and now we have random codes. You would normally have to make this mad stuff up.

This is total rubbish.
Nobody asks for directions by postcode. If you are asking a neighbour then you use the persons name or house number street address.

People are just criticising the postcodes for the sake of it.

murpho999

plodder wrote: »

An eircode is not personal data? If you live on your own it certainly is. Even if you don't, most people would want it to be protected the same as their address.

Your address won't be available beacause everyone knows that addresses are personal information (or privacy sensitive at least). Your postcode might be public because most people think it is anonymous. and therefore not privacy sensitive.

Really think you are scaremongering.

Your eircode relates to a building/property not a person. It is no more private than an address.

I don't see what point you are trying to make.

A present address could be

Sean O'Shea
52 Anyroad
Newtown
Co Whatever

The building will be locatable with those details and adding an individual postcode will not devalue anyone's privacy.
Don't get this whole privacy thing that people are constantly worried about, what are you all up to?

dr.fuzzenstein

murpho999 wrote: »

Really think you are scaremongering.

Your eircode relates to a building/property not a person. It is no more private than an address.

I don't see what point you are trying to make.

A present address could be

Sean O'Shea
52 Anyroad
Newtown
Co Whatever

The building will be locatable with those details and adding an individual postcode will not devalue anyone's privacy.
Don't get this whole privacy thing that people are constantly worried about, what are you all up to?

I can tell you exactly why some people object.

Person A (who doesn't object):

Sean Example
32 Banana Road
Murphtown
Co Clare

He can be readily found. If we now stick 23456 in his address, he can still be readily found.
Then there's this gentleman:

Sean Other
The Shticks
Inch
Co. Clare

His address is vague enough that when it comes to bills for water, tv license, inspectors checking into various dodgy welfare claims and maybe a less than stringent approach to planning laws, it's obscure enough that he can dodge his way through life.
It's called living off the grid (and not just electrical), the principle is to have nothing about yourself and your house on any documents and databases, be they with official state bodies or private companies.
This will facilitate all sorts of fcuk-aboutery and not just confined to dodging bills.
Suddenly now there is the prospect of his address having 23456 in it, and suddenly any idiot with a smart phone or sat nav can find him. So now when it comes to all his little dodges, there is no way out, no excuses and no getting round it.
THAT'S the privacy concern!

MBSnr

murpho999 wrote: »

Really think you are scaremongering.

Your eircode relates to a building/property not a person. It is no more private than an address.

I don't see what point you are trying to make.

A present address could be

Sean O'Shea
52 Anyroad
Newtown
Co Whatever

The building will be locatable with those details and adding an individual postcode will not devalue anyone's privacy.
Don't get this whole privacy thing that people are constantly worried about, what are you all up to?

Yeap in urban areas it makes no odds. In a rural location I can understand that it would pinpoint your exact house and tie it to your name, as it currently would not be numbered and/or be on a road with a name.

But that's the point of this whole thing!

There is no reasonable other way (regardless of sequential numbering or not). If we adopted a poster's suggestion of using KM distance from the start of the road to give numbering (as they do for example in New Zealand which is very like rural Ireland) then that is effectively doing the exact same thing of pinpointing but not in a better more cost effective way. Of course in NZ they have nearly all named rural roads and houses tend to display the number out front on the mailbox, so it's easy to work out which end of the road you started at.

So number 610 is 6.1Km from the start of the road on the right hand side, 631 is 6.3Km on the left etc. This has been in place years there and people have developed and grown up using it, avoiding the petty arguments and disapproval that would happen here over a simple *new* road name.

Also their postcodes are only 4 digits long and identify a large area but since they have numbered rural housing, it makes more sense to have it that way. But then again the main roads are sign posted but some of the smaller ones are only named on the map.... So you can still have issues finding someone's house out there with their very logical system...

Here most rural roads aren't named (unless they are Rxxx or Lyyyy which no one uses in their address) and people aren't going to put out numbers on their property. Not to mention the cost of doing this - sign posting all roads with a name and physically numbering properties.....

So Eircode seems the logical way to go.

spacetweek

Sam Russell wrote:

Because we have in our infinite stupidity devised a system of unique random postcodes to go with our unique random non-addresses, how is anyone to be certain they have arrived at the correct address? It is not related to the one next door, nor is it related to any other in the street. In other parts of the world (all other parts of the world) you can ask a neighbour where is this address and they can deduce from their own postcode where a nearby one is likely to be. Furthermore, the street names and numbers help.

But not here. We do not have street names or numbers on most addresses, and now we have random codes. You would normally have to make this mad stuff up.

Astonishing that there are still people that don't get why we are introducing postcodes.
The stuff you're saying about people not having addresses because their street is not named (which is common throughout the world) ìs the reason why we need the codes. And they must be random and identify a single building or else you are back to square one.

Sam Russell

spacetweek wrote: »

Astonishing that there are still people that don't get why we are introducing postcodes.
The stuff you're saying about people not having addresses because their street is not named (which is common throughout the world) ìs the reason why we need the codes. And they must be random and identify a single building or else you are back to square one.

I am not against postcodes. What I am against is the stupid way these are designed.

1. They should be numeric.
2. They should be hierarchical, down to a small area.
3. They should be introduced in conjunction with unique addresses, or at least in parallel.
4. It should be possible for people to give partial postcodes for privacy.

LeinsterDub

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Suddenly now there is the prospect of his address having 23456 in it, and suddenly any idiot with a smart phone or sat nav can find him. So now when it comes to all his little dodges, there is no way out, no excuses and no getting round it.
THAT'S the privacy concern!

And we would want to actively help this man dodge his social responsibilities?

ukoda

LeinsterDub wrote: »

And we would want to actively help this man dodge his social responsibilities?

I believe that was sarcasm. Not an actual privacy concern.

Carawaystick

Maybe some proponent of eircodes could explain how using eircodes instead of implementing an addressing scheme would solve this issue

Say a person, maybe even Sean Other upthread, wants to develop some land. but the land is undeveloped and has no postcode, so some other method of locating the land must be used.





Solutions include using the townland the land is in, and hierarchically unambiguously determining that townland, maybe in reference to the nearest village and then the nearest town and then the county the land in question is in, rather than the town is in.

This still leaves us with the issue of detemining the land, from all the other land in the townland, so maybe if there was a folio number for the land in question, registered with the pra and shown outlined on a map in red that might work.
but if it worked for any field anywhere, why not use the same for developed land.


People complain that townlands aren't shown on maps, when they mean they are not shown on the complaining peoples maps.

plodder

spacetweek wrote: »

And they must be random and identify a single building or else you are back to square one.

Why must they be random?

ukoda

Carawaystick wrote: »

Maybe some proponent of eircodes could explain how using eircodes instead of implementing an addressing scheme would solve this issue

Say a person, maybe even Sean Other upthread, wants to develop some land. but the land is undeveloped and has no postcode, so some other method of locating the land must be used.





Solutions include using the townland the land is in, and hierarchically unambiguously determining that townland, maybe in reference to the nearest village and then the nearest town and then the county the land in question is in, rather than the town is in.

This still leaves us with the issue of detemining the land, from all the other land in the townland, so maybe if there was a folio number for the land in question, registered with the pra and shown outlined on a map in red that might work.
but if it worked for any field anywhere, why not use the same for developed land.


People complain that townlands aren't shown on maps, when they mean they are not shown on the complaining peoples maps.

How is it currently done?

I don't know about ericode, or if they have plans for this, but in the UK the PAF has a "not yet built" database, so you can get a postcode for a piece of land you want to develop and it goes into the postcode database.
Haven't heard eircode talk about anything like this, but it would be easy for them to do.

If you want to ask eircode that question: sales@eircode.ie, I've asked them a good few questions now and they usually respond in about a day. Tbh, its not great customer service, you might have to pester them a bit but you'll get an answer eventually.

Sam Russell

They must be random to monetise the product. That is make money from the Eircode system. Addresses would be free.

ukoda

Sam Russell wrote: »

They must be random to monetise the product. That is make money from the Eircode system. Addresses would be free.

Nonsense. UK aren't random and it's monetised. The money comes from database access no matter if it's random or sequential.

spacetweek

plodder wrote: »

Why must they be random?

There was something about how you shouldn't have adjacent buildings with sequential codes because direct marketers could guess your code if they knew someone else's.

plodder

ukoda wrote: »

Nonsense. UK aren't random and it's monetised. The money comes from database access no matter if it's random or sequential.

UK postcodes are free. Eircodes will be useless without the database due to the randomness. So, it's not unfair to conclude that it's about money - unless you can suggest a better reason.