Eircode discussion

oscarBravo

plodder wrote: »

Yet, these neighbours already travel to different places (Sligo or Castlebar) for their county council business. They potentially pay different property tax. They elect different councillors to a different council. So, it's hardly all that big a deal if their postcodes have different prefixes.

Yeah, arguing over postcode prefixes really is a bit daft, isn't it?

Not that aligning with county boundaries is an essential feature of a postcode, but it's funny to see people arguing that it's a bad thing.

I didn't say it's a bad thing. I pointed out, for probably the eight millionth time since this conversation started, that every possible solution has drawbacks. If we didn't have people here bitching about routing keys being the wrong size, we'd have a different set of people bitching about how you can't group all deliveries to Charlestown by their postcode prefix.

My point, which I've made so many times that I'm finding it hard to believe I actually have to articulate yet again, is that designing something with conflicting criteria requires that you compromise some of those criteria.

It's like the perennial debate about whether we should hold elections on a Friday or a Saturday. Both options inconvenience a percentage of the population, and no matter which option is chosen, someone will be bitching about how obvious it was that the alternative was better.

BoatMad

Sam Russell wrote: »

The Tender and other aspects were pursued by vested interests on both sides.

There were a number of people who consistently railed against the poor design and the secrecy of the design criteria and the fact that the design specification from the Oireachtas was ignored.

When it was revealed that An Post had no intention of using it (since denied) and that Shannon Airport was in Limerick, then it was a lost cause as far as they were concerned and every bump in the road became another mountain.

However, the large and variable size of the routing codes, their complete meaningless nature, and the use of nonsense random codes all caused most to abandon the whole concept.

Making routing keys of consistent size (as to the number of addresses each one covers, and adhering to county boundaries would remove a large group from the nay-sayers camp.

As to fitting on a satnav - well it does not fit any so far.

These nonsense criticisms are set out here again , all nonsense. The routing key is irelevant, companies can build private routing systems to suit whatever requirement they need

A post code for privacy and control should be random and incapable of simple inspection

The database will fit on most sat navs released in the last 10 years

" most to abandon the whole concept " what nonsense , more and more implementations every day. You sound like " comical Ali "

Give these makey-up negatives a miss, bin them. , it's over , eircode won. These negatives were made up by either vested interests or people that would argue black was white.

plodder

BoatMad wrote: »

A post code for privacy and control should be random and incapable of simple inspection

The truth is that a postcode which uniquely identifies households is a threat to privacy. The Data Protection Commissioner recognised this early on. Maybe the risk is worth accepting, but pretending that a random postcode enhances privacy is burying your head in the sand.

How can you possibly argue that it does anything for privacy when nosy parkers can look-up any number of them for free, find out their full address and exact location on a map?

ukoda

plodder wrote: »

How can you possibly argue that it does anything for privacy when nosy parkers can look-up any number of them for free, find out their full address and exact location on a map?

have you heard of google maps? Where before Eircode I could be a nosey parker and look up any number of addresses in the world for free. They even have this street view this where I can "walk" down your street virtually

plodder

ukoda wrote: »

have you heard of google maps? Where before Eircode I could be a nosey parker and look up any number of addresses in the world for free. They even have this street view this where I can "walk" down your street virtually

Everyone knows what an address is, that it is personal information and how to look after it. Postcodes are anonymous tokens in every country of the world other than Ireland. The risk is that some organisations/companies who we give our postcode to, will not realise an Eircode is personal information and they may end up distributing it, selling it as they do with other non personal information. But, you know this, because I've explained this maybe half a dozen times before.

And randomly perusing google maps doesn't reveal any personal information. Whereas a postcode like D04 XY12 together with information like what you bought in some online store, definitely is.

BoatMad

Postcodes are anonymous tokens in every country of the world other than Ireland

Eircode is as anonymous, even more so then the UK postcode for example , access to lookup is controlled via licensing the database , exactly the same way the RM-PAF is licensed

The current lookup system can be taken down at a moments notice, I suspect its merely there to allow people to verify their own Eircodes. I personally would feel their should be no uncontrolled lookup allowed.

Right now the system is limited to a number of searches per day.

Again I fail to see you issue, Eircode is an if not more anonymous then other codes, what is a laugh , is then to hear those arguing that Eircode should have a human readable interpretation, which is the exact opposite of anonymity .

Again , you are creating rather bizarre fictitious " perceived" dangers. A company that may distribute your Eircode, is likely to distribute it with your address also. to suggest this " not realise an Eircode is personal information" is quite frankly nonsense.

Your eircode is your address and should be treated in whatever way you decide you treat your address.

plodder

BoatMad wrote: »

Eircode is as anonymous, even more so then the UK postcode for example

No it isn't A UK postcode represents around 12 households. An eircode represents 1.

ukoda

plodder wrote: »

But, you know this, because I've explained this maybe half a dozen times before.

Didn't you specifically want a thread where you can discuss the same old argument over and over again. I think we all know the arguments for and against at this stage. Yet here we are with another new thread to have another go at them

ukoda

I think people need to be clear around the data protection side of eircode. An eircode or an address on its own it's not considered to be Personally identifiable Information, as such, that's why you can just buy a list of every address in the country and every eircode and it's perfectly legal and complaint with data protection, and google maps can list every address too. Where this changes, is when you combine an address or eircode with other information, this then potentially (depending on the info) makes that record a personally identifiable piece of information. Eircode on its own is anonymous data freely available to anyone. It's an important distinction

BoatMad

plodder wrote: »

No it isn't A UK postcode represents around 12 households. An eircode represents 1.

UK postcode with additional databases is accurate to 1 metre

plodder

BoatMad wrote: »

UK postcode with additional databases is accurate to 1 metre

Yes, but 'UK postcode with additional databases' is not what the public use. So, it's not really relevant to the discussion.

plodder

ukoda wrote: »

Didn't you specifically want a thread where you can discuss the same old argument over and over again. I think we all know the arguments for and against at this stage. Yet here we are with another new thread to have another go at them

Personally, I think there should just be one Eircode thread, where anyone can say anything they want about it. I think Eircode is only of limited interest to others in the forum. The implementation thread is prone to just being used as a form of propaganda: "Hey look at Eircode being used here!"

"I think we all know the arguments for and against", suggests the arguments for and against are equivalent. I don't think they are.

oscarBravo

plodder wrote: »

The implementation thread is prone to just being used as a form of propaganda: "Hey look at Eircode being used here!"

Annoying, isn't it? Constantly hearing about the damn thing being used. Don't those idiots know that it's useless?

"I think we all know the arguments for and against", suggests the arguments for and against are equivalent. I don't think they are.

We actually agree for once.

ukoda

plodder wrote: »

Personally, I think there should just be one Eircode thread, where anyone can say anything they want about it. I think Eircode is only of limited interest to others in the forum. The implementation thread is prone to just being used as a form of propaganda: "Hey look at Eircode being used here!"

"I think we all know the arguments for and against", suggests the arguments for and against are equivalent. I don't think they are.

Limited interest? It's been the most popular thread in Infatstruture for years.

We've all said what we wanted to say on the design. There's nothing new to debate about. The only new info is areas it's being used in.

I think people realise this and that's why this thread has 100 posts and implementation has over 800.

plodder

oscarBravo wrote: »

Annoying, isn't it? Constantly hearing about the damn thing being used. Don't those idiots know that it's useless? We actually agree for once.

No, it was the fact that resulting discussions kept getting shutdown. I don't see much value in the thread if all we're allowed to say is: Look I got a letter with an Eircode on it today. We'll surely all be using it before long!

ukoda wrote:

We've all said what we wanted to say on the design. There's nothing new to debate about. The only new info is areas it's being used in.

There's plenty new to debate about. I suggested something the other day that they could do to improve the situation. You could debate that.

ukoda

plodder wrote: »

No, it was the fact that resulting discussions kept getting shutdown. I don't see much value in the thread if all we're allowed to say is: Look I got a letter with an Eircode on it today. We'll surely all be using it before long!


There's plenty new to debate about. I suggested something the other day that they could do to improve the situation. You could debate that.

You're welcome not to partake in that thread if its not of interest to you.

You missed my other point, myself, like most it seems, are simply tired of arguing pointless "could have" topics.

keep complaining about eircode if you want, but most it seems are more interested in the "hey look where it's being used" discussion

I think the reality is though, as pointed out by the other poster, you're just annoyed it's being adopted. Everyone of those "hey look where it's being used" posts undermines the anti eircode argument

plodder

ukoda wrote: »

You're welcome not to partake in that thread if its not of interest to you.

You missed my other point, myself, like most it seems, are simply tired of arguing pointless "could have" topics.

keep complaining about eircode if you want, but most it seems are more interested in the "hey look where it's being used" discussion

I think the reality is though, as pointed out by the other poster, you're just annoyed it's being adopted. Everyone of those "hey look where it's being used" posts undermines the anti eircode argument

This thread is being dragged off topic now. So, I'll just say I will be continuing to comment on both threads. I'm not annoyed about anything. I've already acknowledged more than once, it is here to stay. I have suggested some ways of improving it, and you're more than welcome to discuss those points.

BoatMad

plodder wrote: »

Yes, but 'UK postcode with additional databases' is not what the public use. So, it's not really relevant to the discussion.

The uk public have no non commercial address to the PAF file. They can't " use" anything. In fact RM prosecuted an action recently against a web service offering PAF lookup.


Courier companies use the PAF and associated geo databases to very accurately locate postcodes in the uk , overcoming some of the original PAF issues.

You need to get your facts straight here

BoatMad

plodder wrote: »

This thread is being dragged off topic now. So, I'll just say I will be continuing to comment on both threads. I'm not annoyed about anything. I've already acknowledged more than once, it is here to stay. I have suggested some ways of improving it, and you're more than welcome to discuss those points.

Quite frankly you have not suggested any means of improving it. You have generated " perceived " future issues that don't exist to try and justify your position. You are merely arguing against it to be contrarian rather then constructive. ( and a few others that resurrect old issues long since addressed )

plodder

BoatMad wrote: »

The uk public have no non commercial address to the PAF file. They can't " use" anything. In fact RM prosecuted an action recently against a web service offering PAF lookup.


Courier companies use the PAF and associated geo databases to very accurately locate postcodes in the uk , overcoming some of the original PAF issues.

You need to get your facts straight here

Irrelevant waffle, bringing the PAF into it now. You said that UK postcodes are less anonymous than Eircodes, when clearly they aren't. The UK public use their postcode. They type it on websites when purchasing goods online. Because postcodes are anonymous, aggregated data can be bought and sold by these companies relating purchases to postcodes. If that happens with Eircodes then the information will relate to individual households. This is an example of the kind of thing that the Data Protection Commissioner had concerns about. But, deny it all you like.

BoatMad

plodder wrote: »

Irrelevant waffle, bringing the PAF into it now. You said that UK postcodes are less anonymous than Eircodes, when clearly they aren't. The UK public use their postcode. They type it on websites when purchasing goods online. Because postcodes are anonymous, aggregated data can be bought and sold by these companies relating purchases to postcodes. If that happens with Eircodes then the information will relate to individual households. This is an example of the kind of thing that the Data Protection Commissioner had concerns about. But, deny it all you like.

The uk postcode can be partially inspected using public data. To a lessor extent so can eircode ( since the sorting areas have been revealed ).

But your contrarian argument is pure waffle , I've use my eircode , multiple times on Irish web sites , more are adding address verification

In fact uptake on eircode has been incredibly fast , with more and more online sites sccomadating it , it's proceeding much faster then uk postcodes which actually took years to be implemented ( the paf only appeared in the 80's)

But you go on hating , that's all haters do.
You contrarian arguments have now, like most eircode opponents , decended into nonsense , either recalling lost debates, making up ridiculous " perceived " failing , regurgitating falsehoods and disinformation and generally just knocking it for the sake of it. All this smacks of is persistent denial

ukoda

plodder wrote: »

This is an example of the kind of thing that the Data Protection Commissioner HAD concerns about. But, deny it all you like.

HAD being the key word there.

What our DPO said:

"Ms Dixon said it was difficult to say as yet what kind of harms, if any, may derive from the use of a unique code to identify each individual home in the state. “One struggles to come up with an absolutely riveting example of what will definitively happen the day it is introduced,” she said. “But it could give rise to issues.”

I wonder now that we are 6 months in, has she had any luck coming up with a riveting example? Oh wait, no there hasn't been a peep out of her.

Source http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/data-concerns-remain-over-postcodes-and-primary-schools-1.2079095

plodder

BoatMad wrote: »

The uk postcode can be partially inspected using public data. To a lessor extent so can eircode ( since the sorting areas have been revealed ).

But your contrarian argument is pure waffle , I've use my eircode , multiple times on Irish web sites , more are adding address verification

In fact uptake on eircode has been incredibly fast , with more and more online sites sccomadating it , it's proceeding much faster then uk postcodes which actually took years to be implemented ( the paf only appeared in the 80's)

But you go on hating , that's all haters do.
You contrarian arguments have now, like most eircode opponents , decended into nonsense , either recalling lost debates, making up ridiculous " perceived " failing , regurgitating falsehoods and disinformation and generally just knocking it for the sake of it. All this smacks of is persistent denial

What about the previous Data Protection Commissioner? Was he a hater too?

@ukoda. To the best of my knowledge the DPC who raised the issue was never satisfied with the situation. He raised the problem in early discussions and then more recently when the design emerged he repeated the concern. There's enough wriggle room in that quote from the current DPC if something does go wrong.

GJG

ukoda wrote: »

HAD being the key word there.

What our DPO said:

"Ms Dixon said it was difficult to say as yet what kind of harms, if any, may derive from the use of a unique code to identify each individual home in the state. “One struggles to come up with an absolutely riveting example of what will definitively happen the day it is introduced,” she said. “But it could give rise to issues.”

I wonder now that we are 6 months in, has she had any luck coming up with a riveting example? Oh wait, no there hasn't been a peep out of her.

Source http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/data-concerns-remain-over-postcodes-and-primary-schools-1.2079095

I followed this up with the previous DPC (A classic Bertie 'friends' appointee) and I can state with certainty that he did not articulate any coherent objection. He said (quite forcefully) that there were 'issues'; he was unable or unwilling to say what such issues might be.

It seemed obvious to me that the true objection was that it would trigger a workload for DPC - he'd have to actually do something for his salary, and that he far preferred that that Ireland continue to have a huge proportion of non-unique addresses rather than deal with the issues that resolving that problem would generate.

plodder wrote: »

What about the previous Data Protection Commissioner? Was he a hater too?

@ukoda. To the best of my knowledge the DPC who raised the issue was never satisfied with the situation. He raised the problem in early discussions and then more recently when the design emerged he repeated the concern. There's enough wriggle room in that quote from the current DPC if something does go wrong.

This is the untold scandal associated with the introduction of Eircodes. The DPC has a duty in law to develop codes of practice to specify acceptable data use, and they simply have ignored this obligation.

Take for example the IP number of your internet router. This can be associated with your your Eircode very easily, along with any accounts like Gmail/Google or Facebook that most devices are permanently logged in on, along with what other WiFi networks it uses to log in.

From this it is easy to build a database of who is friends with who and how often they visit each other. This problem is not unique to Eircode, and it's not impossible to manage, but it requires detailed rules from the DPC, along with enforcement. I don't see any evidence that they are even aware of the issue, let alone acting on it.

BoatMad

Oh for gods sake. If you contribute to social media , you are implicitly making part of life public. In fact you could be making everything you post public.

This has nothing to do with Eircode.

There is a data protection question and that is is , is the data protection risk associated with a unique code that identifies your location ( more correctly your mail address location ) over doing nothing ( because any code would have to be unique ) , worth the advantage. ?

I would argue, that it is since in reality your address is not that private anyway that it's clearly worth it.

But this isn't a Eircode issue , it's a general postcode issue

Ps. Depending on who has access to what , IP addresses identify your location precisely

plodder

I agree that the DPC could be more pro-active in studying the privacy implications of Eircode. There isn't much on the Eircode site in the way of guidance beyond an FAQ on not giving your code to anyone you wouldn't share your address with. And in fact they are legally required to have a privacy notice, with specific information in it, and I don't see one (which meets the legal requirements).

Also, there is another statement on the site that the Eircode databases don't contain personal information. Yet, the definition of personal data/information is very broad and in a lot cases they could be defined as such.

So, there is definitely confusion out there. In that context, I find it a bit worrying that Paypal have made Eircodes mandatory when you sign up. Given that their privacy policy allows them to give aggregated statistical data to anyone they want, so long as it doesn't include personal information, does that mean Eircodes could or couldn't be given out as part of that aggregate information?

Other concerns would be that not everyone knows about the finder and that it is trivial to reverse lookup an address from an Eircode. On the days after the codes were given out, there were people publishing theirs on Twitter. I doubt those people realised they were giving out their full address.

marmurr1916

plodder wrote: »

On the days after the codes were given out, there were people publishing theirs on Twitter. I doubt those people realised they were giving out their full address.

How do you know? Eircodes were in the news than and being promoted online etc. One of the key points about Eircodes that was being promoted was that they're unique and identify unique addresses.

ManAboutCouch

clewbays wrote: »

So why don't you contact the CSO for a more complex and detailed analysis of the small area that you highlighted (around Jervis street in Dublin 1). For example, ask for the age group and sex of the 1 Lithuanian living in that small area. Could you also ask for the number of persons of Greek nationality living in that small area - nothing about their educational attainment or socio-economic group just one figure of how many Greeks lived in that small area.

Looking forward to you giving us those complex and detailed statistics.

I think you're missing my point. You stated that you don't think anything other than a very vague age and sex breakdown is available at Small Area level. The link I posted shows that that's not true, an extensive set of census variables is available at that level.

The same set of variables is available at the ED level and for a wide range of other geographies, including Dail Constituencies, Garda districts, NUTS regions and so on. The full list, including downloadable GIS format boundary files is available here.

Of course there are confidentiality concerns, so there are some variables which are only ever made available to the general public at the national level. If you need a more detailed regional breakdown of those variables then they might be made available if you complete a Non-Disclosure Agreement with the CSO.

To drag this back on topic, I have seen a draft of the 2016 Census form and it uses Eircode.

plodder

ManAboutCouch wrote: »

To drag this back on topic, I have seen a draft of the 2016 Census form and it uses Eircode.

I assume that is to deliver the forms, rather than quizzing us on our eircode?

ManAboutCouch

plodder wrote: »

I assume that is to deliver the forms, rather than quizzing us on our eircode?

Yes, I think so, it looks like it's to be filled in by the Enumerator rather than the resident.