Our content licensing agreement with AAP stipulates that the material must be taken down 30 days from the date of publication. Therefore this particular story, having exceeded that time frame, has expired. We apologise for any inconvenience.
Our content licensing agreement with AAP stipulates that the material must be taken down 30 days from the date of publication. Therefore this particular story, having exceeded that time frame, has expired. We apologise for any inconvenience.
It won't last more than 10 seconds in my microwave oven.
I was there in the 80's when the Australia card was tested and saw the small number of citizens where the data matching didn't quite fit. You only had a few thousand rejects from the millions of data matched records that needed following up. The current data matching system does the job quite well, as long as you put in the right parameters.
I suspect the issue of a centralised ID card is a fait-accompli, the boys in the Centrelink skunkworks area having pushed the idea for over twenty years, and needing to justify their expensive pilot trials and existence. It won't combat fraud, as it is too easy to build a profile to permit a new card to be issued, but will save time for honest citizens when they initially apply for new payments from Centrelink.
With a centralised ID, the potential for abuse and fraud is made that much easier, as there is only one point of weakness that needs to be compromised with an centralised card, where the current system of checks and balanced ensures that all but the smartest of criminals eventually slips up and gets caught.
This is open slather for organised crime to get in on the act and make regular and extensive bilking of the community purse a pushover.
It needs serious reconsideration and healthy debate. It will not reduce criminal activity, or prevent fraud or terrorism. The rights of a law abiding citizen to have their privacy is being compromised in the misguided efforts to combat crime - we are not all criminals or potential criminals and should not be treated as such.
What happened to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty?
Its called a drivers licence.
Accepted by pubs and police natiowide.
Why do i need another one?
Compassion and collaboration - Tim Ayling
It's important to intorduce compassion and collaboration into business says Tim Ayling at Sydney Ignite 3… Watch it now
How online self-publishing is transforming - Tim Parsons
Tim Parson discusses how publishing one's own books has changed due to the internet at Sydney Ignite 3.… Watch it now
Location intelligence in the real world - Stephen Lloyd-Jones
Stephen Lloyd-Jones speaks about how he thinks location technology has taken a wrong turn and what can be done… Watch it now
Having problems with complex data center? Simplify your data center now.
How reliable is IP telephony?
Forget the NBN, 100Mbps is already here
IT: Govt's cost-cutting bitch
What makes you click?
Tell us for a chance to win a $1,000 GAME gift voucher.
Click here for more.
Win an iPhone 3GS!
Sign up as a ZDNet Australia member during November and you'll go in a draw to win an iPhone 3GS!
Click here to sign up!
Best Laptops
Check out the best laptops here!
Click here for more.
Another example of our individual freedoms being erroneously sacrificed on the alter of security to combat “terror”. I love how this politician opens with the phrase “the question is no longer why” with out bothering to explain what the answer to the previous question actually is. How on earth will an ID card help on determining “who comes and who goes”? If that is the case, why on earth do I have a passport? How will this stop counterfeit and theft ID? It won’t, most of this stems from compromised on-line transactions and an ID card will do nothing to alleviate that issue. Is Ruddock seriously saying that the new invasive terror laws are not enough? The whole ID card scenario is a complete nonsense. It will achieve nothing in terms of increasing our safety, it will do nothing in protecting our identities. It WILL succeed in further eroding any rights we have not to be pestered by any petty government official that feels the need to do so. A classic case of doing something to maintain the appearance of doing something.