National DNA Database: have your say
The Register article here
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics Consultation here (there's also a link from the Register article).
This is interesting and I'd urge those of you who have something to say on this topic (regardless of your views, the discussion is the thing) to say it, at least, to these people, if no one else... it doesn't take long and they accept "online" submissions (they have a MS-Word file for you to email them - assumes you can use MS-Word formatted documents but hey, Open Office doesn't do a bad job these days I guess *sigh* they never learn).
If you're interested in my view it is, in summary, that a National DNA Database is a stupid idea and although I can foresee it happening at some point in the future ("it is inevitable" to quote Mr. Smith) I prefer not to be one of the guinea pigs they try it out on before all the bugs have been ironed out since no-one else in the world has managed to do this on this scale yet (I'm sure they've tried but have fallen at earlier hurdles).
I'm tempted to give them grief by supporting the same idea someone has had for the fingerprint database that is liable to turn up at some point too by making my fingerprints and DNA freely available over the Internet... possibly dangerous if I'm only one of a few that do but then possibly worth the risk since I then have a "plausible deniability" defence... if it were to catch on then it is likely that the whole point of using fingerprints and DNA as identifying marks and thus as security would become pointless. Security through knowledge (e.g. pass phrases) is much better than through biometrics... we are just to profligate with our biometrics in a way that we won't be able to be for a long time with our knowledge (I mean, have you ever tried to transcribe everything you know into a medium others can understand? And they say there's a lot on the Internet! Ha! :)
And yes, I did pinch the headline! ;)
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics Consultation here (there's also a link from the Register article).
This is interesting and I'd urge those of you who have something to say on this topic (regardless of your views, the discussion is the thing) to say it, at least, to these people, if no one else... it doesn't take long and they accept "online" submissions (they have a MS-Word file for you to email them - assumes you can use MS-Word formatted documents but hey, Open Office doesn't do a bad job these days I guess *sigh* they never learn).
If you're interested in my view it is, in summary, that a National DNA Database is a stupid idea and although I can foresee it happening at some point in the future ("it is inevitable" to quote Mr. Smith) I prefer not to be one of the guinea pigs they try it out on before all the bugs have been ironed out since no-one else in the world has managed to do this on this scale yet (I'm sure they've tried but have fallen at earlier hurdles).
I'm tempted to give them grief by supporting the same idea someone has had for the fingerprint database that is liable to turn up at some point too by making my fingerprints and DNA freely available over the Internet... possibly dangerous if I'm only one of a few that do but then possibly worth the risk since I then have a "plausible deniability" defence... if it were to catch on then it is likely that the whole point of using fingerprints and DNA as identifying marks and thus as security would become pointless. Security through knowledge (e.g. pass phrases) is much better than through biometrics... we are just to profligate with our biometrics in a way that we won't be able to be for a long time with our knowledge (I mean, have you ever tried to transcribe everything you know into a medium others can understand? And they say there's a lot on the Internet! Ha! :)
And yes, I did pinch the headline! ;)