Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera Oct 20 2012, 11:14 AM

In 2009 the Guardian asked the question "Why are we fingerprinting children?" [url="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/mar/06/fingerprinting-children-civil-liberties"].

The articles stated:

Why have West Berkshire Schools chosen to support such a dubious scheme, which may well aid in cutting costs, but may also normalise, and the "cradle-to-grave state snooping and control" policies, that this and past Governments seem set on to erode the civil rights of the populace?

Posted by: Adrian Hollister Oct 20 2012, 11:40 AM

I denied my school the right to do this (Brightwalton) - they had a hissy fit and it's caused all sorts of problems getting access to things that required finger prints. Not good.

Posted by: Penelope Oct 20 2012, 12:29 PM

Can anyone out there tell me why we need to fingerprint kids?

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 20 2012, 01:04 PM

It is now called 'biometrics' and is a way of ensuring the identity of people seeking access to various services. UKBA use them on visitor visa applications so they can know the person given the visa and the person who turns up at the Port of Entry is the same. It seems schools (in this case) seek to use to ensure only entitled children take free school meals.

If a standalone system then the information can never be in 'cyberspace', but management and security of the information (as with any) is paramount. That includes purging (not just 'Deleting') redundant information.

If not done carefully the savings are exceeded by the costs.....

Not sure if it is a (central) government policy, or a clever salesman

Posted by: Adrian Hollister Oct 20 2012, 01:27 PM

IMHO it is not something that we should impose on kids - especially primary school. Who knows what they do with the info...

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 20 2012, 06:30 PM

What 'info'? If the database is stored on a system not connected to the internet the only info is 'This fingerprint was taken from John Smith and he is entitled to a free meal' or similar.
The devil will be in the detail, and such 'worthy' schemes can morph into something else, but a proper Security Operating System and management process should not allow any abuse.

I expect you have information about people on your computer. Does every one of them know what you have, why, what you plan to use it for and how you prevent it's use by anyone else?

Posted by: On the edge Oct 20 2012, 06:41 PM

Brilliant observation! Well remember my other half, a few years back, coming back from her 'help at school' stint. She was helping some kids who had severe reading difficulty. One of the teachers gave her an electronic device to help. It didn't and she recognised it as a voice recognition toy she'd seen in Maplins, re-badged and repainted. Had been purchased by the school for £5,000; actual cost in Maplins £25 or there about. Added value could have been in the instructions; which turned out to be two sides of A4. Can't blame the sales guy!

Posted by: Strafin Oct 21 2012, 12:08 AM

It's the culture that concerns me more than anything. Children growing up believing that security and surveillance of this level are necessary, and normal. The implication about everyone being under suspicion, including them.

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 21 2012, 06:40 AM

"In God we trust. Everyone else is a suspect"

Posted by: user23 Oct 21 2012, 07:38 AM

I suspect that by the time these children are adults, biometrics will be a fairly common method of verifying one's identity to access services.

Posted by: blackdog Oct 21 2012, 08:45 AM

Why are we so worried about the use of fingerprints?

Posted by: Adrian Hollister Oct 21 2012, 09:06 AM

"If" is the right word. If they only store the biometic checksum, if they don't share it, if no one hacks it, if if if.

No details were provided other than "it is safe". All this in Brightwalton Primary School (not secondary) for books in the library... what a waste of money and risk to personal liberty.

Posted by: Strafin Oct 21 2012, 09:15 AM

Yes, that's my issue.

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 21 2012, 09:20 AM

If the system is stored on a system connected to the internet there is a Pandora's Box and a whole different debate;
If they are storing personal data in excess of that needed for the activity then the Data Commissioner will shut it down;
If such a system is used only for a primary school library system I suspect the 'salesman' comment applies.

No need to scaremonger, just ensure the issues are considered. Ask questions and challenge, but do not instantly scream the sky is falling

Posted by: Adrian Hollister Oct 21 2012, 09:20 AM

The key for me here is more than just about the fingerprints (and the civil liberty issues) but the lack of information provided to adults who decide on something that could impact the child throughout their lives. Sending out a leaflet says "it is all ok" is just tosh.

Posted by: Adrian Hollister Oct 21 2012, 09:22 AM

Agree. There are lots of questions outstanding and no honest and independent answer.

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 21 2012, 09:23 AM

Then sensible people should ask sensible questions in a way that finds meaningful and satisfactory answers - or discovers a problem that means the issue is agreed as being wrong (if only until corrected).

Hysteria is not a good tool for decision making or fact finding.

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 21 2012, 09:26 AM

Then the Head Teacher should be asked, and the Governors. Sometimes their brief will be incomplete, and their knowledge limited to little more than the promoter has imparted....

Posted by: Berkshirelad Oct 21 2012, 10:01 AM

The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 has specific clauses to deal with this (S26 - 28).

In short, for any school, both parents must be informed of the intention to use biometric data; at least one parent must give consent; if either parent objects then biometrics cannot be used; permission may be withdrawn at any time; permission must be in writing; objections must be in writing; regardless of the parents wishes, the child may refuse to provide biometric data; The DPA 1998 applies to all biometric data.

AFAIK, any school that implemented biometrics prior to the commencement of the Act, must apply for permission in accordance with the Act in order to continue using biometrics.

Posted by: Bartholomew Oct 21 2012, 12:18 PM

I think that the issue with schools (and other organisations) using fingerprints to identify any individual is exactly as described here. It is up to the individual (or in school the parents or individual) to say whether this is an acceptable form of id. This leads to the question of whether rights can be removed because of refusal to use fingerprints. For example if this is used for library borrowing can a school solely use fingerprints or should they use another method as well? Can a school refuse library access because of a refusal?

Posted by: user23 Oct 21 2012, 12:52 PM

What's the issue? Surely the school store lots of data about their pupils?

The problem most people have I think is that fingerprinting has long been associated with catching criminals rather than proving one's identity.

Posted by: On the edge Oct 21 2012, 12:55 PM

Going back to an earlier comment - is collecting dinner money such a big issue that it needs such an elaborate solution. We used to have a dinner money monitor, then I suppose we used to have an education.

Posted by: user23 Oct 21 2012, 01:04 PM

Perhaps because of the evolution of technology it's not such an elaborate solution these days.

I've got a fingerprint scanner on the laptop I'm using for example, so I don't have to type in a password if I choose not to.

Posted by: Berkshirelad Oct 21 2012, 03:05 PM

Well, if it is for Free School Meals, then they cannot refuse to supply the child with a meal...

Posted by: blackdog Oct 21 2012, 05:28 PM

What civil liberty issues?

In what way is the use of biometrics an abuse of civil liberty? Taking the issue to the extreme assume there is a national database of everyone's fingerprints available to anyone to use. What is the impact?

Obviously it would encourage thieves etc to wear gloves (making everyone wearing gloves a bit suspicious). In general it would make it easier to identify wrong-doers - is this a bad thing? It would make it easy for anyone to check someone else's identity - is this a bad thing? It would make it harder to commit crime - is this a bad thing?

Posted by: On the edge Oct 21 2012, 05:54 PM

I'm sure you are right. Then someone has had to write a programme, train the staff and kids, etc. etc, and then pay software licences and maintain the system. Onward march of technology agreed but when schools are said to be short of cash? May seem trifling, but all these little excursions add up.

For me, its probably an age thing! Then again, coming from that era, some of us wrinklies do get a bit bothered. Room 101 for me then!

Posted by: Bartholomew Oct 21 2012, 06:03 PM

There is a lot of information already available to be able to identify and track who people and what they're doing. It is what people and organisations do with this information that is the problem. The government doesn't have a great track record in securing data so I'm sceptical that this data (or any current data) would remain secure.

I belonged to a sports club that introduced fingerprints as method of signing in and out. I (and a number of others) were very concerned that this information wasn't secure and refused to use it. My view is that there are easier and less controversial ways to identify someone. Its just as easy to avoid this kind of controversy by issuing a token such as a library card or membership card after verification.

Yes Ive heard the argument that if you have nothing to hide what's the problem with using this information. I simply don't believe that the information will always be kept for the purposes it was originally identified for.

Posted by: Strafin Oct 21 2012, 06:41 PM

Can teachers not remember who their own pupils are?

Posted by: user23 Oct 21 2012, 07:03 PM

What else do you think it could be used for?

You do realise most adults leave an electronic trail through bank cards, mobile devices and so on that makes them very easy to track by those with access to the records, such as the Police.

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 21 2012, 08:01 PM

I assure you it is easier for the criminal/non legal groups to do that than it is for any official 'enforcement' body.
You are right about how much information we place 'out there' that is capable of misuse.

Posted by: On the edge Oct 21 2012, 08:54 PM

All thin end of the wedge stuff isn't it. We were told that access to privileged personal information by local government officials would be restricted to the most serious cases; primarily to combat terrorism. As exampled by the checking that parents didn't bend the truth when securing places at popular schools. Apparently we are the most controlled population in the free world - why?

Posted by: Bartholomew Oct 21 2012, 09:24 PM

I probably know this better than you do Extending this by statute rather than by my choice is the issue I have.. I choose to use my card or phone as I want and know what is likely to be stored. I don't choose to have my fingerprints taken and stored on a central database. Both commercial and government organisations realise that having data means having control and both exploit this as far as they can, often exceeding their authority.
The abuse by authorities of stored data is already widespread. For example using councils using surveillance powers introduced for terrorism to see if parents are sending children to the appropriate school.

Posted by: user23 Oct 21 2012, 09:26 PM

Who's extending this by statute?

Posted by: blackdog Oct 21 2012, 11:09 PM

Does it matter? To reiterate my question - assume that everyone's fingerprints are readily available from a free database (100% insecure in terms of read access). What harm would come from it?

Posted by: On the edge Oct 22 2012, 06:33 AM

When you think of it Blackdog, what harm would come from making all our personal data readily available?

Posted by: Adrian Hollister Oct 22 2012, 08:57 AM

Control of information is critical to governments. They use it to control people. Businesses do the same as do terrorists, religions etc...

There is a good argument that says if it's all freely available to everyone then the importance of the information goes away. If this is the case, then why do so many people feel compelled to hide on-line behind alias?

I suspect though that the question of the boundary of safe release of information is a very generational - youngest most likely to allow (because it's something they are used too) and the oldest least likely to allow.

Posted by: blackdog Oct 22 2012, 09:24 AM

It's fairly obvious that disclosure of personal data like bank account details, pin numbers, passwords etc could readily be used to our detriment. But fingerprints?

Apart from protecting me from being identified as the perpetrator of a crime what advantage is there to me in having my fingerprints kept secret?

Posted by: On the edge Oct 22 2012, 10:12 AM

Sure, security codes kept confidential, but if fingerprints are OK - why not publish the full electoral roll, tax records, telephone directory info, ans so forth? Lets go a stage further, why not all public administration records as well? What's good for the goose is good for the gander?

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 22 2012, 10:31 AM

can some one explain what use to anyone an 8 year old's fingerprint details are?

Posted by: Jo Pepper Oct 22 2012, 10:46 AM

Who knows? What will they be worth in 40 years time when I'm old, grumpy and voting tory (ok perhaps not the last bit). Would I want my children tracked, no. Are they old enough to decide for themselves, no. Should we finger print them, no.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 22 2012, 10:48 AM

tracked? how exactly? seems to me everyone has been watching too much Mission Impossible again.

Posted by: JeffG Oct 22 2012, 11:46 AM

What on earth is all the fuss about? If fingerprints are anonymous (and they don't need to be anything else) what is the problem?

- this fingerprint is entitled to free school meals
- this fingerprint can open this door
- this fingerprint can access this computer

etc. etc.

Even if they weren't anonymous I would have absolutely no problem with my fingerprints being stored somewhere. Isn't the same thing as retinal scans? I don't hear any uproar about that.

Posted by: On the edge Oct 22 2012, 12:04 PM

OK then, I can make sure the Catholics don't turn up at assembly, little kids often forget. I have positive proof they are at school at any given time
so I'm automatically ensuring better monitoring of 'at risk'. Keep all this data and its a massively useful bit of socio economic info for the future.

Don't get me wrong as a fully trained bureaucrat who made a living for several years selling data mining and inferencing applications to Government, insurance and banking industries I'm all for it.

As a human, I'm not so sure. Might be worth checking the Chief Executives personal number, six,six....

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 22 2012, 12:14 PM

I don't understand a word of your post.

Posted by: massifheed Oct 22 2012, 12:18 PM

Nor me.

Posted by: NORTHENDER Oct 22 2012, 12:32 PM

Any relation to Prof Stanley Unwin?

Posted by: Penelope Oct 22 2012, 01:02 PM

"Doh"!

Posted by: On the edge Oct 22 2012, 01:33 PM

But of course, the tidy administrative mind never does - 'till its too late.

I think the phrase 'if you aren't doing anything wrong, you shouldn't be worried' fits well alongside 'I'm just following orders' and 'its more than my jobs worth'. Brilliant - we've gone to the expense of taking primary school kids 'dabs' so they can't knock off a free dinner! Amazing.

If this system is really so cheap - why can't we use it to validate electors at Polling Stations? Would be a far better trial and potentially do away with a lot of tellers.



Note - if you want an explanation on the number, you'll need to read the last book in the Bible. Read it all and I hope you'll see the explanation.

Posted by: Nothing Much Oct 22 2012, 01:41 PM

I understood it perfectly. which is why I have lost my Nectar card.
ce

Posted by: blackdog Oct 22 2012, 03:42 PM

Fingerprints are very cheap to read these days - £20 or so for a reader. Every homeowner could have one to check if the chap wanting access to read the meter is who he says he is. Doorstep cons could be eradicated. Elections could be run more cheaply and more effectively. Credit card transactions could be verified far more securely. Etc.

But there is huge resistance to the collection and use of fingerprint data - and so far no one has come up with any solid reason for this resistance apart for the fear of being identified as a criminal.

Posted by: JeffG Oct 22 2012, 06:38 PM

There is also pointless opposition to ID cards. Much more convenient to show at the sorting office to pick up a package than your passport.

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 22 2012, 06:47 PM

Simple - if you carry a mobile phone.......

Posted by: On the edge Oct 22 2012, 07:10 PM

Given the trust we all have in our politicians and administrators and taking into account what history has taught us about 'identifying' people I wonder why?

Posted by: user23 Oct 22 2012, 07:15 PM

I wonder if those scaremongering about the use of fingerprints own a mobile phone, regularly use a bank card, phone, use a computer with a fixed IP address and so on?

If they do there's far more chance of their actions being recorded.

Posted by: Timbo Oct 22 2012, 07:27 PM

That was a genuine laugh out loud post.
You know they do the little key-ring nectar thingies now?!

Posted by: On the edge Oct 22 2012, 08:20 PM

That's quite right. Indeed its rather more than chance. I'm quite happy being a prole, hope the rest of you are too.

Posted by: On the edge Oct 22 2012, 08:22 PM

I didn't realise these things were so cheap. Presumably our LEA and Council Offices use the system for entrance door access control. Must go down and see it in action.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 23 2012, 09:55 AM

The insinuation was thet a 5 year old could be tracked simply because they provided a fingerprint to get a free school meal or a library book.

Yes, if you have a mobile phone you can be followed with relative ease.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 23 2012, 10:00 AM

The readers are very cheap. What isn't is the collection & dissemination of the data.

So in the case of the school, you collect the fingerprints of the kids & every lunch time they stick a finger on the reader. Green light = free lunch. The data isn't sent to a central data base & the data is re-collected every term.

Posted by: On the edge Oct 23 2012, 10:40 AM

That's right - the secret is in the data. Databases can and are linked.

Also right - today the very simple system the school uses is quite safe, today being the operative word.

Glad to hear that today the data isn't sent to a central database and recollected every term. Seem to recall that's how things worked with the Police - but we then found out they didn't. So then, if even our Police service had trouble understanding what 'delete' actually meant - what chance Mrs Miggins in the School canteen!

Then, tomorrow, there is the slick salesman. Do you really need all these individual servers, cloud computing offers you the opportunity to get the physical kit out of schools, saves shed loads of money.

Little acorns!

Posted by: blackdog Oct 23 2012, 10:43 AM

I can't really see the point of a new ID card - even less if there is legislation to require everyone to carry it at all times.

I already have a card that pretty much everyone accepts (my driving licence) until I get to border control, when a passport is handy (if cumbersome) - replacing them with a card would be an improvement.

My wallet is stuffed with cards - all doing the same thing, identifying me to someone. Replacing them all with my fingerprint would be a huge improvement. The only advantage I can see for an ID card is if every organisation could use it for ID checks - reducing the cards I need to carry to one - but I'm sure that such a use would be impossible to implement in the current climate of paranoia about the evils of government and big business.

Fingerprint databases already exist, I know mine will be on some computer in the US - as they check them every time I go through immigration. I suspect they will soon exist in all border control systems - will this stop anyone travelling abroad?

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 23 2012, 10:46 AM

and what are 'they' going to do with the data thus collected?

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 23 2012, 10:54 AM

.

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 23 2012, 05:44 PM

Which is why the construct of the DPA compliance is important, and parents should be asking what that authority permits.

Posted by: On the edge Oct 23 2012, 06:45 PM

What do they ever do? Have you no recollection or imagination?

Posted by: On the edge Oct 23 2012, 07:05 PM

How soon we forget!

I suspect you've lead an absolutely blameless life - which must be applauded. You've mentioned the States. Let us suppose we are now in your data rich society and all has been collected. That youthful fling with the CP means you weren't welcome Stateside.

Times change and fashions come and go. Homosexuality used to be illegal when I was a lad - but the data would have been collected. Even today we are not as free and tolerant as we imagine. Whenever the travelling community come by - hear the uproar!

Our local politicians aren't immune - wouldn't take much of a push to make Gypsies pariahs would it. Imagine, in your data rich society, how easy it would be to identify them. Was your grandmother a Gypsy? Oh yes, putting objections down to paranoia and the evils of totalitarian government might seem sensible but I'll stay very uncomfortable thanks.

Just one more - on an earlier thread in the last few days, someone suggested that the electorate were generally uneducated. A view that carries some weight with various individuals. Keeping all that data could mean restricting the ballot to the suitably qualified - very easily. Of course, our politicians and administrators sign protocols and treat everyone fairly so this can't and wouldn't happen.

Come the day.

Posted by: blackdog Oct 24 2012, 06:46 AM

I'm not talking about a data rich society, I'm talking about a fingerprint database - not a record of my political leanings, race, creed, age, address, etc, etc

My youthful fling with the CP would have made me unwelcome in the US whether they had my fingerprints or not. Sure the ready availability of my fingerprints would make it much, much more difficult for me to pass myself off as someone else at immigration - but I hope I would not be daft enough (or desperate enough) to try to go somewhere where my very presence would be a crime.

We carry umpteen forms of identification, we are the most filmed nation on the planet, we happily wonder around carrying mobile phones that track our every move, we use credit cards, loyalty cards, etc, that track not only our movements but also our spending patterns. But we cannot bring ourselves to allow banks, for instance, to check, using our fingerprints, that we are indeed the person whose account we are drawing cash from - instead we rely on 4 digit pin numbers.

Posted by: On the edge Oct 24 2012, 07:48 AM

Yes and that makes me wish I was your IS salesman....

Fingerprint must relate to individual who may have attributes and is linked to organisation and to account which is all you need to run the base system. Once you have this, we can very easily add couple more elements and you've automated the register very cheaply and quickly. Over time, you'll probably want to keep this data on the Council's IT cloud - so much cheaper and means you don't have to worry when your PC breaks down. Oh yes, once its there, the LEA need not keep bothering you for stats - they'll be able to get the info they need without overloading your administrator.....

So much cheaper, so much more efficient and so much safer. We can make sure no one else has access to this information, not that anyone would find it useful, but rest assured, the Council staff have an unblemished record in keeping it safe and secure, they sign protocols you know.

I can say all that without a blush......

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 24 2012, 09:08 AM

No, in this case it relates to the individual being allowed to have a free meal or not. If you only collect two bits of data ( fingerprint & free meal = yes ) then that is all the data will tell you. No-one is suggesting the finger print is coupled to a complete socio-psychological breakdown of the child.

Posted by: On the edge Oct 24 2012, 11:55 AM

Missing word = yet.

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 24 2012, 12:03 PM

There must be a database that reconciles fingerprints to a name, and when the name is common, to some other form of differentiation. Then there's trust. Many people simply don't trust authorities with electronic data.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 24 2012, 01:10 PM

you don't need a name. just the finger print = free meal. ( finger prints are used cos there unique, so the common name is irrelevant.

a bit like those visitor ID cards - you look in to the camera & it prints out a badge with your picture on it & 'Visitor'

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 24 2012, 01:25 PM

So how is it determined who has their fingerprint withdrawn from free meal list because of a change in circumstances? There has to be a database with a reconcilable list of people who have free meals or not and their finger print.

Posted by: blackdog Oct 24 2012, 03:45 PM

So what? Make the fingerprint database public - it would be much more useful that way.

Still I suppose you don't carry a phone and go out in disguise everyday in case you are recognised on CCTV. These are far more intrusive uses of technology, and yet are accepted and even encouraged - how many people complain about too much CCTV coverage?

Posted by: On the edge Oct 24 2012, 07:31 PM

I do and I'm not a lone voice!

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 25 2012, 12:15 PM

yes but the two don't need to be 'connected'. The list of entitled children could be just that - a paper list.

A child is no longer entitled to a free meal, so they are manually deleted from the fingerpring machine.

Posted by: JeffG Oct 25 2012, 02:04 PM

Ah - not having had one of those new-fangled photo licenses for very long, I never think of using that as ID. (In fact it sits in a drawer at home, rather than use up a slot in my card wallet.)

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 25 2012, 03:56 PM

But which fingerprint is whose?

Posted by: HeatherW Oct 25 2012, 04:08 PM

I heard about school children being finger printed and I think this is a disgrace. This started with the Labour party and Blair wanting a more observant and intrusive society. Before you know it we will all be marked.

Posted by: Bartholomew Oct 25 2012, 05:08 PM

You're right. They don't need to be connected but its possible (in my view likely) that they could be. We are in the data age where knowledge is a commodity and data such as this is valuable.

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 25 2012, 05:11 PM

I reckon if we were all fitted with an electronic 'chip' at birth there could be monitoring of all our actions. People on JSA could be 'made' to turn up for interviews and an electric shock generated if they give the wrong answers?
No-one would ever go missing, people could be placed at the scene of a crime, the chip could be connected up to the brain cortex so the wearer died if it was removed......... Partners could check where their other half was, and who with... No argument about who was driving a car when caught speeding.

I must go and write to my MP

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 25 2012, 05:11 PM

you don't need to know that. you make it so that only those kids getting a meal give a print. kids not entitled still put a finger on the machine, but the machine gives a nil response. when the child is no longer entitled they put their finger on the machine, thus identifying them & you then delete them. You don't need to know their name.

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 25 2012, 06:23 PM

I'm talking about the backend, not the front end.

Posted by: x2lls Oct 25 2012, 07:27 PM

Quite!!

Some people here just don't get it. They are called sheeple.

Posted by: JeffG Oct 25 2012, 09:34 PM

Some other people here seem to be paranoid.

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 25 2012, 09:41 PM

Others would call it showing concern.

Posted by: On the edge Oct 25 2012, 09:46 PM

Its a comfort thing - at least I know others are thinking of me!

Posted by: x2lls Oct 25 2012, 10:10 PM

It's called learning from history and being realistic.
There will always be those that wish to have full control over others, just look at the Syrian government, Hitler, etc etc etc.


Still, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to be concerned about.

Electronic data can be manipulated, I know, I am in a position to do so, as a database administrator. I could so easily amend records to point to the wrong individual, therefore ruining someone's life. All I have to do is change the data and keep my eye on it until backup retention periods are reached. It may not be infalible, but it would sure make some serious trouble for someone.


Credit ratings, criminal history, sexual preferences, medical records can all be changed by unscrupulous members of authorites. Just look what the police did re Hillsborough for example.
The problem is that many think if it's on a pooter, it must be true. That is just not the case.

Posted by: Rowley Birkin Oct 26 2012, 07:34 AM

its a free school meal. how will it ruin someones life and what's hitler got to do with it?

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 26 2012, 09:46 AM

That is just it; we all do.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 26 2012, 09:49 AM

No, data can be manipulated. Analogue or digital.

I don't remember Hilter having any computers.

Posted by: x2lls Oct 26 2012, 09:58 AM

In the OP, yes, but that issue is just one facet of the wider picture.

Hitler, was just one example of where things can go if we allow the unscrupulous to gain power. I made no direct connection with school meals, it was enforce my point about where things can go.

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 26 2012, 11:30 AM

One is more vulnerable to fire, the other is more vulnerable to remote hacking. When it was all paper, the cost to glean information was high; digital now means it is cheap and quick.

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 26 2012, 11:32 AM

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 26 2012, 11:34 AM

very true.


and GIGO applied then, as now.

Posted by: Rowley Birkin Oct 26 2012, 11:55 AM

it will probably go to the canteen cos thats where the free school meals are.

cant believe how hysterical people are getting about this

Posted by: On the edge Oct 26 2012, 01:26 PM

Umm thats what was said about Hitler.

Ironically, the superb German administrative methods and records were called 'computing' in the 1930s. So they did have one - what we see as a computer is simply a box of electronics - nothing more nothing less.

They key is the data and data is only ever of any value when connected and becomes information.

Read 1984 - still a good story, might go someway to explain.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 26 2012, 02:17 PM

In that case the real problem is not taking a 5year olds dabs, but keeping records of their academic progress.


Better stop kids doing exams & you certainly don't want to keep a record of any results.

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 26 2012, 03:05 PM

Who's hysterical? We're having a debate.

Posted by: x2lls Oct 26 2012, 03:13 PM

I really don't understand your comment.

Academic progress has nothing to do with free school meals.

Posted by: Rowley Birkin Oct 26 2012, 04:13 PM

crazy. i cant believe people think storing and displaying pictures of kids is better than using their fingerprints.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 26 2012, 04:51 PM

Err, this thread is about big brother & the keeping of data on individuals isn't it?

Or is the underlying message in 1984 about crap catering?

Posted by: Andy Capp Oct 26 2012, 04:53 PM

Who said they do? You seem to know a bit about this, so rather than ranting, how about calming down and make a rational argument?

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 26 2012, 05:29 PM

Well, there is mention of the smell of overcooked cabbage........

Posted by: On the edge Oct 26 2012, 08:15 PM

If the use of fingerprints is such a foolproof and cheap means of identification isn't it rather surprising that the idea hasn't been adopted for credit cards yet? Or as door checks on LEA offices? Odd that its just to control a small amount of dinner money and primary school children. How much is at risk here? £5 a day if that?

So then, clever salesman? Gullible Headteacher? ......or lets just see what reaction we get! Certainly isn't down to the business case.

Posted by: user23 Oct 26 2012, 08:25 PM

I wonder how much re-issuing lost ID cards costs?

Surely the fingerprint option is cheaper?

Posted by: Spider Oct 26 2012, 09:03 PM

I personally think we are over watched in this country. Aren't we supposed to be the most observed country with things like CCTV and such? I also thought that once the Tories and and Lib Dems got in they would reverse a lot of it?

Posted by: On the edge Oct 26 2012, 09:37 PM

In the case of the LibDems suspect the old Liberals and their principles are no more. Even when they were in office locally, the 'party of open government' kept secrets and used the same old clichés such as 'commercial confidentiality'etc. Regrettably, the rise of managerialisim means that politicians are managed by the executive - whatever they may claim. Expert advice is always impartial if you just do what the expert says!

Posted by: Cognosco Oct 27 2012, 01:14 PM

That is not the case for Newbury as they had already ensured our CCTV was useless; they upgraded it!

Chocolate fireguard was mentioned I believe when asked how much improvement there was over the old system?

Posted by: On the edge Oct 29 2012, 03:58 PM

Looks as if the clever people in charge of our schools concentrated on delivery rather than fancy IT systems. Latest reports suggest that the service provider wasn't even able to deliver food on time. That self same article in NWN went on to say:-

“Where we introduced wireless meal ordering from the class rooms, we experienced some connectivity problems, but these have been resolved. For the small number of schools still experiencing slow connectivity, we are investigating booster hubs and hard wired connections.


Data does seem to be really safe secure and isolated doesn't it! What a shambles.


http://http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/2012/school-meals-caterer-faces-lesson-in-delivery

Posted by: NWNREADER Oct 29 2012, 08:32 PM

Is the system in the secondary schools? Not being ageist, but if it is, and there is wireless connectivity, how long before the orders all get changed? I hope they have a very strong firewall between the personal data and the parts accessible vie the WiFi link.........

DATA PROTECTION ACT – YOUR RIGHTS AND HOW WE PROTECT THEM
When it comes to the information we hold about you, your rights are set out clearly in the law. The Data Protection Act 1998 also says that people who record and use personal data must be open about how it is used, and that they must obey the following eight Data Protection Principles:
 Process it fairly and lawfully.
 Process it for specific purposes and not in any manner incompatible with those purposes.
 Only process information that is adequate, relevant and not excessive.
 Ensure that the information is accurate and up to date.
 Ensure that the information is not kept longer than is necessary.
 Ensure that the information is treated in accordance with your rights.
 Take care of your personal information.
 Ensure that your personal information is not transferred outside the European Economic Area unless there are
suitable safeguards in the countries to which it needs to be sent.
The law exempts us from these principles if obeying the principles would damage the fight against crime or be against the national interest in some way.
If you want to know more about the Data Protection Act 1998, you can visit their website at: www.ico.gov.uk

Posted by: Adrian Hollister Nov 8 2012, 07:20 AM

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/08/national_pupil_database_regulation_overhaul_in_private_sector_data_grab/

Tories and Fib Dems bow sell your kids data.

Posted by: NWNREADER Nov 8 2012, 08:44 AM

They bow?????

The NPD was always intended to be a database of achievements rather than personal information. If the purpose the data is kept/used for changes then the Commissioner would have to approve - always assuming we didn't all miss the ultimate purpose was included in the original application....... I wonder if the Commissioner has ever refused a permission to any Government Dept, or even a Local Authority?

Also interesting that a so called 'rights' website 'assumes' we don't mind their cookies being placed on our computers, but gives no easy option to decline them......

Posted by: dannyboy Nov 8 2012, 09:00 AM

Ludite!!

Posted by: Adrian Hollister Nov 8 2012, 09:19 AM

typo

Posted by: blackdog Nov 8 2012, 09:54 AM

I am also amazed that fingerprints aren't used for credit cards. The sooner they are the better - it could stop a huge amount for fraud instantly. I still find it difficult to understand how they think a 4 digit PIN is adequate.

Posted by: dannyboy Nov 8 2012, 09:59 AM

possibly because criminals would start chopping of fingers along with stealing credit cards......

Posted by: motormad Nov 8 2012, 10:53 AM

Yeah that's true but when I was a lad (well okay 6 years ago) at Kennet, when I was in Year 7 it was the first year that the swipe-dinner cards came into play. Quickly enough people figured out how to trick the machines into giving you free money, or which machine would count 1 £1 coin as £2.. etc.
People would steal cards for the sake of £2 or £3. Sometimes it was "because they could" to show off to their mates.

To kids £2 or £3 and a burger at lunch is to us adults what £10k is.

Posted by: On the edge Nov 8 2012, 12:58 PM

Quite so! Rather interesting then that we should experiment on school children, wonder why?

Posted by: On the edge Nov 8 2012, 01:00 PM

And taking motofrmad's comments into account; what makes you think kids won't try...!

Posted by: dannyboy Nov 8 2012, 01:07 PM

Just imaging having bunches of fingers & forgetting which finger went with which card.....

Posted by: On the edge Nov 8 2012, 01:08 PM

Posted by: motormad Nov 8 2012, 02:20 PM

Unfortunately if you've ever seen a finger print reader they are pretty large and wouldn't fit onto a little thin credit card.
Pin is used because it's quick and simple. And frankly it's perfectly secure - so long as the idiot whom the card belongs to doesn't use a common number (eg 1234) or one easily guessable if you know the password (eg birthday... 120982) - 12th December 82.

Posted by: massifheed Nov 8 2012, 02:44 PM

It really isn't.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_card_fraud#Skimming

Posted by: motormad Nov 8 2012, 05:27 PM

True that -
However there is still an element of protection.

Cover your pin and you're pretty much safe.
Unless you use Shell at Tot Hill Services.

Posted by: On the edge Nov 8 2012, 05:52 PM

...and all this to stop some kid pinching a school dinner! From what I hear about the menus - much ends up in what used to be called the pig bin, waste. Fancy Pizza and mashed suede? Or how about your mashed spud with no butter / milk? Sounds as good as they ever were and all in the interests of a 'balanced' diet!

Put it out to real private contractors and stop the LEA meddling - save us all!

Posted by: dannyboy Nov 9 2012, 10:28 AM

Put it out to real private contractors and stop the LEA meddling
You mean McDonald's?

Posted by: On the edge Nov 9 2012, 12:51 PM

Why not? McDonalds actually run an exemplary business and its cheap. The food they sell is popular and is appropriate for youngsters who are active and boisterous. I've always found it ironic that LEAs and their 'educational experts' are obsessive about feeding standards yet aren't ovefr concerned about delivering a first class education. Public Schools are the exact opposite.

Posted by: dannyboy Nov 9 2012, 01:02 PM

Not at mine old boy....

oh, and letting kids eat a Big Mac & fries every day is appropriate for youngsters .........you jest!

Posted by: Andy Capp Nov 9 2012, 01:13 PM

In the 70s, school meals were cooked on site and were of a good standard with fresh ingredients. We were also relatively poorer then. What has gone wrong? I suppose we didn't have so many supermarkets, games machines, computers, mobile phones, private houses, foreign holidays and designer clothes to afford back then.

Posted by: dannyboy Nov 9 2012, 01:18 PM

my first school instilled in me a love of pudding.

the Queen of Puddings that the burley dinner ladies made was superb. They all looked like Ruth Mott.....

Posted by: motormad Nov 9 2012, 02:39 PM

Wow, you really are old.
Times have changed. Schools do not have enough money to have freshly prepared bolloxnase every day.
I remember in Year 7 and 8 there was a hot canteen and you'd pick what you want. There were everything from Burger, chips and nuggets, to salads, baguettes and fruit.
However they decided to remove our decision as kids in Year 9. Unless you liked Pasta bag or sick in a cup, there was never anything of interest.
Needless to say the Co-Op got my lunch money each day.

Posted by: dannyboy Nov 9 2012, 02:42 PM

children often do not do what is in their own interest. Best to take the decision away from them.

At my school there was a choice at lunch time - what was on the menu or starve. The dinners were hot, varied & tasty.

Posted by: Penelope Nov 9 2012, 02:45 PM

And generally healthy as well.

Posted by: Andy Capp Nov 9 2012, 04:01 PM

Compared to a kid like you; yes.


They say you are what you eat, so all that comes as no surprise, I'm well aware what 'the kids of today' eat. You do, however reinforce my point: we had less money back then, it seems, but were better fed.

Posted by: On the edge Nov 9 2012, 04:09 PM

...and I can go even further back! Meals were cooked by people who knew what they were doing, little direction from the centre. Also, discipline was rather more robust; which helped considerably.

I was only half joking suggesting McDonalds might make a better fist of it. The biggest issue as I see it, is the dead hand of the LEA. Why can't schools simply employ 'good plain cooks' and let them get on with it? It would take a brave parent to take on a Ruth Mott!

Posted by: motormad Nov 9 2012, 04:26 PM

Fair enough.



Next you'll be having Gillian Mckeith..
"Well Andeh, I've been goin thru yer poo...."

The thing is while you may have had less money then (that's debatable) - things COST less. It certainly wasn't £1.20 for a bottle of Cola. :s


I can see where this thread is headed - Newburys middle aged going on about how it was better back in their day. I bet your exams were harder too..... yawn

Posted by: Penelope Nov 9 2012, 04:41 PM

Oooh, exams were harder, kids were better behaved, food was fresher, summers were hotter, coppers were more helpful and you could have a night out for ten bob and still have change in your purse when you woke up the next day. Wonderful times!

Posted by: dannyboy Nov 9 2012, 04:57 PM

Some things were cheaper, but wages were less, so you can't do a direct comparison between the price of a Coke in 1975 & 2005, without knowing what is actually is you want to compare ( commodity prices, income, realative wealth etc etc ).

For instance, a Matchbox car in the late 70s was £0.44. Yet today the 'equivalent' in Tesco etc is only just over £1.00. Is it fair to say that toy cars have only gone up by about £0.80?

Posted by: Andy Capp Nov 9 2012, 05:02 PM

It is a fact school meals were enjoyed by more people and were better quality than the stuff schools serve up today. My question was to wonder why.

I'm am not, however, interested in the type of "wow aren't you old; leave us kids alone" immature naive baloney you tend to bring to debates. If that is all you can do, would you do us all a favour and get in your precious little car and do one.

Posted by: dannyboy Nov 9 2012, 05:04 PM

Then you'd have to actually employ them, with all that entails - pay wages, contribute to pensions, holiday pay, sick pay, training etc etc.

Far better to sack all the cooks & get in some 'outside contractors' who employ servers who need 20mins training on how to operate a microwave & brat pan.

It is the same with the school caretaker, who in the good old days would be on site & ready to repair / do small maintenance jobs. Now it means calling in the FM firm & paying through the nose to have some bloke drive 50 miles to change a light bulb. But at least you have saved the £25k the caretaker / janitor was costing.

Posted by: motormad Nov 9 2012, 05:17 PM

Touchy, Andy. Bang your head on the bog roll holder or something?
For one I very much enjoyed my burger and chip filled lunches.
If you (or some others) disagree then that's fine. But my point is the choice which was there was taken away from us. And while a lot of adults think they know what's best, the fact is they don't actually know much more than the kids they are controlling.

Posted by: motormad Nov 9 2012, 05:18 PM

No, that's fair enough.

But I guess if we compare the prices of staple foods, bread, cheese, milk, basically the things that would go into these "delicious and wholesome" meals..
Eg Milk is ridiculous compared to 10 years ago. :S

Posted by: Andy Capp Nov 9 2012, 05:41 PM

As a child, so would have I, and on occasion that is what we had too.


That has nothing to do with it. Nutritional guidance is the same now as it was years ago. My point is still, why can we not feed our children properly, and why do parents, as a whole, apparently not care. We used to be able to afford to have cooks on site, but now we don't.

Posted by: dannyboy Nov 11 2012, 11:48 AM

Eg Milk is ridiculous compared to 10 years ago. :S

Do you mean that the cost of milk today is ridiculous compared to 10 years ago? Higher, or Lpwer?