How does our government ensure that technology makes our lives better and not worse? (Privacy, data sales…)

Very briefly, the government often does not care.

Sie makes a good point with saying that the expertise is often lacking.That is true indeed. Just look at the countless politically appointed committees and committees that issue opinions on these matters, there is no programmer in it, or even someone with some experience in programming. You have to see it as a kind of Wadden association. Very nice to hear as a politician, but whether it really contributes to something, well often the answer is no.

ICT is a difficult understandable thing.The knowledge of ICT is very often unconscious and abstract and that makes it difficult to divisible with others. It’s kind of like vetting your shoes. You learn that as a small child by doing it yourself. So consider what level politicians are acting in these committees, and they are just putting out opinions.

Laws are generally a washing nose, or are just draconian and have a completely different purpose, such as repression of other nonpolitical tendencies.Remains equally out of sight whether that is extreme or not. In fact, many laws and regulations do not even fight for what it is intended to combat.

An additional problem is that there is also a lot of nepotism and corruption in the procurement of public projects.There is no doubt that the government also suffers from a ‘starving the Beast‘ syndrome and often want a dime on the first row.

That many of these projects fail also comes through a variety of other reasons.It is often not even clear which requirements a project will meet. How do you want to accomplish it?

That in itself makes it a little miracle that some projects succeed, despite problems that the software engineers have to deal with.

The question is also whether they can do anything about it by means of legislation and public projects.For example, laws are at national borders, the Internet is global. Politicians of any family seem to understand that.

If you want to do something about it.A good start starts with yourself.

You have little to expect from the government, they do not know, they can not, they do not want.

I doubt that the government has enough knowledgeable people to do what….. Many choose to work for big business, not for the government.

Not quite the same, but 1 in the 3 very large whole expensive government automation projects fail, this says something about the lack of expertise in this very broad field of digitisation/automation/dealing with big data.

Short answer:

  • Public debate on who should have access to what data.
  • Transparency regarding data usage.

If someone has consulted your data, you should be able to see the I.H.A. as a citizen

  • Anything harnessed should be able to: Register on BSN
  • Everything that does not have to be harnessed: give the citizen the choice between BSN or a private key, for example a pseudo-email address.
  • Never use name, date and address to identify a person (Tenare Hshe himself chooses to use that as own key)
  • Store data as centrally as possible, and consult online.
  • Never use paper for registrations

    Long answer:

    I have been involved in maintaining and managing various person registration systems in the Netherlands, Denmark, UK in New Zealand.Although I always had purely technical functions and therefore hardly any influence, I have expressed opinions about:)

    In Denmark, the person registration has long been In progress on most other countries.About everything, from your bank account to your dentist Dosier and your school grades, is harnessed to the social security number, and it has been around for almost half a century.

    This has ever been controversial.When I was a child, there were constantly heated discussions on TV about registry link, something I did not understand at the time.

    I do understand that central personal registration in the Netherlands and Germany is controversial. It has to do with World War II.However, I hope that we are now sufficiently accustomed to ICT to be able to think rationally about it.

    Centralen Personal registration is of course very useful.For example, when I was converted to the Netherlands, it turned out to be a peaceful legal jungle to legally adapt my gender in the Netherlands, because there are tich registers that need to know it all. So I’m moving to Denmark for a few moments. To the Personal registration office let my new sex and name know, and its then pass it on so that my next passport is automatically adjusted. Uni-Diplomas Customize? Just passing the uni-Ballie and applying for a new diploma, it takes two minutten, they print it on the spot, and you don’t even have to say that they have to change my name and gender because that happens automatically. Relocation, divorce etc is also easier with such a system.

    If you think that the Netherlands is a little Stone age in comparison, then you must try England.My partner accidentally got two voting billets at the municipal councils and two different municipalities. A six-digit number of Polish immigrants were plot zelling “disappeared”, according to the British nowhere more registered and thus probably gone back but the Polish government knows of nothing. Making statistics about health is impossible because hospitals hardly share data with each other. I was even ever involved in a project that was about statistic of the lung cancer patients within a hospital: proved impossible because we could not find out how much overlap there was between the patient files of three different departments.

    You might think that data-lekages and registry abuse would be a big problem in Denmarken, but that’s not so. The registry legislation is fairly liberal, but it is seriously maintained.The central registration also has the advantage that many data are not stored decentrally. Suppose you are mistakenly registered with some embarrassing medical problem, for example, gestal disorder, STD or addiction. If it is rectified, you naturally want the incorrect data to disappear from all registers. That’s tricky as Tich health insurers, the police, social service etc all have aspects of that record keeping track. Totally tricky if some use paper and some identify you on a surname with a spelling error etc.

    In VK and the Netherlands I am regularly gesschockt by the sloordige handling of personnal data.I once found a CD with the whole genom of a patient, just on a desk lying behind an open door, with the name of the patient on it. On a regular basis, English colleagues sent me spreadsheets with the name and the date of birth of patients. If I point out that that shouldn’t, say “yes but we don’t know how to remove a column in Excel” or “If we remove it we cannot identify the patient”.

    Do you remember?Earlier?

    Then my grandfather asked another license for the hood of a row of trees on the edge of his estate.This had to be at the province, because the row had grown in one hundred years half on provincial soil, of the provincial Road,. Or something.

    Two weeks later, he received a hand-tiated letter in which the decision was to extend the legal deadline to decide on it from 6 months to 12 months.

    Thanks to modern technology, automated processes, UZW.A decision on such an application, Anno 2019, will take only a few weeks.

    And this is not the only example.Thanks to modern technology and automation, the Netherlands is able to have extremely efficient public administration.

    Perhaps superfluous to mention that this has improved the lives of all of us.

    There is currently a legislative framework: the GDPR, but de facto it is not yet applied as it could be applied.

    I have written an idea about this: virtual IDENTITY & GDPR

    And 11 and 12 April I organize a Hackathon to take concrete steps here: Data Democracy Hackathon

    Our government is currently quite slow in this, but let us hope that they want to take this direction:…

    Our government doesn’t care for that.The privacy protection offered by the EU is a farce. The most private information such as religious family, political stance, sexual orientation is very easy to link. Forwarding information to the US makes sure that all warranties are gone and Zuckerberg has a grip through bulk data programmes.

    The government is lagging behind on innovation and technology.They can think of laws, but then evil has already happened. Of course, rules are needed, but let them be put in practice by experts instead of politicians.

    Why do you think it is the government’s task to make our lives better through technology?It is up to each individual person to work on his/her own well-being. Most people are not worthy of the Government doing anything for them. They do not contribute to the general well-being (e.g. civil servants, athletes, professional doppers, clerics,…) and therefore have no right to any assistance from the government.

    In This, the government has no interest in protecting our data, following your examples.

    Furthermore, we need to distinguish between technology and technique.Technology is by the suffix logos: the teachings of the technique. Realizing a better life through technology is done by teaching that doctrine and doing so by the government by funding education.

    Then, the people who control the technology use that knowledge to improve our lives.Examples are MRI scanners that can also be used to visualized diseases in soft body parts. Another example is the ease with which we can do all sorts of groceries online nowadays and we get notified when the delivery guy will come about.

    Unfortunately, the Government has only two tools to prevent technology from making our lives worse: regulations and inspectors.Since there are more technologists than inspectors, there is a great chance that such a technologist is doing something with technique that will make our lives worse. Sometimes not even intentionally, think of plastic or nuclear energy. Both are not developed with the goal of making the world worse.

    Leave a Reply