WRITTEN ON May 26th, 2005 BY William Heath AND STORED IN Uncategorized
Still on the matter of the biometrics trial the BBC says
Minister Tony McNulty denied the tests showed the technology discriminated against certain groups. (((Nothing suggests discriminatory intent, but the results clearly differentiate between black and white, and between able-bodied and diabled, and between young and old))) He stressed the trials were designed to discover how people found the scanning process, not test the technology. (((But this tested volunteers. The apathetic majority may differ. Hardcore objectors definitely will. And when do we test the technology?))) “These Orwellian pictures that are drawn up by some people miss the point entirely. (((To dismiss a serioulsy held concern is not to address it.))) and “The technology is moving in the right direction.”
It is of course possible that, like the Incredible Hulk, he’s being badly or partially advised (see below). The Guardian says
The Home Office minister Tony McNulty said the failure rates were partly the reason the decision had been taken to incorporate all three forms of biometric on the identity card/passport. “Those who know far better than I say things are going in the right direction,” he said.
House rules for Ideal Government draw on a different source of Advices: “avoid provocative language. Do not allow the strength of your convictions to betray you into making statements or allegations that are unfair or untrue. Think it possible you may be mistaken.”
Arnie’s Adwizes: In Pumping Iron the now Governor of California knows he will beat Lou Ferrigno to the Mr Universe title. How can Arnie be so sure? “He comes to me for adwizes. So it’s not that hard for me to give him the wrong adwizes.”
2 Responses to “Good Advices, bad adwizes, and Tony McNulty”
“Those who know far better than I say things are going in the right direction,” he said.
Tony McNulty was also quoted saying something similar on the PM show on Radio 4 the other day. They then did an interview with a biometrics experts who has been advising the Home Affairs Select Committee. The quote I found most interesting was:
To be honest, I think that there’s a possibility that eventually we will conclude that [biometric technology] isn’t good enough, or the current systems we’re using are not good enough for a large scale public domain application such as an ID card.
I don’t think that the interview is available on the BBC website any more, but I transcribed it on the day, and posted it here:
http://www.discorice.org/weblog/2005/05/25/well-that-didnt-take-very-long/
(Apologies for the self-link, and indeed for the state of the site at the other end.)
I think the Home Office position is interesting, and slightly confuses two points.
1 – The whole point of biometrics is that it is discriminatory… in the sense that it is intended to “discriminate” between one individual and another. The *technology* is discriminatory, unambiguously but with no moral dimension.
2 – However, the other point of course is that the technology could enable discriminatory behaviour… and that’s what is to be identified and guarded against. So, for instance, if a foreseeable consequence of adopting the technology is that n percent of disabled citizens are unable to register using any of the supported biometric methods, and that in turn results in a difference between their ability to access public services and the ability of other citizens to do the same – *that’s* discriminatory.