An article regarding concerns that Chinese owned Alinta Energy may be breaching customers privacy.
And trying to bankrupt a customer over a missed payment. At least the Federal Court gave them a smack around their ears.
What a disgusting bunch of grubs.
Alinta to be investigated by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, which regulates the Australian Privacy Act.
With all the kerfuffle about companies being hacked and sending information hither and yon it seems our government agencies are at the forefront of loose security. Will the Minister accept responsibility for setting the tone, KPIâs, and adequate funding? Dreaming!
Something to worry residents of New South Wales.
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/pipermail/link/2020-March/106488.html
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/pipermail/link/2020-March/106489.html
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/pipermail/link/2020-March/106492.html
Clearview AI has been mentioned previously here and here. The issue is not just the reliability of facial recognition AI. Clearview is sourcing images from irregular sources.
You can, if you wish, use Opal anonymously, I believe. You would still be subject to substantial video surveillance as you use the transport network but most likely there would be very limited personal information associated with the Opal card and hence being leaked overseas to random companies involved in operating Opal.
Your quote talks about
name & address, email address & 'phone numbers, and my age
but none of that need be available. Just the dates/times/locations/amounts of all cash top-ups and of all trip starts and ends - which admittedly would end being a lot of information.
To further protect your privacy, you should a) wear a disguise at all times when using the transport network and b) have a collection of 30 anonymous Opal cards, choosing a card at random for each trip. 
The Government wants to investigate introducing an age verification process to be able to watch porn.
Looks like Stephen Conroyâs idiocy all over again.
Apparently Insane Clown Posse makeup has proven the best means of confusing facial recognition systems.
Yes.
The face verification service, which is not yet operational, will check facial images against official identity documents, such as a driverâs licence.
I am confused as to how this is going to work if your computer has no webcam or other camera.
Apart from the usual fuddy-duddy busy-bodies looking to inveigle themselves into your bedroom, the real agenda here is to create a national identity database and foist in-home surveillance on you. We are truly close to 1984.
while Juggalo face paint may well fool automated FR, it makes the wearer far more recognizable to just about anyone else â say, humans
That disadvantage doesnât apply if enough people do it.
Face paint seems like a hassle. Would a mask looking like ICP face paint do the trick? Maybe an Anonymous mask would do the trick?
Maybe some people will do the ICP face paint as a tattoo (which would mean that it is on the drivers licence).
Nice tie in between the two news items.
There is no absence of stupid in our political parties. It seems when one wins government the worst of them rise to the top.
Unsuspectingly or not, thatâs how many back to base home security services function. The intrusion detection turns on the camera. The back to base staff can view what is happening. A quick call to the owner and you can act as needed.
The functionality of any such system is unable to be verified readily, so who knows what else is possible. Similar to IOT camera or voice enabled devices and home webcams.
Are any of these systems legally secure or protected from government access, police actions, or unregistered foreign actors?
Who cares about legally? I think the important question is whether they are actually secure from government, police and âsecurityâ forces and foreign actors - and my bet is that the answer is no in pretty much every case.
Winston, only if the cameras are behind the bedroom mirror.
Clothing that confuses the system:
or something a bit more high-tech:
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/clothes-accessories-that-outsmart-facial-recognition-tech-2019-10
Unless you can stop Big Brother from controlling it yes.
A couple of commercial hazards:
https://www.scribd.com/article/449155682/The-Unbearable-Convenience-Of-Google-And-Facebook
If this is not frightening of the arrogance of attitude of this government, nothing would be. Worth reading to understand the innocent professor was essentially made a scapegoat and the government concluded âno worriesâ about its own malfeasance.
Gosh! Where else have we seen attempts to shoot the messenger used to distract from the content of the messengerâs revelation?
It isnât as if this statistical problem is anything new. The ABS does not make individual records available for this reason, also they are careful of any small aggregate such as collectorâs district for the same reason, with a little detective work you might identify individuals despite the lack of names and addresses.
Whoever authorised the release of the dataset should be prosecuted but it will never happen.
In fact the ABS deliberately inserts some inaccuracies in some reports in order to ensure individuals cannot be identified.
Unfortunately, you need decent statisticians who know exactly what theyâre doing to release large amounts of anonymised data that cannot be de-anonymised. One has to wonder, given government desire to make lots of data available to the public, whether all of this data receives the necessary scrutiny prior to publication.
One expects, given her experience, that the professor will now be offered a position in a prestigious overseas university that recognises the need for people to hold data publishers accountable.
