Hello,
At 12:26 05-06-2015, Dhiruj Rambaran wrote:
>So let's look at our lives as it is. If you're
>stopped for a crime and you're innocent, chances
>are technology would have saved you rather than
>having human error/greed/corruption, condemn
>you. If you're ill, chances are you'll die from
>human error than being tracked by technology. If
>you're at school, chances are technology will
>turn you into a semi-genius rather than human
>teachers, with degrees acquired by copying
>fellow students, thus making your children even more stupid in the long run.
>
>All our basic needs, education, legal, health,
>jobs, etc, will all benefit from Data
>acquisition, starting from our personal data.
The following is from a report by Sachooda Ragoonaden published in 2013:
"- Meteorological services
One trained person sent for training but his
skills are not sufficient to set
up or operate a meteorological GIS
- Ministry of Environment and NDU
Two members of staff followed short courses
in Australia and Nairobi. Their
skills are not adequate to implement a GIS project."
"The competence of the local scientists is
not increasing at the rate of the
technology transfer."
"In spite of much effort to promote training in GIS, there is currently a
shortage of adequately trained people in the country. Most of the GIS
projects are implemented mainly by foreign consultants. After their
departure, projects are left at a standstill and incomplete."
Is it possible to derive the benefits in
education, legal, health if there aren't
adequately trained people to do the work? How
will the technology be managed if the competence
of local scientists is not increasing at the rate of the technology transfer?
>And another thing. We have no problem revealing
>our deepest secrets to Zuckerbergs' "Graph API"
>(re: Facebook), mapping the whole of humanity,
>segmenting all personal data acquired for
>systematic target marketing, influencing our
>behaviour (as zuckerberg once tried to do as
>part of a secret experiment) etc. We have no
>problem giving banks all our personal details,
>or hospitals all our medical information. Yet
>all this information is kept in paper files or easily accessible systems.
>
>My point, at the end of this is, are we giving
>too much importance to the, so-called, "privacy"
>we THINK we currently "enjoy"? ... or has our
>privacy already been compromised 20 years ago?
I'll comment on the point in the last paragraph.
Am I giving too much importance to "privacy"? I
discuss about it as it is something which I
consider when I am setting up a (technical)
system. I have to answer questions about the
privacy impact of that system. There is also a
law in Mauritius about Data Protection. I would not ignore it.
There is an article about security and privacy in
the local press [1] which has the following:
"Me Yousuf Azaree souligne que la loi n’empêche pas l’employeur de prélever
les empreintes digitales de ses salariés."
"Aucune loi mauricienne ne fait mention d’une quelconque obligation de
l’employé de fournir ses empreintes digitales à son employeur."
The following may be questions which some people
face in their everyday life in Mauritius: What
should the employee do? Is this a privacy
question or some other question? Should the
employee be able to decide about that?
Was privacy in Mauritius compromised 20 years
ago? In 1995, mobile penetration was
1.05%. Technology which has an impact on privacy
or security was not widely deployed in Mauritius.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
1.
http://www.defimedia.info/defi-quotidien/dq-xplik-cas/item/74059-controle-biometrique-empreintes-digitales-faut-il-les-prelever-sur-le-lieu-de-travail.html
Received on Sat Jun 06 2015 - 04:01:36 PST