Identity theft is a growing concern to our financial security. Mailbox theft seems a common way thieves manage to obtain the sort of information that allows them to assume our identity and rack up bills and purchases in our name. Victims often find that their financial standing is permanently discredited if they become a victim.
A long time ago it was suggested that we need what amounted to an internal passport to counter this threat. It was called " the Australia card " and it would have a photograph of the holder to certify identity whenever that was required. The idea was howled down politically as an " invasion of privacy " and was quietly dropped.
Since then the advances of computer technology have made rapid progress. It is now possible to scan a crowd and recognise an individual face amongst the multitude. Every day we are photographed a vast number of times as we pass the array of cctv cameras that screen city streets and transport terminals. Law enforcement will find this a useful tool when looking for a person of interest.
It is suggested that this technology would be very useful if shared between all levels of government, including local government to put a face to a name and end identity theft. Obviously, the collection of individual photographs would be seen by some as an invasion of privacy, but for most of us those photographs are already held in government archives by way of driving licenses and passports. It has become increasingly necessary to surrender our image to obtain many of lifes necessities and that image is already held by a government department.
In the course of each year ever person on several occasions are asked to provide their ID. Perhaps picking up a parcel from the local post office or seeking service from a bank. Without question we pull out our driving license because that is universally accepted because the photograph can be scrutinised and compared with the holder. Is the sharing of that image and information between government and local government departments too radical a change to be rejected on privacy grounds ?
Along with the development of artificial intelligence has come the power of the data collected on each person and the uses to which it can be put. Some theorists claim it is a form of mind control where fake news is inserted into public information arenas such as Facebook to influence voting intentions. In a close vote, this intervention could manage to swing the election outcome.
With our photograph in government hands we open the potential to where computer technology is leading us. There is no reason to think that face recognition can not in the future track each individual to know where they go and what they do. The data that could deliver on their lifestyle, habits and preferences would be commercially very valuable. We are fast reaching the stage when every moment in a public space is under some sort of scrutiny and the marvellous world of advancing technology has the ability to track our journeys.
When this proposal is debated in parliament the privacy issue will probably result in its rejection, but whether we like it or not, it will most likely surreptitiously become reality in the future. The number of photographs already in government hands means that at least a partial interchange of information between government departments is inevitable.
Perhaps privacy is a myth that belongs in a former century !
No comments:
Post a Comment