Sinster censorship caused by Part P

Just been reading a thread about the Which guide to DIY and it's unavailability, possibly due to the electrical information contained wihtin and Part P.
I have seen an online site stating that it had withdrawn some electrical projects (can't remember the name of the site) due to insurance reasons !?
Surely this is wrong. As I understand it, ordinary people can still do any sort of electrical work so long as they submit plans, get them approved and get it inspected.
We are, afterall, adults and supposed to be able to make decisions for ourseleves.
Information should not be hidden away
As a foot note, I have heard a rumour that in New Zealnd the authorities have moved ion the opposite direction of Part P and de-regulated. Apparently, deaths and injuries fell.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Rob Horton wrote:

for
One would think so, but it appears Labour does not. In fact Tony seems to think we can not, even when grown up, be trusted to walk down the street. This will be a criminal offence if ID cards become mandatory. Basic concepts seems to be alien to some.

authorities
Yet more evidence maybe... do you have a reference for this?
NT
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'd like to think others wouldn't have introduced 'nanny state' legislation, but history says otherwise.

I *really* don't see the problem. We already have to carry works ID cards, etc, so one other shouldn't be a problem. For honest folk at least.
--
*Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk London SW
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

It's not the ID that is the issue so much as the monster all encompassing database that goes with it...
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

All that information will be on a database somewhere anyway. Can't see the problem with centralising it.
--
* I like you. You remind me of when I was young and stupid

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk London SW
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Basic
ID
at
see the

It's not ID cards as such that I object to but the reasons given for the need, why can't they just have the guts to say "We want everyone to have ID cards that we can then, if we think a need, can be use in various ways to monitor people" rather than try and con us that if every UK adult citizen living here legally has an ID card it will cut down on illegal citizens and terrorism - the people who carried out 9/11 were in the USA legally and the authorities knew what they were 'studying', the people behind the Madrid bombings (IIRC) didn't have ID cards and were there illegally even though Spain has ID card....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

That is exactly the problem. It puts all sorts of information together that before would have taken a reasonable amount of effort for someone to gather, and will by default, make it available to anyone who wants to see it.
(Yes I do mean "anyone". You make a system all pervasive and available to a wide range of "people in authority", and even without any malicious intent it will be compromised and publicly visible - long before it is even finished. It only takes one badly configured router or wireless lan).
Rather than preventing identity theft, it will simply make it easier to do and much harder to detect.
If you integrate the system into all facets of daily life, then far from preventing terrorism, it will simply become a new target for it.
It would be one of the largest and most complex IT projects the government has ever taken on. They do not have an impressive record it this arena.
Remember there is a technology gap between organised crime and government. However, there are no indications that the government is going to catch up any time soon ;-)
So in exchange for costing an obscene amount of our money, can you see any tangible benefits it would bring?
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Rumm wrote:

I have been trying to think of ways to disrupt the distribution of ID cards once Tony forces them through (lets face it the battle was lost before it even started). The best idea I can come up with is to pretend you have a medical condition that stops you from being able to sit still long enough for them to get good bioinformatic data. For instance if they have retina scans just keep looking the other way when they tell you to look into the camera. If it's finger prints just move your finger as it scans. We might not be able to stop it but if enough people look the other way (sorry for the pun :o)) we might be able to make it cost so much that they give up. After all they can hardly arrest you for looking in the wrong direction can they.
I'm fairly confident that the government will screw up the implementation to the point where it won't work anyway. After, of course, wasting billions. Time to vote Liberal I think.
What I would like to know is this - why do they have to know someone's name to know if they are doing something wrong. Surely whether what you are doing is wrong, be it speeding or blowing things up, it is irrelevant what your name is? Therefore why do we need an ID card to stop criminals?
--

..`..` Shallow Sea Aquatics ..`..`
..`.. http://www.shallowsea.com .`..`
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Actually, they have a very impressive record -- of completely screwing up every IT project they've attempted, together with going massively over budget.
ID cards has already failed, because they haven't started by trying to identify the problem they want to solve -- they've started with a solution and are trying to make up a problem which it fits. Now where have we seen that before?

A day's plastering with no barrier cream, and you'll have no finger prints for a couple of weeks. Bricklaying is probably equally effective.
--
Andrew Gabriel

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

In fact there is a multitude of areas in which the current biometrics fail. Many fingerprint scanners will not cope with many Asian races (ridges are two fine) as well as the aforementioned bricklayers etc. Many afro caribian eyes are not sufficiently distinct for iris scanners to work. There are a wide range of others with similar problems before you get onto medical conditions. Blunket himself could not be iris scanned for example.
There has been loads of coverage on the whole fiasco here:
http://forms.theregister.co.uk/search/?q=id+cards&x=0&y=0
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Rumm wrote:

Are you sure about that? His blindness might be caused by a problem involving the optic nerve which passes from the eyeball thru to the brain.
I don't know about these things but I wouldn't have made an assumption that just because people are blind it would limit their ability to be tested.
Also, iris testing? I thought the ID cards relied upon a fingerprint of the back wall of the eye? The Iris is at the front.
Andrew
--
Please note that the email address used for posting
usenet messages is configured such that my antispam
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Rumour has it next year's passports will require fingerprints anyway so nobody is going to bother with iris scans or suchlike for ID cards.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike wrote:

The ICAO (is that the right ETLA?) will require a biometric on passports - however all they *require* is a digitised facial biomtric - i.e. a photograph.
It is the UK gov that is attempting to add FUD to justify their case by saying that fingerprint or iris scans etc will also be required - they won't, and there is currently no international treaty setup to use them should it be there.
(Although the US are toying with the idea of RFID enabling passports to facilitate quicker checks on them at immigration desks. This add the reassuring prospect that someone will be able to skim all the usefull informatiion from your passport just by walking close by you!)
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

About 2 seconds in a microwave oven should remove that particular danger.
--
Richard Sampson

mail me at
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Uh ... how ?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

to
danger.
Completely fry any RFID circuitry within said document.
May cause additional delay when passing through borders, though.
--
Richard Sampson

mail me at
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

usefull
No it won't. Might with old style stuff but modern ones wouldn't even notice it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

passports
the
hmm, interesting. Why's that? Antenna/circuitry dimensions too small to be affected by domestic microwaves? I suppose it _has_ to be affected and therefore potentially overloaded by some frequency of radiation though.
I see a market developing for shielding passport holders. Nice, pretty silver-plated cigarrette-case type things...
--
Richard Sampson

mail me at
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Iris scanning includes a check that the pupil responds to changes in light level, so it isn't fooled by holding up a photograph of someone's iris. That reflex doesn't always work in blind people (actually I know an otherwise normally sighted person for whom it doesn't work either).

Anyone trying to leave their fingerprint on the back of my eye will find themselves coughing up their testicles...
--
Andrew Gabriel

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andrew Gabriel wrote:

Yup, that is why to fool them you have to cut out the pupil of the photo and look through the hole while the photo is scanned ;-)
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.