Ah. Ok. Thanks! I was of the opinion that the paper licence was now invalid. Interesting. Thanks for the article. Clears it up for me.
Just tagging on to this discussion. I for one am disillusioned with the so-called better security online and phone access offers, it's also a moot point that forcing photo id and other checks on people increase safety without excluding some for no good reason. My only online security issues have always been with company breaches and overeactions. Equifax in the US managed to give my data to thieves, I wasn't even aware that the UK gov had ok'ed this sharing of info. As a response PayPal (also US based) froze my account, which for once had actual money in it, for weeks. I was only able to free it by providing more personal info to organsations I have little faith in. In the end we can of course refuse to use some facilities but the Equifax stuff I'd had no say in sharing so go figure. Every time I'm asked again for my mobile No (and lets face it most companies want it) I always respond by asking how giving them this aids security, so far no one can give a reason. They explain how it would enable someone with my mobile No to access money/services which are mine, not how it keeps me safe. The most bizzare conversation was with TalkTalk who having lost my info, not telling me this for 5 months, then wanted me to give them more detailed info to "safeguard" my account. I also feel sorry for anyone without a driving license, passport or utility bill trying to do anything in this modern world. Sometimes I wonder if we're mimicking the USA where it's become increasingly difficult to vote without jumping through id hoops which seem designed to block disadvantaged people. If I give away my passwords I'm a pratt, If I transfer money without checking properly I'm a pratt, If I get my phone/laptop stolen with highly sensitive info on I'm a pratt. If a company carelessly gives all my info to criminals I'm a security risk!
Again, you are both misinterpreting what I said and simply wrong about electronics. I simply said people who carried phones would be able to use it as an id and implied that would be most people in the future. Nobody can access securely encrypted information directly, it's not possible and IIRC there's a $1m prize for the first person who proves they've done it because there's not enough computing power on the planet to break the latest encryption techniques. Not even amazon can access your passwords you have stored with them for example. It's when you (or a website) store your password in a plaintext document there's a problem, or when somebody claiming to be from amazon calls you on your landline, or if you use the same password and email for some shady website or the website doesnt encrypt some personal data like billing address and name or something. If you want to crack a digital lock on a safe, you'll use a drill, not hack it. usage habits are less secure in the digital world for sure, but it's not digital itself that's less secure. My local shop in sholing just had burglars make off with its tills. I think most companies who ask for this use a phone as a recovery technique. if they can send you a text to your phone that ensures you must have your phone to read the text, somebody with your details in India wont have your sim card. so the company can use that alongside you providing your details to confirm its you. that way you would have been able to, for example, unfreeze your Paypal account straight away. It can also be used proactively as a security technique so if you access a certain service then they can send you a text with a code that you enter so they know its you before carrying out that service. usually thats used for changing passwords and such. I agree with you that theres a massive issue with companies not encrypting personal data like name, address etc. then some employee with access to that gets scammed and then fraudsters have access. but that access rarely includes things like credit card details. Either way it makes no difference how you provide them with the data and whether you use a mobile phone or not for this type of fraud, just who you give your data to.
The trouble is it's a poor recovery technique in that some one stealing you phone (so easily done) has a easy in to your cash through changing passwords and accessing accounts. I despair at people who's life is kept on their phones without safeguards. What I find strange is a landline is not accepted by my bank, maybe they think someone's going to steal my house, with the landline phone in it? And I'll not notice? The other point I made badly was re Equifax had my info without my permission. The UK gov subcontracted the credit score system to a company based in the US who without telling anyone held information on their servers in the USA. Oh, and it took a scan of my driving license to free the PayPal account, no other id other than photo id which included my address was acceptable! I didn't want to but I wasn't letting the buggers steal my £56 A quick google will inform you of just how PayPal (we're not a bank so not regulated) see this as a viable income source.
you would need A: having stolen the phone: B: access to personal details and C: password to unlock the phone. granted you can probably find B on the phone. But thats still more secure than most methods. the US government even resorted to begging apple to unlock a criminals phone. Getting A and C together is harder than just getting personal details. especially when the government is giving your details out without permission anyway . Paypal is effectively doing the same thing by asking to prove you have access to your passport/driving license which could also get stolen. I'm hoping they delete that after they use it.
Really? I turned up at the polling station once without my card once, but pretty sure I had to produce ID to vote without it? I could be remembering that wrong though. I agree that fraud prevention measures ought to be robust. But not so robust that they prevent legitimate people from voting. It's vitally important to get the balance right. On a completely different note, I have never understood why prisoners are not allowed to vote. The vast majority will be released back into society fairly quickly, why should they lose their vote as well as their liberty? I may be showing my Bleeding Heart liberal credentials here, but it doesn't seem fair to deprive anyone of such a fundamental democratic right.
According to the .gov website you don't need a polling card, all i can really say on the matter. Also i completely agree with you about prisoners voting. It used to be a crime just to be gay after all. They should be able to vote for what they feel is right.
my old paper license is no longer accepted by car hire companies, and i could not get a photo license as i have no address in the uk. can you still drive legally with the paper licenses?
You don't need anything at the moment. You just turn up, give them an address and name and that's it. In theory you could vote for anyone if you had that information.
Yes, you can. But if for any reason you need to make alterations, or add categories such as provisional bus or lorry entitlements, you have to surrender your old license for a new photo card.
I didn't know that. It probably does need addressing then - let's just hope the govt acts in good faith.
is it so hard to get all voting done on line? maybe we should ask the Russians, as they seem to be the experts
Yeah, but you would need to know somebody was registered to vote and not going to vote for it not to get recorded. And why would you risk conviction for a single extra vote thatprobably won't make a difference? I trust the statistics on this one. Remember, In order for the change to be wortwhile the number of invalid votes would have to be higher than the number of people discouraged from voting otherwise you skewing the result more than you're fixing it.
Maybe it has changed since, but I hired a van from Pitters about a year ago and they were happy with my paper licence.
Why? It's worked in the past. In the last General Election, 68% of people turned out. So, if you personate (see * below) there is a 68% chance you'll be caught out by the person actually turning up or you choose someone who's already turned up (I know it's not quite so simple). There'll be an investigation (it's taken seriously). And there were a handful in the last GE. It's not a problem. This is a sledgehammer to crack a nut that's not even there in the first place. If you want to be worried, worry about postal votes. In the past it wasn't worth buying a vote. I could pay you £100 to vote my way, you'd pop into the booth and you could do just what you wanted; I'd never know. Postal votes have boomed (about 1 in 6 now, I think) and they definitely are worth buying, as you can check it's been done to your benefit. Vin * Look it up. I had to.
Clunky though it might seem voting in person has some (if flaky) safeguards. Not least that local volunteers manning stations know many if not most locals by sight, and turning up in person will always put naughty boys and girls off. I think think only a handful of people trying to 'fake vote' in person have been evident over the last decade, as Vin points out postal votes have become a real potential problem in some wards. I was very proud going with my wife and two girls to vote at the last election, even though I was pretty certain I was being outvoted All efforts should be on getting everyone to vote, as already mentioned the model of facing a fine if you can't for good reason works for me.
Most shops these days seem to have a notice on the door saying (no cash left in the till overnight.) I get your point though. Don;t need a mobile for this. You can have it send to your landline where it "speaks" the text and some also offer the choice of e-mail, mobile or landline. I don't put my mobile number on anything because if I do I get upmteen calls and texts for weeks. Mostly from Indian call centres that must have been given my mbile number from legit businesses in the UK (big businesses at that.) Selling of data is going on all over the place not just be gangsters. Handling houses that do marketing will sell info on the sly all the time. That is why when you put your details in on a comparison site for example you don't get a few messages/calls from the comparison site itself nor the insurance companies listed on there. You are unlikely to get any calls from these....but you will end up getting umpteen PPI, Life Insurance, Injury lawyer calls. Doesn't matter if you tick any box. Ask these people where they got the info from they will either lie or put the phone down and go after the next numpty. As above. I get these on my landline instead.
The US government should ask the hackers that they try and prosecute. I await the day when it is announced that Apple are taking a British hacker to court.....who knows they may have already been hacked loads of times but it is not good for their credibility so its kept secret!!! I don;t think the US government being unable says much though. They have enough trouble keeping hackers out of their own systems.
