Posted by racingsnake
@ 07:10 PM GMT+00:00
16 Mar · Thu 2006
A Thing with an Infectious Identity
We all know that we ought to remember that things have identities too, but now it turns out --- not unexpectedly --- that things can be virus vectors too, via some types of RFID tag.
I know it's been a refrain of the IT industry for decades that 'security is best if you don't bolt it on as an afterthought', but we ought to be building on that with a more robust set of assumptions these days. There's another rule here: any given function, when released into the market, will be subverted to someone else's purposes. There's nothing new about this; back in 1969 the amazingly fore-sighted John Brunner wrote about the subversion of consumer technology for disruptive ends, in "Stand on Zanzibar".
If you haven't read that, I recommend it; and don't be put off by the distinctive style Brunner adopts --- it has a purpose, and (just like the content) foreshadows much of what we take for granted these days: plots constructed by interleaving multiple perspectives and storylines. Heck, films like Crash, Jackie Brown and Reservoir Dogs win awards for doing it.
No, No and three times No
The House of Lords yesterday rejected the ID Cards bill for an unusual third time, again on grounds that it should be a wholly voluntary scheme in the first instance, and not one made compulsory on the obtaining of another credential such as a passport.
This fundamental disagreement over a principle of the scheme may lead the House of Commons (which is still on favour of the Bill by roughly the same number of votes as the Lords oppose it) to invoke the Parliament Act (1911) and force the Bill into law without the consent of the Lords.
The Bill, along with the Lords' reasons for insisting on their amendments, is now passed back to the Commons again.
Footnote: The Parliament Acts
The Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949
Until the early years of the 20th century, the House of Lords had the power to prevent legislation, as bills had to be passed by both Houses of Parliament.
David Lloyd-George's so-called 'people's budget' of 1909 brought this arrangement under strain, when the House of Lords originally refused to pass it. Eventually, the budget was passed after a general election in 1910; a second election was then fought on the issue of reform of the House of Lords. The result was the Parliament Act of 1911, which removed from the House of Lords the power to veto a bill, except one to prolong the lifetime of a parliament. Instead, the Lords could delay a bill by up to two years. The Act also reduced the maximum lifespan of a Parliament from seven years to its present five years. The Parliament Act 1949 further reduced the Lords' delaying powers to one year.
Since 1949 four acts have been passed into law without the consent of the House of Lords:
* The War Crimes Act 1991
* The European Parliamentary Elections Act 1999
* The Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000
* The Hunting Act 2004
Source: Houses of Parliament website
It is interesting to note, in passing, that 3 out of 4 of those acts have been passed under the current Labour government. That government has introduced substantial changes to the House of Lords, including the removal of hereditary peers, the creation of a 'Department of Consitutional Affairs', changes to the office of Lord Chancellor and the 'Law Lords', and other changes to the legislature.
It is also currently embroiled in rumours of peerages being 'for sale' to major donors to party funds, and of large 'loans' being made to the party without the knowledge of its Treasurer. Donations over a certain size cannot be made anonymously, but loans can. Ironcially enough, a point of intersection between these two topics is the Minister for Constitutional Affairs, Harriet Harman, who happens to be married to the Treasurer, Jack Dromey. I do not mean to imply any impropriety on their part: in fact, Ms Harman has today voluntarily stepped back from her role on constitutional and electoral reform, and her husband is among those most critical of the way in which the 'loans' affair has been undertaken.
The question of further reform of the House of Lords is still very much a live debate, characterised by a persistent and fundamental disagreement between the Labour Government (and its manifesto commitments to reform), the various Committees set up to propose ways of implementing those commitments, and the two Houses themselves.
If you are interested, you can read a brief chronology of that process here.
- Blogroll
- Alan Mather
- Alec Muffett
- Bill Vass
- Bill Walker
- Burningbird
- CPO - Michelle Dennedy
- Conor Cahill... has an opinion or two
- Consult Hyperion
- Don't Panic - Trust blog
- Eric Mahe
- Eve Maler
- Geoff Arnold
- Gerry Beuchelt
- Greg Matters
- Hubert Le Van Gong
- Ideal Government
- John Sandell's Photography
- Kim Cameron
- Lauren Wood
- Ludovic Poitou
- Mark Dixon
- Masood Mortazavi
- Monkchips - James Governor
- New Drew...
- Oz Yigit's brainstorms
-
POSIWID
- Paul Walker's Getting His Coat...
- Peter Davis
- PlanetIdentity
- Stefan Brands
- Superpat
- Tatsuo-san
- Tim Bray
- Toby Stevens
- Tom Gordon
- Vikram Kumar (NZ)
- Wayne Horkan's eclectic
![[RSS Newsfeed]](/themes/sotto/images/valid-rss.png)
![[This is a Roller site]](/themes/sotto/images/roller-logo.gif){kind=logo}