Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Electricity supply - Must I provide DOB?
545 views
Skip to first unread message
Michael Chare
Nov 16, 2015, 3:15:44 PM11/16/15
to
I made an online application to SWALEC to take over the electricity of a
property we have just acquired.
This has led to an email response asking for the same information again,
which was actually in the email they sent me, plus my date of birth.
What will happen if I decline to provide my DOB?
I have applied to move the supply to EDF the change should go through in
a few days time.
I would be happy to pay SWALEC for any electricity they supply.
--
Michael Chare
property we have just acquired.
This has led to an email response asking for the same information again,
which was actually in the email they sent me, plus my date of birth.
What will happen if I decline to provide my DOB?
I have applied to move the supply to EDF the change should go through in
a few days time.
I would be happy to pay SWALEC for any electricity they supply.
--
Michael Chare
Peter Crosland
Nov 16, 2015, 5:36:09 PM11/16/15
to
--
Peter Crosland
Reply address is valid
Saxman
Nov 16, 2015, 5:36:48 PM11/16/15
to
On 16/11/2015 17:11, Michael Chare wrote:
Iain
Nov 16, 2015, 5:43:27 PM11/16/15
to
In <n2d2j2$gul$1...@dont-email.me>,
Michael Chare <mUNDERS...@chareDOTorg.uk> typed:
The Data Protection Act says that:
"Personal data shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to
the purpose or purposes for which they are processed" (3rd principle).
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/schedule/1
You could argue that it could be considered excessive, but they could say
that they need it as a security check.
You should also be aware that SWALEC (SSE Energy Supply Ltd) has in their DP
registration the following:
"Personal information is traded and shared as a primary business function."
https://ico.org.uk/ESDWebPages/DoSearch?reg=417990
You would need to look at this together with their privacy policy
--
Iain
Michael Chare <mUNDERS...@chareDOTorg.uk> typed:
"Personal data shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to
the purpose or purposes for which they are processed" (3rd principle).
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/schedule/1
You could argue that it could be considered excessive, but they could say
that they need it as a security check.
You should also be aware that SWALEC (SSE Energy Supply Ltd) has in their DP
registration the following:
"Personal information is traded and shared as a primary business function."
https://ico.org.uk/ESDWebPages/DoSearch?reg=417990
You would need to look at this together with their privacy policy
--
Iain
BartC
Nov 16, 2015, 6:17:39 PM11/16/15
to
it could cost them in wages, pensions, and NI contributions? The age
might also be relevant to the sort of work that is to be done, it can
give some indications of experience and maturity, and could tell an
employer how long a candidate would be able to work before retirement.
But for buying electricity, apart from being at least 18 to sign a
contract, it should not be relevant. Because it is used as a security
question so much, the fewer people who know it the better.
--
bartc
Davey
Nov 16, 2015, 7:43:55 PM11/16/15
to
remembered it when you next called them?
--
Davey.
Nick Odell
Nov 16, 2015, 7:44:15 PM11/16/15
to
imagine this is to make sure that if there were an extended loss of
power elderly folk would be prioritised in some way. I think this
because I recently received a letter from my energy supplier asking if I
would grant permission for them to note that I was over XX years old on
their records. XX being a large number which once used to be associated
with retirement.
Nick
Nick
Nov 16, 2015, 7:44:20 PM11/16/15
to
On 16/11/2015 17:11, Michael Chare wrote:
for a previous address.
They will also report your payment record to credit reference agencies.
Janet
Nov 16, 2015, 7:46:22 PM11/16/15
to
In article <n2dku4$o5$2...@news.albasani.net>,
john.h.willia...@gmail.com says...
National minimum wage and living wage are graded by age of employee.
£6.70 per hour for workers aged 21 years old and over
£5.30 per hour for workers aged 18 to 20 years old
£3.87 per hour for workers above school leaving age but under 18
years old
£3.30 for apprentices under the age of 19 years old or aged 19 years
old or over and in the first year of their apprenticeship
National living wage
>From April 2016, the new mandatory national living wage (NLW) will be
£7.20 an hour for workers aged 25 years old and over. The national
minimum wage (NMW) will still apply for workers aged 21 to 24 years of
age.
Janet
john.h.willia...@gmail.com says...
£6.70 per hour for workers aged 21 years old and over
£5.30 per hour for workers aged 18 to 20 years old
£3.87 per hour for workers above school leaving age but under 18
years old
£3.30 for apprentices under the age of 19 years old or aged 19 years
old or over and in the first year of their apprenticeship
National living wage
>From April 2016, the new mandatory national living wage (NLW) will be
£7.20 an hour for workers aged 25 years old and over. The national
minimum wage (NMW) will still apply for workers aged 21 to 24 years of
age.
Janet
Peter Crosland
Nov 17, 2015, 2:22:23 AM11/17/15
to
disability. From personal experience I can say I have received a call
from the network supplier during an extended power cut to tell me of
progress.
Michael Chare
Nov 17, 2015, 6:15:39 AM11/17/15
to
On 16/11/2015 23:27, Nick Odell wrote:
might wish to provide the information.
--
Michael Chare
Michael Chare
Nov 17, 2015, 6:16:18 AM11/17/15
to
On 16/11/2015 21:57, Peter Crosland wrote:
they will do if I decline to provide the information.
I am sure that I have had electricity supplies in the past where I have
not provided this information.
--
Michael Chare
Roland Perry
Nov 17, 2015, 7:04:31 AM11/17/15
to
In message <n2f13o$v6$1...@dont-email.me>, at 10:58:09 on Tue, 17 Nov 2015,
Michael Chare <mUNDERS...@chareDOTorg.uk> remarked:
on you, then if you don't provide the information they'll either decline
to supply or give you a prepayment meter.
Of course, at that point you can complain that you've already got a good
credit record with them [if they were a previous supplier] but the
Balkanisation of utility supplies means this is less and less likely.
When BT decided I'd moved to a "red lined" premises in the mid 90's, and
wanted a deposit, they were forced to retract because I was moving from
somewhere with many years of £300/month[1] BT credit history. (It was a
rented flat, so I'm not surprised it might have had "runners" in the
past).
In those days they somewhat crudely credit-checked addresses, not
occupiers.
I'm also reminded of the "Ionica effect", where utilities attracting
cash-strapped customers with rock-bottom pricing tend to end up with
lots of defaulters.
Not that you are one of those, of course, but utilities do tend to have
a one-size-fits-all policy.
[1] Sometimes people forget how much phone calls cost as recently as
that.
--
Roland Perry
Michael Chare <mUNDERS...@chareDOTorg.uk> remarked:
>my question was, what (do you think) they will do if I decline to
>provide the information.
>
>I am sure that I have had electricity supplies in the past where I have
>not provided this information.
If, as I suspect (another agrees) this is so they can do a credit check
>provide the information.
>
>I am sure that I have had electricity supplies in the past where I have
>not provided this information.
on you, then if you don't provide the information they'll either decline
to supply or give you a prepayment meter.
Of course, at that point you can complain that you've already got a good
credit record with them [if they were a previous supplier] but the
Balkanisation of utility supplies means this is less and less likely.
When BT decided I'd moved to a "red lined" premises in the mid 90's, and
wanted a deposit, they were forced to retract because I was moving from
somewhere with many years of £300/month[1] BT credit history. (It was a
rented flat, so I'm not surprised it might have had "runners" in the
past).
In those days they somewhat crudely credit-checked addresses, not
occupiers.
I'm also reminded of the "Ionica effect", where utilities attracting
cash-strapped customers with rock-bottom pricing tend to end up with
lots of defaulters.
Not that you are one of those, of course, but utilities do tend to have
a one-size-fits-all policy.
[1] Sometimes people forget how much phone calls cost as recently as
that.
--
Roland Perry
Martin Bonner
Nov 17, 2015, 7:08:25 AM11/17/15
to
On Tuesday, 17 November 2015 00:17:39 UTC+1, Bart wrote:
> On 16/11/2015 22:21, Saxman wrote:
> > Likewise, why do employers need to know ones age on a job application?
>
> Because, among other things, the age of an employee determines how much
> it could cost them in wages, pensions, and NI contributions? The age
> might also be relevant to the sort of work that is to be done, it can
> give some indications of experience and maturity, and could tell an
> employer how long a candidate would be able to work before retirement.
But deciding whether or not to employ somebody on those grounds would
> On 16/11/2015 22:21, Saxman wrote:
> > Likewise, why do employers need to know ones age on a job application?
>
> Because, among other things, the age of an employee determines how much
> it could cost them in wages, pensions, and NI contributions? The age
> might also be relevant to the sort of work that is to be done, it can
> give some indications of experience and maturity, and could tell an
> employer how long a candidate would be able to work before retirement.
be illegal. I can see why HR/payroll would want the DOB after issuing
the job offer - but asking for it before is very dodgy.
Sara Merriman
Nov 17, 2015, 7:13:58 AM11/17/15
to
In article <n2f13o$v6$1...@dont-email.me>, Michael Chare
security questions is that they will ask something else instead. You
should be fine.
> I am sure that I have had electricity supplies in the past where I have
> not provided this information.
--
Armagedon is tiny
<mUNDERS...@chareDOTorg.uk> wrote:
> On 16/11/2015 21:57, Peter Crosland wrote:
> > On 16/11/2015 17:11, Michael Chare wrote:
> >> I made an online application to SWALEC to take over the electricity of a
> >> property we have just acquired.
> >>
> >> This has led to an email response asking for the same information again,
> >> which was actually in the email they sent me, plus my date of birth.
> >>
> >> What will happen if I decline to provide my DOB?
> >>
> >> I have applied to move the supply to EDF the change should go through in
> >> a few days time.
> >>
> >> I would be happy to pay SWALEC for any electricity they supply.
> >
> > They use it as a security question when you call them.
> >
> >
>
> I would think you are correct. But my question was, what (do you think)
> they will do if I decline to provide the information.
>
My experience of refusing to provide certain information to be used for
> On 16/11/2015 21:57, Peter Crosland wrote:
> > On 16/11/2015 17:11, Michael Chare wrote:
> >> I made an online application to SWALEC to take over the electricity of a
> >> property we have just acquired.
> >>
> >> This has led to an email response asking for the same information again,
> >> which was actually in the email they sent me, plus my date of birth.
> >>
> >> What will happen if I decline to provide my DOB?
> >>
> >> I have applied to move the supply to EDF the change should go through in
> >> a few days time.
> >>
> >> I would be happy to pay SWALEC for any electricity they supply.
> >
> > They use it as a security question when you call them.
> >
> >
>
> I would think you are correct. But my question was, what (do you think)
> they will do if I decline to provide the information.
>
security questions is that they will ask something else instead. You
should be fine.
> I am sure that I have had electricity supplies in the past where I have
> not provided this information.
--
R. Mark Clayton
Nov 17, 2015, 9:28:44 AM11/17/15
to
Roger Hayter
Nov 17, 2015, 10:09:25 AM11/17/15
to
employ.
--
Roger Hayter
Roland Perry
Nov 17, 2015, 10:26:09 AM11/17/15
to
In message <32001213-84d3-4519...@googlegroups.com>, at
05:14:53 on Tue, 17 Nov 2015, R. Mark Clayton <notya...@gmail.com>
remarked:
>>
>> Likewise, why do employers need to know ones age on a job application?
>
>So they know what your minimum wage is, what NI to charge, when you
>retire, whether you can operate heavy machinery etc. etc.
They can determine that *after* they've offered the job.
--
Roland Perry
05:14:53 on Tue, 17 Nov 2015, R. Mark Clayton <notya...@gmail.com>
remarked:
>>
>> Likewise, why do employers need to know ones age on a job application?
>
>So they know what your minimum wage is, what NI to charge, when you
>retire, whether you can operate heavy machinery etc. etc.
--
Roland Perry
Chris R
Nov 17, 2015, 10:46:16 AM11/17/15
to
>
>
> "Martin Bonner" wrote in message
> news:3126e51e-da30-4367...@googlegroups.com...
whilst still getting a complete career history, where full-life experience
is relevant. Where I trained is very much still part of my skills profile
over 30 years later. Employers want to be able to probe any gaps in history,
eg to make sure you didn't spend 10 years in jail or working for a bank.
--
Chris R
Sara Merriman
Nov 17, 2015, 11:11:42 AM11/17/15
to
In article <Op6dnQdpg7MC1tbL...@brightview.co.uk>, Chris R
I know someone in her late fifties who was asked a few years ago to
provide her O Level certs. She told them that she had no idea where
they would be. They employed her anyway.
--
Armageddon is tiny
provide her O Level certs. She told them that she had no idea where
they would be. They employed her anyway.
--
Armageddon is tiny
Chris R
Nov 17, 2015, 11:43:51 AM11/17/15
to
>
>
> "Sara Merriman" wrote in message
> news:171120151611135329%sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk...
them, or any other certificates, to anyone. Most employers still work on
trust.
--
Chris R
Sara Merriman
Nov 17, 2015, 12:13:28 PM11/17/15
to
In article <9bydnUUAivugxNbL...@brightview.co.uk>, Chris R
same company for close on 30 years and my last CV was stored on a
5-1/2" floppy.
--
Armageddon is tiny
<inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >
> > "Sara Merriman" wrote in message
> > news:171120151611135329%sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk...
> >
> > In article <Op6dnQdpg7MC1tbL...@brightview.co.uk>, Chris R
> > <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Martin Bonner" wrote in message
> > > > news:3126e51e-da30-4367...@googlegroups.com...
> > > >
> > > > On Tuesday, 17 November 2015 00:17:39 UTC+1, Bart wrote:
> > > > > On 16/11/2015 22:21, Saxman wrote:
>
> >
> > I know someone in her late fifties who was asked a few years ago to
> > provide her O Level certs. She told them that she had no idea where
> > they would be. They employed her anyway.
> >
> Mine are about six inches away from me but I don't think I've ever produced
> them, or any other certificates, to anyone. Most employers still work on
> trust.
Really? Wow. I've no idea where mine are. Mind you I've worked at the
> >
> >
> > "Sara Merriman" wrote in message
> > news:171120151611135329%sarame...@blueyonder.co.uk...
> >
> > In article <Op6dnQdpg7MC1tbL...@brightview.co.uk>, Chris R
> > <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Martin Bonner" wrote in message
> > > > news:3126e51e-da30-4367...@googlegroups.com...
> > > >
> > > > On Tuesday, 17 November 2015 00:17:39 UTC+1, Bart wrote:
> > > > > On 16/11/2015 22:21, Saxman wrote:
>
> >
> > I know someone in her late fifties who was asked a few years ago to
> > provide her O Level certs. She told them that she had no idea where
> > they would be. They employed her anyway.
> >
> Mine are about six inches away from me but I don't think I've ever produced
> them, or any other certificates, to anyone. Most employers still work on
> trust.
same company for close on 30 years and my last CV was stored on a
5-1/2" floppy.
--
Armageddon is tiny
Michael Chare
Nov 17, 2015, 12:55:20 PM11/17/15
to
On 17/11/2015 12:12, Sara Merriman wrote:
> In article <n2f13o$v6$1...@dont-email.me>, Michael Chare
> <mUNDERS...@chareDOTorg.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 16/11/2015 21:57, Peter Crosland wrote:
>>> On 16/11/2015 17:11, Michael Chare wrote:
>>>> I made an online application to SWALEC to take over the electricity of a
>>>> property we have just acquired.
>>>>
>>>> This has led to an email response asking for the same information again,
>>>> which was actually in the email they sent me, plus my date of birth.
>>>>
>>>> What will happen if I decline to provide my DOB?
>>>>
>>>> I have applied to move the supply to EDF the change should go through in
>>>> a few days time.
>>>>
>>>> I would be happy to pay SWALEC for any electricity they supply.
>>>
>>> They use it as a security question when you call them.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I would think you are correct. But my question was, what (do you think)
>> they will do if I decline to provide the information.
>>
> My experience of refusing to provide certain information to be used for
> security questions is that they will ask something else instead. You
> should be fine.
>
I will see how I get on! If they had asked for the information on the
> In article <n2f13o$v6$1...@dont-email.me>, Michael Chare
> <mUNDERS...@chareDOTorg.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 16/11/2015 21:57, Peter Crosland wrote:
>>> On 16/11/2015 17:11, Michael Chare wrote:
>>>> I made an online application to SWALEC to take over the electricity of a
>>>> property we have just acquired.
>>>>
>>>> This has led to an email response asking for the same information again,
>>>> which was actually in the email they sent me, plus my date of birth.
>>>>
>>>> What will happen if I decline to provide my DOB?
>>>>
>>>> I have applied to move the supply to EDF the change should go through in
>>>> a few days time.
>>>>
>>>> I would be happy to pay SWALEC for any electricity they supply.
>>>
>>> They use it as a security question when you call them.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I would think you are correct. But my question was, what (do you think)
>> they will do if I decline to provide the information.
>>
> My experience of refusing to provide certain information to be used for
> security questions is that they will ask something else instead. You
> should be fine.
>
original web form I would likely have provided it. What the web form did
not allow was for me to supply a separate invoice address.
I just hope that they don't block my switch to EDF.
--
Michael Chare
Janet
Nov 17, 2015, 1:41:08 PM11/17/15
to
In article <mp2mApNh...@perry.co.uk>, rol...@perry.co.uk says...
Imagine you're interviewing for a shelf stacker; one applicant is 16
and the other is 26.
For the next nine years, thanks to MW legislation, it's going to be
substantially cheaper to employ the younger one. Do you seriously think
the employer won't be swayed by that?
Janet
and the other is 26.
For the next nine years, thanks to MW legislation, it's going to be
substantially cheaper to employ the younger one. Do you seriously think
the employer won't be swayed by that?
Janet
Roland Perry
Nov 17, 2015, 2:31:06 PM11/17/15
to
In message <MPG.30b582e...@news.individual.net>, at 18:31:42 on
Tue, 17 Nov 2015, Janet <nob...@home.org> remarked:
>> >> Likewise, why do employers need to know ones age on a job application?
>> >
>> >So they know what your minimum wage is, what NI to charge, when you
>> >retire, whether you can operate heavy machinery etc. etc.
>>
>> They can determine that *after* they've offered the job.
>
> Imagine you're interviewing for a shelf stacker; one applicant is 16
>and the other is 26.
>
> For the next nine years, thanks to MW legislation, it's going to be
>substantially cheaper to employ the younger one. Do you seriously think
>the employer won't be swayed by that?
Can you quantify the substantially"?
Meanwhile, if my observations in my local stores are representative, the
younger the shelf-stackers are, the more of the time they spend chatting
up other young shelf-stackers, rather than concentrating on the job in
hand.
--
Roland Perry
Tue, 17 Nov 2015, Janet <nob...@home.org> remarked:
>> >> Likewise, why do employers need to know ones age on a job application?
>> >
>> >So they know what your minimum wage is, what NI to charge, when you
>> >retire, whether you can operate heavy machinery etc. etc.
>>
>> They can determine that *after* they've offered the job.
>
> Imagine you're interviewing for a shelf stacker; one applicant is 16
>and the other is 26.
>
> For the next nine years, thanks to MW legislation, it's going to be
>substantially cheaper to employ the younger one. Do you seriously think
>the employer won't be swayed by that?
Meanwhile, if my observations in my local stores are representative, the
younger the shelf-stackers are, the more of the time they spend chatting
up other young shelf-stackers, rather than concentrating on the job in
hand.
--
Roland Perry
Janet
Nov 17, 2015, 3:30:23 PM11/17/15
to
In article <z9hj1ES8...@perry.co.uk>, rol...@perry.co.uk says...
The National Minimum Wage rate per hour depends on your age and whether
you’re an apprentice - you must be at least school leaving age to get
it.
2015
Age21 and over, MW £6.70 per hour
Age 18 to 20, £5.30
Under 18 £3.87
>From April 2016, the national living wage will be £7.20 an hour for
workers aged 25 and older. The minimum wage will still apply for workers
aged 24 and under.
So, by April next year, the 25 yr old employee will be paid £7.20
MW per hour but a 16 yr old is only earning on £3.87 (with another 8
years on low pay until he's age 25 )
Janet
>
> In message <MPG.30b582e...@news.individual.net>, at 18:31:42 on
> Tue, 17 Nov 2015, Janet <nob...@home.org> remarked:
>
> >> >> Likewise, why do employers need to know ones age on a job application?
> >> >
> >> >So they know what your minimum wage is, what NI to charge, when you
> >> >retire, whether you can operate heavy machinery etc. etc.
> >>
> >> They can determine that *after* they've offered the job.
> >
> > Imagine you're interviewing for a shelf stacker; one applicant is 16
> >and the other is 26.
> >
> > For the next nine years, thanks to MW legislation, it's going to be
> >substantially cheaper to employ the younger one. Do you seriously think
> >the employer won't be swayed by that?
>
> Can you quantify the substantially"?
https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates
> In message <MPG.30b582e...@news.individual.net>, at 18:31:42 on
> Tue, 17 Nov 2015, Janet <nob...@home.org> remarked:
>
> >> >> Likewise, why do employers need to know ones age on a job application?
> >> >
> >> >So they know what your minimum wage is, what NI to charge, when you
> >> >retire, whether you can operate heavy machinery etc. etc.
> >>
> >> They can determine that *after* they've offered the job.
> >
> > Imagine you're interviewing for a shelf stacker; one applicant is 16
> >and the other is 26.
> >
> > For the next nine years, thanks to MW legislation, it's going to be
> >substantially cheaper to employ the younger one. Do you seriously think
> >the employer won't be swayed by that?
>
> Can you quantify the substantially"?
The National Minimum Wage rate per hour depends on your age and whether
you’re an apprentice - you must be at least school leaving age to get
it.
2015
Age21 and over, MW £6.70 per hour
Age 18 to 20, £5.30
Under 18 £3.87
>From April 2016, the national living wage will be £7.20 an hour for
workers aged 25 and older. The minimum wage will still apply for workers
aged 24 and under.
So, by April next year, the 25 yr old employee will be paid £7.20
MW per hour but a 16 yr old is only earning on £3.87 (with another 8
years on low pay until he's age 25 )
Janet
Vir Campestris
Nov 17, 2015, 4:43:20 PM11/17/15
to
On 16/11/2015 22:51, BartC wrote:
> On 16/11/2015 22:21, Saxman wrote:
>>
>> Likewise, why do employers need to know ones age on a job application?
>
> Because, among other things, the age of an employee determines how much
> it could cost them in wages, pensions, and NI contributions? The age
> might also be relevant to the sort of work that is to be done, it can
> give some indications of experience and maturity, and could tell an
> employer how long a candidate would be able to work before retirement.
>
I didn't think it was legal to discriminate on those grounds.
> On 16/11/2015 22:21, Saxman wrote:
>>
>> Likewise, why do employers need to know ones age on a job application?
>
> Because, among other things, the age of an employee determines how much
> it could cost them in wages, pensions, and NI contributions? The age
> might also be relevant to the sort of work that is to be done, it can
> give some indications of experience and maturity, and could tell an
> employer how long a candidate would be able to work before retirement.
>
As for age before retirement - well, if I was 63 and apply for a job I
would likely work until retirement. Which may well be longer than a
school lever would last...
Andy
Iain Archer
Nov 17, 2015, 5:04:38 PM11/17/15
to
Chris R <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote on Tue, 17 Nov 2015 at
16:43:29:
I'm still short of one degree certificate, withheld because I didn't pay
a fee requested for non-attendance at the graduation ceremony.
--
Iain Archer
16:43:29:
a fee requested for non-attendance at the graduation ceremony.
--
Iain Archer
Brian Reay
Nov 17, 2015, 8:47:25 PM11/17/15
to
"tailor" their applications to procure a more favourable response, while
a potential employer may have access to information that the candidate
has not supplied, either because it is not about them or because they
wish it to remain hidden. Having the birthdate (or even age) as well as
a name can narrow things down, in most cases to one.
I don't think there is any *law* against asking for the birthdate, and
why shouldn't employers use all the information they can get about people
they may give a job to?
Martin Bonner
Nov 18, 2015, 5:12:52 AM11/18/15
to
I am pretty sure that it is against age-discrimination law to do so
(at least if the younger one is 18 rather than 16). As such, asking for
the DOB on the application is dangerous (unless it is on the separate
"diversity" section which is not seen by interviewers).
Roland Perry
Nov 18, 2015, 5:57:00 AM11/18/15
to
In message <TUVQ1IH1$5SW...@gmail.com>, at 21:45:25 on Tue, 17 Nov
2015, Iain Archer <iane...@gmail.com> remarked:
>I'm still short of one degree certificate, withheld because I didn't
>pay a fee requested for non-attendance at the graduation ceremony.
Are you sure that having failed to attend, you were actually awarded the
degree?
--
Roland Perry
2015, Iain Archer <iane...@gmail.com> remarked:
>I'm still short of one degree certificate, withheld because I didn't
>pay a fee requested for non-attendance at the graduation ceremony.
degree?
--
Roland Perry
Iain
Nov 19, 2015, 2:25:07 AM11/19/15
to
Brian Reay <m...@privacy.net> typed:
> It can also be useful for identification pruposes - candidates often
> "tailor" their applications to procure a more favourable response,
> while a potential employer may have access to information that the
> candidate has not supplied, either because it is not about them or
> because they wish it to remain hidden. Having the birthdate (or even
> age) as well as a name can narrow things down, in most cases to one.
When phoning up my doctor and dentist, the first thing that they ask (for
> "tailor" their applications to procure a more favourable response,
> while a potential employer may have access to information that the
> candidate has not supplied, either because it is not about them or
> because they wish it to remain hidden. Having the birthdate (or even
> age) as well as a name can narrow things down, in most cases to one.
their search) is your DoB.
--
Iain
Saxman
Nov 19, 2015, 5:25:10 AM11/19/15
to
on CV's where a degree of ageism is used. In theory a teenager can be
just as skilled at certain jobs and vice versa.
Roland Perry
Nov 19, 2015, 5:50:31 AM11/19/15
to
In message <n2k240$644$1...@news.albasani.net>, at 08:43:47 on Thu, 19 Nov
2015, Saxman <john.h.willia...@gmail.com> remarked:
There are other ways of doing clandestine ageism - for example asking
for a number of years of experience, or in the other direction asking
for a degree in a subject that wasn't taught, as such, 30 years ago.
--
Roland Perry
2015, Saxman <john.h.willia...@gmail.com> remarked:
for a number of years of experience, or in the other direction asking
for a degree in a subject that wasn't taught, as such, 30 years ago.
--
Roland Perry
Janet
Nov 19, 2015, 8:45:29 AM11/19/15
to
In article <db4ktq...@mid.individual.net>, sp...@smaps.net says...
? I would think they are just protecting patient confidentiality by
seeking confirmation that you are that patient.
Janet.
seeking confirmation that you are that patient.
Janet.
Ian Jackson
Nov 19, 2015, 11:27:54 AM11/19/15
to
In article <MPG.30b7dd1...@news.individual.net>,
safety (which I guess we mostly care about more) to make sure that you
have the right patient.
Names aren't unique enough, and most people know their own DoB. So
medics like to use DoB as part of the patient id when they look you
up. Same thing when you give blood: every time you talk to a new bod
at the donation centre, they ask you again: full name, dob.
--
Ian Jackson <ijac...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
>> When phoning up my doctor and dentist, the first thing that they ask (for
>> their search) is your DoB.
>
> ? I would think they are just protecting patient confidentiality by
>seeking confirmation that you are that patient.
In medical contexts it's very important not just for privacy but for
>> their search) is your DoB.
>
> ? I would think they are just protecting patient confidentiality by
>seeking confirmation that you are that patient.
safety (which I guess we mostly care about more) to make sure that you
have the right patient.
Names aren't unique enough, and most people know their own DoB. So
medics like to use DoB as part of the patient id when they look you
up. Same thing when you give blood: every time you talk to a new bod
at the donation centre, they ask you again: full name, dob.
--
Ian Jackson <ijac...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
tim.....
Nov 19, 2015, 3:57:28 PM11/19/15
to
"Iain" <sp...@smaps.net> wrote in message
news:db4ktq...@mid.individual.net...
database it's a very good key
when you have 6 million, it's not
tim
Roland Perry
Nov 19, 2015, 4:13:07 PM11/19/15
to
In message <n2l5vl$qqu$1...@dont-email.me>, at 18:58:06 on Thu, 19 Nov
2015, tim..... <tims_n...@yahoo.co.uk> remarked:
>> When phoning up my doctor and dentist, the first thing that they ask
>>(for their search) is your DoB.
>
>That's because when you only have 5,000 randomly spread people in your
>database it's a very good key
>
>when you have 6 million, it's not
When I check in at my GP surgery on the screen provided, it asks first
for DoB [day/month], and then a first surname initial. This has never
failed to disambiguate me.
--
Roland Perry
2015, tim..... <tims_n...@yahoo.co.uk> remarked:
>> When phoning up my doctor and dentist, the first thing that they ask
>>(for their search) is your DoB.
>
>That's because when you only have 5,000 randomly spread people in your
>database it's a very good key
>
>when you have 6 million, it's not
for DoB [day/month], and then a first surname initial. This has never
failed to disambiguate me.
--
Roland Perry
Graham Murray
Nov 19, 2015, 4:31:22 PM11/19/15
to
Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> writes:
> There are other ways of doing clandestine ageism - for example asking
> for a number of years of experience, or in the other direction asking
> for a degree in a subject that wasn't taught, as such, 30 years ago.
Or asking for a degree when 20 years ago the normal career entry was
> There are other ways of doing clandestine ageism - for example asking
> for a number of years of experience, or in the other direction asking
> for a degree in a subject that wasn't taught, as such, 30 years ago.
with A-levels.
Roland Perry
Nov 20, 2015, 5:22:46 AM11/20/15
to
In message <87egfl1...@einstein.gmurray.org.uk>, at 21:29:44 on Thu,
19 Nov 2015, Graham Murray <news...@gmurray.org.uk> remarked:
>> There are other ways of doing clandestine ageism - for example asking
>> for a number of years of experience, or in the other direction asking
>> for a degree in a subject that wasn't taught, as such, 30 years ago.
>
>Or asking for a degree when 20 years ago the normal career entry was
>with A-levels.
That would affect older teachers if one of the criteria was having a
degree, because the majority will have just a teaching certificate,
unless by now all of those have worked their way through the system.
The sort of thing I had in mind was the possibility of a job advert
specifying a degree in "Digital marketing and social media" [yes, that
really does exist] when it's unlikely that anyone over the age of 25
today would even have been able to study that.
--
Roland Perry
19 Nov 2015, Graham Murray <news...@gmurray.org.uk> remarked:
>> There are other ways of doing clandestine ageism - for example asking
>> for a number of years of experience, or in the other direction asking
>> for a degree in a subject that wasn't taught, as such, 30 years ago.
>
>Or asking for a degree when 20 years ago the normal career entry was
>with A-levels.
degree, because the majority will have just a teaching certificate,
unless by now all of those have worked their way through the system.
The sort of thing I had in mind was the possibility of a job advert
specifying a degree in "Digital marketing and social media" [yes, that
really does exist] when it's unlikely that anyone over the age of 25
today would even have been able to study that.
--
Roland Perry
tabb...@gmail.com
Nov 20, 2015, 10:04:15 AM11/20/15
to
NT
Roland Perry
Nov 20, 2015, 10:25:16 AM11/20/15
to
In message <a677025a-0027-4d87...@googlegroups.com>, at
05:14:33 on Fri, 20 Nov 2015, tabb...@gmail.com remarked:
50% chance of two people with the same birthday, from a set of as small
as 23.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem
Secondly, the distribution of surname initial letters is far from
random, with around half clustered into: BHMSW
http://www.surnamestudies.org.uk/teaching/micro.htm
Thirdly, the system doesn't have all the patient names in it, only those
who have an appointment due that day, and quite likely only those with
an appointment in the next couple of hours.
--
Roland Perry
05:14:33 on Fri, 20 Nov 2015, tabb...@gmail.com remarked:
>> >> When phoning up my doctor and dentist, the first thing that they ask
>> >>(for their search) is your DoB.
>> >
>> >That's because when you only have 5,000 randomly spread people in your
>> >database it's a very good key
>> >
>> >when you have 6 million, it's not
>>
>> When I check in at my GP surgery on the screen provided, it asks first
>> for DoB [day/month], and then a first surname initial. This has never
>> failed to disambiguate me.
>
>It is however trivial to see that once you have over 366x26 = 9516 people
>that method has to fail. And that under that number it must fail some of the time.
A couple of problems there - first of all the maths says that there's a
>> >>(for their search) is your DoB.
>> >
>> >That's because when you only have 5,000 randomly spread people in your
>> >database it's a very good key
>> >
>> >when you have 6 million, it's not
>>
>> When I check in at my GP surgery on the screen provided, it asks first
>> for DoB [day/month], and then a first surname initial. This has never
>> failed to disambiguate me.
>
>It is however trivial to see that once you have over 366x26 = 9516 people
>that method has to fail. And that under that number it must fail some of the time.
50% chance of two people with the same birthday, from a set of as small
as 23.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem
Secondly, the distribution of surname initial letters is far from
random, with around half clustered into: BHMSW
http://www.surnamestudies.org.uk/teaching/micro.htm
Thirdly, the system doesn't have all the patient names in it, only those
who have an appointment due that day, and quite likely only those with
an appointment in the next couple of hours.
--
Roland Perry
Mark Goodge
Nov 20, 2015, 4:08:08 PM11/20/15
to
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 05:14:33 -0800 (PST), tabb...@gmail.com put finger to
keyboard and typed:
Yes, but not all of them will have an appointment that day. It's only a
conflict if two people have the same identifying data and the same
appointment date. So it's 365 * 365 * 26, or 3,463,850. In reality,
somewhat less than that, since all of those values (birthday, initial and
appointment date) are not evenly distributed. But it's still a very low
chance of a conflict. Maybe one in a few hundred thousand, for a typical
surgery.
If that high odds event does actually occur, and there is a conflict, it
refuses to allow them to check in via the screen and refers them to the
receptionist. The probability of that is sufficiently low that the burden
of resolving it is not particularly onerous.
Mark
--
Insert random witticism here
http://www.markgoodge.com
keyboard and typed:
conflict if two people have the same identifying data and the same
appointment date. So it's 365 * 365 * 26, or 3,463,850. In reality,
somewhat less than that, since all of those values (birthday, initial and
appointment date) are not evenly distributed. But it's still a very low
chance of a conflict. Maybe one in a few hundred thousand, for a typical
surgery.
If that high odds event does actually occur, and there is a conflict, it
refuses to allow them to check in via the screen and refers them to the
receptionist. The probability of that is sufficiently low that the burden
of resolving it is not particularly onerous.
Mark
--
Insert random witticism here
http://www.markgoodge.com
Chris R
Nov 20, 2015, 4:32:47 PM11/20/15
to
>
>
> "Mark Goodge" wrote in message
> news:522v4blr5uqsb0q3n...@news.markshouse.net...
>
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 05:14:33 -0800 (PST), tabb...@gmail.com put finger
> to
> keyboard and typed:
>
> >On Thursday, 19 November 2015 21:13:07 UTC, Roland Perry wrote:
> >> In message <n2l5vl$qqu$1...@dont-email.me>, at 18:58:06 on Thu, 19 Nov
> >> 2015, tim..... <tims_n...@yahoo.co.uk> remarked:
> >>
> >> >> When phoning up my doctor and dentist, the first thing that they ask
> >> >>(for their search) is your DoB.
> >> >
> >> >That's because when you only have 5,000 randomly spread people in your
> >> >database it's a very good key
> >> >
> >> >when you have 6 million, it's not
> >>
> >> When I check in at my GP surgery on the screen provided, it asks first
> >> for DoB [day/month], and then a first surname initial. This has never
> >> failed to disambiguate me.
> >
> >It is however trivial to see that once you have over 366x26 = 9516 people
> >that method has to fail. And that under that number it must fail some of
> >the time.
>
> Yes, but not all of them will have an appointment that day. It's only a
> conflict if two people have the same identifying data and the same
> appointment date. So it's 365 * 365 * 26, or 3,463,850. In reality,
> somewhat less than that, since all of those values (birthday, initial and
> appointment date) are not evenly distributed. But it's still a very low
> chance of a conflict. Maybe one in a few hundred thousand, for a typical
> surgery.
So long as there are no twins amongst the surgery's patients.
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 05:14:33 -0800 (PST), tabb...@gmail.com put finger
> to
> keyboard and typed:
>
> >On Thursday, 19 November 2015 21:13:07 UTC, Roland Perry wrote:
> >> In message <n2l5vl$qqu$1...@dont-email.me>, at 18:58:06 on Thu, 19 Nov
> >> 2015, tim..... <tims_n...@yahoo.co.uk> remarked:
> >>
> >> >> When phoning up my doctor and dentist, the first thing that they ask
> >> >>(for their search) is your DoB.
> >> >
> >> >That's because when you only have 5,000 randomly spread people in your
> >> >database it's a very good key
> >> >
> >> >when you have 6 million, it's not
> >>
> >> When I check in at my GP surgery on the screen provided, it asks first
> >> for DoB [day/month], and then a first surname initial. This has never
> >> failed to disambiguate me.
> >
> >It is however trivial to see that once you have over 366x26 = 9516 people
> >that method has to fail. And that under that number it must fail some of
> >the time.
>
> Yes, but not all of them will have an appointment that day. It's only a
> conflict if two people have the same identifying data and the same
> appointment date. So it's 365 * 365 * 26, or 3,463,850. In reality,
> somewhat less than that, since all of those values (birthday, initial and
> appointment date) are not evenly distributed. But it's still a very low
> chance of a conflict. Maybe one in a few hundred thousand, for a typical
> surgery.
There might also be issues if one person has multiple appointments.
>
> If that high odds event does actually occur, and there is a conflict, it
> refuses to allow them to check in via the screen and refers them to the
> receptionist. The probability of that is sufficiently low that the burden
> of resolving it is not particularly onerous.
>
Is the system not intelligent enough to keep asking questions until it
> If that high odds event does actually occur, and there is a conflict, it
> refuses to allow them to check in via the screen and refers them to the
> receptionist. The probability of that is sufficiently low that the burden
> of resolving it is not particularly onerous.
>
achieves full disambiguation?
--
Chris R
Clive George
Nov 20, 2015, 4:53:44 PM11/20/15
to
On 20/11/2015 21:32, Chris R wrote:
> So long as there are no twins amongst the surgery's patients.
Twins with names starting with the same letter would be a pain.
> So long as there are no twins amongst the surgery's patients.
Vir Campestris
Nov 20, 2015, 4:58:41 PM11/20/15
to
surname. All the male ones, and all the unmarried females for a start...
Andy
Clive George
Nov 20, 2015, 5:11:41 PM11/20/15
to
what the next level of checking is.
Chris R
Nov 20, 2015, 5:29:06 PM11/20/15
to
>
>
> "Clive George" wrote in message
> news:-76dnVzv0q10BNLL...@brightview.co.uk...
--
Chris R
polygonum
Nov 20, 2015, 5:38:32 PM11/20/15
to
On 20/11/2015 21:51, Clive George wrote:
--
Rod
Mark Goodge
Nov 20, 2015, 6:23:53 PM11/20/15
to
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 21:32:25 -0000, Chris R put finger to keyboard and
Still relatively unlikely to have an appointment on the same day, though.
>There might also be issues if one person has multiple appointments.
>>
>> If that high odds event does actually occur, and there is a conflict, it
>> refuses to allow them to check in via the screen and refers them to the
>> receptionist. The probability of that is sufficiently low that the burden
>> of resolving it is not particularly onerous.
>>
>Is the system not intelligent enough to keep asking questions until it
>achieves full disambiguation?
It needs to stop before the data displayed on screen can identify a person
to a shoulder surfer. So there's a practical limit. But it may differ
according to implementations. The one I have sufficient knowledge of to be
able to comment just gives up immediately if it can't disambiguate. But, on
the other hand, that's not the same software as was in use at a previous
surgery where I was registered. So it's entirely plausible that they're not
all the same.
>There might also be issues if one person has multiple appointments.
>>
>> If that high odds event does actually occur, and there is a conflict, it
>> refuses to allow them to check in via the screen and refers them to the
>> receptionist. The probability of that is sufficiently low that the burden
>> of resolving it is not particularly onerous.
>>
>Is the system not intelligent enough to keep asking questions until it
>achieves full disambiguation?
to a shoulder surfer. So there's a practical limit. But it may differ
according to implementations. The one I have sufficient knowledge of to be
able to comment just gives up immediately if it can't disambiguate. But, on
the other hand, that's not the same software as was in use at a previous
surgery where I was registered. So it's entirely plausible that they're not
all the same.
Roland Perry
Nov 21, 2015, 4:39:11 AM11/21/15
to
In message <pJ-dnSDNw7DxDNLL...@brightview.co.uk>, at
21:32:25 on Fri, 20 Nov 2015, Chris R <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk>
discussing the DoB-down-the-phone situation, you can extend the theory
to working out probabilities of two patients at the same surgery having
been born the same year (as well as day/month). Of course, in that
situation the receptionist can go on to ask for the full surname.
>So long as there are no twins amongst the surgery's patients.
But as the screen is loaded only with appointments *today*, you'd need
both twins to be booked in.
>There might also be issues if one person has multiple appointments.
All it's doing is confirming "Fred has entered the building". It can
then inform whoever the appointment(s) are with.
>> If that high odds event does actually occur, and there is a conflict, it
>> refuses to allow them to check in via the screen and refers them to the
>> receptionist. The probability of that is sufficiently low that the burden
>> of resolving it is not particularly onerous.
>>
>Is the system not intelligent enough to keep asking questions until it
>achieves full disambiguation?
I've never seen it ask additional questions, but rather it refers you to
the receptionist if it can't identify you.
--
Roland Perry
21:32:25 on Fri, 20 Nov 2015, Chris R <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk>
remarked:
>> >> >> When phoning up my doctor and dentist, the first thing that they ask
>> >> >>(for their search) is your DoB.
>> >> >
>> >> >That's because when you only have 5,000 randomly spread people in your
>> >> >database it's a very good key
>> >> >
>> >> >when you have 6 million, it's not
>> >>
>> >> When I check in at my GP surgery on the screen provided, it asks first
>> >> for DoB [day/month], and then a first surname initial. This has never
>> >> failed to disambiguate me.
>> >
>> >It is however trivial to see that once you have over 366x26 = 9516 people
>> >that method has to fail. And that under that number it must fail some of
>> >the time.
>>
>> Yes, but not all of them will have an appointment that day. It's only a
>> conflict if two people have the same identifying data and the same
>> appointment date. So it's 365 * 365 * 26, or 3,463,850. In reality,
>> somewhat less than that, since all of those values (birthday, initial and
>> appointment date) are not evenly distributed. But it's still a very low
>> chance of a conflict. Maybe one in a few hundred thousand, for a typical
>> surgery.
Unfortunately Mark has fallen for the Birthday Paradox. Even if he's
>> >> >> When phoning up my doctor and dentist, the first thing that they ask
>> >> >>(for their search) is your DoB.
>> >> >
>> >> >That's because when you only have 5,000 randomly spread people in your
>> >> >database it's a very good key
>> >> >
>> >> >when you have 6 million, it's not
>> >>
>> >> When I check in at my GP surgery on the screen provided, it asks first
>> >> for DoB [day/month], and then a first surname initial. This has never
>> >> failed to disambiguate me.
>> >
>> >It is however trivial to see that once you have over 366x26 = 9516 people
>> >that method has to fail. And that under that number it must fail some of
>> >the time.
>>
>> Yes, but not all of them will have an appointment that day. It's only a
>> conflict if two people have the same identifying data and the same
>> appointment date. So it's 365 * 365 * 26, or 3,463,850. In reality,
>> somewhat less than that, since all of those values (birthday, initial and
>> appointment date) are not evenly distributed. But it's still a very low
>> chance of a conflict. Maybe one in a few hundred thousand, for a typical
>> surgery.
discussing the DoB-down-the-phone situation, you can extend the theory
to working out probabilities of two patients at the same surgery having
been born the same year (as well as day/month). Of course, in that
situation the receptionist can go on to ask for the full surname.
>So long as there are no twins amongst the surgery's patients.
both twins to be booked in.
>There might also be issues if one person has multiple appointments.
then inform whoever the appointment(s) are with.
>> If that high odds event does actually occur, and there is a conflict, it
>> refuses to allow them to check in via the screen and refers them to the
>> receptionist. The probability of that is sufficiently low that the burden
>> of resolving it is not particularly onerous.
>>
>Is the system not intelligent enough to keep asking questions until it
>achieves full disambiguation?
the receptionist if it can't identify you.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Nov 21, 2015, 4:39:41 AM11/21/15
to
In message <-76dnVzv0q10BNLL...@brightview.co.uk>, at
22:08:14 on Fri, 20 Nov 2015, Clive George <cl...@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk>
remarked:
that still produces a clash, then refer them to the receptionist.
--
Roland Perry
22:08:14 on Fri, 20 Nov 2015, Clive George <cl...@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk>
remarked:
>>>> So long as there are no twins amongst the surgery's patients.
>>>
>>> Twins with names starting with the same letter would be a pain.
>>>
>> I imagine quite a lot of twins have the same first letter on their
>> surname. All the male ones, and all the unmarried females for a start...
>
>Ah yes, surname. I did think of that just after posting :-) I wonder
>what the next level of checking is.
It'll ask itself "Which of the twins has an appointment later today". If
>>>
>>> Twins with names starting with the same letter would be a pain.
>>>
>> I imagine quite a lot of twins have the same first letter on their
>> surname. All the male ones, and all the unmarried females for a start...
>
>Ah yes, surname. I did think of that just after posting :-) I wonder
>what the next level of checking is.
that still produces a clash, then refer them to the receptionist.
--
Roland Perry
Chris R
Nov 21, 2015, 4:43:04 AM11/21/15
to
>
>
> "Mark Goodge" wrote in message
>
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 21:32:25 -0000, Chris R put finger to keyboard and
> typed:
>
> >> "Mark Goodge" wrote in message
> >> news:522v4blr5uqsb0q3n...@news.markshouse.net...
> >>
> >> >>
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 21:32:25 -0000, Chris R put finger to keyboard and
> typed:
>
> >> "Mark Goodge" wrote in message
> >> news:522v4blr5uqsb0q3n...@news.markshouse.net...
> >>
> >> >>
> >> Yes, but not all of them will have an appointment that day. It's only a
> >> conflict if two people have the same identifying data and the same
> >> appointment date. So it's 365 * 365 * 26, or 3,463,850. In reality,
> >> somewhat less than that, since all of those values (birthday, initial
> >> and
> >> appointment date) are not evenly distributed. But it's still a very low
> >> chance of a conflict. Maybe one in a few hundred thousand, for a
> >> typical
> >> surgery.
> >
> >So long as there are no twins amongst the surgery's patients.
>
> Still relatively unlikely to have an appointment on the same day, though.
>
As the parent of twins, I can tell you that you do your utmost to make sure
> >> conflict if two people have the same identifying data and the same
> >> appointment date. So it's 365 * 365 * 26, or 3,463,850. In reality,
> >> somewhat less than that, since all of those values (birthday, initial
> >> and
> >> appointment date) are not evenly distributed. But it's still a very low
> >> chance of a conflict. Maybe one in a few hundred thousand, for a
> >> typical
> >> surgery.
> >
> >So long as there are no twins amongst the surgery's patients.
>
> Still relatively unlikely to have an appointment on the same day, though.
>
they do the same thing on the same day as often as possible. Though they
tend to catch things about a week apart.
--
Chris R
=
Roland Perry
Nov 21, 2015, 5:17:38 AM11/21/15
to
In message <Y_CdnfjqLL3soc3L...@brightview.co.uk>, at
09:42:08 on Sat, 21 Nov 2015, Chris R <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk>
remarked:
80 years. But at some point they'll probably move, and be at different
surgeries.
--
Roland Perry
09:42:08 on Sat, 21 Nov 2015, Chris R <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk>
remarked:
>> >So long as there are no twins amongst the surgery's patients.
>>
>> Still relatively unlikely to have an appointment on the same day, though.
>>
>As the parent of twins, I can tell you that you do your utmost to make sure
>they do the same thing on the same day as often as possible.
That's going to work until they are about 15, not so much for the next
>>
>> Still relatively unlikely to have an appointment on the same day, though.
>>
>As the parent of twins, I can tell you that you do your utmost to make sure
>they do the same thing on the same day as often as possible.
80 years. But at some point they'll probably move, and be at different
surgeries.
--
Roland Perry
Mark Goodge
Nov 21, 2015, 9:40:52 AM11/21/15
to
On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 09:33:37 +0000, Roland Perry put finger to keyboard and
typed:
>In message <pJ-dnSDNw7DxDNLL...@brightview.co.uk>, at
>21:32:25 on Fri, 20 Nov 2015, Chris R <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk>
>remarked:
>>> >> >> When phoning up my doctor and dentist, the first thing that they ask
>>> >> >>(for their search) is your DoB.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >That's because when you only have 5,000 randomly spread people in your
>>> >> >database it's a very good key
>>> >> >
>>> >> >when you have 6 million, it's not
>>> >>
>>> >> When I check in at my GP surgery on the screen provided, it asks first
>>> >> for DoB [day/month], and then a first surname initial. This has never
>>> >> failed to disambiguate me.
>>> >
>>> >It is however trivial to see that once you have over 366x26 = 9516 people
>>> >that method has to fail. And that under that number it must fail some of
>>> >the time.
>>>
>>> Yes, but not all of them will have an appointment that day. It's only a
>>> conflict if two people have the same identifying data and the same
>>> appointment date. So it's 365 * 365 * 26, or 3,463,850. In reality,
>>> somewhat less than that, since all of those values (birthday, initial and
>>> appointment date) are not evenly distributed. But it's still a very low
>>> chance of a conflict. Maybe one in a few hundred thousand, for a typical
>>> surgery.
>
>Unfortunately Mark has fallen for the Birthday Paradox.
No, I haven't.
The probability that any person attending the surgery will have a conflict
of data with someone else attending the surgery the same day is around one
in a few hundred thousand. The probability that, on any given day, there
will be at least one such clash between two people attending the surgery
is, obviously, a lot lower and depends on how many patients the surgery
has. But that's still high enough for it not to be a major issue when it
happens.
typed:
>In message <pJ-dnSDNw7DxDNLL...@brightview.co.uk>, at
>21:32:25 on Fri, 20 Nov 2015, Chris R <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk>
>remarked:
>>> >> >> When phoning up my doctor and dentist, the first thing that they ask
>>> >> >>(for their search) is your DoB.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >That's because when you only have 5,000 randomly spread people in your
>>> >> >database it's a very good key
>>> >> >
>>> >> >when you have 6 million, it's not
>>> >>
>>> >> When I check in at my GP surgery on the screen provided, it asks first
>>> >> for DoB [day/month], and then a first surname initial. This has never
>>> >> failed to disambiguate me.
>>> >
>>> >It is however trivial to see that once you have over 366x26 = 9516 people
>>> >that method has to fail. And that under that number it must fail some of
>>> >the time.
>>>
>>> Yes, but not all of them will have an appointment that day. It's only a
>>> conflict if two people have the same identifying data and the same
>>> appointment date. So it's 365 * 365 * 26, or 3,463,850. In reality,
>>> somewhat less than that, since all of those values (birthday, initial and
>>> appointment date) are not evenly distributed. But it's still a very low
>>> chance of a conflict. Maybe one in a few hundred thousand, for a typical
>>> surgery.
>
>Unfortunately Mark has fallen for the Birthday Paradox.
The probability that any person attending the surgery will have a conflict
of data with someone else attending the surgery the same day is around one
in a few hundred thousand. The probability that, on any given day, there
will be at least one such clash between two people attending the surgery
is, obviously, a lot lower and depends on how many patients the surgery
has. But that's still high enough for it not to be a major issue when it
happens.
Roland Perry
Nov 21, 2015, 10:23:40 AM11/21/15
to
In message <ed015b1mcftledgn7...@news.markshouse.net>, at
14:40:40 on Sat, 21 Nov 2015, Mark Goodge
<use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>>Unfortunately Mark has fallen for the Birthday Paradox.
>
>No, I haven't.
>
>The probability that any person attending the surgery will have a conflict
>of data with someone else attending the surgery the same day is around one
>in a few hundred thousand.
You are still going for the 366 days x 26 initials? (That's only 9,500
by the way, ignoring that neither is equally distributed).
>The probability that, on any given day, there will be at least one such
>clash between two people attending the surgery is, obviously, a lot
>lower and depends on how many patients the surgery has. But that's
>still high enough for it not to be a major issue when it happens.
According to the Birthday Paradox, the chance of 23 people attending
that day having the same day/month is 50%, add the initial and it works
most of the time, despite the clustering of initials.
At no point do any of these numbers approach 100's of thousands.
--
Roland Perry
14:40:40 on Sat, 21 Nov 2015, Mark Goodge
<use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
>>Unfortunately Mark has fallen for the Birthday Paradox.
>
>No, I haven't.
>
>The probability that any person attending the surgery will have a conflict
>of data with someone else attending the surgery the same day is around one
>in a few hundred thousand.
by the way, ignoring that neither is equally distributed).
>The probability that, on any given day, there will be at least one such
>clash between two people attending the surgery is, obviously, a lot
>lower and depends on how many patients the surgery has. But that's
>still high enough for it not to be a major issue when it happens.
that day having the same day/month is 50%, add the initial and it works
most of the time, despite the clustering of initials.
At no point do any of these numbers approach 100's of thousands.
--
Roland Perry
0 new messages