It is important to know why ABS does not need the name or address of each individual to make us think that our community benefits from such an activity.
Please allow me to illustrate. I am not simplifying anything that, in this case, ABS is trying to achieve. I want ABS to know that the census data it collects will be as good as the data it collects even without the names.
Let us take a simple example of guessing jelly beans in a jar. Even if limiting the sample to a size of less than 200, the law of averages hold good to such an extent the average count is closer to the actual number of jelly beans, irrespective of how many such samples are done. It is more likely that jelly beans will be jelly beans if people are not asked for their identity to be stamped on the jelly beans when they are asked to put a jelly bean in the jar. How can this be done in 21st century?
It is known that ABS has been collecting this data for years. But the circumstance under which it wants to collect the data has changed dramatically. What once deemed to be safe with the government is not any more. What once deemed kept encrypted strongly enough to decrypt is not any more. Just because a certain type of data is available does not mean that it should be acquired.
Nations are adjusting to the requirements as attacks on an individual’s privacy and identity increase in numbers and intensity. Social security numbers in USA are not revealed fully to identify all 9 digits even when an identity of a person needs to be verified.
ABS generates a unique number for a residence. Its acts as a jar for ABS. It is more than enough for ABS to look at the all jelly beans in that jar without a need to stamp them with a name. It can be stamped with a number. It’s like a virtual credit card number used to shop on the internet without revealing the actual credit card number. It can be made more secure my attaching a pin to that number to ensure that the jar is not hijacked.
ABS can now actually count the jelly beans in those jars without any guesswork and those jelly beans can be tracked and stored for years without jeopardizing the privacy or identity of those individuals (jelly beans) who are diligently complying with the census requirements. They can do that without compromising their privacy or identity to the hackers.
For communities to thrive, we don’t need name, exact date of birth. We don’t yet have any services so customized to uniquely benefit each and every individual in a community.
Can we nudge ABS to adopt some of the following to make sure census data in 21st century becomes more accurate with a need to scrub the data of private and hackable information?
- Abolish the requirement of procuring the names, instead go by a virtual name or number
- Ask for age, and not date of birth
- Ask for income range than specific income details
- Ask to provide accurately the information on the number of people deemed to be at the residence including the guests, but not make guest comply
- More importantly, device security protocols for the new generation, who are already at increasing risk of being compromised because of their open attitude, to protect them from financial, social and character losses.