RAAus to disclose member details

[turboplanner]

" In business digital ensures you are paying the correct price for the correct item; mistakes are eliminated "

You Have to be joking, some poor sods are looking at million dollar bills, with just a missing digit or dot, or even an extra three zero's.

 

Machines Don't come up without a Person entering DATA.

 

But machine Do go wrong, and "stuff-up" the end result !.

 

Funny they (who ever|) picked tens, when computers run on "bits" that are Not ten based.

 

spacesailor

If you type in 1000000 instead of 100, then a million dollars will be taken out of your account instead of ten; funny that.

 

I think you might be thinking of the DECIMAL system when you talk about bits and tens

 

The basis of a computer starts with an In and an Out (IO). All the combinations flow from that, so it has nothing to do with tens.

 

The software is what determines our day to day calculations, and is not based on tens either.

 

You can tell the computer to put a dot of a certain size and certain colour on the screen a certain distance from the left of the screen and the top of the screen, and that dot will instantly appear. That's digital, and if you put a few thousand commands in like that, you can produce a drawing (rendering) similar to a digital photo. Because every single point has an address, you can tell the computer to change the colour on every address related to a person's clothing, and their clothes will change colour; that's digital.

 

If you want to crunch numbers for financial reasons you can use software like Microsoft Excel. The default size of an excel cell is about 6 mm high x 22 mm wide, and each cell has an address, so you can put information in a cell and call it up in another cell, add it to what's in another cell, or if it contains a drawing, put that saved drawing on the screen somewhere else every time it is called up.

 

Excel has hundreds of thousands of these cells; I've forgotten the real height of it's page, but the 22 mm wide cells go for about 2.1 KILOMETRES

 

Excel is not based on tens either; if you input cubits into the calculation, you'll get cubits out.

 

In the 1980s GIGO (garbage in = garbage out) was stressed by computer suppliers and the software industry, but as per the example Spacesailor has given us, we all fumble now and again, but these days there are algorithms even for that.

 

In designing trucks I would always do each calculation twice to eliminate miss-strikes, and  B Double would take about a week to assess and correct. Today Excel does that for me doing 67 concurrent calculations in about 11 minutes - a huge power increase.

 

 

[aro]

In designing trucks I would always do each calculation twice to eliminate miss-strikes, and  B Double would take about a week to assess and correct. Today Excel does that for me doing 67 concurrent calculations in about 11 minutes - a huge power increase.

Studies have shown that 9 out of 10 spreadsheets contain errors.

 

If Avdata can correct errors in their bills, it is evidence that they are not heavily computerized. If you have ever tried to correct a billing error by the large telcos or utility companies it can be very difficult because the person on the phone can't change the computerized record.

 

Sometimes I suspect there are policies of making errors that are small enough that the customer won't bother to go through the hassle of correcting them. A few dollars over a million customers adds up...

 

 

[spacesailor]

Counting on fingers !,

 

If you use the thumb to count the segments of each finger you Will get:  Three X four finger, making 12 (Yes it does make  sense to count in Twelves )

 

I have only Four fingers on each hand.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[kaz3g]

Might be some sort of record for the number of glaring mistakes in a short post.

It’s all the fault of predictive text, Frank...at least that’s my excuse.

 

 

[frank marriott]

It’s all the fault of predictive text, Frank...at least that’s my excuse.

Couldn’t argue with that Kaz but still embarrassing 

 

 

[Jim McDowall]

No matter what the problem why should the administrative solutions be reduced to a proposition that caters for the lowest common denominator.  After all, people still drive unregistered and uninsured despite the risks and unlawfulness. I object to my privacy being traded for a bureaucratic convenience. If my aircraft was VH registered I know what the deal is but RAAus is a private body and governed by a different set of rules and I expect to be protected by the laws that were enacted by Parliament to prevent unauthorized exchange of private information.

 

If airfield operators were so concerned they could cheaply install cameras to see who is using their facilities. They may miss some touch and go traffic but that loss may be cheaper than Avadata's fees.

 

 

[poteroo]

If airfield operators were so concerned they could cheaply install cameras to see who is using their facilities. They may miss some touch and go traffic but that loss may be cheaper than Avadata's fees.

 

Many don't use Avdata, (and save 60% of their landing charge).  Notwithstanding, if a camera image allows ID of an RAAus aircraft, how will the airport owner invoice the operator? 

 

Hiding behind a flimsy argument based on privacy does not alter the fact that if you use the service - then you are required to pay for it.    You can't  'eat the steak' and then argue about payment.

 

If we want our say, then we should pay our way.

 

I'm quite frankly dismayed that people are not prepared to meet their user obligations.

 

 

[KRviator]

So I have a question...

 

WHEN will RAAus provide my details to an airfield operator?

 

Whenever they (the airfield operator) request it, irrespective of whether or not I've actually landed there and then - like the AvData clowns - will I end up arguing with them about my plane being in a hangar interstate at the time....Or will RAAus expect some kind of proof that I was there before releasing my details?

 

Going by their actions this far, I'd expect it to be the former.

 

 

[kasper]

Many don't use Avdata, (and save 60% of their landing charge).  Notwithstanding, if a camera image allows ID of an RAAus aircraft, how will the airport owner invoice the operator? 

 

Hiding behind a flimsy argument based on privacy does not alter the fact that if you use the service - then you are required to pay for it.    You can't  'eat the steak' and then argue about payment.

 

If we want our say, then we should pay our way.

 

I'm quite frankly dismayed that people are not prepared to meet their user obligations.

Completely agree that people who use facilities with landing fees should absolutely pay.  I always have. 

 

But equally i find find it offensive and just plain wrong for RAAus to allow access to member and aircraft owner private data to third parties.  

 

The two two issues are not necessarily exclusive of each other however the existence of one does not nevesesitate the access that is he issue in the second.

 

 

[aro]

The solution seems simple, Avdata send the information to RAA who pass on the bill to the owners. Then RAA require outstanding landing charges to be paid before renewing aircraft registration.

 

RAA could add a fee to cover costs - or Avdata might even discount their fee to account for sending one invoice a month instead of one for every aircraft.

 

 

[facthunter]

The more who are involved, the less of the money gets to the provider. That's in no one's interests. Yes YOU should pay a reasonable amount for what YOU use

 

     Your personal info should NOT be given out without your express permission. That's a breach of trust,  especially when there's a box to tick to indicate your wishes. (When it was) There's been no survey since (as far as I know). Nev

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

I was at the RAA meeting at Ycab this morning and asked a question about this. Its part of the privacy agreement you sign when you join RAA. Its the fine print that no one reads as usual. They have made it that they can only get one entry at a time and all requests are logged. They input your rego number and they get back your contact details. 

 

 

[kasper]

I was at the RAA meeting at Ycab this morning and asked a question about this. Its part of the privacy agreement you sign when you join RAA. Its the fine print that no one reads as usual. They have made it that they can only get one entry at a time and all requests are logged. They input your rego number and they get back your contact details. 

Interesting.  If they want to try running that one they will be on a hiding to nothing for anyone who joined before they put it in the joining form ... like everyone who became members on incorporation from the former incorporated association and have never lapses their membership.

 

certainly hope they have flagged as not searchable ALL the ones who never agreed and do not allow access to any records for them. 

 

 

[kasper]

Oh dear.  

 

Just had had a look at the online membership application screen and the privacy commissioner is going to die laughing looking at just how informed your consent is on the RAAus form. 

 

Screenshotvhelow is where they have slipped it in .... after the payment options without ANY opt out even though there are 3 screens of opt ins and outs to tick before you get to the payment and I’m not a robot bit. 

 

Sorry RAAus but THAT is not informed consent and they way you did it you KNOW it’s not legit. When there are 7 tick boxes getting various consents and even allowing an opt out but you do not for this. 

 

 

 

[Keith Page]

The solution seems simple, Avdata send the information to RAA who pass on the bill to the owners. Then RAA require outstanding landing charges to be paid before renewing aircraft registration.

RAA could add a fee to cover costs - or Avdata might even discount their fee to account for sending one invoice a month instead of one for every aircraft.

Hmmmmm.. You may have the answer there.

 

Tweak your solution and see what the masses say about that.

 

Have a system where landing fees are paid.

 

That way all the members information stays in house and to renew the registration pay the outstanding landing fees.

 

KP 

 

 

[KRviator]

I was at the RAA meeting at Ycab this morning and asked a question about this. Its part of the privacy agreement you sign when you join RAA. Its the fine print that no one reads as usual. They have made it that they can only get one entry at a time and all requests are logged. They input your rego number and they get back your contact details. 

It is a part of the 2018 Privacy Policy. It is not part of any privacy policy prior to that. The 2018 policy was added to their website after I called out the CEO last year for not complying with their own policy after they apparently left their old one up. And their was ZERO notification to the membership that the existing privacy policy had been changed to include the disclosure to airfield operators.

 

 

[frank marriott]

One thing is consistent over the last few years ‘consideration of members views is not necessary - I know best so there’

 

Dare I say it again, as was predicted.  As in politics we get what we vote for.

 

 

[M61A1]

We are in the digital age and the digital age, for the greater good

It can be good when used properly, but also can be abused.

 

Clearly RAAus has a problem managing it. It was only hours after using my work email address with RAAus, (because we have a lovely scanner there), that I started getting all manner of spam and phishing emails.

 

There have been several cases where personal data has been accidentally or deliberately mishandled by govt agencies, with serious consequences

 

 

[turboplanner]

It can be good when used properly, but also can be abused.

Clearly RAAus has a problem managing it. It was only hours after using my work email address with RAAus, (because we have a lovely scanner there), that I started getting all manner of spam and phishing emails.

 

There have been several cases where personal data has been accidentally or deliberately mishandled by govt agencies, with serious consequences

True; when I was outlining all the possibilities, I didn't mention the users who just transfer bad marketing habits from shoving open the front door to the digital equivalent.

 

Lie the ones that think because you bought a five dollar item from them, you wanted to marry them.

 

Or those where you bought an item and for the next six months received emails to buy exactly the same item from them even though it was supposed to last for life.

 

Or the data miners; the ones who come up with a Facebook picture of the kind soul willing to hand over his house to a homeless person if he gets enough likes, and every dill in the district is giving it likes, when it's a business paying FB so much per like so they can put all the names on a list and go to advertisers selling ad spaces for 2.6 million viewers which eventually clog up the FB pages of all the gullible.

 

When an organisation sells data on its own members, that's about the bottom of the pit.

 

Eventually someone will come up with a do not disturb app, and that will be the end of those turkeys.

 

 

[spacesailor]

I WANT ONE NOW !

 

" do not disturb app, "

 

Please.

 

spacesailer

 

 

[kgwilson]

Easy, turn your phone off &/or delete every social media account you have or ever had, block all email addresses except those you explicitly trust & these aren't your bank, accountant, friends, lawyer, or anyone in business, i.e withdraw from the modern world. 

 

 

[kasper]

Easy, turn your phone off &/or delete every social media account you have or ever had, block all email addresses except those you explicitly trust & these aren't your bank, accountant, friends, lawyer, or anyone in business, i.e withdraw from the modern world. 

Or - rather than dealing with the result by disconnecting you deal with the causes ... like data security and privacy ??

 

 

[Yenn]

If you really don't think RAAus should give your details to airport owners and that is illegal, you are not going to get anything done about it on this forum. I suggest that you talk to RAAus and if not happy, then you can pursue it through the courts. A group of you could do this together, there must be about a dozen or so who give the impression that it is a very serious matter.

 

 

[kasper]

If you really don't think RAAus should give your details to airport owners and that is illegal, you are not going to get anything done about it on this forum. I suggest that you talk to RAAus and if not happy, then you can pursue it through the courts. A group of you could do this together, there must be about a dozen or so who give the impression that it is a very serious matter.

Have done. 

 

1. Rang RAAus and spoke to our Michael - he thinks the policy is all fine.  I noted my renewal did not include any consent to disclose. 

 

2. Have raised this with information commission as a report of breach.  Up to them as to how they approach RAAus. 

 

3. If I ever get an invoice from an airfield operator that I think came from RAAus improper disclosure I will commence action - can’t raise an action until I have standing. 

 

4. Each and every board member of RAAus will be getting yet another email from me on what I consider to be illegal activity asking them directly to respond. 

 

In sure board member are heartily sick of me by now but until RAAus starts behaving as I think they should I’ll just have to keep sticking emails and letter to them as and when. 

 

 

[Jim McDowall]

It is a part of the 2018 Privacy Policy

It (the Privacy Policy) matters not one bit if I do not specifically agree to the release of my personal information and usually for specific purposes. That consent cannot be buried in a "agreement to obey the Rules and Policies of the Company". Indeed, the Corporations Act requires that all company members of the same class have the same rights (not obligations)  and these can only be varied by agreement via the carriage of a variation to the rules of the company at a General Meeting.

 

This illustrates the problem of private bodies undertaking public functions. CASR Part 149 is not a solution but merely a band aid "fix" until it suffers the scrutiny of the courts aided by some lawyers who understand the breadth of the law that comes into play when you mix public function with private obligation.