Microchip inplanted in your body makes everything better - RFID commercial

[LORD M]

Oooooook... so now they want us to get microchips inplanted in our bodies. The excuses for it are pretty damn questionably lame imo. Just another way to get more control over the masses and keep track of your location?

I have heard that in South Korea they are building a city already on this technology. The chip will be your identity.


iyAVm5G1Cso

[Stark]

Yay Orwellian dystopia! You would think that people would realize that '1984' was only a book and not a guideline on how to screw the world up. Big Brother is always watching.

[BlightedArt]

Oh god no...

[MikeMakesModels]

Sorry, but we're already there - when was the last time you did anything without a card, a reference number or a bit of paper to show you were who you said you were? Hell, to log into CA I needed a username and password - it's like I'm just a line of code in a database here!

That ad is shockingly bad, but patients do die because they're given the wrong drugs and the mechanisms for control are already firmly in place. I can't say I'm too worried if this is going to be the next development if it cuts out some of the current redundancy and bureaucracy.

[Hookswords]

It's already in you if you got a flu vaccine

*adjusts his tinfoil hat*

[AsaB]

Oh wow, this ad is so bad, makes me want to barf.

And no, I certainly won't be getting one of these!

[Stark]

Sorry, but we're already there - when was the last time you did anything without a card, a reference number or a bit of paper to show you were who you said you were? Hell, to log into CA I needed a username and password - it's like I'm just a line of code in a database here!

That ad is shockingly bad, but patients do die because they're given the wrong drugs and the mechanisms for control are already firmly in place. I can't say I'm too worried if this is going to be the next development if it cuts out some of the current redundancy and bureaucracy.

Yeah, but you can always say that your account was hacked or your identity stolen. There are ways to play the system, but if this gets put into you, then guess what, there's no trying to hide where you were when the hooker went missing and your bank account is suddenly $2,000 short.

[TASmith]

Stark, if that were the only problem it'd be a good thing.

Back in the 30's there was a comedian named Will Rogers who joked about his birth certificate. He goes into a govt office and they say they can't help him without a birth certificate. He just says, "Gee, where I come from, they just kinda take it for granted."

[Jason Ross]

So I guess it's safe to say that this is no longer a "conspiracy theory" anymore? Alex Jones has been saying this for years. I guess the people who were saying "Oh they would NEVER do that" are now saying "Oh well it must be for OUR own good".

My buddy who works at a government building was offered one of these last year. They were placing them in the upper tricep.

[WeAreLegion]

This ad disgusts me, next thing you know they'll start making it a requirement to have these implants, is it me or is the government tightening it's grasp on America's nutsack?
If you are going to make an ad as sickening as this one, atleast make it half-way decent. *FacePalm*

[s.ketch]

Oh god! technology! everybody panic!

Quote from the guy who posted the vid "What? By vaccines, Immunizations, and now chipping?"

Yeah guys, let's listen to some people who think vaccines are evil government tools to control populations. Sure is critical thinking in here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microchip_implant_(human)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio-frequency_identification#Problems_and_concerns

In 2002, the VeriChip Corporation received preliminary approval from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to market its device in the U.S. within specific guidelines. Since its effective approval in 2004 [2], about 80 hospitals and 232 doctors have elected to use the system.[3]

By implanting such a chip with a patient's medical record, hospitals and emergency workers can immediately gain access to an ill or injured person's medical history regardless of location or condition. Implanted chips are impossible to lose, which could reduce (extremely difficult to steal the implant itself) or increase (may be able to be hacked and read without touching the person) the chances of information theft.


One major challenge in securing RFID tags is a shortage of computational resources within the tag. Standard cryptographic techniques require more resources than are available in most low cost RFID devices. RSA Security has patented a prototype device that locally jams RFID signals by interrupting a standard collision avoidance protocol, allowing the user to prevent identification if desired.

Logical concerns:

-The frequencies used for RFID in the USA are currently incompatible with those of Europe or Japan. Furthermore, no emerging standard has yet become as universal as the barcode.
-EPCglobal Network, by design, is also susceptible to DoS attacks. Using similar mechanism with DNS in resolving EPC data requests, the ONS Root servers become vulnerable to DoS attacks. Any organization planning to embark on EPCglobal Network may cringe upon discovering that the EPCglobal Network infrastructure inherits security weaknesses similar to DNS'[63].
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-in-the-middle_attack
-Suppose Alice wishes to communicate with Bob. Meanwhile, Mallory wishes to eavesdrop on the conversation, or possibly deliver a false message to Bob. To get started, Alice must ask Bob for his public key. If Bob sends his public key to Alice, but Mallory is able to intercept it, a man-in-the-middle attack can begin. Mallory sends a forged message to Alice that claims to be from Bob, but includes Mallory's public key. Alice, believing this public key to be Bob's, then encrypts her message with Mallory's key and sends the enciphered message back to Bob. Mallory again intercepts, deciphers the message, keeps a copy, and reenciphers it (after alteration if desired) using the public key Bob originally sent to Alice. When Bob receives the newly enciphered message, he will believe it came from Alice.

The chips aren't secure enough to implement on a wide scale. There is no global, or even a US standard for the RFID frequencies. So how is the evil guberment going to track all of you when they don't even know the frequencies? Not only that but you can clone tags which means that the person that's being read might not be that person. I'm sure the New World Order in all their grand scheming and plans overlooked a bunch of security and technical problems that would thwart their plans.

Wait a sec....

Religious Issue

Some Christians are concerned that the development of implantable microchips and RFIDs are a precursor to events prophesied by the apostle John the Apostle in the Bible's Book of Revelation.[12][13] Implantable chips are seen as technological development that could be used to implement the prophesy that predicted that a "Mark of the Beast" on the hand or forehead will be required for individuals to complete any transactions in future society. According to belief in this interpretation of the prophesy, the fate for those that take the mark will be that they are destroyed or condemned by God.[14]

Sure. Bible says some people will get tattooed with 666 so let's interpret that as "RIFD is the devil." Another win for religion!

[LORD M]

Oh god technology everybody panic

Oh god technology used in the wrong way for questionable purposes everybody panic

[Falchion]

Just a friendly reminder folks: WE ARE WATCHING. :)

[s.ketch]

Oh god technology used in the wrong way for questionable purposes everybody panic

What's questionable about it? What evidence do you have that implies the government using this technology to track you 24/7.

[LORD M]

What's questionable about it? What evidence do you have that implies the government using this technology to track you 24/7.

Don't you find it a bit questionable that all of a sudden we need to get microchips inplanted in us so that everything will work better? They are planning to make this chip have the ability to open doors, start your car, cheeck in at work, as passport and as your ID and the gods knows what more. All of a sudden all our daily endevours will be controlled by this chip - and the government controlls the chip, and thereby controlling you.

And what if you don't act as they want you to act? What if you're critical towards the government, will they simply turn off this chip so that you cannot execute your daily endevours? What then if you cannot prove who you are since the chip IS your ID? The chip is using radio frequencies, thereby it can be remotely switched on and off with such an application. This chip is nothing else but taking our free will and our rights away from us, just as they have done little by little for many many years.


I think that you should analyze everything and look at the possibilities that are both good and bad, not just accept anything unknowingly what it do and can do. And as far as I can tell, imo, the bad outweights the good a lot.

[Shard]

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio-frequency_identification#Passports

"Standards for RFID passports are determined by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), and are contained in ICAO Document 9303, Part 1, Volumes 1 and 2 (6th edition, 2006). ICAO refers to the ISO/IEC 14443 RFID chips in e-passports as "contactless integrated circuits". ICAO standards provide for e-passports to be identifiable by a standard e-passport logo on the front cover."

there are standards for some RFID applications, all it needs is a reader installed in the airport (or wherever) and its easy to immediately know the history of whoever is around that receiver. of course their use make sense in many cases but we shouldnt ignore the massive loss of privacy this would imply.

[jcpahl]

I can't see anything at all wrong with the population being tagged-and-released like cattle. I think this will help the nanny-state take care of us better, and that can only be a good thing.

[Dan!]

http://tenser.typepad.com/tenser_said_the_tensor/images/laughing-man.jpg

[nauvice]

Yay Orwellian dystopia! You would think that people would realize that '1984' was only a book and not a guideline on how to screw the world up. Big Brother is always watching.

This type of fiction isn't warning us about technology, but its misuse by overbearing laws. This to me sounds like great news

just the other day I was having a discussion with my parents about how they feel we've become just mere numbers (our social)... they came from a small town where everyone knew each other by name and were friendly with their doctor, banker, priest etc. But we're no longer segregating ourselves in small towns, and doctors today cant keep track of their hundreds of patients. I think a social is Better than a name.. it only sounds bad because its made of numbers, that's just a psychological attachment they should get over with. With names, there are most likely 100+ people who share your same name, but only you have such a social and that makes you an individual less likely to be mistaken for someone else.

This is an improvement of that, you hear in news stories all the time of dead people with no identity on them. And not to mention this would make identity theft almost impossible... the only people who should fear this are criminals

[s.ketch]

Don't you find it a bit questionable that all of a sudden we need to get microchips inplanted in us so that everything will work better?

All of a sudden? This tech has been around for years. I find your phrasing odd. Nobody said we NEED it. Nobody has said "You have to get this implanted, your life depends on it." Like all new technologies, it's being offered and marketed by a corporation. We didn't need the internet, or computers but it sure has made things a bit easier. Why aren't you upset that companies market to hospitals for computer systems that store and organize medical records? Hospitals now are eliminating paper. My doctor's office is mostly electronic already. Nurses use special laptops instead of clipboards.

This commercial is simply offering a product to store your medical record. It's not a necessity, and there are valid problems with the system that haven't been worked out. Simply fearing it because of unfounded suspicions about government conspiracy isn't a valid complaint.



They are planning to make this chip have the ability to open doors, start your car, cheeck in at work, as passport and as your ID and the gods knows what more. All of a sudden all our daily endevours will be controlled by this chip - and the government controlls the chip, and thereby controlling you.

Who is "they"? Scientists you mean? Yes the chips will be able to unlock doors, car doors included, possibly clock in at work, and they already use RFIDs in your passport. These are possible features of the technology. You can already accomplish these tasks without putting the chip in your body. The difference being convenience.

Not to mention the technological boundaries in the way of this. You can't just switch over night. In order to clock in at work using a chip 1) Chips must be fully secure (they are not). 2)Employers must have readers (this means buying and converting all facilities) 3) New computer databases/serves/networks. This is not a small task for a business.

The chip doesn't control your life. What you must mean is that people will become dependent on the chip. But we're already dependent on keys. Thats all a chip would act as in this instance. It's not like your soul is downloaded to your car before you can drive it. It's a simple unique radio frequency sent to a device in the door that says "open it" The only difference is that it's hard to misplace a chip inside of you.

And what if you don't act as they want you to act? What if you're critical towards the government, will they simply turn off this chip so that you cannot execute your daily endevours? What then if you cannot prove who you are since the chip IS your ID? The chip is using radio frequencies, thereby it can be remotely switched on and off with such an application. This chip is nothing else but taking our free will and our rights away from us, just as they have done little by little for many many years.

What if you don't act like "they" want you to act now? Why not shut down your bank accounts, repossess your home and vehicle, delete your SSN, etc?

The only way to identify yourself isn't your drivers license. You have a birth certificate, social security card, deeds and titles to property. Your family and friends know who you are. You're making up a pretend world where the only way to know who you are is a chip. The chip is just a replacement for a plastic card.

If your drivers license was a small plastic cube that you attached to your keyring, how would you feel about it? You wouldn't care. You'd probably say it's pretty cool. But there is this stigma around chips propagated by conspiracy theorists and religious folks. Just like stigma around any technology that people don't fully understand. The LHC is going to cause black holes and destroy Earth, remember?


I think that you should analyze everything and look at the possibilities that are both good or bad, not just accept anything unknowingly what it do and can do.

I agree completely. We should analyze everything and fully understand what this technology is. But it's also not about a fantasy or what we feel. It's about reality. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. There's absolutely nothing but hearsay and half-cocked rants that says this is a bad technology that will be used by the government to control us.

It's not even guaranteed that the technology will take off or be successful. This might just be betamax or UMD with the discovery of something better around the corner.

[TASmith]

Buckwiesal, I can see how this microchip could be useful, especially in holding medical information. That information you could also put on a card in your wallet.

This issue isn't as simple as it seems. First of all, it could be used in different countries. In America it may not seem so frightening, maybe, but what about in China, or North Korea? And what information would they put in the chip?

Secondly, it's historical fact that authoritarian regimes have sprung up in the past, notably Nazi Germany, but also in South America, and Russia. What happens when people with trackable chips suddenly commit such crimes as meeting together in a public space, reading certain books, organizing a protest, etc? There're questions involving degree of use, temptation on the part of govt to misuse technology, and slippery slopes. There's also a question of legitimizing this to the point where it becomes standard - to where people accept it, and inject a microchip at a young age, before they can understand the implications. Say, in 30 years, a lot of people have this. Then, in another hundred years, a country turns several degrees more authoritarian. They have a system in place to oppress many, many people.

Not all countries relish personal freedoms the way we do in the US. For instance, random roadside checks are standard here in Slovakia - they can pull you over and ask for your documents anytime without suspicion of a crime. Plus, the UK has a host of issues regarding personal freedom. They already use cameras and detectives to track people for the most inane reasons, imagine if they could track you with these chips? Would they?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/world/europe/25surveillance.html?_r=1&ref=world

EDIT: On a practical note, what happens when your medical info changes? How easy is it to change the info on that chip? Say, if you develop an allergy to a certain medicine. Do you then need a second, updated chip implanted? And then what if they read the wrong chip? Just curious. Excising the first chip sounds painful. I'd much rather have a new card in my wallet. Why do I sound like Jack Handey, now?

[nauvice]

a society where we're becoming robots > society where we're just wild ants.

At least in either situation, a brain with creativity and imagination is what still makes us human and we artists are the front runners proving that, hurray for us

[s.ketch]

Buckwiesal, I can see how this microchip could be useful, especially in holding medical information. That information you could also put on a card in your wallet.

This issue isn't as simple as it seems. First of all, it could be used in different countries. In America it may not seem so frightening, maybe, but what about in China, or North Korea? And what information would they put in the chip?

Secondly, it's historical fact that authoritarian regimes have sprung up in the past, notably Nazi Germany, but also in South America, Russia. Not all countries relish personal freedoms the way we do in the US. For instance, random roadside checks are standard here in Slovakia - they can pull you over and ask for your documents anytime without suspicion of a crime. Plus, the UK has a host of issues regarding personal freedom. They already use cameras and detectives to track people for the most inane reasons, imagine if they could track you with these chips? Would they?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/world/europe/25surveillance.html?_r=1&ref=world

What about China or North Korea? They already abuse and exploit computers. Should we stop making computers? The chip, like any modern technology could be used anywhere that it's needed. I don't think tribesmen in Africa or South America are going to be getting them though. China and NK are already being controlled by their government without chips. Chips aren't going to change decades of political and social injustice. It's not going to make it better, and it's not going to make it worse.

And yes it is historical fact that authoritarian governments spring up. Is it historical fact that all authoritarian governments have sprung up suddenly due to one tiny bit of technology? Doubt it. That historical fact has little to do with the discussion of RFID chips. It's a straw man.

[nauvice]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/world/europe/25surveillance.html?_r=1&ref=world

that seems creepy because of the subject matter... what's more perceived as innocence than a mother and 3 little girls? This happens often to people suspected of other crimes like drug dealing, gang association, etc. her would-be crime isnt as high and life threatening as my examples, so maybe they didnt need to take such a drastic measure, but I dont see the big deal.

[TASmith]

"and it's not going to make it worse."

It very well could, and the same people who make that chip for medical purposes here could make a ton of money off it elsewhere for questionable purposes. I never said the technology itself will change a government, but if and when that happens, they'll have another tool at their disposal. There's also a question of identity fraud. If there are readers for those chips, then a thief could get one too, and read people's personal info just by walking by them, or sitting by them in a subway.

[nauvice]

Chips aren't going to change decades of political and social injustice. It's not going to make it better, and it's not going to make it worse.


really? I think it would make a big change for the better or worst. It would make it harder for liars and cheaters to climb their way into the political spectrum, that would be a better change. but in a corrupt government, it would make it harder for revolutionists to hide themselves, would make their situation a bit worst.

[TASmith]

zwarrior, when a politician lies in the US, you don't need a microchip to remember it, you need John Stewart.

[s.ketch]

Of course there's security issues. I said so myself in earlier posts. That's why this tech isn't being implemented tomorrow or practical as a way to control a populace.

I'll use your Slovakian paper checking thing as an example. Right now the police can pull you over, check your papers and search you for little reason. I agree that this is an injustice and shouldn't occur. But it does.

So let's imagine all of your papers are on a small chip inside a plastic shell that you carry around with you. The police can pull out a scanner and read this chip. Is this less or more of a crime? The chip simply replaced the papers. Police have to be within range in order to check them. They could already check your papers at will anyways. There is no difference.

Now lets go with a chip inside your hand. The police pull you over and scan your hand. Before, they pulled you over and checked some papers. Same situation, same crime against privacy, different medium. So why is a chip worse? What logical, rational, argument makes chip reading more invasive than forcing you to hand over physical identification?

If you refused papers, they would arrest you or beat you up. True, you can't refuse a chip reading, unless you had the device to block it. Even if you did, they would beat you up. If you didn't have papers, you'd be arrested. So having a chip saves you from being arrested even though it's pretty damn bad that you're being forcibly searched just as you are now in a world without a chip.

The whole point of all my walls of text is that the US isn't suddenly going to be a totalitarian nazi regime because of a chip. Conspiracy theories are baseless fears that usually have 0% evidence to back them up. This technology isn't the downfall of democracy or freedom. It's simply a different medium of information storage/transfer. It's cool to be cautious, trust me I understand that. But to act like this is the end of the world is silly.

EDIT: And the tech isn't so advanced that normal people can't understand it. Wrap your hand up in tin foil and then it's pretty useless. All it is, is a tiny chip of a material that emits a radio frequency when a scanner activates it. It's electromagnetic radiation. Less advanced than a cell phone signal. Do your cell phones work in tunnels? In large stores? Do you guys know why? You can easily block the signal of an RFID if you wanted.

EDIT 2:What I'm more worried about is the commercial applications of this. Imagine walking down the street and advertisements knowing your name. A credit chip. A television or video game console that knows who you are. Take a computer in to be fixed and Geek Squad and them being able to scan a chip on the computer that has my identity attached to it.

[TASmith]

I'm generally not so paranoid about the US govt. The thing with a chip, though, is that it could also be equipped with a GPS device. That bothers me a lot more than just having info on it. And there have been some instances in the US of civil rights abuses. Like finding protest organizers and arresting them en masse BEFORE THEY PROTEST. How do you arrest someone for a crime they haven't committed? That and the occasional cop who arrests someone for not having an ID. It's rare but it happens.

[carlosranna]

Nobody is gonna put a chip on me, if i can avoid it! It´s already to much that google knows where i am right now.

[s.ketch]

The chip can't be equipped with GPS, if it was it would no longer be RFID. The RFID advertised in that commercial are passive. They have no power source. They're not a microchip like the ones in your computer. They're just pieces of material that emit a signal when activated by a scanner. So when they're not scanned, they're dormant pieces of plastic. GPS would require a power source, a processor, a larger microchip. Like a cell phone. But unlike cell phones, chips only can be read by a few meters at most.

That's one of the main problems actually, is that they're so simple. You can't have decent security on something like that. Encoding the data for security requires a more complex device. Complex = bigger at the moment so it's not available yet.

[TASmith]

certain watches generate electricity by the normal hand/arm movements your body makes throughout the day. :)

Watch out for our new Swiss overlords.

[s.ketch]

Does that mean the government knows what time it is? :D

[TASmith]

not even.

[Christian223]

The vaccine issue is very related with the chips, since it can be used to track if you have your vaccines or not, so here is an interview of Jane Burgmeister, please watch it.

PelTWCUmTsU

The Goverments are desperate to vaccine people, so much they exagerate numbers, check this article by CBS News:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/21/cbsnews_investigates/main5404829.shtml

Here is another video for spanish speaking people, this is just the second part of 5 videos:
Q0BDFGRaHv8

There is lots more info if you look around...

[MikeMakesModels]

If I didn't know better I'd say it's almost as if governments are trying to prevent limited-capacity health services being flooded during the normal flu season thus showing undecided voters that they were prepared and saving money in the process. (Gotta pay the bankers somehow)

But what's the likelihood of that? :P

[Psychotime]

Heh. Creepy.

http://tenser.typepad.com/tenser_said_the_tensor/images/laughing-man.jpg

I recognize that. Where's it from? An anime, I think?

[DeadlyFreeze]

Ghost in the Shell

99% of the population is already trackable via cell phones anyway, might as well go all the way.

[HunterKiller_]

might as well go all the way.

That's a scary attitude, buddy.

[Raoul Duke]

Quick before supreme overlord barack hussein obama controls every thought in our head.

Raegan sells cocaine to the angels now!

Soilent Green is People!

Who wants corned beef when you can have cloned beef!

Horde your tinfoil hats everybody! They will rocket in value faster than elvis collector plates.

Glen Beck will overdose on wine and childrens asprin for your sins!

[Raoul Duke]

Hunting down relivent links
link 1 (http://208.111.134.1/video/play/1020815)

[VulgarDragon]

The vaccine issue is very related with the chips, since it can be used to track if you have your vaccines or not...

The chip is too large to be implanted via hypodermic needle and it has to be surgically implanted. However, if mandatory vaccines are imposed, they may decide to make people wear a wristband with RFID chip in it as a proof that they were vaccinated. They probably would use that as a precursor to the implanted chip when the public has been conditioned to accept that (and the people who refuse it are thrown into prisons.)

Eventually people will be chipped and sensors set up in buildings pick up data and are fed into the network into the central computer so whoever has access to the data will know where you have been, what you brought...etc etc. It is not hard to imagine whoever who has the access to that data will be able to control entire world.

Welcome to the brave new world. The Beast is coming....


"He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name. This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666."-REVELATIONS 13:16-18

[s.ketch]

Does anyone here have any complaints that don't come from books of fiction or aren't based solely on fear of things they don't understand?

[Blahm]

one reason i think these are a dumb idea is that it would be possible to rig a transmitter/reciever to steal peoples personal info en mass. Just walk into a public place and wave a suped up scanner around. Doctors just need to organizer their stupid offices better. And in the future im assuming people are going to be putting alot more than their doctors records on those things. Its just a dumb idea period.

[sudpetgic]

one reason i think these are a dumb idea is that it would be possible to rig a transmitter/reciever to steal peoples personal info en mass. Just walk into a public place and wave a suped up scanner around. Doctors just need to organizer their stupid offices better. And in the future im assuming people are going to be putting alot more than their doctors records on those things. Its just a dumb idea period.

Eventually people will be chipped and sensors set up in buildings pick up data and are fed into the network into the central computer so whoever has access to the data will know where you have been, what you brought...etc etc. It is not hard to imagine whoever who has the access to that data will be able to control entire world.

[Ian Miles]

http://i37.tinypic.com/j0jmmr.jpg

Sad thing is I see this coming. :(

[DeadlyFreeze]

I get the giggles every time someone thinks the government is remotely competent at anything.

[carlosranna]

Does anyone here have any complaints that don't come from books of fiction or aren't based solely on fear of things they don't understand?

Have you seen how many things fiction has predicted and we worked our ass of to make it come true?

[Ian Miles]

I get the giggles every time someone thinks the government is remotely competent at anything.

I get giggles every time someone thinks the government is in charge of something.
The real trouble are the non-public people that actually make things happen. :oneye:

[daestwen]

Dude, guys, did no one see the mythbusters on this?

The chip is too large to be implanted via hypodermic needle and it has to be surgically implanted.

Wrong. They do implant it with a needle, it's just a fucking HUGE scary needle.

Just saying.


Personally I'm of the opinion that there is no technology that is inherently evil, only people behind it. Nuclear weapons? We're going to be very happy to have them if we track a very large asteroid or comet coming our way...

Technology can't be evil in itself. It's just a set of tools.

Just, yeah. I don't really see the need for a panic attack at this point.

[LuckyDevil]

I would only condone this to be implanted in people who have lost their rights and freedom (AKA prisoners and sex offenders) that way people who escape, will most likely return to doing crime, and ofcourse sex offenders in your neighborhood could be tracked.

Other than that, forcing people to have it implanted would be pretty scary and against our freedom (which i doubt will happen) on the other hand voluntary implants of this would be fine if your elderly grandma had to stay home and something happens kinda stuff.

So yeah their are both good and evil sides of this thing, and it's in this country its usually up to the people to decide what it's going to be used like.... at least i hope it still works that way.

[Jason Ross]

Does anyone here have any complaints that don't come from books of fiction or aren't based solely on fear of things they don't understand?

I just don't like the idea of transmitting personal information 24/7/365 without a choice. Anyone with the correct receiving device (honest or dishonest) would be able to know whatever is on that thing. I have a choice to leave my information at home if I want to. We have a right to privacy in which permanent transmission of personal data would most likely encroach on that right. The right to privacy is a constitutional right for a reason. It would put an enormous amount of leverage in the hands of a few.

[Falchion]

Y'know, pre-implantation, I used to have the same fears about this as you guys did. Now? I don't know what I'd do without my government mind-control RFID!:happypatriot:

[Helaine]

Holy moses.


But I haven't heard anything about it... perhaps it's because I don't live in Seoul? 0_0


Implanting chips.... seem painful D:

[s.ketch]

Have you seen how many things fiction has predicted and we worked our ass of to make it come true?

Flying cars?
Teleportation?
Time Travel?
Everybody taking pills to make them emotionless?
Androids?
Long distance space travel?
Forcefeilds?

Fiction didn't "predict" anything. Fiction imagined a technology and much much later we had the means to make it real. But only if the technology made sense in the real world. Flying cars don't make sense logistically. The little communication devices in Star Trek are sort of like cell phones. But we already had telephones then, making them mobile was the next logical progression. Fiction is usually founded on reality. Some things are bound to come true in a small way.


I just don't like the idea of transmitting personal information 24/7/365 without a choice. Anyone with the correct receiving device (honest or dishonest) would be able to know whatever is on that thing. I have a choice to leave my information at home if I want to. We have a right to privacy in which permanent transmission of personal data would most likely encroach on that right. The right to privacy is a constitutional right for a reason. It would put an enormous amount of leverage in the hands of a few.

Passive RFIDs don't transmit 24/7/365 though. They only transmit when activated by a reader. And yes, there are blatant security problems such as people reading the chips who aren't supposed to. That's why this isn't being implemented on a wide scale. Security is an obstacle that needs to be overcome before this tech is in any way viable. I talked about it in many of my posts here. The people developing knows there is a security problem. It's not a secret.

[Man Made God]

Everybody taking pills to make them emotionless?
To an extent, yeah

Androids?

Early days yet, but I don't see why not.

Some ideas/technology in fiction are unfeasible by nature, but the ones that aren't too far outside our current standards are often created. In the case of computers, science fiction often lags behind actually.

I can't think of any power that governments gain and then use responsibly with no abuse. It might be cynical, but I think that the type of person who wants to be a politician is the last type you should place any trust in. These are people who decide to build careers on controlling other peoples' lives and then lying for the sake of their own popularity. Corruption is institutionalized imo. Why create the potential for abuse, when you know it will come about. Even if the original motive for implanted microchips is good, these people just can't be trusted. It's bad enough that they control so much of our lives already.

[Jason Ross]

So its passive like a barcode i take. I assume that once it is implanted it can not only be read but also changed to have new information added. I can't see having it "surgically" removed each time your license/passport status changes.

You can kinda read between the lines as to why credit card companies didn't want Mythbusters doing a show about these.
X034R3yzDhw

[CKLamb]

Epimetheus.

[carlosranna]

submarine, space travel, teleport (yes, we are teleporting atoms), video conference, airplanes, helicopters...

But there is no point in arguing anymore. I´m out of the conversation now. Over and out.

[Ryan K]

If it's implanted below the skin - it doesn't seem like it would be difficult to cut it out...

Plant it on a bird or something. (or maybe a parrot, that's trained to say "Fuck You")

[KonnA]

That seemed like one of those mock-up ads for a thriller movie, where everyone is a drone and the protagonist breaks the chain.

[GhostValkyrie]

Oooooook... so now they want us to get microchips inplanted in our bodies. The excuses for it are pretty damn questionably lame imo. Just another way to get more control over the masses and keep track of your location?

I have heard that in South Korea they are building a city already on this technology. The chip will be your identity.


iyAVm5G1Cso

They've been trying to get this rolling for quite some time. Doesn't surprise me it's becoming more overt nowadays. Every time a law or policy is created under the pretense of protection it reveals itself to be another trojan horse. lol, like al qaeda will be getting those implants.

As always; someone wants to control what someone else can or cannot do beyond the realm of them harming a human being due to their own personal concerns and desire to engineer society toward their personal preferences of cohesion. Fascism doesn't always resemble 1932 Germany's boot stomping.

It's evolved, and is much more attractive to idiots when it comes under the guise of helping/protecting everyone. Huxley must be turning in his grave, and Atlas has certainly shrugged.

As a note about the security, it's been reviewed these aren't as secure as people seem to think. Data is relatively easier to store, but also easier to obtain when a person has the know how. Some programmers have made a revealing case against this technology by cracking the chip and stealing the person's - essentially becoming that individual digitally. I would think the millions of compromised credit accounts of Citi group members due to hackers, and the thousands of cracked accounts at Navy Federal last year(I am a member of this bank, so trust me when I say I educate myself about matters relating to it.), would tell people to stop and think about the uses of such technology. I don't want innovation and creativity to slow down, but legislating this as law I believe would be a clear violation of my human rights, and consideration of using it to put in humans is a discussion I think should continue before any practice even in the public establishment takes place.

Buck; You're not entirely wrong, but that means you're not right. When I was in the Gulf, they offered this technology to us. They offered it to my aunt as well. You can be tracked. Of course, back then it was choice - there's no telling if it still is.

[TASmith]

forcefields aren't science fiction anymore. The army's already planning to add them to large navy vessels. Missiles don't bounce off the field, but detenate prematurely. It's been in the Economist for years. It's just costly, so there's a debate about funding.

[GhostValkyrie]

forcefields aren't science fiction anymore. The army's already planning to add them to large navy vessels. Missiles don't bounce off the field, but detenate prematurely. It's been in the Economist for years. It's just costly, so there's a debate about funding.

Neither are Rail Guns. I'm all for having the technology, it would be expensive but saves lives and equipment(though the government doesn't seem to care about that) which in turn saves money...wait, that would mean the government would likely still be opposed.

Anyway; I would hope they could use the 4% defense budget increase to use by utilizing something useful. The number of military membership has been forcefully downsizing for years, yet the expenses continue to be increased. We've been continually given outdated, pre/post vietnam war technology to deal with. The only new stuff we have has been recently legislated away. It makes no sense what we're doing, so I don't see why they're debating the cost of the tech if they won't even use it.

Ehh, this will get me off on a nasty ramble about wasteful spending if I don't stop. It's ridiculous I tells ya!

[s.ketch]

See, now I am in a bad situation. I could say that I am done arguing about this and that I'm going to shut up, but I can't un-ring the bell. What I should have done was shut up to begin with, let this thread play out in all its Bahm like merriment, and go about my life. But I didn't.

Luckily though, I have one fail safe. Time. It doesn't matter who here thinks that I am right or even if I am right. Time will tell. I don't need to explain the technology to any of you, or beg you to go read up on it for yourselves because in the years to come we will see who was correct about all this. I could either be having my car door unlocked by a tiny black box in my pocket or we could all be slaves to our robotic reptilian Illuminati Obama overlord. We'll see.

Sharpton fo' president. I'm outie. Peace.

[nicolas]

What evidence do you have that implies the government using this technology to track you 24/7.

Because they can. If look at the state of the world today, look at increased surveilance everywhere, and then think a government sector had this oppurtunity and not use it, then you are not only naive, you are one of them letting them do it (eventually).

"If you have nothing to hide, then it shouldnt be a problem" may look like a harmless sentence used for every form of new surveillance tech/method, but it is not the fact that someone has something to hide. It is the fact that he could if he wanted to. Thats called freedom. period.

[TASmith]

I think it's funny when I'm taking photos in public, and someone tells me not to - that I'm invading their privacy (this hardly ever happens, but still). Then I tell them they're already being filmed and photographed on average 55 times a day by people a lot more powerful than me.

[Alexandr Pascenko]

there where is power, there is abuse. there is proof in history . its just they make it smarter this time.

[TASmith]

also, about the global positioning, I know they can do it, because they do it to any dog you adopt over in Boston. My roomate back in 2002 got a dog, and the chip they gave him caused an infection. They had to remove it. Pretty nasty. The idea is, if your dog runs away, they got lo-jack on him so they can find him again. So, the technology exists.

[Man Made God]

I could either be having my car door unlocked by a tiny black box in my pocket

You mean like your car keys?

or we could all be slaves to our robotic reptilian Illuminati Obama overlord.

Or you could have selfish incompetents finding ways to abuse whatever power you hand to them. That's not a conspiracy, and constantly relying on that kind of word association doesn't make your argument any better. Labelling people as Obama haters and idiots will only piss people off and bring an argument down to name calling.

This technology definitely has its uses, but storing all your information on a radio transmitter or letting people implant you with what can easily function as a tracking device is beyond retarded.

[Hookswords]

aWov49PdZS8

[JFierce]

Ugh this whole idea disgusts me, I dont believe in conspiracies but those who have said that we dont have the technology to track people makes me laugh. Yes... yes we do.....and if its not to the degree of being in a chip yet then then eh it wont take long. I mean we're making our technology sleeker, more compact everyday. I mean geeze the simplest of car GPS's are close to this in terms of technology and one of those can fit in the palm of my hand. Also, I mean do you really think the government lets out about every technological advances we make? Government research and development facilities have high level security clearances for a reason
Hell, do you think anyone outside of the government knew about the atom bomb before it blew people to hades and back?


No I'm not saying that "Ooh this will become where big brother has its eyes on all of us" But I'm not saying its impossible, its far from impossible
The government is full of corrupt individuals, power corrupts
What starts as I decide whether to get this implant can become mandatory through a passed law and from there conspiracies could become a reality quite easily

I like the freedom to go where I please without someone knowing where I am at all times. Would you like if someone was in your business 24/7? No

[Blahm]

Ugh this whole idea disgusts me, I dont believe in conspiracies but those who have said that we dont have the technology to track people makes me laugh. Yes... yes we do.....and if its not to the degree of being in a chip yet then then eh it wont take long. I mean we're making our technology sleeker, more compact everyday. I mean geeze the simplest of car GPS's are close to this in terms of technology and one of those can fit in the palm of my hand. Also, I mean do you really think the government lets out about every technological advances we make? Government research and development facilities have high level security clearances for a reason
Hell, do you think anyone outside of the government knew about the atom bomb before it blew people to hades and back?


No I'm not saying that "Ooh this will become where big brother has its eyes on all of us" But I'm not saying its impossible, its far from impossible
The government is full of corrupt individuals, power corrupts
What starts as I decide whether to get this implant can become mandatory through a passed law and from there conspiracies could become a reality quite easily

I like the freedom to go where I please without someone knowing where I am at all times. Would you like if someone was in your business 24/7? No

yea this thing doesnt even need gps, the beacon can be triangulated from cell phone towers or something similar. Anything with a radio freq can be tracked.

[Slash]

yeah, i was just about to mention that when i read blahms post. Iphones or ipod touch don't have a gps. Neither does common phones. Still their location can be pinpointed fairly accurately. The ipod touch doesn't even have radio/cellphone capabilities, but uses wifi to find your location. If you have one, go into google maps and see how easily it finds your location.

So to track an RFID implant you'd only have to put up a couple of radio beacons with $50 worth of hardware. (i pulled that number out of my ass)

[Peter Coene]

Sorry, I am philosophically against getting tattoos or piercings on my body, and having this put in goes against those same philosophical ideals.

Have fun when you all realize that the 1st 3 digits to every id code on each of these is 666.

[Slash]

you mean 616, right?

[Cron]

If it's implanted below the skin - it doesn't seem like it would be difficult to cut it out...

Hmmm...What if they implant it right into your balls? :yum:

[Falchion]

If you're the concerned about this, wrap yourself in aluminum foil and live in the wilderness, relying solely on archaic and analog materials. For the rest of us...

[Slash]

By the same logic we should get rid of sketchbooks, canvases, pencils and paint, as they too are archaic and analog.

[Falchion]

By the same logic we should get rid of sketchbooks, canvases, pencils and paint, as they too are archaic and analog.

Yep. Digital's the wave of the future, baby. ;)

[Mordus]

My views are conflicted on this. On one hand, I understand it would be extremely difficult for a government, any government barring those under personality cults, to implement this kind of technology without a grand public outcry. Possibly even revolution. This thread alone is proof: Apart from a few more practical people, the natrual response is revulsion. Not only due to the possible implications concerning privacy and control, but the very idea of having alien (here used as "other") technology within you is repellant. Should a government finally manage to place these within the majority of the populace, the possibility for abuse is great.
Conspiracies can almost always be treated with great scepticism (and rightly so) but never totally dismissed. No one believed the government was deliberately infecting black citizens with syphilis during the 1930s as an experiment..but...
Look it up. Be careful. If things come to a head, we can always flee to a commune somewhere. But its unlikely. So my rambling finally comes to a point: Be doubtful, but cautious. It could easily happen if the factors line up.

[Falchion]

I...still don't get the outcry. These are RFIDs. Radio-Frequency identification tags for those who cannot access Wikipedia. They are inert plastic and metal chips, if you're feeling generous enough to call them that. They aren't like a miniature computer that can be injected into your bloodstream so Big Brother follow you into the bathroom whenever you take a dump.

RFIDs can only be activated with an external source, a scanner if you will. Only when "woken up" by an appropriate scanner's radio waves will it function. And even then, it's essentially just a short burst, active only as long as the waves can be received. So in order to get the sort of "Eye See You" situation everyone's panicking about, Big Brother would need to bathe the entire landmass with a specific frequency of electromagnetic radiation 24/7.

And then this is assuming that we don't all get fucking terminal brain tumors from 24/7 bombardment by high-frequency radio waves, then what? Whoop-de-shit, the government knows where we are. The government already knows where we are. Or at least where we pay our taxes, where we go to the doctors, where we park our cars, if they're so inclined. Why bother with a catch and release program? The ankle bracelet they gave Martha Stewart for some questionable accounting works just as well.

[s.ketch]

Shhhhhh, rationality frightens them.

[Blahm]

powder rfid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vxdaj9Z-Bw

[s.ketch]

powder rfid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vxdaj9Z-Bw

The guy giving the presentation said that the human brain is genetically programmed to work with computers. Just drop some brain tissue on and it'll organize itself. I had to watch it twice to make sure I wasn't hearing it wrong and then I went and got a cat scan to make sure I wasn't suffering from any damage to the head

He's about as much of a scientist as a soap dish. If those statements have even the tiniest bit of basis on real science, its over simplified to the point of being wrong.

I just don't get how a group of people who take the position of "Question everything" doesn't even bother to read a small wikipedia article on the stuff they're talking about. If you don't trust wikipedia, I'm sure there are plenty of other resources that explain how RFID works.

Futurists/Transhumanists are pretty much the same as Intelligent Designers. They claim their message is one of pure science, but it's not. They're just fancy political agendas disguised as "The truth." They are not reputable sources.

[Blahm]

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2001/11/48278

lol buckweisel, nice signature you little futurist you.

[Slash]

I...still don't get the outcry. These are RFIDs. Radio-Frequency identification tags for those who cannot access Wikipedia. They are inert plastic and metal chips, if you're feeling generous enough to call them that. They aren't like a miniature computer that can be injected into your bloodstream so Big Brother follow you into the bathroom whenever you take a dump.

RFIDs can only be activated with an external source, a scanner if you will. Only when "woken up" by an appropriate scanner's radio waves will it function. And even then, it's essentially just a short burst, active only as long as the waves can be received. So in order to get the sort of "Eye See You" situation everyone's panicking about, Big Brother would need to bathe the entire landmass with a specific frequency of electromagnetic radiation 24/7.

And then this is assuming that we don't all get fucking terminal brain tumors from 24/7 bombardment by high-frequency radio waves, then what? Whoop-de-shit, the government knows where we are. The government already knows where we are. Or at least where we pay our taxes, where we go to the doctors, where we park our cars, if they're so inclined. Why bother with a catch and release program? The ankle bracelet they gave Martha Stewart for some questionable accounting works just as well.

They already sell consumer grade rfid scanners with a 10 meter range (for passive reading). Granted, this read distance is for higher frequency chips, my knowledge about how that affects read distance is limited. Still, this is a situation where i'd bet on safe rather than sorry. Install a reader in the doorway of buildings (not unlike whats already in place in most stores) and you could tell who passes by that checkpoint and when. Then do the same to subways, trains etc. (there probably is a system like this in place for subways and trains, i'm just not aware of it.) Or you could put a reader in the stop lights for pedestrian crossing, a lot of those require you to push a button, thus getting close enough to read. Or put them in cabs. etc etc..

The entire landmass is already bathed in high frequency radio waves. To my knowledge the rfids operate at a couple of hundred khz, which i doubt will cause any more cancer than the constant bombardment of much higher frequency radiation from radio, tv, wifi, cellphones, SPACE etc. Not to mention pollution, food additives etc. :P

Sure, powers at be can locate us easily if we choose to use credit cards, passports, cellphones, libraries etc. The key word here is choice. We can choose not to use these things. When we can be monitored without our consent or knowledge, thats when things have a potential to go fishy. This martha stewart person got a bracelet for monitoring her, well, then she KNOWS she's monitored, thats part of the punishment for breaking the law.

Interesting read, how to clone a verichip with radioshack supplies: http://www.cq.cx/verichip.pl

Buck: Rationality? really?

[s.ketch]

Yes Slash, rationality.

As in thinking before speaking, understanding the facts, and forming opinions founded by logical thinking, empirical observation and intelligent supposition.

If the point of this thread was an honest critique of the the technology, then there isn't much of a problem. However, from post #1 it has been about a conspiracy theory.

As I have said there are problems with RFID, which is why they're not widely implemented. These are problems that are well known by those who work with the technology and can be proven beyond reasonable doubt. But the complaints in this thread have all basically summed up to a giant invocation of Godwin's Law, except replacing Hitler with their dictator of choice.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with asking questions. But generally you have to ask the right questions. Simply being subversive isn't being intelligent. Most of the points brought up are supported by anecdotes and "reading in between the lines." The problem with reading between the lines is that since there is no hard evidence to go on, any story a person makes up will most likely be whatever story they want. In this case, we have hard facts about RFID and it's problems. That's it. End of conversation.

Saying that the government could use this to track people or they could use this to control a population is unfounded, illogical, and plain ignorant. I don't care if you don't like the government. It doesn't matter how angry you are or how much you mistrust them. Everything past reality is superstition. I could say that the government is run by reptillian creatures from mars. There's nothing wrong with me saying that. But it's not fact, reality, science, a possibility or anything. I don't know that they're reptillian so I have no place to say that.

It wouldn't be so bad but people in this discussion don't even know simple things like what electromagnetic radiation is. Regardless of what side you're on, that's high-school level knowledge. So we're all pretty much discussing a technology we understand little about.

would need to bathe the entire landmass with a specific frequency of electromagnetic radiation 24/7

If you have a light on, you are being bathed in electromagnetic radiation. And light is higher frequency than radio waves. So even if they do use high-frequency radio waves, it's not even as high as light. If AM and FM radio haven't given you cancer yet, then you're fine.

I'm really not sure why everyone thinks that their governments don't know who they are. Where do you think your social security number came from? Somewhere in a computer is all your info. Where you live, your age, your D.O.B., etc. You can say "But, but, I can fool that by not telling the government where I live and avoiding the system." Yes, yes you could. If you had an RFID chip you could also avoid the system by taking it out, or shielding it from readers. So why is the latter any different from the first?

Thesis: The government will use RFID chips to track and keep tabs on the population

Questions to answer:

What is an RFID chip?
How does it work?
How would a government implement them without causing panic?
Why would a government need to use such a technology?
What would the government do if they succeeded?
How would a government combat those who cheat the system?
How would a government combat black hats?
Is this really the most efficient way to control a population?
Is this technology really viable for this kind of use?
What is the limitations of the technology?
Has there been any examples of this technology being used to control/track people?
Who within the government is working on this plan?
How many people are involved?
How do they keep it secret from the people that don't know?
How can so many people know and the secret not get out?
Where did I get my information about this plan?
Were they reliable sources?
What are the credentials of my sources?
Does anyone with a solid background in working with this technology agree with them? Why or why not?
What do the people on the other side of the issue have to say?
Is there information solid?
Are their sources also have the credentials?
Are there any logical fallacies in my opnion on the subject? What about in my opponent's opinion?
Is there any solid proof such as authentic documents, verified tapes of audio/video from within this conspiracy that back my position?

You get the point by now.

Blahm: The idea of replacing one's body parts and internal organs with machines frightens me. Outside of amputee's and disabled people of course. But we shouldn't live forever, nor for a really long time. We cheated the 30-40 age limit already. People should die naturally.

That doesn't mean we cant do great things while we're here though. There is nothing wrong with having hope that humanity will become a peaceful move into space.

[Dimension]

It wouldn't be so bad but people in this discussion don't even know simple things like what electromagnetic radiation is.

So they aren't qualified to speculate about the ramifications of such technology? While the technology itself may be complex, the purpose is extremely basic. Any six year old could figure out the ramifications for such technology. Whether or not anyone knows anything about electromagnetic radiation is irrelevant.

there is no hard evidence to go on, any story a person makes up will most likely be whatever story they want. In this case, we have hard facts about RFID and it's problems. That's it. End of conversation.


First, how could you know there is no hard evidence. What makes you the authority? Have you done 10 years of research and written 5 books on RFID chips or something?

But the complaints in this thread have all basically summed up to a giant invocation of Godwin's Law, except replacing Hitler with their dictator of choice.


I think Godwin's law is a bit of a paradox. It's probably the dumbest law ever come up with, thus any argument where someone brings up Godwin's law is void. That's my law.

Saying that the government could use this to track people or they could use this to control a population is unfounded, illogical, and plain ignorant.

WHAT??? That must be a typo. I think you meant to say "Saying that the government WILL"

Has there been any examples of this technology being used to control/track people?

Check out IBM, and WW2. Oh wait, damn it! I can't use that example because of Godwins law! DAMN IT!

What are the credentials of my sources?

Yeah, what are the credentials of your sources?

How can so many people know and the secret not get out?


Because even if it did, which I think it has, anyone that beleived would be labeled a conspriacy theorist.

Is there any solid proof such as authentic documents, verified tapes of audio/video from within this conspiracy that back my position?


Check out Aaron Russo. He's dead now...

Does anyone with a solid background in working with this technology agree with them? Why or why not?


Of course they won't! That's like asking Tobaco companies if cigarettes cause cancer. They now admit it only because there's irrefutable proof.

The idea of replacing one's body parts and internal organs with machines frightens me. Outside of amputee's and disabled people of course. But we shouldn't live forever, nor for a really long time. We cheated the 30-40 age limit already. People should die naturally.

So you think people should die naturally, but not live naturally?

[s.ketch]

So they aren't qualified to speculate about the ramifications of such technology?

You can speculate about whatever you want. It's just retarded to "hurr durr technology bad" because of an unfounded speculation about a possible use that it may or may not be used for.

The government could jam a computer in each one of our rectums and use Wii controllers to move us around. So hey, computers must be inherently evil right? Let's not even give them a chance.

And holy shit! Nazis using computers during WW2! They used cars too, maybe we should re-think those. And airplanes, and medical science, and mathematics, and anything that Nazis may have ever used.

I can't remember how many times it came up during the Bush years that he signed some act that allowed him to repeal presidential term limits during a national emergency. Then all the shit about the patriot act giving him unlimited power. Katrina happened and then all the TROOTHERS thought it would happen, but it didn't. Bush never took over the US. So now there's a new guy in office and they're trying their best to turn him into Hitler too.

It's like if someone said it was going to rain every singe day. Then when it finally does rain, they feel vindicated. I know people who say every few months "Yep, things are looking bad with Iran, it won't be long now until WWIII." Then the time passes, nothing happens. "Won't be long now..."


So you think people should die naturally, but not live naturally?

What are you saying here? That you think we aren't living naturally? Pacemaker's are unnatural? Bolts and metal plates that hold bones together are unnatural?

Or that having a piece of plastic in your hand is somehow a complete game changer and is absolutely different from any other use of modern technology?

All I was saying that being a robot isn't being human. A chip doesn't make you a robot. There is no slippery slope. There is a very clear difference between a single inert chip and having most of your body replaced with mechanical devices. Don't even begin to try to equate them.

You have a brain. It is natural for humans to build tools and technology. It's natural for us to communicate ideas and develop intelligence. Living the way we do today was somewhat inevitable. If we live "unnaturally" then so does any animal that builds a shelter or uses tools.

[Dimension]

Most of us have been bestowed with the gift of logic, reason and common sense. Sure, the government may want to stick a computer up my ass and controll me with a wii mote, but simple common sense tells me it'll never happen. It's not beleivable. Implanting a computer chip to track everyone, store their information and handle all of their monetary transactions (which is the inevitable conclusion), is beleivable. It's inevitable that the government will want to get rid of cash, because you can hide cash from taxation. With a chip that promises to be oh so convenient and secure, they just may be able to pull it off. More government control also makes their jobs that much easier.

It's going to rain, no one knows when, but it's going to rain...

All I was saying that being a robot isn't being human.

Yeah, but you're contradicting yourself. If replacing our body parts with mechanical parts is the natural progression of technology and our thoughts, then of course you'd have to consider it natural, in your view. Or is it the un-natural progression? How do you define natural and un-natural? Where's the line? Is there a line?

[Irishdrunk]

The only thing I want read on my RFID is 'Generous Billionaire'.

[s.ketch]

Sure, the government may want to stick a computer up my ass and controll me with a wii mote, but simple common sense tells me it'll never happen. It's not beleivable. Implanting a computer chip to track everyone, store their information and handle all of their monetary transactions (which is the inevitable conclusion), is beleivable.

But why is it anymore believable? I could use all the evidence against RFID to support my theory too. Despite the whole, no connections in the brain can be made through the arse, thing. I could say "But just think about it! They could make us do whatever they want!" I mean, seriously, they can make mice rage by using little electrodes in the right part of their brains. Imagine a person with a gun, just one little shock from an electrode in the right place and you have The Hulk minus the muscles. Look at what just happened in Texas. He did work for the military. The news could just say he was mentally unstable. Then the government has more reasons to take away our guns. Then we have no way to defend ourselves! Can't you see?

But that would be wrong for me to say those things. It sounds plausible, and I could even use a little real science to back it up, but beyond me connecting a bunch of dots, there is no real evidence. If I connect the dots, I make whatever connections I want. It doesn't matter if sounds like it could happen. Once again, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

It's inevitable that the government will want to get rid of cash, because you can hide cash from taxation. With a chip that promises to be oh so convenient and secure, they just may be able to pull it off. More government control also makes their jobs that much easier.

If the government was so hellbent on stopping people not paying taxes, they wouldn't offer so many social programs so easily. If it was about money, then there would be no pork barrel spending. No stupid flowers on the side of the highways. No welfare, no Pel grants, no medicaid. No tax-free weekend. All states would charge sales tax, which some don't. No "donate your old stuff get a tax-break." They wouldn't give you a tax return at the end of the year.

It's going to rain, no one knows when, but it's going to rain...

Something will happen at some place during some time.


Yeah, but you're contradicting yourself. If replacing our body parts with mechanical parts is the natural progression of technology and our thoughts, then of course you'd have to consider it natural, in your view. Or is it the un-natural progression? How do you define natural and un-natural? Where's the line? Is there a line?

I like every normal person have a list of things that are unnatural and natural. It's hardly black and white. Houses, cars, airplanes, medicine are somewhat natural. Though I think these things could be a little more "natural" in the traditional sense aka environmentally friendly. But we did learn to do these things via natural, as in born with, means. We're still human. We more than likely will have the means to become androids in the future, and yes, because of our intelligence. But would that make us something other than human? I think so. However, just because I think that we wouldn't be human doesn't mean it's inherently evil. I don't like it probably because it's so alien to me. After all, what does it mean to be human? Where does that definition end if we can adjust it? Do definitions ultimately mean anything in the grand scheme of things?

Perhaps in 2100, on Conceptart.org 10.0, there will be an android having this conversation talking about how transferring consciousness to a digital medium is unnatural. Who knows?

I feel fairly certain that a chip won't make me less of a human. I just know that if I refuse to be a skeptic about the world, then I am failing the function of my biology. I would be a bird that refuses to fly.

[Vatsel]

Buckwiesel
when it comes down to it - the benefits of the chip are meager compared to the risk of of identity theft and governmental abuse.
You say that the government claim is unfounded, but it still leaves identity theft on the table.

You're asking why not? Why are we soooo afraid of the government?
While I'm asking: What for? Why should we merge all these services together? are things that inconvenient now?
We can restrict these medical history chips to the very sick, or just give them a collar. You want traffic lights to switch when you'll approach them? Install some scanner system that won't track you identity, or, god forbid, put a button on that thing.
Open car doors? A simple key will do. Shopping? a credit card. Hell you can shop online without showing up at the store anyway.

My bottom line is :weighing the pros and cons shows that it's not worth it.

Just installing that thing into everybody and maintaining the system will be very costly,
Mark.

[s.ketch]

The term "conspiracy theory" may be a neutral descriptor for any legitimate or illegitimate claim of civil, criminal or political conspiracy

The term "conspiracy theory" is frequently used by scholars and in popular culture to identify secret military, banking, or political actions aimed at stealing power, money, or freedom, from "the people".

A world view that centrally places conspiracy theories in the unfolding of history is sometimes termed "conspiracism".

"But if conspiracies exist, they rarely move history; they make a difference at the margins from time to time, but with the unforeseen consequences of a logic outside the control of their authors: and this is what is wrong with 'conspiracy theory.' History is moved by the broad forces and large structures of human collectivities."

Perhaps the most contentious aspect of a conspiracy theory is the problem of settling a particular theory's truth to the satisfaction of both its proponents and its opponents. Particular accusations of conspiracy vary widely in their plausibility, but some common standards for assessing their likely truth value may be applied in each case:

* Occam's razor - does the alternative story explain more of the evidence than the mainstream story, or is it just a more complicated and therefore less useful explanation of the same evidence?
* Logic - Do the proofs offered follow the rules of logic, or do they employ fallacies of logic?
* Methodology - are the proofs offered for the argument well constructed, i.e., using sound methodology? Is there any clear standard to determine what evidence would prove or disprove the theory?
* Whistleblowers - how many people – and what kind – have to be loyal conspirators?
* Falsifiability - Is it possible to demonstrate that specific claims of the theory are false, or are they "unfalsifiable"?


According to some psychologists, a person who believes in one conspiracy theory tends to believe in others; a person who does not believe in one conspiracy theory tends not to believe another.[27] This may be caused by differences in the information upon which parties rely in formulating their conclusions.

Psychologists believe that the search for meaning is common in conspiracism and the development of conspiracy theories, and may be powerful enough alone to lead to the first formulating of the idea. Once cognized, confirmation bias and avoidance of cognitive dissonance may reinforce the belief. In a context where a conspiracy theory has become popular within a social group, communal reinforcement may equally play a part.

Humanistic psychologists argue that even if the cabal behind the conspiracy is almost always perceived as hostile there is, often, still an element of reassurance in it, for conspiracy theorists, in part because it is more consoling to think that complications and upheavals in human affairs, at least, are created by human beings rather than factors beyond human control.

It is possible that certain basic human epistemic biases are projected onto the material under scrutiny. According to one study humans apply a 'rule of thumb' by which we expect a significant event to have a significant cause.[31] The study offered subjects four versions of events, in which a foreign president was (a) successfully assassinated, (b) wounded but survived, (c) survived with wounds but died of a heart attack at a later date, and (d) was unharmed. Subjects were significantly more likely to suspect conspiracy in the case of the 'major events' — in which the president died — than in the other cases, despite all other evidence available to them being equal.

Christopher Hitchens represents conspiracy theories as the 'exhaust fumes of democracy', the unavoidable result of a large amount of information circulating among a large number of people. Other social commentators and sociologists argue that conspiracy theories are produced according to variables that may change within a democratic (or other type of) society.

Conspiratorial accounts can be emotionally satisfying when they place events in a readily-understandable, moral context. The subscriber to the theory is able to assign moral responsibility for an emotionally troubling event or situation to a clearly-conceived group of individuals. Crucially, that group does not include the believer. The believer may then feel excused of any moral or political responsibility for remedying whatever institutional or societal flaw might be the actual source of the dissonance.

Popular for Anti-vax'ers too:

Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD) is a tactic of rhetoric and fallacy used in sales, marketing, public relations,[1][2] politics and propaganda. FUD is generally a strategic attempt to influence public perception by disseminating negative information designed to undermine the credibility of their beliefs.

An appeal to fear (also called argumentum ad metum or argumentum in terrorem) is a fallacy in which a person attempts to create support for his or her idea by using deception and propaganda in attempts to increase fear and prejudice toward a competitor. The appeal to fear is common in marketing and politics.

Fear appeals are nonmonotonic, meaning that the level of persuasion does not increase in proportion to the amount of fear that is used. A study of public service messages on AIDS found that if the messages were too aggressive or fearful, they were rejected by the subject; a moderate amount of fear is the most effective attitude changer.

Mean World Syndrome is a phenomenon where the violence-related content of mass media convinces viewers that the world is more dangerous than it actually is, and prompts a desire for more protection than is warranted by any actual threat

Appeal to emotion is a potential fallacy which uses the manipulation of the recipient's emotions, rather than valid logic, to win an argument. Also this kind of thinking may be evident in one who lets emotions and/or other subjective considerations influence one's reasoning process.

The appeal to probability is a logical fallacy. It assumes that because something could happen, it is inevitable that it will happen. This is flawed logic, regardless of the likelihood of the event in question. The fallacy is often used to exploit paranoia.

The argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam ("appeal to ignorance" [1]), argument by lack of imagination, or negative evidence, is a logical fallacy in which it is claimed that a premise is true only because it has not been proven false, or is false only because it has not been proven true.

The argument from personal incredulity, also known as argument from personal belief or argument from personal conviction, refers to an assertion that because one personally finds a premise unlikely or unbelievable, the premise can be assumed to be false, or alternatively that another preferred but unproven premise is true instead.

The logical fallacy of the package deal consists of assuming that things often grouped together by tradition or culture must always be grouped that way.

Proof by example (also known as inappropriate generalisation) is a logical fallacy whereby one or more examples are claimed as "proof" for a more general statement.

Retrospective determinism is the logical fallacy that because something happened, it was therefore bound to happen; the term was coined by the French philosopher Henri Bergson.



Even though I probably did one or more of the things above, here are some things I know I did for sure.

Proof by intimidation or proof by verbosity is a reference to an argument that is so complex, so long-winded, and so poorly presented by the authors that others simply accept the argument, lest they be forced to sift through the minute, illogical details.

The psychologist's fallacy is a fallacy that occurs when an observer presupposes the objectivity of his own perspective when analyzing a behavioral event. The fallacy was named by William James in the 19th century. It is a specific form of the "similar to me" stereotype: what is unknown about another person is assumed, for simplicity, using things the observer knows about himself.

Reification (also known as hypostatisation, concretism, or the fallacy of misplaced concreteness) is a fallacy of ambiguity, when an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete, real event, or physical entity. In other words, it is the error of treating as a "real thing" something which is not a real thing,

[Vatsel]

You bring a bunch of fallacies to the table - aiming them loosely at all the arguments against the RFID chip, essentially putting them all in one big pile and labeling them "conspiracy theories".
Now that you got them all under the conspiracy banner, you present some of common fallacies used to support conspiracies and comfortably proceed of showing us they are indeed, false.

A classic straw man fallacy, so to speak.

[s.ketch]

Hey bro, believing the government is working towards taking away one's personal freedoms is the definition of a conspiracy theory.

Nobody, not even me, is denying the security problems with the chip. As a matter of fact, I brought it up in my first post in this thread. If that was the point of this thread, then I wouldn't have posted. However,

Oooooook... so now they want us to get microchips inplanted in our bodies. The excuses for it are pretty damn questionably lame imo. Just another way to get more control over the masses and keep track of your location?

THAT IS CALLED A CONSPIRACY THEORY. I even gave the definition of the phrase.

The security issues have nothing to do with tracking abilities of the government. The government wants to use the chip right? To track us right? And security problems would mean that people can duplicate chips, steal other's identity and information right? So it's a good idea for the government to make sure there are no security problems right? So what does having terrible security have to do with the ability to track us when the government's readers will be able to read the chips regardless of security?

"The government is going to track us because the chip has no security"

That makes no sense.

I wasn't aiming the fallacies at all the arguments against RFID. I was just aiming it at the conspiracy theory arguments which happen to make up the bulk of the opposition against chips.

Bringing up conspiracy theories in an argument about the government conspiring to take away our personal freedom isn't a straw man since it's not irrelevant to the topic at hand.

[Vatsel]

I wasn't aiming the fallacies at all the arguments against RFID. I was just aiming it at the conspiracy theory arguments which happen to make up the bulk of the opposition against chips.

Fair enough,
though you should've made that point more clear I suppose :)

[Man Made God]

Hey bro, believing the government is working towards taking away one's personal freedoms is the definition of a conspiracy theory.


There are plenty of examples of governments abusing power, spying on people and building actual databases to monitor the behavior of millions of people. To conclude that any of these governments is talking away or violating personal freedoms seems pretty logical to me. If a drug addict asks you for money to buy food, it isn't a conspiracy to say the he's more likely to buy drugs. If you conclude that he's having secret meetings with other addicts to organise a plan to take your money and then cover tracks, then yeah... conspiracy. One is looking at probabilities and trends, the other is unsupported speculation.

A conspiracy is more like believing that you know the inner workings of a separate group of people... that isn't necessary to make the generalisation that government "A" is not serving our best interests/is abusing power/is undermining our "rights" and "freedoms".

[Peter Coene]

I have to wonder, why is it that when a government passes bills that allow wiretapping and listening in on phone calls we flip out, but when they make a chip that can track our activities and personal history we don't.

Saying "its only for legitimate benevolent reasons like health care and making payments and identifying you if you get stopped on the street without your wallet." is just as good an excuse as "its only for legitimate benevolent reasons like keeping you safe by bolstering homeland security."

[DeadlyFreeze]

Does everyone in this thread realize this is a company SELLING these. Which means you know you have to PAY for it.... it has nothing to do with the goverment.

[s.ketch]

There are plenty of examples of governments abusing power, spying on people and building actual databases to monitor the behavior of millions of people. To conclude that any of these governments is talking away or violating personal freedoms seems pretty logical to me. If a drug addict asks you for money to buy food, it isn't a conspiracy to say the he's more likely to buy drugs. If you conclude that he's having secret meetings with other addicts to organise a plan to take your money and then cover tracks, then yeah... conspiracy. One is looking at probabilities and trends, the other is unsupported speculation.

A conspiracy is more like believing that you know the inner workings of a separate group of people... that isn't necessary to make the generalisation that government "A" is not serving our best interests/is abusing power/is undermining our "rights" and "freedoms".

You're thinking that I am using the term conspiracy theory in the "tinfoil hat wackjob" sense. In that post I was using it in the literal definition. Sorry if I used it in the wrong way before that, it won't happen again. The literal meaning applies to both legitimate concerns and fringe theories.

What you just said here:

There are plenty of examples of governments abusing power, spying on people and building actual databases to monitor the behavior of millions of people. To conclude that any of these governments is talking away or violating personal freedoms seems pretty logical to me.

Seems logical, but it's not. "There are examples of poor people stealing things therefore all poor are probably thieves." or "There are examples of governments that do bad things therefore all governments must do bad things." That's a fallacy, I believe one of the ones listed above. Now before everyone jumps on my case, and I bet someone will reply without reading this: I am not saying do not question the government. I'm not saying "oh yes, our government is nice and good and pure so let's let them do whatever they want."

I am advocating skepticism. That works both ways. A government could never take over a country of true skeptics (that excludes people who just don't trust the government for silly reasons). And likewise conspiracy theories such as this would never be accepted in said country.

Also, I think you're confusing the definition of conspiracy and conspiring alone with the entire term conspiracy theory.

This thread is about a conspiracy theory. For one, governments having done bad things in the past is irrelevant per reasons stated above. Secondly this thread is not simply about a government spying, collecting information, or building databases about people. If it were, then it would involve a lot more than a single technology.

This thread is about a future government spying on people through a technology that's being sold by a private company, regardless of the current limitations of said technology and without any evidence other than historical references of completely separate governments abusing power. That's quite a bit different than "Oh hey, I just gave money to that known drug addict for food, he will most likely purchase drugs with it instead." It's more like "I dropped some change on the sidewalk, it will probably be picked up by a guy in the near future and instead of buying food with it he will buy drugs because he's a drug addict."

I always liked conspiracy theories. They're so colorful and definitely way more interesting than reality. I'm going to quote it once more, because it is exactly how I felt about all these theories where the end result is a government take over.

"But if conspiracies exist, they rarely move history; they make a difference at the margins from time to time, but with the unforeseen consequences of a logic outside the control of their authors: and this is what is wrong with 'conspiracy theory.' History is moved by the broad forces and large structures of human collectivities."

It didn't work for Rome, it didn't work for Stalin, Marx, Mao, Hitler, Castro, etc, and it won't work for *Insert current US president and therefore source of all evil in the US*, or the Illuminati.

All I can say is, prepare for unforeseen consequences.

[Slash]

portals to xen?

[TASmith]

OKAY, NEW THREAD RULE!!!!! NO ONE HERE CAN POST UNLESS THEY'RE SAYING SOMETHING NEW!!!

So far this thread has been an exercise in how long people can just repeat the same things over and over. Let it die already.

[Slash]

SOMETHING NEW!!!

Okay, so what it boils down to for me is the claimed benefits weighed against the possibility of something going awry. At this point the choice is easy.

[s.ketch]

You're right TASmith, an exercise in how long, and how many people, can repeat the same thing.

Oooooook... so now they want us to get microchips inplanted in our bodies. The excuses for it are pretty damn questionably lame imo. Just another way to get more control over the masses and keep track of your location?

I have heard that in South Korea they are building a city already on this technology. The chip will be your identity.


iyAVm5G1Cso

Yay Orwellian dystopia! You would think that people would realize that '1984' was only a book and not a guideline on how to screw the world up. Big Brother is always watching.

Yeah, but you can always say that your account was hacked or your identity stolen. There are ways to play the system, but if this gets put into you, then guess what, there's no trying to hide where you were when the hooker went missing and your bank account is suddenly $2,000 short.

So I guess it's safe to say that this is no longer a "conspiracy theory" anymore? Alex Jones has been saying this for years. I guess the people who were saying "Oh they would NEVER do that" are now saying "Oh well it must be for OUR own good".

My buddy who works at a government building was offered one of these last year. They were placing them in the upper tricep.

This ad disgusts me, next thing you know they'll start making it a requirement to have these implants, is it me or is the government tightening it's grasp on America's nutsack?
If you are going to make an ad as sickening as this one, atleast make it half-way decent. *FacePalm*

Oh god technology used in the wrong way for questionable purposes everybody panic

Don't you find it a bit questionable that all of a sudden we need to get microchips inplanted in us so that everything will work better? They are planning to make this chip have the ability to open doors, start your car, cheeck in at work, as passport and as your ID and the gods knows what more. All of a sudden all our daily endevours will be controlled by this chip - and the government controlls the chip, and thereby controlling you.

And what if you don't act as they want you to act? What if you're critical towards the government, will they simply turn off this chip so that you cannot execute your daily endevours? What then if you cannot prove who you are since the chip IS your ID? The chip is using radio frequencies, thereby it can be remotely switched on and off with such an application. This chip is nothing else but taking our free will and our rights away from us, just as they have done little by little for many many years.


I think that you should analyze everything and look at the possibilities that are both good and bad, not just accept anything unknowingly what it do and can do. And as far as I can tell, imo, the bad outweights the good a lot.

I can't see anything at all wrong with the population being tagged-and-released like cattle. I think this will help the nanny-state take care of us better, and that can only be a good thing.

Buckwiesal, I can see how this microchip could be useful, especially in holding medical information. That information you could also put on a card in your wallet.

This issue isn't as simple as it seems. First of all, it could be used in different countries. In America it may not seem so frightening, maybe, but what about in China, or North Korea? And what information would they put in the chip?

Secondly, it's historical fact that authoritarian regimes have sprung up in the past, notably Nazi Germany, but also in South America, and Russia. What happens when people with trackable chips suddenly commit such crimes as meeting together in a public space, reading certain books, organizing a protest, etc? There're questions involving degree of use, temptation on the part of govt to misuse technology, and slippery slopes. There's also a question of legitimizing this to the point where it becomes standard - to where people accept it, and inject a microchip at a young age, before they can understand the implications. Say, in 30 years, a lot of people have this. Then, in another hundred years, a country turns several degrees more authoritarian. They have a system in place to oppress many, many people.

Not all countries relish personal freedoms the way we do in the US. For instance, random roadside checks are standard here in Slovakia - they can pull you over and ask for your documents anytime without suspicion of a crime. Plus, the UK has a host of issues regarding personal freedom. They already use cameras and detectives to track people for the most inane reasons, imagine if they could track you with these chips? Would they?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/world/europe/25surveillance.html?_r=1&ref=world

EDIT: On a practical note, what happens when your medical info changes? How easy is it to change the info on that chip? Say, if you develop an allergy to a certain medicine. Do you then need a second, updated chip implanted? And then what if they read the wrong chip? Just curious. Excising the first chip sounds painful. I'd much rather have a new card in my wallet. Why do I sound like Jack Handey, now?

"and it's not going to make it worse."

It very well could, and the same people who make that chip for medical purposes here could make a ton of money off it elsewhere for questionable purposes. I never said the technology itself will change a government, but if and when that happens, they'll have another tool at their disposal. There's also a question of identity fraud. If there are readers for those chips, then a thief could get one too, and read people's personal info just by walking by them, or sitting by them in a subway.

Nobody is gonna put a chip on me, if i can avoid it! It´s already to much that google knows where i am right now.

The vaccine issue is very related with the chips, since it can be used to track if you have your vaccines or not, so here is an interview of Jane Burgmeister, please watch it.

PelTWCUmTsU

The Goverments are desperate to vaccine people, so much they exagerate numbers, check this article by CBS News:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/21/cbsnews_investigates/main5404829.shtml

Here is another video for spanish speaking people, this is just the second part of 5 videos:
Q0BDFGRaHv8

There is lots more info if you look around...

The chip is too large to be implanted via hypodermic needle and it has to be surgically implanted. However, if mandatory vaccines are imposed, they may decide to make people wear a wristband with RFID chip in it as a proof that they were vaccinated. They probably would use that as a precursor to the implanted chip when the public has been conditioned to accept that (and the people who refuse it are thrown into prisons.)

Eventually people will be chipped and sensors set up in buildings pick up data and are fed into the network into the central computer so whoever has access to the data will know where you have been, what you brought...etc etc. It is not hard to imagine whoever who has the access to that data will be able to control entire world.

Welcome to the brave new world. The Beast is coming....


"He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name. This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666."-REVELATIONS 13:16-18

one reason i think these are a dumb idea is that it would be possible to rig a transmitter/reciever to steal peoples personal info en mass. Just walk into a public place and wave a suped up scanner around. Doctors just need to organizer their stupid offices better. And in the future im assuming people are going to be putting alot more than their doctors records on those things. Its just a dumb idea period.

Wat. "The government" could shoot a cruise missile down your chimney. Bureaucracy is unwieldy, but governments are powerful, precise institutions with a lot of smart people working for them and, historically speaking, a propensity to tyranny.

Imagine if Stalin or Mao or Pol Pot had had this kind of technology. It makes me uncomfortable.

Because they can. If look at the state of the world today, look at increased surveilance everywhere, and then think a government sector had this oppurtunity and not use it, then you are not only naive, you are one of them letting them do it (eventually).

"If you have nothing to hide, then it shouldnt be a problem" may look like a harmless sentence used for every form of new surveillance tech/method, but it is not the fact that someone has something to hide. It is the fact that he could if he wanted to. Thats called freedom. period.

there where is power, there is abuse. there is proof in history . its just they make it smarter this time.

You mean like your car keys?



Or you could have selfish incompetents finding ways to abuse whatever power you hand to them. That's not a conspiracy, and constantly relying on that kind of word association doesn't make your argument any better. Labelling people as Obama haters and idiots will only piss people off and bring an argument down to name calling.

This technology definitely has its uses, but storing all your information on a radio transmitter or letting people implant you with what can easily function as a tracking device is beyond retarded.

There are plenty of examples of governments abusing power, spying on people and building actual databases to monitor the behavior of millions of people. To conclude that any of these governments is talking away or violating personal freedoms seems pretty logical to me. If a drug addict asks you for money to buy food, it isn't a conspiracy to say the he's more likely to buy drugs. If you conclude that he's having secret meetings with other addicts to organise a plan to take your money and then cover tracks, then yeah... conspiracy. One is looking at probabilities and trends, the other is unsupported speculation.

A conspiracy is more like believing that you know the inner workings of a separate group of people... that isn't necessary to make the generalisation that government "A" is not serving our best interests/is abusing power/is undermining our "rights" and "freedoms".

I have to wonder, why is it that when a government passes bills that allow wiretapping and listening in on phone calls we flip out, but when they make a chip that can track our activities and personal history we don't.

Saying "its only for legitimate benevolent reasons like health care and making payments and identifying you if you get stopped on the street without your wallet." is just as good an excuse as "its only for legitimate benevolent reasons like keeping you safe by bolstering homeland security."

No wonder I have had to repeat myself so much.

[salus]

My concern with the chips is that they will be used together with satellites to link us up to a central "hive" computer where they will be able to bombard us with mind controlling thoughts and be able to effect our emotions so that they have total control over us. Humans become slaves. It may be that they also will be able to create pain within us. I dont know about you but I dont trust the government and I dont intend putting my soul in the hands of people I dont trust. The implications and potential for abuse of the human race is phenomenal! Hell on earth could yet become a reality. I for one wont be getting the chip!

Salus

[TASmith]

I'm further concerned that a webbot, such as the one above me, with so many deviant thoughts about the potential of this technology for harm, could infiltrate one of these RFID chips, like it just did to Conceptart.org.

[vampire cervix]

I don't care. If the authorities really wanted to abuse and oppress me they could effortlessly do so without the damn chip anyway, so it's just as well. Plus, come on, it does have some benefits.

[Kraus]

What i find pathetic is the outrage against the questionable chip, and not the fucked up society that devolved into such beureaucracy that people don't use their sense of sight to recognise other people anymore.

And besides, i'd much rather avoid the long hospital lineups and the hassle of having even one health document missing at the needed moment.
Sure the governement will know i'm a stoner, but i have nothing to worry about. Why? Because if i get snatched away by a black van, it will not be the chip's fault. I will again blame it on a fucked up society that prosecutes people for inhaling a roadside plant in the first place.

Well, 'why not exile yourself and become a hermit if you're so unhappy with society?' i feel the looming question.. Because there's no fucking internet in the woods that's why. And to change society in my favour would require killing too many old white anglosaxons. Got no time for that shiz.

[CCorsair]

RFIDs are in not only chips that go in your arm but in you credit card and you bank cards there days the tech isn't that old anyone work in a job that had the card you held to pad or you drive across a bridge there days .

Note the next time you are about town or on the high way you will see these little gray boxes that look like cameras but have no lens(about the size of pack of cigarettes) . these are RFID scanners there are tons of them. I know this because I work high tech Computer security I know it because I been told what they are and why. The whole world isn't run by elections and who we vote .. its money and greed and fear Yes George Orwell in 1948 some how saw a lot how we are today. I studied ton of things in my life time and seen and even help bring about ways to watch people. I do not like how those people in power use the tech that was made to protect into ways to kill us. Its about power and control this is what it is about keeping those number down as you better control over all if you less to fight you. the problem is that they can not really keep this under secrets as with that box in front of you connected to the internet send out all the information they do not want you to have. RFIDs chips in your bank card can be read with 20 feet so get some thing block that signal that is easy . you don't want eh flu shot don't get it (I haven't and just will not that is just me and I have my personal reasons and many in my line of work will not as well)

Big brother is who? the Governments? or those in real power ?
follow the money see who buying into the tech and the idea this good and those are they one to fear.
Cutting you self off from all the world isn't going to help and no Tech is not evil just those who learn to use it wrongly . I got into computer tech so i could use it for my art work I learn networks adn the what data is moved and by who. I found early one they power we have in the net and that the greater the numbers and the more put the from out the dark great shadows of the net and put to the light for all to see if good but the flip side is disinformation those that put out info to take the truth and slant it to make it look like it just Paranoia Fringe making claims of far out things but when see more and more things that connect you to those who are look as wacko fringe .. it starts to take on more of the truth.

I would say stay alert to what is said in the news and on the net keep in mind that the real power is with people with the money and that anything we as mass they do fear. what is that Line in V is for Vendetta "The People should not fear its government the government should fear it's people" .. this show apply to the Rich and wealthy as well .

some days I really wish I didn't know as much about what goes on i the world and some I am glad but for most I just look for ways to do my best to fight back with out being target

CC

I was once asked if I wanted to work for one those groups with a alphabet for a name i said no.. they kept asking me over the years I told them on over and over for years.. The last ask me 15 years ago to work for them I said why do you ask what you know is the answer .. They said "we will be watching you.." I said that good I am sure those watching you will find it wasteful and amusing ..They said what does that mean no watches us I said yes they do as there is some always above you and they are always watching. He said I never work in the area i wanted to but I have I have never had any problems. I do not live in fear of "THEM" for THEM is anyone who is in a place of power and those names change and those who had the power last week fall to some new next week ..

We need to stop fearing and start fighting back and taking back .

Artist have an always been and are the rascals that paint the way to freedom .

[Cleverdart]

Were gonna need a new rainbow book.....