Identity Badge Worn Under Skin

[madhaha]

1. Who do we trust to make sure that only relevant medical information will be stored on this chip? The government?

The data isn't in the chip... Its in a database. The chip stores an id number, much like a library card.

2. Who else can see the future of "medical chip" upgrades? Next thing you know, we'll have DNA information stored on the chips, deemed need by the medical profession to pick out birth defects. Hitler would have loved that for tracking down Jews.

Your DNA is kind of part of most of your body? You can extract DNA information from a couple of hairs. Are you going to wear a hair net for the rest of your life in fear of people picking up your bodily secretions and scanning it (and finding out you have blue eyes and blood type O minus)? Screening for birth defects is done through blood tests. I'm not quite sure how you'd manage that from an implant holding a 16 figure number.

The Hitler scenario is particularly strange. But if you're feeling particularly insecure you can ALREADY purchase tag deactivators. One sweep and you're clean. Compare this to. for example, a mandatory barcode tattoo being placed on everyone. Just as you can hide a tattoo, you can mask the tags with the smallest amount of metal. A lot easier to remove manually too.
Does it stop people sending out squads to round up all the black or asian people and shooting them? Does it make thier job much easier? I doubt it. Its not as is they can act as tracking devices, unlike mobile phones.

3. Imagine the USA becoming like other countries, with governmental medical care. How does that chip sound now?

Huh? I have no idea what you're insinuating here... But then again, our secret service takes great pains in not being invasive. But it seems a very unlikely scenario considering how much of a drain public health systems are on public spending.

4. Do you really think that there won't be scanners 4 feet apart across the USA if this takes hold?

Er. Yes. Again imagine the barcode scenario. Do you imagine everyone getting their hands on barcode scanners just so they can read your precious 18 digit number? As mentioned above, there are MUCH easier routes to ID theft. Speaking of barcodes, I think there was a similar reaction from the public when the technology came out... What did it result in? Much faster tills and speedy ID.

5. All it takes is one scanner to fall into the hands of the private or public sector, for the scanner to be universally obtainable.

So? You still need the right freq and the database. Admittedly, finding the freq probably won't be too hard but without the database, the code is useless. In the UK we have the Data Protection Act which lets you view and amend any data someone has on you.

This isn't some radio collar (note that radio collars have been around for many years and criminals are tagged, but no government has ever asked for the same to be done to the general public) holding everything there is to know about you. This isn't truth serum. And the potential benefits for emergencies, organ donation etc. are worthwhile. At the end of the day, its a library card you can't lose by accident. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Esav Benyamin]

Those who seek security at the expense of freedom ...

You do know who David Blunkett is.

 

[Centaur]

Just as you can hide a tattoo, you can mask the tags with the smallest amount of metal.

Hey, there's money to be made here for the innovative clothier!

Garments made to specifically to mask your VeriChip signal! The latest blocking fashion from Versace! Dior! Armani! Gucci! Prada! Just think of the possibilities for accessorizing! The garments can be made to go with the aluminum foil hats that those people wear to keep the CIA from reading their thoughts!

 

[OwenM]

Real funny.
Some people refuse to see what's going on in the world around them.
Two decades ago, people worried about things that they could foresee possibly happening in the future. And other people thought they were paranoid.
A decade ago, as technology available to the public made leaps and bounds, there were underground video tapes circulated that leaked (not predicted the possibility of, but stated as fact) coming changes in government policies, currency, Central American and Middle Eastern military involvement, and yes, even chips for keeping track of medical information, or tracking individuals that would initially be used in cattle and dogs. There were people who believed this stuff, and even worried more. And other people thought they were paranoid.
I've never gone off the deep end about this stuff. Just like anything else, my attitude is usually "I'll believe it when I see it".
Today, after watching so many of the things I heard about ten years ago come true, I don't think it's paranoid. I think some of it's pretty realistic, because I see it every day, right in front of me, here and now.
And some people still think it's paranoia.
Maybe it's time we woke up.

btw, the technology that joeshredd mentions as being able to read chips from a distance has been around since the 80's.

 

[craigz]

It's only a 16-digit number. What do you need an expensive high-tech gadget for? Why not just tattoo everbody's number on them, maybe on the inside of the wrist? Why didn't anybody think of that?

Oh yeah, I guess someone did.

 

[madhaha]

Those who seek security at the expense of freedom

Thats quite ambiguous... Please explain. If you mean tagging ourselves with these chips makes us more secure, at the price of freedom then I don't follow your argument at all. We are already readily trackable by mobile phones, readily identifyable by biometrics/dental records. We already exist in countless databases (how many cold calls have you had recently?). The chip does not offer us, or the state increased security. It just offers convenience. Its reversible. Its not mandatory.

OwenM, please can you give SOURCES. And please remember the massive volume of predictions that haven't come true from years gone by (remember the armageddon at the millenium because of the millenium bug? The massive food shortages that would have us all eating food pills? The irradication of all diseases? The settling of mars by the end of the 90's? The magic of the internet that would instantly allow even the smallest of shop owners compete against the supermarket giants?). You are being very selective without naming your method of selection.

Just think for a bit. Lets assume this technology is misused. Everyone gets tagged. Lets assume all the doctors are in on it and explain away these tags and it works perfectly allowing us to be tracked everywhere we go. Lets assume that soon after, any idiot can download schematics for long range scanners off the internet and the parts are all readily and legally availible. What happens next? I think the most likely thing is that the system then becomes useless or secure. People will probably start destroying/deactivating the tags en masse (or if worse comes to worse, you can dig them out with a needle, they're only under the skin) OR people decide that hey, these things are actually quite handy for saving lives. Why didn't we carry medical info around with us before! Neither of these appear to be doomsday scenarios.

 

[thatmguy]

If the chip becomes mandatory, then I'm heading for the hills. At the risk of sounding biblical about this, the whole idea seems to have the "mark of the beast" ring to it.

Ditto........

 

[thatmguy]

And, with all due respect, those of you who don't have what we do, can't possibly understand.

 

[Esav Benyamin]

It's not ambiguous at all. It's no more ambiguous than any other smothering technology, like the automobile. What a great idea that was. Now our entire society is built around feeding the internal combustion engine.

Only this is not an enabler, it's a stabilizer. It doesn't tell you what you can do, it tells you who you are. It tells everyone else who you are, too. It circumscribes options.

Maybe you think because we are pinned down by all our other databased obligations already, taking on one more would be no big deal. But the others are only chains. This is the lock.

Like the automobile, it will remain a rich man's toy for a short time. Then everyone will need the improved model to be able to function in the new society. There will be no more creative ambiguity.

You will be assigned your designed and monitored function.

 

[thatmguy]

Welcome my son, welcome, to machine.........

Where have you been? It's alright we know where you've been............

 

[Esav Benyamin]

From The Telegraph, Letters to the Editor:

(My emphasis)

Re: What we have come to expect
Date: 18 October 2004

Sir – Philip Johnston's report (News, Oct 13) on the Home Office's imminent appointment of a PR team for identity cards, before the legislation even reaches Parliament, confirms the level of arrogance and disregard of due process that we have come to expect from the Home Secretary.

David Blunkett has so far failed to respond to his last so-called "public consultation" about ID cards, or to engage with the serious concerns regarding the purpose, practicality and principles of the scheme expressed by members of the Home Affairs Select Committee, professional bodies - including the Law Society and the CBI - and growing numbers of the public.

Yet he continues to brief technology suppliers at closed sessions and, in May, awarded a development contract (estimated to be worth £10 million over 18 months) to PA Consulting.

If Mr Blunkett wishes to spend more public money explaining why we should be compelled to pay for ID cards, he should at least provide a clear and unambiguous case for the scheme: explaining precisely how the Government expects a centralised database containing biometric and other personal data to reduce the risk of terrorist attack, prevent illegal immigration and working and avoid an increase in identity fraud. He has singularly failed to do this so far.

Until he has clearly identified the benefits of ID cards and has addressed growing privacy concerns around, say, the linking of people's medical records via a system intended for use by a wide range of state and commercial organisations, Mr Blunkett should halt all further development and spending on ID cards at least until he has a clear mandate from Parliament and the country. This can only follow an open and informed public debate, which the Home Office spin doctors quite evidently wish to avoid.

If 80 per cent of the country is supposed to be in favour of ID cards, then why does the Home Office so urgently need a department devoted to selling the idea? And if there is nothing to hide about the scheme, then what is it that Mr Blunkett fears?

From:
Phil Booth, Development Director, NO2ID, Lewes, E Sussex

 

[maximus otter]

I wasn't aware of NO2ID until I read Esav's post (above).

I have since looked at their site, and I find a lot to agree with. I am fundamentally opposed to ID cards, despite the fact I am an LEO. I see them as a pointless and gross intrusion on liberty.

Take a look at NO2ID's site here and see what you think.

maximus otter

 

[madhaha]

While the Government's current proposal is for a voluntary scheme, if you choose not to apply for an ID card you may not be able to:

• Leave the country
• Drive
• Get a job
• Access basic services like health care
• Work with children

Note that all of the above require different pieces of ID/paper work now anyway. You'd need a passport or visa to leave the country, a driver's license (which comes in 2 parts) to drive, NI (national insurance, social security to those Americans out there) to get a job, in theory an NHS number to get health care and some sort of qualifications to work with children. Ok, I admit I'm not sure on that last one but I know it entails a lot of paperwork and a police check (I've gone through this myself to teach a voluntary class). What a centralised system really offers, is a way to kill off all these seperate forms of ID and have just one record for everyone.

The site claims this is an enormous waste of time and money. Quite true in the short term, but I think in the long term it will save money and mountains of paperwork.

ID cards change the burden of proof enshrined in the Magna Carta ? innocent until proven guilty. We will all be asked to prove we are British.

But you kind of need to do that anyway... You need to show ID to recieve packages, open bank accounts, buy alcohol and tobacco, get children's fare tickets, rent videos... These people "assume you're guilty" unless you have ID. Its reasonable and sensible. Try telling a bank you're innocent unless proven guilty and see how far that gets you "Innocent unless proven guilty" has been abused to the hilt.

Read the Magna Carta here:

http://www.bl.uk/collections/treasures/magnatranslation.html

How much of it is still relevant and unalianable now? Its almost 800 years old. Attempting to enforce the rights given to the "free men" (an old english social/feudal class) of the period now would be stupid, especially since the feudal system is long dead.

A centralised system would NOT make ID fraud easier. Traditionally if you wanted a fake ID, you have numerous ways to go about it. The easiest to forge would be something like a Birth Certificate with which you would use to aquire the other documents. With a centralised system there is one record to scrutinise, not hundreds of records to crosscheck, each supporting the other. You get one at birth (instead of a birth certificate). Its locked to your biometric (possibly genetic) details instead of your name and duplicates or tampered ID would be much easier to check.

There is nothing wrong with the technology

The real issues are with the ministers. They clearly don't know what the benefits and problems of the varying systems are. The REAL reason they support one private company rather than another is because one of them has nicely made them chairman or given them shares or made substantial donations to the party. It has nothing to do with the public interest. It has nothing to do with the quality of results or value for money. Its simple, shallow, greed. The technology itself can potentially be extremely helpful if properly implemented. When the problems crop up, it will be because the company and the politicians running the show are corrupt. Don't blame the tags.

 

[Esav Benyamin]

Don't take us to be naive. Nobody is blaming the non-sentient tags. The ministers will always be corrupt, so will the clerks administering the system.

The advantage of having all these separate ID cards is that I can choose which bank to provide services for which I will identify myself. I can apply for and receive a license to drive without needing ID for a bank. If I can't leave the country, I can still live within it, even if I don't take care of children.

A National ID Card requires me to qualify for all of this or be denied all of it. I have no more chance to pick and choose. Once everyone is required to carry this, it WILL be required to be produced at the discretion of any official. Today I can walk down any street at any time, and unless I am behaving inappropriately or the police are able to demonstrate a reason for questioning someone matching my description, no one has any right to impede me. I resent being told I must have an internal passport.

By the way, Maximus Otter is right, of course, in that it gives the LEO no real advantage. Unfortunately, it will be used to burden that same LEO with an unnecessary, onerous, unproductive extra duty, for which the LEO, not the government, will end up taking the heat.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

 

[Geraldo]

I personally don't want anything stuck under my skin, but I don't see a big, evil plot here either.

The same people who worry about a tag being used to track them will turn on their cell phone without a second thought.

Here's one reason I don't see big brother keeping track of me with a tag: The FBI currently has thousands of hours of electronic intercepts they don't have the time and translaters to deal with, and the number of people they are trying to track is relatively small. So how could they track the movements, email, voice transmissions, and commercial transactions of 290 million citizens?

As far as cameras go, just think about how many people and cameras are required to watch casinos, which are the most surveilled pieces of real estate on the planet. Again, this surveillance would have to be multiplied by an enormous factor if the government wanted to track all of us.

This stuff makes for a fun movie, like Enemy of the State, or Minority Report, but that's about it.

 

[Danelle O'Shea]

And he shall make all, both little and great, rich and poor, freemen and bondmen, to have a character in their right hand or on their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, but he that hath the character, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. (Revelation 13: 16-17)

 

[Esav Benyamin]

And we don't need marks to defend ourselves.

Genesis Chapter 4

15 And the LORD said unto him: 'Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.' And the LORD set a sign for Cain, lest any finding him should smite him.

23 And Lamech said unto his wives: Adah and Zillah, hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech; for I have slain a man for wounding me, and a young man for bruising me;
24 If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.

 

[madhaha]

An odd choice of quote. Do you doubt the lords wisdom?

Your argument doesn't really hold water since as stated many many times, the information contained in the chip is merely a central account number. You can still choose which bank you id yourself with, it just means a different number on your record (or numbers if you have multiple accounts). Also, there is no suggestion that you HAVE to use it for your financial services. Possession of the chip does not automatically grant you a driver's license or a passport! All of these are seperate entries on your record.

The database will probably be (or SHOULD be) set up with layered access so that a delivery driver wouldn't have access to your medical details for example.

LEO's aren't burdened with an extra duty because like you said, its at their discretion. They don't have to scan everyone as they go on their beat. I have no idea who the maximus otter you cite is so if I've missed a point in his argument let me know.

 

[Esav Benyamin]

maximus otter is a British LEO. See post #32 to which you replied, only you replied to the reference in his post, not to him directly.

You continue to miss or elude the point that the current technology is only the first step. Of course it only links to a database, not containing the information in itself. Why would it have to, when ANYONE can get access to any part of that database once it's established? And you are walking around with a key that ANYONE can copy.

Furthermore, if any location can be fitted with a scanner that identifies you, it can send back a signal, a light, a flashing warning, openly or to a nearby security officer, to forbid you entry. Or simply to track your location, just as this forum can track who is present on which subforum at any given time.

And of course the laws aren't in place now, but once the technology can be and is by law mandatory and universal, anyone frying their implant will be picked up by the police simply for not showing the necessary data to be allowed out in public.

 

[Esav Benyamin]

An odd choice of quote. Do you doubt the lords wisdom?

I don't know what you mean.