The Mark: Scientist Claims Human Microchip Implants Will Become "Not Optional"
They will have to physically force this on me. Hell, I won't even use a GPS and my cell phone is older than dirt.
You type: | You see: |
---|---|
*italics* | italics |
**bold** | bold |
While we're very happy to have you in the Gulch and appreciate your wanting to fully engage, some things in the Gulch (e.g. voting, links in comments) are a privilege, not a right. To get you up to speed as quickly as possible, we've provided two options for earning these privileges.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
Parents are already doing this to their children out of fear of child kidnapping. They think of it like a human 'Lotrack' for safety.
I am aware of this possibility as a result of having worked a bit with (a) search and rescue dogs and (b) clinical laboratory. In the latter, serious work is going into confirming a patient ID by genetic markers...one of the major problems with lab work is that specimens get mixed up and the wrong results can be reported on a patient. If your automated analyzers all check DNA tags on their samples you can catch most of these discrepancies.
Jan
As technology progresses (and is kinda already here), they could very easily implant a nano-sized device that is next to impossible to find physically without using a combination of sensors to triangulate its location.
Or they could install multiple in different locations so if one is removed, the others take over and alert the government that one was removed.
Tech is at a point that a lot of things can be done autonomously in an instant.
Honestly, there's a lot that could be done, and I believe that the ones who are going to come out on top are going to be the ones who can react to technology the fastest (read: not the feds in their current instantiation). The losers can either react with overwhelming force, or realize they're lagging behind and change. The way the media responds will determine if they react with overwhelming force or not.
Let us say, Ranter, that you avoid being microchipped (as would I). The next level of urban scrutiny may well be 'sniffers' that sample the DNA imprint of those passing by and trace their movements accordingly. We would then have to come up with some other method of preserving anonymity to fool that system. This cycle of surveillance and avoidance could continue indefinitely.
I think that a better answer is to change our culture such that this level of scrutiny is considered unacceptable...but this requires that a preponderance of the people actually do not want to be traced. It is the security/freedom dichotomy again. Failing this, we who value freedom will have to come up with a technical solution to each problem. This is not a case of a sudden 'apocalypse', it is an endurance race by those people who will not give up valuing freedom.
Jan
My point is that this is merely technology. I am not too concerned about it being put into use because any where that can sponsor a maker-lab, abortion clinic, or illicit drug lab can also provide for inactivation, exchange, or optional use of these devices.
The battle is not to outwit an implanted RFID; the battle is for there to be someone left who would want to.
Jan
Jan
Load more comments...