Yes, I am aware of that. Which is precisely why I think that RFID chipping an individual human being will only continue the trend.
Unless the mall is only the place you collect the data, and not where you use the data.
Ahh, yes.
Well, then back to my suggestion of tracking all the chipped people for their own good. If you do that, then the thieves can’t use their chip #'s without doing something like stalking them.
I’ve never understood the whole ‘OMG civil liberties the government is going to get youuuuuuu’ arguement.
I mean don’t get me wrong, I think it would be tremendously wasteful to track everyone in the country and so I oppose it for that reason… but really what’s the big deal? So the government knows you sit in front of your TV too much, shop every thursday at walmart, and take a trip to visit your sister once a month.
My dad is super paranoid about that sort of thing… and he’s never once given anything resembling a real reason why that’s so horrible.
Anyway, such a system would be interesting but I think for all the various reasons mentioned it would not really accomplish much except being wasteful. I think we could make it at least as secure as current credit cards but there’s no real point to it - Criminals would get around it.
I’m just curious, badlyburnttoast, did your parents name you that, or did you change your name yourself when you were old enough? And how do you cope with things like filing tax returns or getting a driver’s license with a name like “badlyburnttoast”?
Because it isn’t anybodys freaking business that I do those things and when and with who and for how long. And right after they make it their business some do gooder will use such data to do something about me watching tv too much, when I shop, or what mode of transportation I take to visit my sister every month.
Because not everyone leads a couch potato lifestyle, and they don’t want to be trackable 24/7. It would be a great way to end dissent once and for all because the government could make it known to you very clearly that they are watching your moves and that they are cataloguing the people that you meet.
The tags that work with this device are for mounting on vehicles and pallets and are quite large. The range of an RFID tag is limited by the size of its antenna. A tiny implanted chip would not be able to have an antenna that would reach more than a few feet.
This is kinda like saying guns are really dangerous because the army has guns that can blow through a tank from 12 miles away. This is a heavy commercial version for large scale warehousing.
I used to date a guy who sold drugs, he had his own company selling office telecommunications equipment. You got dope on your credit card as a service visit, or some other more or less unphysical charge. Service call, consultant fee … I know someone who was a ‘baby sitter’ or ‘house sitter’ or ‘pet sitter’ or ‘house cleaning service’ variously as needed.
Nope, reading a chip through the electromagnetic nightmare that is a car not to mention generating a powerful enough RFID scan to get a return that will penetrate the body of a car by more than a few feet would probably give your injection computer a seizure or two and or burn out the device.
I know exposure to advanced radio concepts and electronics are not part of typical HS and non engineering college programs, but almost every argument I have heard for why RFID is bad is based on ignorance of the capabilities of the tech.
Plenty of people already carry RFID enabled credit cards. Their ranges are measured in inches for the very reasons you are worried, so you don’t get long range or bleed over scans of the card by neighboring terminals.
Doesen’t work that way or at that range, your argument is based on unsupported assumptions.
I have heard of plenty of this kind of thing, The best part is, he pays taxes on it and the people with the best tools for nailing his ass (the IRS) just opted out of investigating.
Fair enough.
Wait, what?
You don’t like what I say, so you attack my user name? Really? I’m not being wooshed or something, you’re being serious here? I mean, feel free to tell me my ideas are stupid (and preferably explain why) but to tell me my user name is stupid? What’s that even accomplish?
Edit: unless this is some sort of statement about anonymity on the internet (hey, I’m slow but I’ll get there eventually). I think that’s a whole different issue completely.
The government can’t even get it’s act together to pass health care reform that the majority of the population supports with a democratic supermajority and you expect it to enact some sort of top secret plan to quash dissent? Where is the roughly 50% of the government that the dissenters support when this is happening? Where are the courts upholding the laws that even our elected officials have to follow? Where are the journalists who would latch on to this in an instant?
I mean, right now dissenters are not exactly in any danger. Look at all the tea parters, or the birthers, or the american socialist party, or NAMBLA and so on. None of them are in any danger (from the government), why do you think that would change if suddenly they knew where the members of those movements spent their time? If the government was really willing and able to resort to illegal methods to quash dissent, why don’t they do it now?
I suppose that we all just assumed that, since you were so free and open about letting everyone else’s personal habits be logged you wouldn’t be simultaneously trying to hide your identity by posting here under a pseudonym.
So tell us, Comrade Toast, what exactly do you have to hide?
Yes, I figured that out a moment after I posted, and edited it.
There are differences. First, we can’t have 100 bob smiths on a forum, so some sort of pseudonym is nessicary and second, there’s a difference between giving out information to the public in general and having it in a restricted database somewhere - would you post your credit card number, or hell your social security number (which the government already has, oh no!) for all to see?
badlyburnttoast I guess you don’t recall the Bush administration.
The number of active posters on this message board isn’t really that high. There are probably high schools–and certainly universities–with more students than there are active posters here, and yet students don’t get to sign their papers with cool, self-made “handles”. Of course no one should just post their credit card info on a public message board, but most of you guys don’t even post with your names.
Which I actually have no problem with. Maybe you just made up an Internet “handle” out of some vague sense of “security”, or maybe you just don’t like the idea of your Mom someday stumbling across something you posted about your sex life. As adults, you all have a right to keep your lives (semi*-)private if you wish, for whatever reasons, or no reason at all.
*Actual privacy on the Internet being very, very hard if not impossible to obtain.
The other thing is that “the government”–not to sound all anarchist, here–does not exist. There are just people. Maybe your information is in a “restricted database”, but someone, some group of fallible human beings who are complete strangers to you, has access to that database. (Otherwise it’s a pretty useless database.)
Some types of information do need to be kept for good and sufficient reasons, with appropriate safeguards to keep track of what the people who have access to those databases are up to and make sure they don’t abuse their authority. Mass collection of information on every action every person takes–or proposals which come as close to that as the one in the O.P.–go too far, and treat us all like toddlers instead of adult citizens of a free society.
So, a list of any traffic tickets I’ve gotten is fair, especially since those are incidents where I was ethically at fault. Some government tracking device that can see every single place I’ve ever driven to is not appropriate. If there’s probable cause to believe I’ve committed a crime, get a warrant or a subpoena and investigate, but otherwise I shouldn’t have to allow anyone to pry into every detail of my personal life.
It’s a lot easier to screw things up and mess with people you don’t like than it is to actually do something constructive (like provide for a decent health care system in a First World country like the U.S.A.) Lots of regimes and groups, from the mildly repressive to the outright totalitarian–everyone from Joe McCarthy to Joe Stalin–have managed to stiffle dissent, even while being in some cases proverbially unable to do little things like make decent toilet paper. More often than not, political oppression seems to go hand-in-hand with general ineptitude at running everything else besides the secret police and the army.
But the point of proposals like the one in this thread is much of what would be needed to silence dissenters wouldn’t be illegal anymore.
Your idea is stupid.