[Winstonm]

Sometimes I think I'm the last person to find out....maybe I am again. Only today I learned of a new technology termed RFID microchips (Radio Frequency Identification) that are produced by Verichip, a subsidiary of Applied Digital. These chips, as small as a grain of sand, can be inplanted anywhere, on any type of merchandise, and unlike traditional scans that identify a common stock item for stores, these new chips allow an individual number for each item, meaning that if you buy a product with an inplanted, nearly invisible chip, wherever you go could be tracked and indentified.

Already WalMart, Proctor and Gamble, and other marketers have instituted trials of this chip.

On the board of directors for Verichip is Tommy Thompson, once a cabinet member in the Bush administration. Obviously, getting a government contract for "alien registration chips" would go far in subsidizing this company.

A companion concept was announced in December of last year my Matsushita Electrical Company: "Matsushita announced late last year they have developed a computer chip that will allow a broadband connection to any home appliance simply by plugging it into an electrical socket. The technology the Japan-based firm has created is capable of transmitting data via the electric wiring in homes at speeds faster than Ethernet."

There you have it....a pinhole camera like I used to see used when I worked in Las Vegas that is virtually indetectable....implanted in your new ceiling fan that plugs into the electrical supply and thus can transmit live pictures of your every move while you are home.

To me this is a fascinating breadthrough in technology, as the benefits could be enormous, but it is so ripe for misuse that it turns out to be chilling news as well.

Already, the company who makes the chips is touting a new chip designed to be installed under the skin of humans so a medical record could be had simply by scanning the chip. That is a good use....but there are so many bad uses. What would happen if every currency transaction was monitored by implanted chips in the currency and the bodies of individuals? As for the microchip, can you imagine, as oil prices escalate, a national "gas card" that would only allow purchases for "approved" vehicles. Personal privacy is the last bastion of freedom. This news frankly scares the hell out of me.

For me, I would rather sacrifice the positive benefits rather than allow the potential for government and corporate misuse.

[hrothgar]

While I think that privacy is a real concern, RFID tags don't worry me overly much.

The best way to think of an RFID tag is a bar code that can be read at range. While its true that some tags are programable and can given a unique identifier, the primary goal is for inventory management. RFID tags make goods cheaper by decreasing inventory holding costs. If the RFID tags that are embedded in clothes become an issue, the manufacturers will design mechanisms to allow folks to brun them out. Alternatively, its quite easy to design a detector that will indicate if you are being "scanned".

My main concern with RFID tags has to do with money and passports. (The federal government is talking about embedding RFID tags into both). Personally, I'm a bit wary about anyone being able to scan me and identify how much money I'm carrying (potentially where its located). In a similar fashion, I don't want folks to be able to immediately determine whether I am carrying a US passport.

As for implanting chips into people... It might make sense.

Using "something you have" as part of a comprehensive security system has been used for thousands of years. (You carry keys for your car or your house every single day). Its perfectly reasonable that the form factor for these keys might change over time. I don't know if we'll go back to the concept of a signet ring (embedding key's in jewelry) or just implant ships in people's arms. However, I suspect that folks would appreciate more convenience.

For what its worth, there are some real nut jobs raising similar concerns. The book "The Spychips Threat: Why Christians Should Resist RFID and Electronic Surveillance" is considered a classic in my social circles (When I say classic, I'm using the word in much the same vein one says that as "Reefer Madness" or "Plan 9 from Outer Space" are classic movies)

[mike777]

We have talked about this here in this forum quite a bit. This is the chip in dogs and soon in every kid so they can be tracked if kidnapped.

See chip removal tech. to hide as a new job career.

As for privacy...everyone talks about it but study after study has shown if you offer enough money/incentives people will give up alot of privacy.

[DrTodd13]

Say what you will but the Christian eschatalogical belief in the "mark of the beast" is not looking so ridiculous these days. There was a long time where people would never have considered it possible that something implanted under the skin would ever become necessary to buy or sell but I think that is no longer the case. A cashless society is on the way and surprise surprise it just so happens that will enable total monitoring of everyone.

[hrothgar]

DrTodd13, on Jul 16 2006, 08:57 PM, said:

Say what you will but the Christian eschatalogical belief in the "mark of the beast" is not looking so ridiculous these days. There was a long time where people would never have considered it possible that something implanted under the skin would ever become necessary to buy or sell but I think that is no longer the case. A cashless society is on the way and surprise surprise it just so happens that will enable total monitoring of everyone.

The Jesus freaks have been screaming about the "Mark of the Beast" for as long as I can remember. I remember back in the days of my youth when the exact same arguments were made about bar codes...

[DrTodd13]

The Bible clearly states that the mark will be on the right hand or the forehead. So, when some fanatic starts screaming about barcodes then they can't be a very good Christian if they haven't read the text enough to know that barcodes in general could not be the mark (unless tattooed on one of those locations). There are lots of crazy theories about what it could be and many of them have nothing to do with one of these body parts. My point was that the argument that the prophecy must be wrong on the grounds that "it could never happen" is certainly not valid these days. I'd say most people can imagine a not too distant future in which governments mandate such things.

[Winstonm]

I know for me it is not any biblical prophecy that scares but my basic distrust of the motives of power - power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. These implanted microchips have the ability to grant absolute power in the name of humanitarian/economic/patriotic causes.

I don't believe in "conspiracy theories", but I also do not think it is difficult to accept the concept that people of like beliefs can support others of like beliefs, leading to what appears to be conspiracy. For those who believe the ends justify their means, it matters not if they are the purveyors or someone else does the work, as long as a common ends is attained. Once the ends is reached, on backward look it appears conspiratorial when in fact all it contains is mutual and unorganized cooperation.

[luke warm]

hrothgar, on Jul 16 2006, 01:33 PM, said:

The Jesus freaks ...

this is (by my recollection) the 2nd time you've used that phrase... let me ask again, do you use it in reference to all christians? as an aside, one i, at least, find interesting, i've never seen you refer to 'allah freaks' or 'buddah freaks', and certainly never to 'godless freaks'

[hrothgar]

luke warm, on Jul 17 2006, 03:23 AM, said:

hrothgar, on Jul 16 2006, 01:33 PM, said:

The Jesus freaks ...

this is (by my recollection) the 2nd time you've used that phrase... let me ask again, do you use it in reference to all christians? as an aside, one i, at least, find interesting, i've never seen you refer to 'allah freaks' or 'buddah freaks', and certainly never to 'godless freaks'

"Jesus Freak" is a fairly common derogatory expression used to describe individuals that go overboard in their religious devotion. You can read the Wikipedia entry here

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Jesus_freak

Surprised that you've never run into it before.

I certainly don't use the expression to refer to any/all Christians. Just as its possible to drink alcohol without become an alchoholic, I believe that its possible to practice religion without succumbing to extremism and bigotry. However, I think that Marx said it best when he called religion the opiate of the masses...

For what its worth, I tend to be fairly eccumenical in my distain for religious extremists. I tend to bash Christianty more often than most religions because its the dominant religion here in the US and its what gets shoved into my face every day. (Members of of minority religions are alot more serious about issues like separation of Church and State)

[luke warm]

hrothgar, on Jul 16 2006, 08:01 PM, said:

Surprised that you've never run into it before.

oh i've run into it a time or two, but thanks for the link... hard to argue with such luminaries as elton john, ted turner, and howard stern

Quote

Just as its possible to drink alcohol without become an alchoholic, I believe that its possible to practice religion without succumbing to extremism and bigotry.

i certainly agree that extremism and bigotry are to be avoided, regardless of one's religions bent (or lack thereof)

Quote

However, I think that Marx said it best when he called religion the opiate of the masses...

with all due respect to the intellectual prowess of marx, i do think there's an obvious dichotomy between religion and communism ... perhaps he might have had an ulterior motive? or, as we sometimes say down heah, i think he had a dog in that fight

Quote

For what its worth, I tend to be fairly eccumenical in my distain for religious extremists.

probably that's true; however, i'm sure you can understand why i might not have known that (ie, the lack of 'allah freaks' etc)

Quote

I tend to bash Christianty more often than most religions because its the dominant religion here in the US and its what gets shoved into my face every day.

well i certainly understand how that could cause your seemingly deep-rooted antipathy towards christianity...

Quote

(Members of of minority religions are alot more serious about issues like separation of Church and State)

the type of separation of church and state which i think you speak of is based on court rulings as to the meaning of this section of the 1st ammendment to our constitution:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."

the only other time religion is mentioned in the constitution occurs in article VI, paragraph 3, which mandates that all elected federal officials must take an oath promising to abide by the constitution, and ends with the words "... but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

several states tried to establish, in their constitutions, christianity as the 'official' religion in their states, which is contrary to the words and spirit of the 1st ammendment.. those efforts were appropriately, imo, foiled

often, jefferson's 'wall of separation' quote is used as justification for taking God out of gov't... here are the two quotes by him that use this phrase

Quote

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore man to all of his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society.

the first was from a letter sent to a group of connecticut baptists, the second was written to a group of virginia baptists... both letters were responses prompted by religious persectution visited upon the addressees by their respective states... jefferson was affirming that in his view (backed up by his then attorney general, levi lincoln) neither state had the right to either favor or discriminate their citizenships based upon religious affiliation or lack thereof

of course it might matter to some that jefferson had no part in writing the first ammendment, he was serving the new country's interest in france at the time of its writing... the author's views on his own words were:

Quote

Fisher Aimes -- Author of the first ammendment, wrote an article called "School books" in the Pladium magazine in January 1801, "We have trouble in the classrooms, we are putting in new text books. Nothing wrong with new books but we are spending more time on them than the Bible; it is drifting to the back of the classroom. We cannot tolerate this in American education. The Bible's morals are pure, its examples are captivating and noble.

as you can see, it seems that it wasn't his intention to take God or the bible out of schools when he penned the 1st ammendment... one would think that the author would have some understanding of the meaning of his words

[Winstonm]

Jimmy, here is a point of contention. If a public school starts their morning with a prayer, isn't that in a sense a state-sponsored church? Even if the wording is somewhat ambiguous, like saying God, how does that affect those who believe that God should be called Allah, or Buddha, or Kris Kringle for that matter - and what of the rights of atheists and agnostics? For whatever few seconds these prayers last, isn't that a state-sponsored morning prayer and as such a state-sponsored religion? I agree that this is an extreme view, but I believe the founding fathers would concur that extremism which insures indivual rights rather than infringing of individual rights is the lesser evil.

I do not understand the evangelical christian's vehemence about bringing religious views back into govermnent - if one believes that religion should influence politics and government one need only to look at Iran to see how well the two coincide.

I fear a President Jerry Falwell as much as I do an Ayatollah Khomeni.

[luke warm]

Winstonm, on Jul 16 2006, 11:39 PM, said:

Jimmy, here is a point of contention.  If a public school starts their morning with a prayer, isn't that in a sense a state-sponsored church?  Even if the wording is somewhat ambiguous, like saying God, how does that affect those who believe that God should be called Allah, or Buddha, or Kris Kringle for that matter - and what of the rights of atheists and agnostics?  For whatever few seconds these prayers last, isn't that a state-sponsored morning prayer and as such a state-sponsored religion?  I agree that this is an extreme view, but I believe the founding fathers would concur that extremism which insures indivual rights rather than infringing of individual rights is the lesser evil.

I do not understand the evangelical christian's vehemence about bringing religious views back into govermnent - if one believes that religion should influence politics and government one need only to look at Iran to see how well the two coincide.

well reasonable men and women may certainly argue reasonably on the subject... my point was that the constitution does not say what some are representing, that's all... should we also do away with the pledge of alligiance to the flag in public schools? it uses the phrase "... under God..." i could be behind the times, maybe it's already been trashed and i just don't know it

i don't personally believe that prayer in schools violates the constitution, and i have read nothing *in* the constitution to change that opinion... i think you'd admit that, right or wrong, even the author of the 1st ammendment didn't foresee a time when his words would be interpretted in a way he obviously (re: the quote above) didn't intend

Quote

I fear a President Jerry Falwell as much as I do an Ayatollah Khomeni.

so do i, but only if falwell wanted america to be a theocracy... i actually think many christians don't have a clear view of 'separation of church and state'... in their zeal to see a christian america, they miss the lessons of history (imho).... the fact, as i see it, is that christianity is better protected when the gov't is not allowed to interfere, ie when a separation does exist... but remember, i was not giving my views in the previous post (necessarily)... i was simply arguing from what appears (and what doesn't appear) in the constitution...

[helene_t]

Back to topic.

There's a disco in Rotterdam that offers regular clients RFIDs so that they don't need to show ID when entering the disco. Also, the implant is linked to an account at the disco's "mini bank" so that you don't need any cash or paying card when going out dancing. If the RFID says you're too young you can't buy certain drinks.

Teenagers are eager to get RFID't since it's considered to be cool.

I welcome the cash-less society with complete transaction surveiliance as chrime could be made a lot more difficult. But it has little to do with RFIDs as the same can be achieved with paying cards. It has everything to do with database management and nothing to do with means of payment, as long as we get rid of that stoneage technology called "banknotes". But if people stick to banknotes I'm all for getting them RFID's allthough I can see Richard's concern about robbers locating their victims. But there must be some technical solution. BTW, banknotes allready have individual IDs so RFIDs may not be necesary.

I acknowledge that it's a sensitive topic in the US where certain politicians want the BB to watch you and put you in jail for thought chrime like sympathy with the axis of evil, while others take the extreme opposite position. I have hope that Europeans and Asians will relate more practically to this issue and that the same will be true in the US as soon as the political climate gets better.

There are a lot of wonderful applications for RFIDs. Washing machines that read the RFIDs of your laundry and optimize temperature and washing powder usage are allready designed and will enter the market as soon as RFIDs in socks and panties become common. The possibilities are endless.

[hrothgar]

luke warm, on Jul 17 2006, 08:04 AM, said:

well reasonable men and women may certainly argue reasonably on the subject... my point was that the constitution does not say what some are representing, that's all... should we also do away with the pledge of alligiance to the flag in public schools? it uses the phrase "... under God..." i could be behind the times, maybe it's already been trashed and i just don't know it

Starting a new thread where we anyone who wants can discuss separation of church and state. Hopefully this one can return to RFID...