Microchipping Humans.

24

Comments

  • gomezzgomezz Posts: 44,506
    Forum Member
    Logan's Run?
  • James FrederickJames Frederick Posts: 53,184
    Forum Member
    I think it would be a good idea if at first it was done on a voluntary measure I would sign up for one
  • ÆnimaÆnima Posts: 38,548
    Forum Member
    Watcher #1 wrote: »
    You've been watching too much Sci-Fi

    Actually, I read about a possible future application for chips in the body to detect various diseases early.
  • noise747noise747 Posts: 30,692
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I don't think it will happen in my time to be honest, if it happens at all. Government even got worried about a Id card and stopped it and i think if labour had got back into power at the last election the Id card would have still failed.
  • neo_walesneo_wales Posts: 13,625
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I'm all for it, certainly biometric chips to help when your ill, I also favour I.D. cards too. I'm not paranoid about this issue and believe its the way forward. I'd volunteer for it now.
  • KittiaraKittiara Posts: 2,001
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I would be against it. As someone else mentions, I feel it would change the relationship between citizens and the state.

    People who commit horrible crimes are still going to commit horrible crimes. If they're in a mindset to do such things, a chip isn't going to stop them.

    If something like that were to be made compulsory, I would rather leave the country than have it done. The idea of the state messing with my body? No thanks!

    I'm not a computer. I don't need a chip.
  • ravedadaveravedadave Posts: 55
    Forum Member
    I'm up for it too, in fact I would volunteer if it did the medical side of things.

    I live alone and often wonder what would happen if I fell hard, or had a stroke/heartattack.

    If things like this were in place that alerted the emergency services, that would be ace.

    If they made it so I didn't have to get out of bed after getting in because I forgot to switch a light off or put the washer on too it would be a bonus :p
  • mackaramackara Posts: 4,063
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Watcher #1 wrote: »
    You've been watching too much Sci-Fi

    My dog is fitted with an I.D chip that doubles as a body temperature sensor, not sci-fi but getting there.
  • nvingonvingo Posts: 8,619
    Forum Member
    It's all about how it is marketed.
    If it was Facebook who offered it rather than the State making it compulsory, people would be falling over themselves to have one installed:
    I think it would be a good idea if at first it was done on a voluntary measure I would sign up for one
  • Roland MouseRoland Mouse Posts: 9,531
    Forum Member
    How would Microchipping Humans stop missing persons? If those 3 women who have just escaped being kidnapped for 10 years were Microchipped, how would that have helped then or stopped it?

    It wouldn't have.
  • ÆnimaÆnima Posts: 38,548
    Forum Member
    How would Microchipping Humans stop missing persons? If those 3 women who have just escaped being kidnapped for 10 years were Microchipped, how would that have helped then or stopped it?

    It wouldn't have.

    What part are you not understanding?

    You would implant everyone with microchips with various possible functions- GPS for example, then a system would be set up.

    If someone went missing, you could type their name into a system with some other details, find their chip, then locate it using GPS.

    Come on, it's not that difficult for gods sake.
  • Roland MouseRoland Mouse Posts: 9,531
    Forum Member
    Ænima wrote: »
    What part are you not understanding?

    You would implant everyone with microchips with various possible functions- GPS for example, then a system would be set up.

    If someone went missing, you could type their name into a system with some other details, find their chip, then locate it using GPS.

    Come on, it's not that difficult for gods sake.

    What you are missing is all understanding that people don't want to be tracked or even have the capability of it. You are simply not living in the real world.

    Understand?
  • KittiaraKittiara Posts: 2,001
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ænima wrote: »
    What part are you not understanding?

    You would implant everyone with microchips with various possible functions- GPS for example, then a system would be set up.

    If someone went missing, you could type their name into a system with some other details, find their chip, then locate it using GPS.

    Come on, it's not that difficult for gods sake.

    What if someone does not want to be found? Someone who's run away from an abusive relationship, for example, who is thinking about how to deal with things?
  • JulzeiJulzei Posts: 4,209
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    No maybe criminals deserve to be treated like dogs but not law abiding citizens.
  • ÆnimaÆnima Posts: 38,548
    Forum Member
    What you are missing is all understanding that people don't want to be tracked or even have the capability of it. You are simply not living in the real world.

    Understand?

    You just said "if they were chipped", now you are saying "people don't want to be" yet some people have already said they would in this thread.

    Understand?
  • Pisces CloudPisces Cloud Posts: 30,239
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    neo_wales wrote: »
    I'm all for it, certainly biometric chips to help when your ill, I also favour I.D. cards too. I'm not paranoid about this issue and believe its the way forward. I'd volunteer for it now.

    I never saw anything wrong with ID cards, either, particularly for those who have no passport or driving licence. We all still need ID, so why not one instead of messing around with different ones? Although, I didn't like the idea of paying for it, they should have been given free.

    I also agree with an earlier poster about us not really being as important to the powers that be as what some like to think, and if we lived down that route of paranoia we'd still be reading info off stone tablets.
  • TranceClubberTranceClubber Posts: 2,779
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    No im against it , not that i have anything to hide i believe its far too much of Right wing idea everyone deserves privacy and freedom.
  • KittiaraKittiara Posts: 2,001
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I never saw anything wrong with ID cards, either, particularly for those who have no passport or driving licence. We all still need ID, so why not one instead of messing around with different ones? Although, I didn't like the idea of paying for it, they should have been given free.

    I also agree with an earlier poster about us not really being as important to the powers that be as what some like to think, and if we lived down that route of paranoia we'd still be reading info off stone tablets.

    But as we are not really that important to the powers that be, why would we need microchips? Looking at it dispassionately, it would cost a huge amount of money. The chipping, the logging of the details, the big data bank, employees who look after the information, regulation, and so on.

    Then, the government does not exactly have a brilliant track record when it comes to big projects. And there's the risk of security leaks.

    A project like this would be a nightmare to implement and maintain, in my opinion.
  • Si_CreweSi_Crewe Posts: 40,202
    Forum Member
    Can't really see it myself.

    If it were some kind of active transponder it'd need a power source and that'd get rather messy and create the opportunity to disable it.

    If it were a passive system it'd only have a short range and rely on external detectors to activate it and that'd mean it'd be easy to obscure.

    Plus, of course, it'd create a market for "legal" chips for criminals, which'd probably prove hazardous for the "donors".
  • RogerBaileyRogerBailey Posts: 1,959
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Something like this seems to be predicted in the Book of Revelation. Whether it will be a chip under the skin or some other technology is still unclear.

    "Also it (the beast) causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name." Christians are forbidden from voluntarily receiving this mark. The implications would no doubt be loss of access to bank accounts, being unable to buy food, and probably losing one's job and house. So they will be interesting times. However the fate of those who agree to receive the mark will be far worse.
  • Pumping IronPumping Iron Posts: 29,891
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Maybe it'd have a purpose for violent criminals, but not everyone else.
  • Pisces CloudPisces Cloud Posts: 30,239
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Kittiara wrote: »
    But as we are not really that important to the powers that be, why would we need microchips? Looking at it dispassionately, it would cost a huge amount of money. The chipping, the logging of the details, the big data bank, employees who look after the information, regulation, and so on.

    Then, the government does not exactly have a brilliant track record when it comes to big projects. And there's the risk of security leaks.

    A project like this would be a nightmare to implement and maintain, in my opinion.

    I actually think a microchip would be too invasive, but I wouldn't rule out something like an eye scanner or thumb scanner. I think it's about making things easier and more efficient for everyone. You don't think that the modern computer system is a lot better than having the old paper file system? Also, human error is going to occur no matter what system we have. That's why the pros and cons are usually weighed up first.
  • Watcher #1Watcher #1 Posts: 9,017
    Forum Member
    I actually think a microchip would be too invasive, but I wouldn't rule out something like an eye scanner or thumb scanner. I think it's about making things easier and more efficient for everyone. You don't think that the modern computer system is a lot better than having the old paper file system? Human error is going to occur no matter what system we have. That's why the pros and cons are usually weighed up first.

    Retinal or fingerprint scans are a different kettle of fish though. Unless you are an environment that calls for you to scan in at a number of points, your location can't be tracked via that, and they may be excellent security for certain tasks (although they remain open to abuse from people threatening violence to you, for example; or someone 'liberating' the required body part).

    One of the problems is that, with a lot of modern systems, any common sense or flexibility goes out the window. "Computer says no" could be replaced by "Computer says you don't exist" and the mindset is that the system is always right
  • mackaramackara Posts: 4,063
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Maybe it'd have a purpose for violent criminals, but not everyone else.

    Electronic tagging is already common among criminals
  • ÆnimaÆnima Posts: 38,548
    Forum Member
    Kittiara wrote: »
    But as we are not really that important to the powers that be, why would we need microchips?

    For many reasons, already stated by me and others. Those saying we aren't really that important to the powers that be, were making the point that it wouldn't just be used to track every person, day to day, willy nilly. It'd be used when it needed to be used, to track dangerous offenders, find injured people, or any of the other uses listed. Like cctv, it's ignored most of the time, but it is extremely useful if the police want to find soneone who just mugged an old lady in the centre of town, for example.

    It's also a hypothetical, meaning if we had the system up and running and working. You can debate the practicalities if you want, but it'd be like me saying- 'If, in the future, we were able to visit the nearest stars, do you think it would be a good idea?' and you countering with; 'Well, I don't think it'd be practical to visit the nearest stars because we don't have the technology'. Just to be clear, I'm not going to implement this technology, I just was interested to debate whether people would think it would be a good idea "if" we could get it working at some point in the future. Hypothetical, get it?

    It's not like it's that far fetched or impossible an idea either. We have many complex systems already running in the world today. Are bank cards a total disaster? Is the monetary system as a whole a total disaster? These are complex systems that, for the most part, work brilliantly. I don't think anyone would argue for a return to a time when none of this technology existed, on the basis of the occasional error. The general concensus is, it's worth keeping, which is why we still have it and continue to improve it. There is no reason this couldn't happen some day too.
Sign In or Register to comment.