Microchipping Humans.
Ænima
Posts: 38,548 Forum Member
✭
Do you think in the future, people will be chipped?
It could have many remarkable advantages; Missing people would become a thing of the past. The chip could be configured to detect serious physical trauma and automatically direct emergency services to you, via gps.
It could be used to track violent offenders on the run, or to monitor people who would usually be tagged. It could even be used to identify abuse- maybe spousal or to babies, if the trauma detector was advanced enough, not to mention how easy it would be to monitor gang members tagged with an 'offender chip', which could be used to map patterns of gang behaviour.
What do you think? Do you see this happening in the future, and if so, do you think that overall, it would be a good or bad thing?
It could have many remarkable advantages; Missing people would become a thing of the past. The chip could be configured to detect serious physical trauma and automatically direct emergency services to you, via gps.
It could be used to track violent offenders on the run, or to monitor people who would usually be tagged. It could even be used to identify abuse- maybe spousal or to babies, if the trauma detector was advanced enough, not to mention how easy it would be to monitor gang members tagged with an 'offender chip', which could be used to map patterns of gang behaviour.
What do you think? Do you see this happening in the future, and if so, do you think that overall, it would be a good or bad thing?
0
Comments
It's an invasion of human rights, Big Brother tracking our movements, etc etc.
I've never really understood that argument. I think it's peddled by paranoid people who have no idea how much easier we have made it to track people already.
Think of cctv, mobile and emails, electronic information on databases about us, gps, etc... It all came about to make it easier to find and communicate with people. The government can already track you, if they are so inclined, but that doesn't mean they would, unless you were a terrorist or some other dangerous criminal.
What this would do though is vastly improve emergency serves, detect abuse quicker, find missing persons and catch violent criminals. To me, the pros would far outweigh the cons.
I don't think that it will happen any time soon. But if it does it would create a black market of people removing chips and replacing them with ones taken from others, so wouldn't cure the whole offender on the run issue, just create a who new problem.
Interesting concept tho, and would stop access to public services etc to those not meant to be getting them.
MichaelAlanR
Well it wouldn't be too difficult to instal a system which would detect anyone trying to remove the chip. It also depends where it was and how big it was.
Murders are far less common (thankfully) than other general violent offences. I do think it would act as a pretty strong deterrant though if people knew they could be caught pretty much right away, and it would also stop them going on to kill or rape more people, so I think it'd still be worth it, even for these extreme examples.
Plus, even if it did ever happen, you could enforce it by country, but how would you enforce it around the world?
I beleive that one day the world will be under the control of a single leader and that part of that rule will involve the population being given some kind of implant which will be used for transactions, admission into hospitals, using public tansport etc. Without it you will not exists and not be able to do anything. This of course is what is prophecised in The Bible.
To protect our freedoms, our liberty and to fight "turrism".
People will argue it's one step too close to being like Iran, North Korea or China then others will claim if "we have nothing to hide we have nothing to fear".
That aside who needs a "chip", all they do is continue to do what they are doing now, you're on CCTV, you're online and you use your mobile. They harvest your information and your locale the best way as it is, why go backwards with a microchip?
Well the Right Wing want to remove those pesky Human Rights Laws, so it is possible, especially if UKIP should ever win a General Election.
Given the history of government IT projects, what on earth makes people think that this would be run without error, without work rounds, without mistakes being made.
And, of course, the idea that the government of the day will always be nice and cuddly and only use the chips to help us and protect us ignores the whole sweep of human history.
It won't deter crime (criminals don't expect to get caught, never have done, never will do).
It will go wrong.
It is an even stupider idea than ID cards
The idea that the government would even want to track the general public is paranoia. Probably the result of attempting to bolster a feeling of self-importance. It's far more likely that no-one outside of our immediate circle of friends, family and (perhaps) co-workers gives a stuff about us. Most of us are just not that important.
How could you fight it though? Protest?
We've seen the hatchet job done to protesters and now any form of protest is seen as taboo. Also the likelihood of Right Wingers mobilising and protesting against it would be nil as they would overwhelmingly support microchipping.
Agreed.
Now if someone was to pose some kind of legitimate threat to the establishment like organising civil unrest or a coup then it would be different. As it is there is no such threat. The Ruling Class can soundly sleep at night knowing full well they will be in power the next morning.
I suppose when I say "chip", I mean it symbolically to mean any number of technologies which are being developed/ could be developed to do basically, the same jobs. I agree that the number of applications for such a technology would be staggering, and would no doubt speed up and improve our everyday lives. Things like this tend to happen gradually. There was probably a time when people would have objected to having thousands of cctv cameras on street corners, all around the country, but now they are everywhere, and I do think the pros outweigh the cons there too. I mean, I know I could be tracked walking down a busy street right now, but that doesn"t make me paranoid about walking down the street! I know the cameras are there, but we get used to them, we stop noticing and caring about them, but when we need them, we are glad they are there. I think the same applies here.
Protest. Debate. Explaining why it's a dumb idea, why it won't work, and how the money (and it will be insanely expensive) could be better spent (or how much we could reduce taxes by). Voting for anyone but a party supporting such a draconian policy. Outright refusal to have me or mine chipped.
I don't see this as a right/left thing (many right wingers were against the Labour ID card idea after all).
I agree, steps like above would need to be taken. However I feel that IF the establishment wished to press on with it, it would need more than this to counter it.
I disagree, it's those Right Wing minded folks who remind us "if we have nothing to hide we have nothing to fear".
It's not the application of technology, it's about a fundamental shift in the relationship between the individual and the state.
Right now, there is no form of identification I am required to have. It would be possible (although challenging) to live a life without a bank account, driving license, credit card etc. I don't have to prove who I am to anyone, unless I choose to.
Having anything compulsory changes that. It makes not being able to show who you are at any given instant a crime. it changes the balance of power massively in favour of the state.
The effectiveness of CCTV is grossly distorted by better than reality TV programmes. The images are not great quality, many cameras are dummies, and often don't look in the right place, or record often enough (or hold the recordings for enough time).
You've been watching too much Sci-Fi