Posted on 02/12/2006 4:28:09 PM PST by wagglebee
An Ohio company has embedded silicon chips in two of its employees - the first known case in which US workers have been “tagged” electronically as a way of identifying them.
CityWatcher.com, a private video surveillance company, said it was testing the technology as a way of controlling access to a room where it holds security video footage for government agencies and the police.
Embedding slivers of silicon in workers is likely to add to the controversy over RFID technology, widely seen as one of the next big growth industries.
RFID chips – inexpensive radio transmitters that give off a unique identifying signal – have been implanted in pets or attached to goods so they can be tracked in transit.
“There are very serious privacy and civil liberty issues of having people permanently numbered,” said Liz McIntyre, who campaigns against the use of identification technology.
But Sean Darks, chief executive of CityWatcher, said the glass-encased chips were like identity cards. They are planted in the upper right arm of the recipient, and “read” by a device similar to a cardreader.
“There’s nothing pulsing or sending out a signal,” said Mr Darks, who has had a chip in his own arm. “It’s not a GPS chip. My wife can’t tell where I am.”
The technology’s defenders say it is acceptable as long as it is not compulsory. But critics say any implanted device could be used to track the “wearer” without their knowledge.
VeriChip – the US company that made the devices and claims to have the only chips that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration – said the implants were designed primarily for medical purposes.
So far around 70 people in the US have had the implants, the company said.
However, someone like her, will eventually get into office. Look at Clinton. If you won't trust a gov't like that to handle RFID, then you cannot give that tool to any gov't--that includes one in which you have the utmost respect/trust for.
Checking out, this is just getting silly now and with all the hysterics, I fear someone is going to have a heart attack. There hasn't been a single post on the merits or risks of the use of this technology in a while. Think I'll water my plants (yes, they are chipped).
heh--I was right. You can't defend this in light of my post.
You've provided no evidence that most LEO's favor mandatory implantation of the entire citizenry. And you've done far more than give them "some benefit of the doubt". You've completely shut off your brain to any kind of rational scrutiny of this extremely ill-advised idea.
I didn't start the name calling
Yes you did, right at the beginning, with your comments on "ACLU types". That shows that you're utterly incapable of defending your position rationally.
you're right i'm just too weak
If the farmer sells enough of his land to allow them to change the land use regulations, just who is the fool?
You seem to have missed what appears to be your own main point - RFID chips are currently used to search you without your expressed consent or knowledge - That's specifically what they were designed to do, prevent shoplifting ... duh.
Every time you leave a store with scanners in place you are being searched. You don't have to wait - go sue Walmart tomorrow.
Taken as a percentage of population, I think they'd be similar....remembering that the Finnish affray was blessedly short in duration. Most authorities set 25 Jan 1918 as the start of the conflict, though the first armed battles happened a week previously. The final Red-occupied stronghold at Viipuri fell on April 28-29 and mopping up continued until May 7, though there were many, many executions after that date.
With a total casualty figure of around 36,640, out of a population of some 3 million, they managed a casualty figure of about 1 per 1000.
Given the U.S. Year 2000 Census population figure of just under 300 million, that'd extrapolate here to more than a quarter million dead... but given a probable longer duration, and improved technologies for effectively performing the task at hand, I'd expect a butcher's bill of at least a million. Minimum.
No .. I did trust my CinC and did my duty over in Kuwait, but if I were ordered by my government to forcibly inject RFID tracking devices in citizens as you suggested earlier in this thread, I would have refused and been on the other side in a heartbeat.
I'd find a new job (or start up my own new business) before I'd allow my employer to do this to me.
Bump for later.
I could see where creeps might murder to obtain personal chips from people. THAT is enough to make one ponder their personal use.
the control of information is everything, and always has been. Even if someone disagrees with the means to the end, you have to admit the framework is being set up so there will be no more civil liberties...
Exactly. People defending government surveillance try to justify it by saying things like "Well, Lincoln jailed editors during the Civil War, isn't that worse?" No, it's not worse than a government that's able to keep tabs on its citizens at all times. Freedom can survive occasional abuses. It can't survive chronic total lack of privacy.
This is music to my ears!
Thanks for the book link.
Also, my site on it too:
http://nationalpropertyowners.org
But there are all these FORMS to fill out.....
>>>>Try Googling up I.G. Farben to see what I'm talking about.
Monsanto MERGED with THEM too!!!!
Read this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1573646/posts
How do you say No NAIS in Japanese?
I don't get the impression that these particular chips have lots of personal information about the employees -- just the fact they are allowed into this high security room, and presumably something to idenfity each of them, so if something goes missing, there's a record of who was in the room.
The DATABASE has all the personally information. The chip is the identifier.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.