Life In 19x19

I just read another news article about a firm in Sweden that is allowing ( not forcing, TTBOMK ) their employees to get RFID chips embedded, which would give them access to various doors and equipment without keys or codes.

As with most such articles, there was the seeming obligatory reference to privacy concerns. Also, as usual, there was no statement of exactly how privacy might be invaded, nor exactly what data would be on said chip, nor if such data would be encoded.

It seems to be a hot button issue for a lot of people.

As for me, I want a chip embedded in my hand. And a second chip in my other hand in case the first one fails. My only condition is that there is an on/off switch ( probably activated by pressure )

How about you? Do you want a chip?

Absolutely not. Apart from the privacy concerns I would be very worried about cancer. It is already proven that a cell phone next to the brain causes cancer. Imagine what it would do if it were inside you.

Absolutely not!












...unless they paid me $1,000,000. Then I would consider it.

Araban wrote:...unless they paid me $1,000,000. Then I would consider it.

I would want it in $20 gold coins.

What's wrong with using a card key? I don't see a real reason to substitute with a chip.

If the chip did something cooler (i.e. give me special powers), then maybe I'd consider it.

DrStraw wrote:...I would be very worried about cancer. It is already proven that a cell phone next to the brain causes cancer. Imagine what it would do if it were inside you.

They use different frequencies and different power levels. Even under the worst of conditions, a cell phone can do a mile ( and sometimes 30 or 40 under ideal conditions ). An implanted RFID usually does about an inch ( and maybe up to a foot under ideal conditions )

Since the power required is proportional to the square of the distance, a cell phone uses approximately ( 5280 * 12 )^^2 or 4,014,489,600 times as much power. The use of different frequencies complicates the calculations, as does the complexity of the data being transmitted, but in general a cell phone uses something on the order of a billion times as much power.

I don't think that you have to worry about cancer.

Wouldn't the RFID chip allow the person to be tracked? - even if it is just within the building that's giving the company too much information they could use against me - so no. Also, can RFID be deactivated? I thought they were always on, passive devices. Plus I hate operations.

edit: however if one of the conditions of getting a dream job was to get one I'd probably just go with the flow.

I'd rather not, basically why not have the RFID chip in a card? Or be identified in any other way. After all, having an RFID chip inside me is more or less as effective to keep someone interested from breaking in as a card would be. They "only" need to cut my hand to do it instead of stealing my wallet.

Not in a million years. Benefit-intrusion-ratio?

DrStraw wrote:Absolutely not. Apart from the privacy concerns I would be very worried about cancer. It is already proven that a cell phone next to the brain causes cancer. Imagine what it would do if it were inside you.

A chip is not a cell-phone, please do not mix those two together.
Here is what I know about that, correct me if I am wrong, have been out of the loop for a while.

Health Issues:

From what I heard of such chips, there is at least one huge difference between them and cell phones: the chips are passive. This means that all the energy will be incoming, not outgoing - i.e. not generated by the chip. And the energy which will be incoming, will be incoming regardless if you have a chip embedded or not. You have sensors in the walls or doors or whatever, they send signals which intend to bounce off of the chip. You will still be exposed to those energies regardless if you have a chip inplanted or not. Just like you are exposed to radio frequencies if you own a radio or not - the radio waves are all around you, and they don't care if you have a receiver.

So if you are afraid about getting cancer, the chip will have absolutely no role in that, unless it actually dissolves in your body or something and the chemicals make you sick.

The danger from cell phones is not really energy levels by themselves (sitting under a light bulb too long exposes you to more energy than talking on the cellphone, so does cooking a dinner) - it is also the frequency which modulates this energy. The frequency which queries the chip will be important, but the situation can possibly be structured so that it is harmless. Both in its frequency and its intensity.

And anyways, as said above, you will be exposed if you have a microchip or not.
As a matter of fact, you are already exposed if your company (or any other place you frequent) requires badges to open doors - the badge readers are pretty much the same technology as microchip readers. Or if you go to stores which have the new fancy credit card readers which only require you to swipe the card in front of a panel instead of through the slot.

Its more like dogs and cats being micro-chipped, and have been for years, if not decades. I have not heard of any correlation of pet microchipping to pet cancer, have you? As far as I know, there is no adverse effects. Wildlife specimen (sharks, whales, rhinos, etc.) have been microchipped for decades as well, without any adverse health effects neither, afaik.

Privacy Issues:

Privacy issue is another matter, one which I do not quite understand, although admittedly I know a little less about that. I am skeptical, though.

But what is the fear, really? That the chip will broadcast your wereabouts to some secred data-gathering organization so it can be used against you when the government decides to... what, exactly? Steal your carrots? Give you more health insurance?

As said above - such chips do not broadcast, and if somebody really wants to target you personally and figure out where you go and what you do every day - there are easier ways. Cell phones for example. Cars. Credit cards. Or simply call and ask a nosy neighbor.

Seriously, what is the big "privacy" argument. All I ever heard about that is "I don't what *them* to track me" - like *they*, whoever *they* are, don't really have anything better to do. Unless you get on *their* radar, that is... but at this point, it might actually be better if you are tracked.

Personally:

Anyways... having said the above, I don't think I would like to be microchipped. Too much hassle, and I hate needles. There is nothing wrong with a regular badge, I think. Still, if this was to become a rule in my company, I would not object too much.

I guess the biggest problem I have with such chipping is this: what happens when I quit the job? Will they have to surgically remove the chip? Or will the system de-register my chip, and the system in my next job register it so I can use it there? This would be a logical choice, but there might be some security issues then.

And I hate surgeries even more than I hate needles.

CnP wrote:Wouldn't the RFID chip allow the person to be tracked? - even if it is just within the building that's giving the company too much information they could use against me

Too many bathroom trips? Going out to lunch and clocking it in? Charging the company for work while you actually fishing? What?

If you come to work when you should and do what you get paid for, there should never be a problem.
If you are scamming them, its a different issue. But I would think the employer in such case would have all the right to "use it against you" - chipped or not chipped - and more power to the them, I'd say! I would love to have such technology implemented in the company I work for. Would make my life so much easier if I did't have to pick the extra load for all the slackers.

And no, I do not believe a chip would allow anybody to track you any more than a badge card would.

Joaz Banbeck wrote:As with most such articles, there was the seeming obligatory reference to privacy concerns. Also, as usual, there was no statement of exactly how privacy might be invaded, nor exactly what data would be on said chip, nor if such data would be encoded.

It seems to be a hot button issue for a lot of people.

See forum rules.
Your post is trolling and baiting users into a political discussion. I think it is completely out of line.

Bantari wrote:

CnP wrote:Wouldn't the RFID chip allow the person to be tracked? - even if it is just within the building that's giving the company too much information they could use against me

Too many bathroom trips? Going out to lunch and clocking it in? Charging the company for work while you actually fishing? What?

If you come to work when you should and do what you get paid for, there should never be a problem.
If you are scamming them, its a different issue. But I would think the employer in such case would have all the right to "use it against you" - chipped or not chipped - and more power to the them, I'd say! I would love to have such technology implemented in the company I work for. Would make my life so much easier if I did't have to pick the extra load for all the slackers.

And no, I do not believe a chip would allow anybody to track you any more than a badge card would.

I agree with you in part and have no love for people who get no work done. However I think simply tracking what an employee does on their computer is enough to figure out who's wasting company time (in an IT job). I also think people should have a bit of freedom and not be treated like children. - and yes ID badge tracking would be similar - just without minor surgery and with the option to take the card off at the end of the day (which is why a chip is different to a card).

Not something I'm totally against but what would happen if the system were developed enough that those same chips were read by the supermarket, or town centre scanners etc? Would you agree to being barred from promotion because town-centre scanner#23 tracked you going into a gay bar and the CEO doesn't like 'that sort of thing'? - that's a scary world to me - possibly just a distopian fantasy - I'm not completely paranoid btw . I've heard the "if you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to worry about" argument but that assumes the 'people in power' always act for the common good - which seems a little naive.

Bantari wrote:I would love to have such technology implemented in the company I work for. Would make my life so much easier if I did't have to pick the extra load for all the slackers.

You poor, poor man (I assume). Of course it's just right to lift the weight of the world from your shoulders, I'm sure you've already done so much for it. And to hell with those people you deem slackers, what rights should they have, when those rights don't benefit you?

Ahh, what a wonderful place this earth could be, if only all the other people would think and act exactly like me. I bet I can come up with some laws and repressive technical devices to just force them to think and act the way I like it. But I better make sure that they resonate with primitive inner urges, because don't we just love a little bit of Schadenfreude! Naturally, model and hard-working citizens will have nothing to fear.

"Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me."

I am surprised someone as skilled as Bantari works at a company where people are not judged on how much work they get done but how long they spend defecating.