Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Lets be freaks

  1. #1
    Senior Member cwk9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002

    Exclamation Lets be freaks

    Take a gander at this article and tell me what you think.

    This makes me sick to my stomach. I can understand how parents want to keep there children safe but this is insane. What ever happened to good parenting and programs like block parent or neb hood watch. Any child who has to walk around with a GPS/radio transmitter system in them will most likely become a screwed up menace to society. But thatís ok because we can find them when they flip out and rob a 7-11. I herd of a program in Africa were they put a GPS in your car and when it gets soled the security company dispatches a commando death squad to recover it. But thatís a car not a human being.

    The chip "emits radio waves through a mobile phone network and beams its exact location to a computer. If Danielle went missing, her location would be marked by an X on a computer map.... It will be inserted in her arm by a GP using local anaesthetic. It costs about £20 and will be invisible."

    Well then, how does that work? Warwick's experiments in chipping himself haven't gone as far as GPS, at least publicly, and any communications aspect to them has been decidedly short range. An "invisible" device that handles both GPS and mobile phone communications, and doesn't need its batteries changing every five seconds would however clearly make him a large fortune, if it existed.

    Which manifestly it doesn't. As regards GPS, you can get an idea of the current state of the art as far as footprint goes by looking at this PDF, which describes the Trimble Lassen SQ GPS module, announced in March. Two penlight batteries can power it for more than 40 hours, it is postage stamp-sized, and is "compatible with active 3.3 VDC antennas." So the small ones aren't invisible, they need two penlight batteries that you have to change every 40 hours, and they need an antenna.

    So the "invisible" chip is not a GPS device, and must perforce communicate with a real GPS device secreted somewhere about your person. In that sense it would therefore seem to be well within the technical capabilities already demonstrated by Captain Cyborg, who habitually shoves things under his skin so he can open doors automatically and such, when lesser mortals would merely use a smartcard ID tag. If indeed this is the way the tag will operate, then Warwick is wandering into the dubious territory of VeriChip/Digital Angel, which has been punting cattle tags at the hard of thinking. That one's the size of the ball of a ballpoint, but it needs a scanner run over it to identify you, and can't tell where you are.

    OK, but presuming the child protector chip can communicate with an external GPS device, where does that get you if you've been kidnapped? You can tell where you are, but how does the X get onto the computer screen? Mobile phone, obviously, but that needn't be another box, as it could be one with GPS built in, so there's still only one thing to keep hidden. We covered a system of this sort for hunting dogs a while back, and if you look here, you'll see the pawprint of that rig. The dogs of course don't have pockets to put it in, and no immediate need for concealment, but even so...

    However even if you've got a concealed mobile phone with GPS, then what use is the tag? The phone rig does all this already, so for as long as you can hang onto the phone, you're trackable, and if you can't, you're not. After that the chip could help them identify you if they find you, and if for some reason you're not in a position to tell them yourself. Again, we're in VeriChip territory here, albeit a somewhat grimmer variant thereof.

    So it's complete hokum, and under the circumstances pernicious. The Holly and Jessica case has generated much concern, and some hysteria in the UK, and stories such as the Mirror's serve only to fuel that hysteria by deluding parents into thinking that technology can somehow protect their children. And by pushing positive aspects of tagging, even years before it's actually feasible, they're softening public opinion up for the days when it can be widespread, and when its application can be more sinister.

    And Warwick's role? As we said earlier, the technological 'explanation' is not attributed to him, but he's clearly encouraging it. He said: "The implant won't prevent abductions, nothing will. But if the worst happens, parents will at least be in with a chance of finding their children alive." No more chance, it seems to us, than if the implant had not been fitted. Warwick, as is his habit, slides seamlessly into some future where it is feasible: "Children may resent that their every movement is traceable. It's also possible some parents might abuse the system. But I'm confident this has to be the correct course of action in the light of recent, tragic events."

    So in the light of recent tragic events the correct course of action for parents has to be the fitting of a manifestly useless tagging device to their child. "The technology exists," says Warwick, "it's affordable and accessible." No it doesn't, no it's not. This is a publicity stunt well up to the usual mark, with the added extra of being in the worst possible taste. It marks the point where Captain Cyborg ceased to be comical, and started to look like something far worse.
    Its not software piracy. Iím just making multiple off site backups.

  2. #2
    well you know in a way its a good idea for parents to keep an eye out on there kids, but usually the parents lose there children because they let them run loose or dont keep an eye out on them in the first place. the chip is kinda an invasion of privacy imo. another thing, if this technology is out there and that cheap, then ppl could track others easily and stalk them etc. this would be horrible, and should be outlawed. think of the consequences of the possible security. i dont know, but if they couldnt get that chip out of her, then she is going to be tracked until it breaks, and that wouldnt make me feel too comfortable when im out on my own and someone always knowing where im at.

  3. #3
    Flash M0nkey
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Its evil praying on parents fears at a time like this just to soften the blow for what could be when realsed a very controversal develpoment!


  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    My God... I'd never do that to my child. I mean, I'd be a good parent, and I'd be strict as hell with them at times. But I want them to sneak out of the house a few times to meet their friends, I want them to wander around aimlessly with a few pals for miles and miles just talking about anything random, I want them to be "cool".

    I mean, my parents did none of this to me and I ended up just fine, never really did anything majorly illegal before in my life (besides hacking, cracking, phreaking, which is besides the point... thats intelligent crime... ). I'm not considered a "bad kid" or a "menace to society" ...

    But I can agree with the fact that if your a 'youngin' and you get kidnapped by some sicko... it would be VERY useful. But how often does that happen (one time to many, sadly...). I believe this technology applied like this would only make parents more stressful,... and thats just not good at all.

    [P.S. - Jeez...imagine trying to sneak your way to your girlfriend's/boyfriend's house (!!!)... gah!]
    ...This Space For Rent.


  5. #5
    Just imagine... Everyone who ever got arrested would have to supply their fingerprints and GPS information. Send a squad car out when Rosie "who was arrested for prostitution" is standing at the corner of west and main. Sent out an under cover when G-Dev "arrested for minor drug dealing" is walking around down town. Have a squad car stroll by Jeff's "on house arrest" if you notice the chip says he's more than 50 feet away from his house.

  6. #6
    Gray Haired Old Fart aeallison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Buffalo, Missouri USA
    ...and everyone will be given a number....

    This is scarey, it seems that there is a profecy about this or something, does this come before or after pestilence and swarming locusts? Or am I mixing up stories? I really don't think we as humans should do this to other humans, no matter what the reason, I see this as a step in the wrong direction socially.
    I have a question; are you the bug, or the windshield?

  7. #7
    Flash M0nkey
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    don't think we as humans should do this to other humans
    heh the only thing I have heard about like this is the chips they put in dogs with their owners address in them.......so is that what they're planning to do to humans now? Plant a chip in them so they can be traced like pets?

    they'll not be gettin near me with one
    and if they do
    and rather perform some home surgery on myself than keep it!!


  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    That sucks! She would always be tracked! If everybody got something like that under their skin, we would never be able to go anywhere wtihout someone knowing it! We would be under constant surveillance! It would certainly be used by the government to track down, at first, criminals, then later people who might just be acting weird! Iīm scared....
    I breathe, therefore I am!
    I type, therefore I live!
    [shadow]I love, therfore I die![/shadow]

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts