Go to Holy Church of Blog
- Add a comment
- Go to The Mark of the Beast
Kid, I'm not sure of the range either.
From what I gathered, they have to pass the reader within a couple of feet of Tek's back.
posted by
SuccessWarrior
on October 31, 2006 at 7:30 AM
| link to this | reply
Put a hole in Chardonnay and get cabernet. What?
posted by
SuccessWarrior
on October 31, 2006 at 7:29 AM
| link to this | reply
Thanks for clarifying, Success - that's an important consideration. I've been considering having Garfield and Michael microchipped, but the whole privacy thing had me a bit concerned.
posted by
kidnykid
on October 31, 2006 at 7:13 AM
| link to this | reply
i am afraid of what they might find
just opening MY HEAD - cabernet might fly out of the needle
posted by
ladychardonnay
on October 31, 2006 at 4:48 AM
| link to this | reply
Kid, I have my dog chipped
He's a black lab so I thought identification was important. It doesn't have his credit history, medical history, or shopping preferances on it. It's just i.d.
posted by
SuccessWarrior
on October 31, 2006 at 4:30 AM
| link to this | reply
I just thought of something
What about the use of microchips in household pets? It's in common use already - PetsMart vets use one frequency, most other vets another, and they're considered useful if your pets (like my two cats) won't wear collars.
posted by
kidnykid
on October 31, 2006 at 4:13 AM
| link to this | reply
sorry i dont want no
computer chip in me.
dont matter fi its beast or not
just dont seem right
posted by
Xeno-x
on October 30, 2006 at 2:44 PM
| link to this | reply
Success -
I'm with Gome. I think it comes down each individual's comfort level. Personally, currently, there is nothing about me that, if it got out, I would be concerned about. But I can imagine if I were in a different sitauation, say I had a health concern that I didn't want anyone to know about, then I'd not want a chip inside me. Any 'ol schmoe walking down the street with a reader could get my info.
posted by
sannhet
on October 30, 2006 at 12:43 PM
| link to this | reply
kid, that's my concern. How much information will be freely given out
posted by
SuccessWarrior
on October 30, 2006 at 9:35 AM
| link to this | reply
gome, it can only help identify legal citizens who take part in the program
I agree that more secure i.d. is going to come around. What I'm concerned about is how much information will be stored, how it will be given out, and who will have access to the knowledge.
posted by
SuccessWarrior
on October 30, 2006 at 9:33 AM
| link to this | reply
For me, it's a privacy thing
As a Catholic, I don't necessarily buy into the Antichrist/Mark of the Beast thing, but I am deeply private by choice, and I resent all the privacy invasions I have to undergo as a part of my medical followup (after a kidney transplant, you bet there are tons of privacy invasions there, over which there is no control). Rest assured that I will try my best to hold out as long as possible if this computer-chip thing becomes mandatory.
posted by
kidnykid
on October 30, 2006 at 9:25 AM
| link to this | reply
SuccessWarrior - the effect on illegal immigration would not be direct
I mentioned "expediting" goods and/or individuals through security checkpoints. What this would mean in terms of affecting illegal immigration is that; a person such as myself for example, who crosses the US border 12-15 times a year as well as importing and exporting goods across the border on a continuous basis, can get into the fast lane for all such activity. (this service already exists in a card swipe at all border crossings). Think about your question on a broader scale. First off, it is impossible to utilize such a technology as a means of "stopping" illegal immigration. It can only be used as a means identifying the legal citizens. A fairly important consideration for letting legal citizens back into the country, especially if plans for heightened border security are implemented. The movie "Born in East LA" comes to mind.
As for the technology itself being tamper proof; Ultimately it will be as it will be used in conjunction with at least one other tamper proof physical identifier in either retinal scans or finger prints. Whether we like it or not, a more sophisticated means of personal identification is inevitable.
posted by
gomedome
on October 30, 2006 at 8:36 AM
| link to this | reply
I have two thoughts on this Gomey.
First, if it's voluntary, then what effect will it have on illegal immigration? What restrictions can be placed on illegal aliens that won't effect legal citizens who opt out of getting chipped?
Second, can't false i.d. chips be implanted in people? If you can make false i.d., won't you also be able to make false computer i.d.?
posted by
SuccessWarrior
on October 30, 2006 at 8:12 AM
| link to this | reply
SuccessWarrior - I think the question of the use of a tracking computer
chip being an invasion of individual privacy is a legitimate concern.
This determination can only be made on an individual basis, determined by personal comfort level with the idea. There is one thing worth mentioning about the use of this type of high tech tracking technology; it will never come to pass in our lifetimes, at least not in terms of universal use. The first introduction into our societies will be on a voluntary basis. Most likely in instances where individuals or businesses are offering an instantaneous identification of themselves or their goods, as a means of expiditing their transit through security checkpoints. In a society that is living with the constant threat of terrorism, while attempting to control immigration and who is entering its borders, a more efficient means of tamper proof identification is inevitable.
posted by
gomedome
on October 30, 2006 at 7:51 AM
| link to this | reply