Former Health Secretary Pushes for VeriChip Implants 638
An anonymous reader writes "Tommy Thompson, the former Bush Health Secretary after implanting a chip into himself, is going to submit a proposal within the next 50 days to promote it for everyone in the USA. VeriChip spokesperson John Procter said 'virtually everyone could benefit from having a chip inserted.' Enjoy your assimilation in the land of the free, citizen."
Medical Purposes Only (Score:5, Insightful)
This will be introduced as optional and quickly become as voluntary as credit cards, drivers licenses, and cell phones. Sure, you can opt-out of these, but you will never be accepted at a job that requires them.
Newsflash (Score:5, Insightful)
Newsflash 2: There is a revolving door between executive-level government and industry!
Newsflash 3: A former government official might use his contacts to lobby for his benefit!
Newsflash 4: Company in question presents its product in a positive light!
Newsflash 5: Melodramaic slashdot sumbission contains no actual news at all.
Frankly, there could be benefits from and novel uses for a universally globally unique identifier that is always with you and can't be lost. But the potential for abuse, obviously, outweighs those benefits. (In fact, if it could only be activated and/or read when you explicitly wished, it might be a good, albeit voluntary, idea. But that's not how this system is applied.)
And further, it's probably not a bad idea for health applications. However, like the Social Security number, it's bound to get misappropriated and misapplied for all manner of other uses. Some of which we
So far, where has it been used? Bars and clubs as gimmicks.
So what does this all mean?
We have a former government official with no official standing or position in government whatever promoting a product of a company of which he's a member of the board.
Stunning.
Bottom line: Sure, absolutely: be vigilant. But there will never be compulsory "implants" that will be required for all. Does that mean a company that would benefit massively from such an idea wouldn't try to promote it? In fact, I'd be worried if a for-profit company operating in a quasi-capitalist society didn't attempt to promote its products. (And no, having national standards for state driver licenses and identification cards was/is not a bad idea.)
[1] Tommy Thompson, while he incidentally may have been the former HHS secretary, is a director of the company that makes the RFID chips.
Oh god (Score:3, Insightful)
WHAT THE FUCK?
This is a terrible idea (Score:4, Insightful)
The second problem is that there is very little benefit compared to the cost. The cost being the pain and suffering involved in getting implanted in addition to the medical costs involved in having it inserted.
Add to this the amount of conspiracy talk that's bound to arise, and you're looking at a real lashback from the populace.
You'll find me in favor of the government doing a lot of things, but this is not one of them. It's a poorly thought-through idea and should be resisted as much as possible.
New tech, same old issues. (Score:4, Insightful)
From TFA:
That's really what this is all about, isn't it? Unfortunately, although many may consider implanted RFID chips to be the security 'magic wand', this simply isn't the case. If a beach club can program and insert a chip for you, it's not too far a stretch to imagine terrorist groups programming and inserting bogus chips in their operatives. In the context of security, all this does is create a false sense of security.
The other major concern regarding implanted RFID chips is the increased danger of information/identity theft. If all a thief needs to do to lift your information, including your identity, medical records, and bar tabs, is stand next to you on the subway, we're going to see a whole new chapter written in the history of information theft.
Medical uses are realistic (Score:3, Insightful)
I Am Not A Number, I'm A Free Man! (Score:3, Insightful)
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own."
"MOVE ALONG NOTHING TO SEE HERE" (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, the company that makes them is lobbying to move things in the direction of making them compulsory for all. They may not ever succeed at this. But does that make it okay that they're trying?
Yes, the practice of ex-political officials entering industry and using their contacts for lobbying purposes is common. However just because it is a common thing does not make it a good thing.
At any rate, you are probably right that these things won't ever become mandatory-- in the United States. But there are lots of other places in the world. The government of China, for example, already has national "citizen identification" cards, and already has a precedent of compulsory medical care (for example abortions). Do you think it would be the least bit unusual if this kind of chipping became mandatory there? Because I don't.
Re:Be very afraid... (Score:5, Insightful)
Who said it would need an act of Congress? Get yourself chipped and get a decent reduction in insurance premiums in return and people will wait in line to get one.
Get chipped and you don't have to wait in line at the supermarket.
Get your kids chipped and you can tell where they are at all times and protect them from baddies...
Don't need a law to make it compulsory. I reckon the free market will do just nicely.
Re:Medical Purposes Only (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Newsflash (Score:4, Insightful)
While I agree with most of your post, I'd be careful with statements like that. Never say never - there's already lots of stuff going on today that people probably wouldn't have believed would ever happen some 230 years ago.
Re:Medical uses are realistic (Score:4, Insightful)
Thing is, this could be put in a card or a brecelet and be only minimally less effective, with fewer bad implications.
Re:"MOVE ALONG NOTHING TO SEE HERE" (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't have any problem with a company making a product attempting to promote it. Viewed in a vacuum, as I said, these products, like many others, could have positive applications. That they would try to promote the product in such a fashion as it would be used as widely as possible comes as no surprise to me.
If we expand the discussion to politics, civil liberties, and so on, I certainly can see how people who be disturbed by any such proposal, however initially benign it might be. But in a "free" country, as some who oppose this might be quick to sarcastically point out, as the submitter did, isn't a business free to make and promote products?
Yes, the practice of ex-political officials entering industry and using their contacts for lobbying purposes is common. However just because it is a common thing does not make it a good thing.
Here we can perhaps agree. But it's only natural, and frankly, to me anyway, expected, for very skilled and effective managers and leaders to be picked up from government by industry and vice versa.
At any rate, you are probably right that these things won't ever become mandatory-- in the United States. But there are lots of other places in the world. The government of China, for example, already has national "citizen identification" cards, and already has a precedent of compulsory medical care (for example abortions). Do you think it would be the least bit unusual if this kind of chipping became mandatory there? Because I don't.
And once again, companies involving themselves in the affairs of governments with questionable regimes (cf. US companies in Nazi Germany) is an issue much larger than what we're discussing here. If we agree that, say, China doing this with all of its citizens is a bad idea, what do we do? How do we respond? Make it against the law to make implantable RFID chips? Of course, this would only apply in the jurisdiction of the US. Oops, there's a business lost, too. Granted, that's kind of an oversimplified fringe example, but really, what would you propose we do?
I'd personally rather use the extremely imperfect system of democracy we've built to hopefully elect leaders that will make halfway decent decisions - keep in mind that non-ignorant, thinking conservatives (and no, not bible-thumping fundie ones, but honest to God reasonable conservatives - and yes, they do exist) are just as sure their philosophies on government, economics, etc., are just as likely to bring happiness to the widest amount of people as the liberals and progressives are of their policy. (Of course, if you're someone who believes that all US politicians are already bought and paid for, and cynically think that the entire government is a behemoth out to get you and we've already lost all of our freedom, then we're probably speaking on a slightly different wavelength here.)
Re:Medical uses are realistic (Score:4, Insightful)
Instead of storing this data in an implanted chip, why not encode this data on re-writable magnetic strip on a credit-card-type card (with no personally identifiable info) that you can keep in your wallet/purse/keychain etc?
It's a good idea to have this info available for legitimate medical uses, but an implanted RFID doesn't do enough to strike a balance between privacy and usefulness.
Re:Be very afraid... (Score:3, Insightful)
This assumes people know it is there, and even then it's an iffy assumption. Remember, riders can be added quite literally at the last minute. Slip it in a 100+ page bill that's up for a vote in less than a day, and watch it slip under the radar. It's happened before and will probably happen again.
Re:only when hell freezer over (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Medical Purposes Only (Score:5, Insightful)
As you point out:
Sure, you can opt-out of these, but you will never be accepted at a job that requires them.
We can add that a credit card is necessary to travel. Sooner or later this chip, or one like it will be required. Saying it is optional is kind of a misnomer if you want a life.
I recently attended a "National Identity Card" presentation and the subject of implants was raised. I initially walked into the conference thinking it was a good idea. But after listening to the speakers it became quite clear this is about population control by government. Business will love it as they can profile you for insurance (all kinds), purchasing habits, travel patterns and target marketing.
I walked out realizing liberty and freedom are in fact at risk from with-in.
Lets realize the fact that 95% of the terrorists of 9/11 and more recent bombings in London had valid papers. They could also have had valid implants too. It is a myth these new technologies of tracking people are any more effective than a tried and relatively cheap passport. Techo hype companies don't like this fact and the population is getting marketing, and not reality message. Good security is about people keeping their eyes open.
Re:Newsflash (Score:2, Insightful)
Just as there will never be internments for all Japanese- or German-Americans in certain states, or random searches on the NYC subways.....
Re:"MOVE ALONG NOTHING TO SEE HERE" (Score:3, Insightful)
Yah, but on this side of the pond they are called 'social security card', so that makes them completely different, and 'good' because a 'citizen identification' card is 'bad'.
Re:"MOVE ALONG NOTHING TO SEE HERE" (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't bet on it. Of course the first people to be tagged won't be Republicans. It will start with convicted felons. Then it will be required for other types of disenfranchised people, such as retarded citizens, "for their own good". Then it will be required for airline travel "for our own safety". Then there will be a knock on the door....
You never realize you're on the slippery slope until you've stepped on it.
Re:hacking (Score:4, Insightful)
Most likely the people responsible will exempt themselves from the system, as they always do.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Newsflash (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Medical Purposes Only (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Medical Purposes Only (Score:3, Insightful)
~X~
Re:Disgusting (Score:5, Insightful)
Speaking as a life-long atheist, I find that most religious texts carry some wisdom, even though I don't believe in their literal truth ("Let him without sin cast the first stone" is a good tenet to live by, whether you believe in the godhood of the guy who said it or not).
In the same vein, I find a lot of wisdom in works of fiction without believing in their literal truth (go read Dune sometime, or anything by Vonnegut).
In this case, I'd say the Revelations comment is relevant: the book describes a nasty situation, whether you look at it as prophecy, allegory, or the ravings of a lunatic. It's a situation we don't want to get ourselves into, regardless of what we believe.
Re:Be very afraid... (Score:3, Insightful)
From TFA:
No, it's not a proposal -- YET. But it will be soon.
100 years ago, people said the same thing about a national ID.
Now we have Social Security Numbers. And national ID cards are almost here., having been approved by the REAL ID Act of 2005 [schneier.com]
Those of us in our 20s will be required by the U.S. federal government to be chipped by the time we are dead. Mark my words.
Compared to other nations, we are not a totalitarian police state, true. But we are without a doubt traveling along a trendline in that direction.
Re:Disgusting (Score:2, Insightful)
railgunner wasn't pushing any agenda, he was simply pasting a bible quote. Is it really THAT big of a problem for you to even VIEW religious text?
Not to mention, his post was actually on-topic and discussion-provoking, as opposed to your off-topic juvenile rant.
Re:New Agers did a good job at warning us, (Score:3, Insightful)
10 years ago people were saying exactly the same thing about bank cards and a "cashless society". Some places I have been recently have actually told me that they don't accept cash anymore because of the risk. You'd be surprised what people will accept, only in small increments. This is coming, too. And when it does you will have a choice. But they'll mandate it for newborns, just like vaccines and the basic screening tests every newborn gets.
Why would you oppose this, citizen? It's for the good of society. You wouldn't be a terrorist sympathizer would you? I'm afraid I will have to report this.
Re:Newsflash (Score:1, Insightful)
At least to me, it seems glaringly obvious that these cards will be pushed for sex offenders, "so they can be tracked at all times;" for small children, "so their parents know where they are at all times;" for mentally and physically handicapped persons, "for their well-being and safety;" for air travellers, "for our safety and security;" for convicted felons, "for our safety and security;" and the list just goes on, as more politicians can think of more ways to institute the chip.
On the other hand, like you said, there are some good things to be said for such a chip, like unified credit cards, drivers licenses, personal information to verify identity, credit reports, etc. etc. etc. But what happens when hackers get into people's chips? Your entire life can be ruined. What happens when there are new, initially "optional" programs that allow government agencies to track you "for your safety?" I'd bet you that half the country would be willing to sign up for that, right off the bat. They've already demonstrated that will with the PATRIOT Act.
Once the Gov't has the information, it's theirs. (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem with a government collecting information of great detail on its citizens is that even if that current government would use that information in ways that only benefit you, governments (like anything else) are not permanent. So if you volunteer for a chip, and that chip can be read and more details put on it as uses are found and applied to this type of identification technology, that information could be used later by a government to harm you.
Think Nazi Germany or worse, Sadistically Opressive East Germany. Or the way the Soviet Union had a reputation for treating its dissenters. Or the way Mugabe handles people who aren't willing to agree with policies they believe are unfair.
This is my most basic, logical argument against this sort of thing, but there is an infinite array of other arguments against this sort of practice.
As much as I'd like to believe that we're at a point where the civilzed world is just that, and that our societies would never be able to devolve into some sick and opressive police state, I don't believe that. I'm sure that Germans wouldn't have believed that their government would get up to what it did if you had asked citizens or soldiers 30 years prior.
This is outside of the concerns of RFID being snagged by someone, anyone at all who has a device in RF proximity.
This is my rationale.
What do you think?
Re:Medical Purposes Only (Score:5, Insightful)
As I understand it, the London bombers were British citizens. They didn't just have valid papers, but a cast-iron legal right to be in the country. No amount of ID can protect from a legal citizen with no record "suddenly" turning suicide bomber.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Newsflash (Score:4, Insightful)
Let me know when the chimneys are being raised and the forced labor begins.
I'm not happy iwht the things my government is doing right now, but it's a far cry between the current policies of the US government and that of the Nazis of the 1930s and 40s.
This can bring us all together... (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, the fundies are going to go apeshit if this even makes it into draft legislation - and the atheists and agnostic pro-privacy people can join them. The Christians have the grass roots political network to block this with a bit of help - I hope that both sides (athiest privacy advocates and Christian fundamentalists) can put aside their differeces long enough to defeat stupidity like this, and, perhaps learn a bit from each other.
Oh, yeah, it's not enough to stop this from becoming law - you also have to pass NEW laws banning insurance companies from discriminating against those who don't get the chip, which is most likely the real danger.
-Steve
No, they won't (Score:1, Insightful)
And the shrubs war is RAPIDLY losing favor with many Christians, they can see how they have been lied to, but are STUCK the same as you with "what to do about it". Check the latest polls, he's (his admin and policies in total)lost a *ton* of support in the last year, and it keeps dropping. Now here's big hint, think hard about this now, just take a sec to ponder it. He never had the liberals or non christians support much,did he, yet he's "dropping in the polls". How can that be then?? So, where is the ONLY place he can be losing support?? It's in (mostly) Republican circles and in some Christian circles.
I think you'll find people are really getting sick of neocons, limousine liberals, and the entire capital D and R scam conjobs.
Millions might be scared or faked out into taking the chip, but a lot WON'T, and will resist, and resist as hard as they can.
Take it from there sparky
Re:New tech, same old issues. (Score:3, Insightful)
How cool would it be to run an experiement like that in an airport and ask random people to submit to an cavity search behind a translucent curtain after a few tens of other people (all actors) had to endure the same? I bet a surprising number of people wouldn't do anything if they are under the impression that everyone else has accepted the new measure.
Re:Disgusting (Score:3, Insightful)
First off, you missed an article in that sentence: a deity. Without it, you sound like Madonna
The best definition of "sin" I ever saw was in Carpe Jugularum by Terry Prachett. I'm paraphrasing, but I beleive Granny Weatherwax said sin is treating other people as objects. No more, no less. All "sins", whether of a religious basis or not, flow from this one thing. Murder, theft, lying, etc..