Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Proposal to Implant RFID Chips in Immigrants

Posted by Zonk on Fri Jun 02, 2006 01:34 PM
from the goes-over-like-a-ton-of-bricks dept.
John3 writes "Some people are OK with voluntarily implanting themselves with RFID chips, but how about making RFID implantation mandatory for immigrant and guest workers? VeriChip Corporation chairman Scott Silverman has proposed implanting RFID chips to register workers as they cross the border. According to Silverman, 'We have talked to many people in Washington about using it...' Privacy advocates see this move by VeriChip as a way to introduce their product to Latin America after a lukewarm reception in North America. Would immigrant workers trade their privacy for the opportunity to work in the U.S.? If this type of tracking is enacted, how long before the government decides to start tracking others for various purposes (for example, pedophiles who are released from prison)?"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Ask Slashdot: Social Consequences and Effects of RFID Implants? 531 comments
kramdam asks: "Even with all the talk about privacy and security, there seems to be a growing community of people who are implanting themselves with RFID chips. Being a developer myself, I am intrigued about building applications and solutions that will open my doors, unlock my car, log me on to my computer and control home automation. I'm seriously considering jumping into this head first, being on the bleeding edge, and going with an implant. I have looked at resources like Mikey Sklar's site, and Amal Graafstra's site, since they are two pioneers on this subject. For research, I have started TaggedLife to document my own journey. I was wondering what the Slashdot community think about this. What do you think are the social, security, privacy, and health risks associated with this? What are the pluses? Would you do it?"
[+] VeriChip Implants 222 People With RFID 306 comments
cnet-declan writes "Anyone remember VeriChip, a company that came up with the idea of implanting chips in humans for tracking them? They've been behind ideas like RFID tagging immigrant and guest workers at the border, and they've persuaded a former Bush Health Secretary to get himself chipped. In this CNET News.com article, we offer an update on how successful the idea has been. It turns out that, according to IPO documents, 222 people have been implanted, with sales revenue of $100,000."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Yay! (Score:5, Informative)

    by alx5000 (896642) <alx5000@noSpAm.alx5000.net> on Friday June 02 2006, @01:35PM (#15455675) Homepage
    Yay! Just like dogs! In case they get lost, any vet could read the RFID chip of your favorite immigrant/guest worker, and you could have him or her home in a matter of minutes!

    BTW, that was sarcasm... NSA rapes your phones, and now this... makes me sick...
    • Re:Yay! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Digital Autumn (664952) on Friday June 02 2006, @01:40PM (#15455737)
      I bet Mr. Verichip is kicking himself that his company didn't exist back in the grand old days of slavery. He would have made a killing.
      • Re:Yay! (Score:5, Funny)

        by modecx (130548) on Friday June 02 2006, @02:42PM (#15456420)
        I bet Mr. Verichip is kicking himself that his company didn't exist back in the grand old days of slavery. He would have made a killing.

        Yeah, his company was doing just fine back in the day.

        If I remember correctly, it was called Veri-Brand(tm) back then.
    • Re:Yay! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by falcon8080 (975701) on Friday June 02 2006, @02:28PM (#15456291) Homepage
      You know whats scary?
      Im an immigrant, I moved here legally, from the UK, ive paid thousands of dollars just to be here, i contribute a lot of money to the US economy and employee a number of US workers... and for my efforts to play by the rules, to hand over money for fees, to wait and wait and wait patiently on different sides of the atlantic, and to fill in god knows how many forms and pay more fees.. I get the opportunity to be chipped.

      Thanks for that, next youll be telling me I could have brought a cheap plane ticket, stayed here past my visa experation and payed less in fines than the fees i paid and granted would have been granted 'amnesty'... oh, wait..
      • Re:Yay! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Aspirator (862748) on Friday June 02 2006, @03:01PM (#15456630)
        I'm also a legal immigrant from the UK (and an employer). I felt that I was treated
        like a criminal at the US port of entry (including fingerprinting). I doubt that
        I would have come if I had to be chipped to do it.

        Back then I had a perception of the US as a 'land of the free'. It is becoming less so,
        OTOH so is the UK.

        Counteless patriots have died to defend the freedoms we now so happily fritter away.

        Now chipping ex cons (provided that it is the law at the time they commit their crime,
        and that it is part of the sentence) seem altogether more reasonable to me.
        • Re:Yay! (Score:5, Insightful)

          by pizzaman100 (588500) on Friday June 02 2006, @02:56PM (#15456569) Journal
          Hey numbnuts ... this chip idea is for the illegals crossing the Mexican border. Not for the legal immigrants.

          So how do you chip illegals? Do you do it when they sneak in?

  • A Cautionary Tale (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TripMaster Monkey (862126) * on Friday June 02 2006, @01:37PM (#15455702)


    First they chipped the products,
        and I didn't speak up,
            because I was not a product.
    Then they chipped the livestock,
        and I didn't speak up,
            because I was not livestock.
    Then they chipped the house pets,
        and I didn't speak up,
            because I was not a house pet.
    Then they chipped the immigrants,
        and I didn't speak up,
            because I was not an immigrant.
    Then they chipped the felons,
        and I didn't speak up,
            because I was not a felon.

    Then they chipped me,
        and by that time there was no one
            left to speak up for me.
    (Apologies to Reverend Martin Niemoller)
        • by TripMaster Monkey (862126) * on Friday June 02 2006, @01:51PM (#15455884)

          You don't have to get chipped, but no loyal, patriotic citizen would conceiveably refuse...ergo, if you refuse, you automatically make the 'short list' of terror suspects.

          The 'short list' is only called that by comparison...everybody is on the 'long list'.
          • by miskatonic alumnus (668722) on Friday June 02 2006, @01:57PM (#15455949)
            ...chips can't be removed by a person trying to claim your dog as their own, and a stray branch in the woods is unlikely to rip the chip off.

            Aha! But, your pet might be EATEN by another animal. This is how your favorite poodle can polymorph into a pit bull.
        • by GWTPict (749514) on Friday June 02 2006, @03:06PM (#15456690)
          WHOOSH!! Congratulations, that was the sound of the whole point of the grandparents soppy poem disappearing into the distance without you noticing it. He wasn't saying you are required to microchip your dog, he wasn't saying that anyone has microchipped immigrants or proposed doing it to felons. You know, I'm confused, was your mention of great literature intended to demonstrate you're familiar with the original verse? Because if so how could you so totally fail to understand the point of it?

          Yes it is a slippery slope, if you're going to fuck people over do it incrementally, they'll accept it much easier that way. If immigrants etc were chipped how long do you think it would be before someone suggested various other segments of the population could usefully be chipped? Mmm? you might trust the government you have now but what about the one 5, 10 or 15 years down the line?

          I've spent the last 18 years of my life writing systems that need to identify people, to say whether they've payed their rent or not, what care are they getting from social services, is their library book overdue or not, the list is endless. From a purely job based perspective, yes, chip the buggers from birth. From a purely personal perspective, come near me with a chipping device and I'll take your arm off and beat you to death with the soggy end.

          Technology is neither good or evil, the uses it's put to are another matter, the danger is once it's out of the box you can't put it back in.

      • Re:A Cautionary Tale (Score:5, Interesting)

        by MBCook (132727) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Friday June 02 2006, @02:33PM (#15456337) Homepage
        Interesting take. I think you point about people removing the chips is an excellent one. If having a chip identifies you as a previous sneak-in, then why not just remove it? If you are willing to run through a border and a desert to get into the US, you may be willing to do that too. About the only solution would be to put it where it can't be easily removed (like in someone's pelvis) but that would be a major operation compared to the quick prick putting it in their arm would be.

        About the only Mexican side of this debate you hear on US TV is from the illegal immigrants already hear and people on the other side of the border (the Mexican side) who are worried it will become harder to cross.

        That said, you have presented an opportunity that I can't pass up to ask you a question. What do you think about the Mexican government's role in this immigration debate? Specifically it seems to me they are the problem. We don't have Canadians flooding into the country because Canada is very good shape.

        From everything I've heard Mexico has some serious problems in this area. My understanding is that 10% of Mexican citizens are living in the US (either legally or not). 12% of the Mexican work force is working in the US (again, legally or not). I have heard estimations that if flow of money from workers and families in the US to their relatives back home in Mexico were to be stopped, the Mexican economy would collapse. According to the figures I can find the underemployment/unemployment rate in Mexico is as high as 25%.

        Do Mexicans blame their government for all this? Is there anything of a movement to get it fixed, or is it just easier to try to get the US government to help by taking on people?

        Of course, Bush can't say any of this because we have to try to keep relations with Mexico good. Why the media doesn't mention this more would surprise me if I didn't think them all so crooked.

        What do you think of the "Pay backed taxes, a fine, and prove you know English and you can become a citizen" proposal? Obviously that is somewhat simplified.

        My last question is, does the issue of illegal immigration strike you as ironic at all? There are so many people (and groups, which I don't understand) that are pushing for (illegal) immigrant rights in the US and saying they should be treated like citizens. But illegal immigrants into Mexico from South and Central America face robbing, beatings, rapes, and other terrible fates from Mexican officials if they are caught. Mexico is not kind to those who sneak in, yet the President of the country is asking the US to be kind to those who sneak in. Is that issue raised at all in the Mexican media?

        I don't mean to offend you, I've never heard answers to these questions and I am genuinely curious. I'll be glad to answer anything I can for you with my opinions.

          • As a Mexican person who prays for never needing to go to the USA (I just went once to Disney World and Universal Studios), I say, fuck the USA government.

            How ironic, I'm an American who knows he'll never need to go to Mexico, and I'm always saying "fuck the Mexican government."

            And, to make things better, I am a Mexican who knows that one day he is going to have to return to Mexico and I am always saying "Fuck the Mexican government".

            I'm a Canadian...what the fuck is going on down there?

          • by flyingsquid (813711) on Friday June 02 2006, @03:15PM (#15456791)
            Also, they arn't being forced. It's the price of admission to America.

            Frankly I'm disgusted that anyone would seriously consider this. Seriously, would you claim it was just the "price of admission" if you were required to get one before you could vote, or perhaps if you were required to have on implanted into you at birth before your citizenship would be official?

            Implanting chips into people like they were a cow or your dog is just disgusting, it's treating people as less than people simply because they were born in a different country. I just can't see why having a passport that says "U.S." means you should be entitled to basic human dignity, while having one that says "Mexico" means you should be treated like an animal. But that's what supporting this proposal is arguing.

  • wait a second.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MustardMan (52102) on Friday June 02 2006, @01:38PM (#15455706)
    Before you go all "1984" on our asses, take a moment to stop and realize that this is the company that SELLS THE CHIPS making the proposal, NOT the government. What next, a company that makes bombs approving of a war? Or, shock and horror, a cigarette company talking about how harmless their product is? News flash: Guy who sells product proposes people use product. Film at 11.
    • Re:wait a second.... (Score:5, Informative)

      by TripMaster Monkey (862126) * on Friday June 02 2006, @01:43PM (#15455779)

      Before you go all "1984" on our asses, take a moment to stop and realize that this is the company that SELLS THE CHIPS making the proposal, NOT the government.

      Are you sure about that? [newstandardnews.net]
            • by TripMaster Monkey (862126) * on Friday June 02 2006, @03:05PM (#15456685)

              Your argument is nothing more than straw man flamebait, but it's late Friday afternoon, and I'm bored, so sure...I'll play:

              Given that it's much easier to just shoot detractors than hold an electio

              There's the flaw in your argument. It's much easier to hold a rigged election then it is to shoot detractors.

              Disinformation is far easier and works far more effectively than brute force in oppressing populations. If you don't agree with this, just watch Fox and Friends for a little while.
    • by realmolo (574068) on Friday June 02 2006, @01:47PM (#15455825)
      Well, you're right. HOWEVER, as we all know, money talks in Washington. If this company bribes the right politicians, and promises some kind of benefit to a given congressman's state, then it WILL happen.

  • by Art Popp (29075) * on Friday June 02 2006, @01:38PM (#15455710)
    If it's not O.K. to do something to the people of one's country, it's inappropriate to do it to foreigners.

    Can this be more obvious?

    • I fear that that's exactly the point they will be making. "Hey, we've been chipping immigrants for a while, and the program has yielded great benefits! The technology is proven, there's no reason we shouldn't have every U.S. citizen chipped!"

      All entirely voluntary, of course...with the tacit understanding that anyone who refuses obviously has something to hide, and immediately becomes a 'terror suspect'...

      ...but this couldn't happen in the 'land of the free', right?

    • I entirely agree with you. But there are lots of people who don't. A friend of mine posted something about Guantanamo on her blog and had tens of people saying, in effect, that they had no problem whatsoever with innocent people being imprisoned, tortured, and killed, if there was even a chance that some of those people might be terrorists.

      That breaks my brain. Once you make that leap, then *everyone* is your enemy and you grab a gun and just start shooting until there's nobody left, to keep yourself safe.

      Which, basically, is what the USA is doing in the world at large. There are lots of people who don't see a problem with this, maybe even a majority of Americans.
  • What the FUCK? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mg2 (823681) on Friday June 02 2006, @01:39PM (#15455721)
    Privacy advocates see this move by VeriChip as a way to introduce their product to Latin America after a lukewarm reception in North America.

    Um, um, what? Just a marketing ploy? Just looking to get more market share?

    In other news, The Burger King Corporation has finished constructing it's first run of biomechanical overlord drones. These drones have been shown to be capable of both mind control and world domination. Market Analysts see this as a ploy to increase the Whopper's market share, as the Big Mac has rapidly been gaining popularity.
  • by pavon (30274) on Friday June 02 2006, @01:40PM (#15455728)
    Isn't the problem with immigration that we have today due to those who enter our country illegally? How does this solve that problem? Only those legally immigrating would be tagged. It may even make the problem worse by motivating more people to risk entering the country illegally rather than be tagged if they enter legally.

    Obscene violation of human rights: Check
    Increased power given to government: Check
    Does not help solve any real problem: Check

    Sounds like another winner from the people that brought you the Real ID Card and Airline Profiling.
  • Slippery Slope (Score:5, Insightful)

    by spun (1352) <loverevolutionary@nosPAM.yahoo.com> on Friday June 02 2006, @01:40PM (#15455733) Journal
    This is NOT a road we want to start down. This is just an excuse to start getting people okay with this (plus an election year anti-immigant pander-fest.) Next it will be, "Chip your kids to keep 'em safe," then "chip yourself and never have to carry credit cards!" then "chip yourself or we lock you up."

    All right, I'm taking off my tinfoil hat now, but this is still a bad idea.
  • Slippery slope? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sharky611aol.com (682311) on Friday June 02 2006, @01:47PM (#15455821)
    The summary actually raises a good question as to whether this sort of "tagging" should be allowed at all.

    Sure, let's go ahead and tag immigrants. And pedophiles. And murderers. And rapists. Any got a problem with that? (I'm going to ignore the fact that pedphiles were the next logical step after immigrants for the time being...)

    Ok, how about hackers? Jaywalkers? IP pirates? Yes, I know the whole "Slippery slope" argument is technically a fallacy, but when you're dealing with the government, it tends to be the norm. When has the gov't ever been happy with a limit on their power once a particular "right" is stripped away?

    I think we all need to agree that nobody needs to be "tagged" for any reason. We have a right to have our identity hidden unless we have performed actions which forfeit this right. You have the right to refuse to show identification to a law enforcement officer if they do not have probable cause. (Before I get lots of cries of foul, Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Nev. still requires "suspicious activity") All that goes out the window though if all an officer has to do is wave a wand at you.

  • by nick_davison (217681) on Friday June 02 2006, @02:05PM (#15456048)
    Would immigrant workers trade their privacy for the opportunity to work in the U.S.?

    No. I, for one, would be leaving.

    Granted, I am here as a spouse of an American citizen and working simply because of that, not because I simply came for work.

    We're in California because she was badly injured in a car accident and her injuries hurt her less in that climate (I know, another one of those selfish immigrants selfishly supporting your disabled citizens so they don't need to claim benefits - it shouldn't be allowed!). But, should any government expect to implant chips in my body, tattoo a series of numbers on my wrist or demand I wear a Star Of David, in the name of "administrative tracking", I'm sure as hell not staying. We gave that a shot in Europe back in the 30s and 40s - it wasn't too popular. Much as I'd hate putting my wife through the physical pain associated with what the British climate does to her injuries, America can do without a highly skilled and heavily in demand science worker. And then everyone who remains can post on Slashdot lamenting how, once all of those workers leave, America's strangely falling even further behind in the sciences.

    I'm sorry but it's just not worth starting down that slippery slope to keep a job. I can earn just as well back in Europe and not go down that slope. Forgetting about my wife's specific case, the only people who'll really lose out are the American citizens whose country continues to fall further behind (don't worry, I'm sure your president will authorize borrowing even more to make up for it). So, granted I don't speak for all immigrants (given I have blonde hair, blue eyes, white skin, and the ability to legally work anywhere in Europe which means most Americans don't think of me when justifying their racism in the name of immigration control) but I am at least one immigrant who'd happily sacrifice living in the states for avoiding a path with disturbing similarities to something the Nazi's (with the help of another U.S. business, IBM, tried back in the 40's).

    And, yes, this was just one long post to repeatedly hammer home on Slashdot that I have a wife. Some guys'll do anything to show off. ;)