Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Proposal to Implant RFID Chips in Immigrants 559

Posted by Zonk 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)?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Proposal to Implant RFID Chips in Immigrants More

Proposal to Implant RFID Chips in Immigrants

Comments Filter:

  • Yay! (Score:5, Informative)

    by alx5000 ( 896642 ) <alx5000&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.
    • as a way to introduce their product to Latin America

      One way or another, yeah...
    • And it was good sarcasm too. I'd mod it funny. (Never have mod points when I need them)

    • 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 morleron ( 574428 ) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {norelrom}> on Friday June 02, 2006 @03:51PM (#15457171) Journal
      The problem is that this process can't stop with immigrants. If the idea is to make it possible for employers to tell if the person they want to hire is legal or for INS to tell the same thing, then the lack of an ID chip will leave one in a non-verifiable condition. Obviously, the government can't have that, after all that non-chipped person may be a "terrorist". Thus, sooner rather than later, everyone who has a legal right to be in this country will be required to get "chipped" and lack of a chip will be taken as de facto evidence of illegal activity of some sort. This idea needs to be squashed ASAP and not quietly either, lest it be snuck back in to the immigration debate later on. Allowing this step to be taken is merely letting the camel get most of the way into the tent and soon our children will be "chipped" at birth.

      Just my $.02,
      Ron

       

  • 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)

    • Re:A Cautionary Tale (Score:3, Insightful)

      by xtracto ( 837672 )
      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.

      On the other hand, I think that the idea is hilarious, this reminded me of MI-3, they surely will have to implant those chips with those mini bombs. Because if they dont do it, I am completely sure immigrants (at least mexicans) will just "un-implant" the chips and put it in a secure place like their home or things like that. Do not underestimate the power

      • Re:A Cautionary Tale (Score:2, Insightful)

        by lbrandy ( 923907 )
        Oh, and please if you are from the USA do not get offended, it is nothing personal against citizens, its about the government :).

        None taken. No matter how much you think our government sucks, we think yours is worse. And we're right.
      • Too bad I can't vote for you for president.

      • 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.

    • (*initial reaction to the proposal*)
      Oh, hell no!

      (*upon further thought*)
      mandatory chipping for the following:
      - politicians
      - lawyers
      and last but not least
      - a certain chairman working for VeriChip Corp.
    • Quick note: Since neither livestock, nor house pets, nor immigrants (other than immigrant-citizens), nor felons, currently have the right (or even, in most cases) to speak up for citizens anyway.

      But please, tell us more about this world in which cows and housecats normally speak out against man's inhumanity to man.

  • 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]

      • Re:wait a second.... (Score:4, Funny)

        by MustardMan ( 52102 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @01:45PM (#15455805)
        Right. Because handing someone an ID card with a chip in it is EXACTLY the same as sticking the chip in their neck.

        • Not exactly, but it supports my assertion that the U.S. government is pursuing RFID technology for exactly these reasons. Embeded RFID chips will be more convenient, more difficult to lose, and more difficult to tamper with...given the demonstrated fact that the government is already pursuing RFID technology, and given the benefits of implantable RFID chips I outlined above, can you come up with a plausible reason they wouldn't pursue implantable RFID technology?
          • The government buys guns. Therefore, this supports my assertion that the U.S. goverment is pursuing firearm technology for exactly the reasons of killing people. Killing people will be more convenient, less expensive, and faster than trials. Therefore it's only logical that the military will begin immediately shooting anyone who questions the government. Given that it's much easier to just shoot detractors than hold an electio, can you come up with a plausible reason why they wouldn't pursue martial law

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

              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.

      • Re:wait a second.... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Software ( 179033 )
        From the article you linked [newstandardnews.net]:

        Over the next year, people in these categories will be issued new "I-94" visa cards embedded with an RFID tag ... Homeland Security Department requires that the I-94 cards be carried at all times.

        whereas the article in the /. story discusses the CEO of the chip company who wants to implant chips in people.

        Implanting chips in people != implanting chips in visas, even if you have to carry the visa (tinfoil, anyone?)

    • We know what bombs are and what they do to people.

      Now we are talking about a company that makes RFID chips. What are RFID chips and what do they do? Are they like a bar code that is used to track products in a store? Or are they like the serial number tattoos that the Nazis used to track people and process them appropriately?

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

      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.

      • 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.

        Hang on, you forgot some:
        1. Company bribes the right politicians
        2. Company promises the right kind of benefit to a given congressman's state
        3. Bill is actually drafted
        4. Bill is voted on in the House and passes
        5. Bill is voted on in the Senate and passes
        6. The president doesn't veto (someone besides G.W. will be in by then,

      • If this company bribes the right politicians, and promises some kind of benefit to a given congressman's state, then it WILL happen.

        Provided the congresscritter believes the public won't get too freaked out by the results. The folks in Congress are still elected. Also, there are plenty of other private interests that are likely opposed to RFID tagging of immigrants. After all, business lobbies are already putting up a fight [washingtonpost.com] against more restrictive immigration controls.

        For every private interest or pu

    • Of course, the real question is, do they require it of their employees? I will bet that not many would do it.

      However, this is being flipped out from the company, because the republicans do not want to be the first to suggest it. Keep in mind, that shortly after GWB pushed his immigration policy with high-tech ID, it was quickly seen that it would not work unless everybody had it. Of course, within 5 days, a number of Republicans were pushing just that. IOW, GWB's push is to get us IDed (and possibly chippe
  • This is one of those moves thats so over the top you mentally check for april fools dates. This kind of thing always seems a bit far-fetched in sci-fi movies, let alone modern-day America. I hope some big names kick up a fuss over this, because whatever insane big brother actions the USA takes, our useless govt here in the UK copies soon afterwards.
    • I hope some big names kick up a fuss over this, because whatever insane big brother actions the USA takes, our useless govt here in the UK copies soon afterwards.

      You guys came up with tracking every single car in your country through omnipresent mass surveillance and automatic license plate readers with data saved in a single central database all on your own. You guys are also leading the way on RFID license plate to aid in tracking drivers.. and America is looking to see how those experiments go before
    • Sounds kind of like that idea from Coneheads. Remember?

      The head INS agent/bad guy in the movie thought that they should make the mexican border an invisible fence.

      Every time the catch an illegal immigrant, they put a coller on him and send him back home. Then when he tries to cross over again, he gets fried as the invisible fence causes the collar to electrocute him.

      Funny stuff. This seems about as possible.
    • cliffski says:

      This kind of thing always seems a bit far-fetched in sci-fi movies, let alone modern-day America.

      This reminds me of that cringe-worthy scene in Total Recall [imdb.com] where Douglas Quaid sticks a set of pincers up his nostril and pulls out a glowing ping-pong ball sized tracking device, on advice from a video of himself running in his open briefcase.

  • Did they learn nothing from Guantanamo Bay? (Score:5, Insightful)

    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?

    • Re:Did they learn nothing from Guantanamo Bay? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TripMaster Monkey ( 862126 ) * on Friday June 02, 2006 @01:48PM (#15455841)

      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?

      • It's funny (in the "bowling ball dropped on your foot" sense of funny), that by the time you see the pattern, folks consider you one of those "whacko cantankerous old geezers." When really you've just lived long enough to see how companies like VeriChip penetrate the market.

        If human rights are in the way, you lobby to affect people perceived has having "fewer rights." Whether they be prisoners, foreigners or former-pedophiles doesn't matter so long as public perception is against them.

        Two hundred years ag

    • If it's not O.K. to do something to the people of one's country, it's inappropriate to do it to foreigners.

      Considering everyone that was imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay is still there, with no hope or plans for actual trials, I'd say "they" haven't learned anything and show no signs of ever doing so.
    • Didn't they learn apples from oranges!

      Guantanamo bay has nothing to do with it. Also, it IS ok for the American government to do what they want to foreign fighters in a time of war. Especially ones that don't fight by the geneva convention. Use your common sense here, would you fight by the rules of boxing if you were in a street fight and the other guy were choking you?

      As for chipping innocent illegals, or anyone for that matter, it's a no go. Chipping enemies in a time of war might not be a bad

    • Re:Did they learn nothing from Guantanamo Bay? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by smellsofbikes ( 890263 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @02:16PM (#15456153) Journal
      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.

  • Business as usual (Score:4, Interesting)

    by FooHentai ( 624583 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @01:39PM (#15455723) Homepage
    This isn't such a surprising strategy. If you can convince the masses to do something to the least favoured members of society, then you can start to gradually argue the case for doing it to everyone.

    All they had to find was the lowest rung on the ladder of american society.

    Surprised they didn't go with pedophiles TBH. It's probably because they were already on with the immigrant thing.
  • is to drive the ones that legally cross the border underground or to the places where the illegals cross.

    what then? have drone aircraft flying the border strafing illegals with RFID bullets from a machinegun? :p

  • How does this solve the problem? (Score:5, Insightful)

    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&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.
    • Other than your comment about taking off your tinfoil hat, I agree with you wholeheartedly.

      Someone apologized on this page for mis-quoting Niemöller but the principle is the same. Chipping people in exchange for the right to work is to succumb to a significant component of was obviously wrong with society in the movie, Gattaca [imdb.com].

      Someone, please, shut VeriChip up before the really repressive countries in the world get hold of their technology and decide that it's just one more tool to manage what woul

  • They start 'branding' people.

    Natural, as all they know about the outside world can be summarized as ; 'cows'

    Americans. Stand up. It is your freedom on the line next.
  • I think they should track pedophiles any way feasable.

    I'm not so much on the guest / immigrant worker part of this, but chipping a pedophile isn't anywhere close to the same catagory.
    • I think they should track pedophiles any way feasable.

      I'm not so much on the guest / immigrant worker part of this, but chipping a pedophile isn't anywhere close to the same catagory.

      correct me if i'm wrong, but in some places in the US, a sex offender can be legally required to wear a monitering device (similar to a GPS transmitter). a RFID tag would not be a suitable replacement for this, as you would have to have RFID readers placed everywhere to be able to track it, as the things have pretty short rang
  • This is NOT a privacy issue ... These people's location, and place of work is already known as is when and how they cross the border... This is actually a human RIGHTS issue... Why should someone force you or even ask you to put an electronic device under your skin? The human body, and what you choose to do with it is your choice, that is an absolutely fundamental freedom ... It is *the* fundamental freedom!

    Please excuse the expression but I'll have an RFID implantation over my dead body.
  • For a variety of reasons, I have been considering starting visa proceedings so I can go over, work, and live with my GF in the States. However, if they want to implant a tracking chip in me, I hate to say it, but that's a dealbreaker.

    I love my GF more than anything but if this becomes the case she should come up to Canada to live with me.

    That said, of course, I seriously doubt this will come to pass, at least not in the next few years. I mean, the idea's coming from the CEO of an RFID manufacturer.
    • Well, in fairness the Canadians should all be chipped even if they DON'T enter the US. Just to make sure. Or at least chip all the touques.

  • There's already moves to track pedophiles with GPS (Score:3, Interesting)

    by thewldisntenuff ( 778302 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @01:43PM (#15455774) Homepage
    If you think it's bad now, it's only the tip of the iceberg...

    A few states have already begun tracking pedophiles via GPS - see this Fox News story [foxnews.com] about it.

    FTFA -
    "Many states are initiating programs that track registered sex offenders using Global Positioning Satellites, or GPS, sometimes for life. GPS can track the exact location of the offenders at all times, making it easier for law enforcement to ensure that they're abiding with the terms of their release.

    It sounds like an efficient system: Authorities can keep track of dangerous sex offenders without having to keep them in prison at taxpayers' expense."

    While I'm not defeding pedophiles (surely it's painted that way - "If you don't want GPS on pedos, then you're with them!"), where do we go next? GPS tracking for drug offenses? DUI? And what happens when people can track these GPS recievers? Scary stuff - what ever happened to paying your debt to society once you got out of jail?

  • Stealing Chips (Score:2, Interesting)

    by archer, the ( 887288 )
    How long until someone kidnaps chipped people to steal the chips? Implant stolen chips for the highest bidder.
  • First we make them carry an electronic ID, and now we are looking at imbedding it. When does the far-away camps come in? Oh wait.....

    My one question is, why are these republicans not in hurry to get ID and RFID chips for themselves? After all, everybody in congress and the whitehouse should get one to get in and out, as well as give up their fingerprint and DNA to show us how it is done.
  • First of all, any comments made to a story that's at all immigration related should be immune to flame bait.

    Okay, with that said. Immigrants are still people. You don't just chip them and turn them into an object. They deserve humanity rights as well as any person on Earth.

  • 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.

    • Re:Slippery slope? (Score:4, Informative)

      by jez9999 ( 618189 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @03:43PM (#15457094) Homepage Journal
      How is the slippery slope argument always a fallacy?

      What if I say that implementing a law that allows police to use lethal force when dealing with terrorists is a slippery slope as it would make future laws allowing police to use lethal force in other situations more likely? As long as you accept that the enactment of the first law makes the others more likely, which in this case we do because it softens public resistance to them, the argument holds.

  • What's good for the goose ... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by plehmuffin ( 846742 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @01:47PM (#15455831)
    Is good for the gander.

    I propose that we enact legislation to track all politicians who hold governmental offices. That way we can make sure that they aren't up to no good.

    Slimy Politician: This new energy policy was not influenced by the oil industry.

    Citizen/Reporter: Then why does your location log indicate you visited the major oil companies' headquarters while preparing the legislation?

    Slimy Politician: Umm...

  • I say "no" to tracking immigrants, since they are typically hard-working, decent people, and tracking them is creepy.

    Pedophiles, on the other hand, deserve little more than a bullet in the head. I say "yes" to tracking those twisted freaks.

  • Don't chip "the people" (Score:2, Insightful)

    by w33t ( 978574 )
    RFID implants can be used for good. To fight fire sometimes one must use fire. I think what we need is a "little brother" scenario.

    What we should do is chip our politicians. I think constituents shoud be able to see where they are and what they are doing during their "hours of operation".
    --
    Music should be free [myspace.com]

  • that is just gross (Score:2, Insightful)

    by kendoka ( 473386 )
    my wife is an immigrant, half of my family are immigrants; they're people just like you and me. Tagging them like an animal is inhuman, regardless of the practical outcome there are things we simply do not do in a civilized society; we don't kill our elderly after they're no longer useful, we don't put children our children to work, instead we put them into free schools.

    Any one with half a brain and half a reason would just have the thing removed anyway. All this will do is treat regular people with indigni
  • This isn't about legal immigrants. Nobody cares about legal immigrants. It's illegal immigrants everyone is worked up about. And, of course, the ones who enter the country illegally won't be affected by this proposal at all.

    In order to find and track illegal immigrants with RFID chips, we would have to chip everyone else, from birth. Which will be the next proposal, or the one after that.

    And then it just might be time to stand a few politicians against the wall.
  • This company has been known to be associated with April Fool's type hoaxes and controversy... "Seattle officials have introduced "Safe Harbors." An Orwellian phrase. Many homeless will not get a home, but they will be tagged and surveilled as they slog through the labyrinth of services and shelters. Safe Harbors will be a component in the federal Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). Participation is not mandatory. But programs that choose not to participate in the monitoring of misery will lose fu
  • "My fellow Americans. I'm pleased to announce that I've just signed legislation that will outlaw VeriChip Corporation forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."
  • Lets ask Silverman about to look up "Dignity" in the dictionary.

    Well, Goodness, it IS still in the dictionary. And not just the PETA dictionary, it's in the real life HUMANS dictionary. In case he's reading, I'll make it easy for him.

    http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dignity [reference.com]

  • This means, the sooner we get immigrants tracked we can start working on pedofiles?? I'm all for it! Then we can start working on all sex and violent crime offenders! Woot!

  • One vote: No. Buh-bye. (Score:5, Insightful)

    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. ;)
  • Since the INS cant keep track, of well anyone at all, what makes these "representatives" think this would do any good.

    Ill ask the question apparently no one else bothered to ask in this proposal.

    What is the point? what purpose will it serve.

    None, thats exactly what I thought.

  • OMG PONIES!!!!1!~!!one (Score:4, Funny)

    by MrNougat ( 927651 ) <ckratsch@noSPAm.gmail.com> on Friday June 02, 2006 @02:09PM (#15456093)
    Wait, this isn't April Fools' Day?

  • Technical Problems, RFID != GPS (Score:3, Insightful)

    by aldheorte ( 162967 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @02:13PM (#15456131)
    Ethics and morality aside, which are being much discussed in other topics, what problem does embedded RFIDs really solve here? RFIDs are extremely low distance information responders. They would not let anyone track down someone to their location. This means that RFIDs embedded in migrant workers serves no purpose besides embedding 'papers' on them, which they could remove just as they could lose papers, though it is probably in their best interest if legitimate to keep their papers on them.

    Therefore, all this does is attempt to solve an already solved simple problem (identification papers) in an overly complex and expensive way.

    Also, people do not seem to understand the difference between GPS, active transponders, and RFID. Embarrassingly, even IBM doesn't have a clue even though it wants to sell RFID solutions. I cite a commercial where a truck is notified it is off course in the middle of a desert as an advertisement for RFID solutions.

Slashdot Top Deals

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." - Bert Lantz

Close