CA Bill Limits Skin Implantation of RFID Chips 275
twitter writes with a link to a ZDNet blog entry about a piece of legislation submitted to the California state senate. Drafted by Democratic Senator Joe Simitian, its purpose is to ensure that employers cannot require the implantation of RFID chips as part of employment. It is meeting with scorn from the American Electronics Association. "'Our bottom line is we're opposed to anything that demonizes RFIDs,' she said. 'The technology has been in existence for more than 50 years. It's in more than 1.2 billion ID credentials worldwide. ... We've not seen a single showing of ID theft or harm,' said Roxanne Gould, vice president for California government relations for the American Electronics Association, a high-tech industry group."
RTFA? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:RTFA? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:RTFA? (Score:5, Informative)
Now you've got only one remaining excuse for not reading it : you're on Slashdot
Re:RTFA? (Score:5, Informative)
Huh? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Huh? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Huh? (Score:5, Interesting)
That she wants to dedemonize RFID chips is fine with me, but at the moment she seems to support forced implantations of the chips. It's really only one step away from no longer being able to buy food without an implanted chip under your hand or forehead.
Re: (Score:2)
But no, she instead wants employers to be able to do this to their employees. Ri
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
---
Its old news actually.
Clubbers choose chip implants to jump queues - 21 May 2004 - New
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn5022 [newscientist.com]
http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Chip_Implants/ [greaterthings.com]
Re:Huh? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Huh? (Score:5, Insightful)
Often this kind of legislation has to be extended to barring the technology altogether as corporations or government departments will try to work around the legislative ban forbidding compulsion by the use of various extortion techniques, reduced pay, promotion restrictions, implied threats of dismissal, unlikely employment.
Why wait for the abuses, ban questionable applications of technology to start with.
Just think of the benefits for the weasel in chief, he wont have to wait for you to make a phone call so that the NSA can record you calls, he can just download you sound recording chip when ever you walk past a phone for any questionable anti-republican statements.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Nah..that wouldn't work too well....at least for the majority of girls working at high end strip clubs.
You thought ALL of those were 'natural'??
Auschwitz 2.0 (Score:5, Insightful)
For one thing, no employer should ever have the right to demand the violation of an employee's body.
Another issue is that this is too damn close to a slave collar. "Property of ACME Inc."
And finally, the RFID tag doesn't stop working once the work day is over, but works 24/7/365.
The problem I see with a ban is that the ban is likely going to be too narrow if it mentions RFID. Unless it's a ban against any permanent or semi-permanent marking of employees, it's going to be worse than nothing, as the wrong judge might rule that since RFIDs were banned, but tattoos were not mentioned, it means that tattoos are implicitly allowed.
Regards,
--
*Art
They can demand all they like (Score:3, Insightful)
Does this really need to be legislated? Eh, no I don't think so.
Re:They can demand all they like (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:They can demand all they like (Score:5, Insightful)
Legislation that hinders companies from exploiting their employees is not a bad thing. The free forces only go so far, and protect only those in a position to say "no". That's not everyone, even if it's you.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"this has never happened to me, therefore your logic is silly for suggesting it could happen. Further, I am far too talented and independent to ever work somewhere that would do such a thing."
Good for you that your company doesn't demand it. However, that really wasn't parent poster's point, was it? Rather, it was that something we previously assumed would never be required as a condition for employment now is. And there are quite a few large, successful companies (ones t
Re: (Score:2)
Agnostics don't have to do that. They can just claim insufficient evidence and move on without a political bent to their beliefs.
As far as the marketplace is concerned, paranoid employers employ far more people than liberal employers do, and the fact that they are employers at all gives many companies an undeserved mandate to become paranoid. There are companies out there which requ
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There is a surplus of workforce compared to jobs. And while it's not pressing in the high paying management positions, it sure as hell is in the trenches with the grunts. Anyone can work that slurpee machine, so
What a load of hysterical rubbish. (Score:2)
IMO: Anything but an outright ban will invariably result in indirect force to have it implanted.
FFS, this is just utter bollocks.
If an employer can gain employees that 5% cheaper by not demanding implantation, they'll do it. If their cost base is 5% lower they'll be more competitive in the marketplace. Their paranoid competitors will find themselves losing both their market share and their best employees to their more enlightened and now cheaper competitors.
I'll say it again. If this kind of crap was going to happen, we'd all have barcodes by now.
Re: (Score:2)
Now, if you got 1 spot to fill and 5 people applying for it, and you already said you're paying not a cent more than minimum and all 5 nod eagerly, then you throw in that you require chipping, how many do you think will not nod?
The reas
Re: (Score:2)
How do you know that free "flu shot" wasn't really an RFID? Funny how they recorded the vaccine serial number "for your records."
Re: (Score:2)
They already do. It is called "drug testing" without probable cause.
Re:Huh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Read as:
We all stand around here with our eyes closed and our hands over our ears shouting BLABLABLABLABLA.......
Ignorance is bliss!
Re: (Score:2)
Then you get to why: Because we're not identifying ourselves with RFID tags yet. If you hold up a blank card with your RFID chip in there as your ID card, well, try flying with that; it'll be fun, I promise.
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't like anyone it watching for foul play or anything. If somethi
Re: (Score:2)
I think if we looked and monitored, we would find her statement to be false on several levels.
It is a good thing to limit skin implantations. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
A tattoo on the forehead (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Taking a longer break than is allowed? *KA-BOOM*
Missed a deadline? *KA-BOOM*
You cannot find a better motivator than this! It's well worth the cleaning crew expenses due to people exploding regularly. And if you tag them too, the workplace never stays filthy for too long!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
doesn't mean you can't have it (Score:5, Insightful)
Doesn't mean you can't have your RFID -- it just means they can't REQUIRE you to have it.
and that's a good thing.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Don't like the laws? (Score:2)
Re:Don't like the laws? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I think that is a classic libertarain mistake of not thinking carefully enough about the market for jobs (or at least I assume that your granting to employers the right to do whatever they want to employees is motivated by libertarian-esque thinking that letting the market settle such things is better than regulating them). Now if
Re: (Score:2)
I really doubt of those people would understand economic concepts like elasticity. Nice try, but in my experience most politicians and "business" people only have a vague notion of economic concepts. Even my Business Management teacher (from years past), who has an MBA, thought it wo
Re:doesn't mean you can't have it (Score:4, Interesting)
You see, the free market concept assumes people are free to chose what they want to purchase. Now, even in IT, there are only so many jobs at so many places so if they are all filled in my town, I either have to move or find another. Now notice I didn't place a third option of not working in there. that is because you don't have that option as a realistic choice. Sure, you could draw unemployment for a while, spend your savings down but in the end, you will HAVE to find a job or dies. And that is only if you don't goto jail or something first.
Anytime you take the option to walk away out of the picture, you cannot have a free market. This is the same thing with gasoline, a certain amount in todays age has to be spent on transportation for all but a small set of people. there is nothing free about the gas market except they are free to exploit your needs. Now, these needs can be artificial yet still be enough to screw the idea of a free market. Mass or public transportation for instance, It needs to purchase gas in order to function. It will have to raise fair to cover expenses when they prices go up, so even if you do have an alternative to buying it directly, you would still be force to pay indirectly.
Now, with jobs this is no different. In most areas, they have reserved sections of the town to provide the bulk of the jobs and with the smaller towns, you have to go outside in order to get a job that pays a decent amount of wages. Most jobs now require a certain skill set (like IT) where you cannot just up and learn another in the time it takes to quit one job and goto the next even if it is outsid your skill set. When a person is forced to work or live in poverty or die, you cannot consider that a free market. Even if you manage to find one example where it might be. When a person is forced to have years of training to do a certain line of work you cannot expect them to find another job in another market area because he disagrees with a policy, it would take longer to train then it would take for the policy they disagree with to be implemented. They would be forced to adapt to the policy. Again, it isn't a FREE market by any means. And that is the entire point of the GP. If you think it is a free market, then you just aren't looking at it good enough.
Re:doesn't mean you can't have it (Score:4, Insightful)
Considering the fact that power corrupts and companies tend towards the lowest common denominator when it comes to moral issues like workers rights and just plane ordinary dignity, it is not unreasonable to have a law that requires employers not to treat their workers too much like cattle. If people really did have a choice of not to work for bad companies, I'm sure they would. Until that day comes, we will need legislation protecting us from our employers.
Re:doesn't mean you can't have it (Score:4, Insightful)
Not true (Score:4, Informative)
The employer is free to not hire someone who doesn't take the RFID implant, but then they're free to report said employer for even requesting it, and California is free to fine/imprison/punish the employer.
The question then boils down to enforcement. How likely then is the company to get punished for breaking the law, and to what magnitude? That is where we ought to be asking the biggest questions.
Re: (Score:2)
Linky? (Score:5, Informative)
this might help.
Not yet (Score:4, Insightful)
It's in more than 1.2 billion ID credentials worldwide.
In my humble opinion, just because something did not happen yet does not mean that it will not happen in the future
And the summary missing a link to the ZDNet blog.
like ID tattoos? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not primarily about the RFID security. It is about mutilating the staff to save the employer the cost of installing and using a less Nazi-slave-like security system. Seems to me that any doctors that perform the procedure should have their license removed. The tags are hardly justifiable as cosmetic surgery providing any self-image benefit, since the tags aren't supposed to be visible.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There are also privacy implications in that this identifies the them as an employee even when they are not at work. (It may even be useful to criminals such as burglers.) Would requiring a barcode tatoo (on a piece of skin not usually covered by clothing) be legal currently?
Re:like ID tattoos? (Score:5, Informative)
Please check your facts before stating incorrect FUD like this... I remembered reading about this a while ago and it took only a few seconds with Google to find it.
"A Cincinnati video surveillance company CityWatcher.com now requires employees to use Verichip human implantable microchips to enter a secure data centre. Until now, the employees entered the data centre with a VeriChip housed in a heart-shaped plastic casing that hangs from their keychain.
The VeriChip is a glass encapsulated RFID tag that is injected into the triceps area of the arm to uniquely identify individuals. The tag can be read by radio waves from a few inches away.
The news was reported by CASPIAN (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering), a US organisation that opposes the use of surveillance RFID cards."
Re:like ID tattoos? (Score:4, Interesting)
This is incorrect. Some passive RFID systems do challenge-response authentication. See Exxon's SpeedPass. It does it BADLY, but it does it.
Tut-tut from the library (Score:3, Funny)
Futurama (Score:2)
But, "you gotta do what you gotta do."
Re: (Score:2)
Where do the libertarians stand? (Score:2)
Do you believe employers should be allowed to require employees to have RFID implants?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
. It's only one step from existing laws that demand proof that a person can legally be employed (which laws are wrong) to the additional law that accepts o
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that forced implantation of RFID chips should be illegal, but you're a little confused.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is utter utter Bollocks (Score:2)
FFS. The market is made up of human beings making at least semi rational decisions.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's not quite how it works, but it is pretty close to an idea that is correct. If the only thing that changes is the supply of money, then inflation/deflation will even things out, and the result is no real change. However, if efficiency is improved or people work more then everyone really can
Re: (Score:2)
Wages can't actually universally increase, they can only seem to. If everyone got paid more, proportionally, then we would simply experience inflation until real wages were the same as they previously were.
Uhuh. And in a real market some things become more desirable than others and increase more than others. Inflation isn't uniform.
Now some employers might try to get an advantage by not requiring RFID in this situation, but it wouldn't be much of an advantage for employees: what they would do is offer lower salaries, compensated by no RFID implant. Thus employees get screwed either way.
I think you need to ask yourself why we aren't already barcoded. Apparently the politicians have only just discovered that it's legal to demand this kind of marking.
Re:Where do the libertarians stand? (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with implanted RFID is that most people underestimate their future costs as a result of an employer implanting the chip. It costs considerably more to remove an RFID, in money and personal risk, and the employer makes no provision to pay for this. Over a lifetime of jobs, once all employers require RFIDs, how many of these chips will need to be implanted? Assume that every time you change employers or even locations for the same employer you'll need new chip implanted. Every time a system is cracked (your individual chip or the outdated technology of the original chip) you'll need another chip implanted. If your company is bought by another company, implant a new chip. Technology changes constantly and employment terms for one entity are becoming increasingly shorter than in the past. Once employers do it, everyone else will want a chip under your skin for credit cards, or even customer memberships. You may have, literally, hundreds of opportunities to be re-chipped. How many chips can you realistically implant in your arm? Will you be forced to remove some of them because they compete with other technology? (The RFID used for toll booths in Maryland and Delaware are incompatible so I have to put one in the glove box to pass through the other because their systems interfere and cannot read their own ID if the other ID is also present.)
How many of these concerns do you think a person who is asked to install a chip has actually considered before they get implanted? The long term issues of chipping and the future costs which will be borne by the person being chipped and they are woefully uninformed. This lack of information availability is exactly what allows larger players in a market to abuse the smaller players. When a company knows the dangers but the employees or customers do not, they can shift future costs to them because they lack this information. The market is notoriously bad at affixing future costs to those who caused the problem (from cancer risks of smoking to pollution of locales to bad economic decisions.)
Re: (Score:2)
Religious objection: (Score:5, Funny)
Dear Roxanne Goebbels (Score:4, Interesting)
Please, be advised that although the Arabic number system had been in use for centuries without significant bugs or security compromises, the abuse of the Arabic number system in the form of tattooing Arabic numbers onto the wrists of European Jews became problematic.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the bill (Score:4, Informative)
SB 362 [ca.gov]. "A person shall not require, coerce, or compel any other individual to undergo the subcutaneous implanting of an identification device."
Re: (Score:2)
Why... (Score:5, Insightful)
I've never been to California, and I know that it's not perfect, but a good portion of their newer laws make a ton of sense, and should probably be implemented nationwide.
What's sad is that when a government body passes a law that is good for it's people, it's news.
Aero
Re: (Score:2)
As a Californian, I can acknowledge some deficiencies that my state can exhibit. But I'm very proud to be a Californian. This is another example of why this is so.
California has led the United States for at least the last 50 years. It's the single largest exporter of culture worldwide. It's huge on manufacturing, agriculture, aerospace, i
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Southern California is... err mixed if you want to all it that.
The boon of having the would-be-hippies around is that their inherent suspicion of government helps to limit its power over the worker. The bane is th
Actually, California Dragged Their Feet... (Score:3, Informative)
Tech isn't the issue (Score:2)
and when you change jobs... (Score:2)
RFID rsucks (Score:2)
Sounds crazy? In Australia kids doing advertising letter box drops (for below minimum wage*) have been fitted with GPS tracking devices, and the privatized Telstra teleco tracks employees time spent in the toilet or making coffee. RFID is the sort of thing these employers would love. Nice to see Government (well, at least one person in Government) being pro-active, as
Re:RFID rsucks (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, I found that part of it refreshingly honest. What she's saying is tantamount to something like this:
The nice thing about that is that it means their opinion on any subject can be dismissed out of hand. It's like a binary signal that's always set to one; it carries no data. We already know what they're going to say, whatever the question ("RFID tags are GOOD!") and we know why ("because it make us MONEY!").
It's just rare to see one of these industry pressure groups quite so willing to disqualify themselves from the debate.
Its not RFID... (Score:3, Insightful)
This is another case of an industry group going crazy to protect what they perceive to be their interests, when in fact its no challenge to the technology at all, its a challenge to having an employer being able to modify your body.
Require? Force? Oh no, c'mon, who would? (Score:5, Insightful)
Pure coincidence, of course.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A company can't just coincidentally fire all the non RFID employees first - this is discrimination and there have been MANY successful lawsuits against such practices.
What's more frightening (Score:4, Insightful)
It's dangerous (Score:2)
not a single instance of harm? (Score:2, Interesting)
"...We've not seen a single showing of ID theft or harm"
From Wikipedia:
In 1948 Léon Theremin invented an espionage tool for the Soviet Union which retransmitted incident radio waves with audio information. Sound waves vibrated a diaphragm which slightly altered the shape of the resonator, which modulated the reflected radio frequency. Even though this device was a passive covert listening device, not an identification tag, it has been attributed as the first known device and a predecessor to RFID technology.
The next major event in RFID history is in 1973, so either she's an idiot for claiming fifty years of no harm or she's a communist (insert 'in soviet russia' joke here).
Re: (Score:2)
Why implantation? (Score:2)
Doesn't matter ... (Score:2, Interesting)
... if laws such as this are passed.
Market forces and government requirements will take care of ensuring RFID chips become implanted.
The financial benefits and incentives of voluntarily getting chipped will far outweigh not being chipped.
I'm reminded of a speech [iwar.org.uk] given by Michael Chertoff about the role the private sector can play in traveller screening:
yeah, daemons and stuff (Score:2)
Please, can we round up and shoot all the PR and marketing freaks who wage war on our minds using language as their weapon?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The problem isn't "identity theft". It's freedom. (Score:2)
Not too long ago (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good for child molesters (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a bad idea for the same reason that it's a bad idea to be chipping our own citizens:
What happens when people who weren't intended to be reading these chips start using them to track and find the chipped?
Aero
Re: (Score:2)
Well, in the case of "troops on the combat field", those trying to operating the high-powered RFID readers, throwing off EMI in every direction for hundreds of miles, have a very short life expectancy.
It doesn't work like you think (Score:2)
Well, there are active ones too, but you wouldn't want to operate that guy every year to change the batteries.
This limits range drastically, since both EM fields power is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. Basically, if you wanted to scan from a mile away to see
Re: (Score:2)
How soon before arms dealers will be offering an "enemy soldier finder"? Either as a handheld unit or built into weapons systems (e.g. to help target artillary.)
Re:I don't remember exactly how this goes (Score:4, Insightful)