|
Post by goz on Feb 19, 2018 2:07:02 GMT
There has been some discussion on this board about micro chips and implantations, surveillance and perceived invasions of personal privacy and security.
I am going to play the Devil's Advocate for a moment here and ask people why they fear this, what is the intrinsic harm, what could be the consequences of that perceived harm and how we can stop it.
For my part, as a regular kind of law abiding citizen who has already come under some of this type of surveillance because I have a mobile phone, a computer an internet server, a credit card and I walk into public places such as malls, use the roads and have a car with an identifiable number plate etc..... In some ways don't these things protect me?I am innocent of wrongdoing, what harm is there? What can happen to me?
Can someone tell me what the 'intrinsic' harm is, if you are a law abiding citizen?
Wouldn't it be only criminals with something to hide that is seriously at risk of 'discovery', and isn't that good?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Feb 19, 2018 2:22:56 GMT
I don;t like people knowing I'm doing the right thing.
There's no reason for everyone to be canvassed just to catch a select few of the bad guys who are often smart enough to evade detection anyway.
That said, I don't care at all about surveillance in public places.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 19, 2018 2:29:08 GMT
I don;t like people knowing I'm doing the right thing. There's no reason for everyone to be canvassed just to catch a select few of the bad guys who are often smart enough to evade detection anyway. That said, I don't care at all about surveillance in public places. LOL that is too cute for a Christian...in fact anyone!
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 19, 2018 2:30:08 GMT
goz, are you aware that if a microchip is implanted in someone, it has to be individually programmed for that person?
Well, if can be programmed once, it can be programmed again, and without the permission of the person who is implanted. That's the intrinsic harm.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 19, 2018 2:38:47 GMT
goz, are you aware that if a microchip is implanted in someone, it has to be individually programmed for that person? Well, if can be programmed once, it can be programmed again, and without the permission of the person who is implanted. That's the intrinsic harm. So you think that 'consent' is the main issue? From the way you portray this problem, it could be readily fixed with the installation of a personal reader to vet the information on your chip...no?
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 19, 2018 2:44:25 GMT
goz, are you aware that if a microchip is implanted in someone, it has to be individually programmed for that person? Well, if can be programmed once, it can be programmed again, and without the permission of the person who is implanted. That's the intrinsic harm. So you think that 'consent' is the main issue? From the way you portray this problem, it could be readily fixed with the installation of a personal reader to vet the information on your chip...no? I don't know, and I'm not ever going to find out. I also don't have a smart phone, and I'm not ever going to get one. It's against my religion.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 19, 2018 2:48:44 GMT
I don;t like people knowing I'm doing the right thing. There's no reason for everyone to be canvassed just to catch a select few of the bad guys who are often smart enough to evade detection anyway. That said, I don't care at all about surveillance in public places. LOL that is too cute for a Christian...in fact anyone! You start these threads, and then you make fun of people when they take the time to reply on them. Bit of a sadist, aren't you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2018 2:49:40 GMT
There has been some discussion on this board about micro chips and implantations, surveillance and perceived invasions of personal privacy and security. I am going to play the Devil's Advocate for a moment here and ask people why they fear this, what is the intrinsic harm, what could be the consequences of that perceived harm and how we can stop it. Good luck with that. I asked and the only answer seems to be that we might wind up in a dystopian future where such things can't be removed. There really isn't any intrinsic harm. As you point out, these chips do nothing that your phone doesn't do - in fact right now they do an awful lot less. The only inherent difference is that they're a centimetre inside you rather than a centimetre outside you, and thus a little bit harder to throw away. Except that almost nobody throws away their phone on a whim, either, so that difference really doesn't amount to a whole lot. Sounds good to me!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2018 2:51:56 GMT
goz, are you aware that if a microchip is implanted in someone, it has to be individually programmed for that person? Well, if can be programmed once, it can be programmed again Actually that's not necessarily true. There are plenty of chips that are one-time-only; they can be written to once, and then never again. If an implanted chip was an ID sort of deal, such a thing would be very likely to be used.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 19, 2018 2:53:24 GMT
So you think that 'consent' is the main issue? From the way you portray this problem, it could be readily fixed with the installation of a personal reader to vet the information on your chip...no? I don't know, and I'm not ever going to find out. I also don't have a smart phone, and I'm not ever going to get one. It's against my religion. Your know, Erjenious, sometimes you are almost kinda cute in your naivety. Yep, never change, and a 'smart' phone would add nothing to you life.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 19, 2018 2:57:05 GMT
LOL that is too cute for a Christian...in fact anyone! You start these threads, and then you make fun of people when they take the time to reply on them. Bit of a sadist, aren't you? No, Erjenious, life is suppose to be fun. Mine is.....mostly. I enjoy a good reposte and a good giggle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2018 2:58:12 GMT
I would call a computer virus intrinsic harm.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 19, 2018 2:58:22 GMT
I don't know, and I'm not ever going to find out. I also don't have a smart phone, and I'm not ever going to get one. It's against my religion. Your know, Erjenious, sometimes you are almost kinda cute in your naivety. Yep, never change, and a 'smart' phone would add nothing to you life. Okay. I've made it this far without a smart phone. I reckon I can make it the rest of the way without a smart phone.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 19, 2018 3:00:33 GMT
There could be concerns that the government might not keep the information secure and have it be leaked to hackers/identity thieves. Yes, true, though IMHO we are at greater risk from commercial enterprises who get our information than the government selling it. Government tend to have better encryption legislatively ( at least where I live though Russians/Chines tec hacking shit is always on the cards) I try my best with online purchases etc to use a third party enterprise rather than use my credit cards numbers butt we are all at the mercy of technology.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 19, 2018 3:01:57 GMT
goz, are you aware that if a microchip is implanted in someone, it has to be individually programmed for that person? Well, if can be programmed once, it can be programmed again Actually that's not necessarily true. There are plenty of chips that are one-time-only; they can be written to once, and then never again. If an implanted chip was an ID sort of deal, such a thing would be very likely to be used. I very much doubt that the implanted chips that are in use now are one-time-only. In my thread about the RFID, one of the men who helped design it said that a bar code tattoo was considered but rejected because it was not updatable, whereas the chip is updatable.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 19, 2018 3:02:12 GMT
I would call a computer virus intrinsic harm. VERY true, good point and most of us pay companies with up to date technologies to avoid this though we are in the hands of the technology ourselves.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Feb 19, 2018 3:22:51 GMT
There has been some discussion on this board about micro chips and implantations, surveillance and perceived invasions of personal privacy and security. I am going to play the Devil's Advocate for a moment here and ask people why they fear this, what is the intrinsic harm, what could be the consequences of that perceived harm and how we can stop it. For my part, as a regular kind of law abiding citizen who has already come under some of this type of surveillance because I have a mobile phone, a computer an internet server, a credit card and I walk into public places such as malls, use the roads and have a car with an identifiable number plate etc..... In some ways don't these things protect me?I am innocent of wrongdoing, what harm is there? What can happen to me? Can someone tell me what the 'intrinsic' harm is, if you are a law abiding citizen? Wouldn't it be only criminals with something to hide that is seriously at risk of 'discovery', and isn't that good? All that information being collected is open to misuse. Also, there are legal things that people do that they might not want known about them. Would you be ok with cameras in your lounge, bedroom? Why not? If you arent doing anything illegal, what does that matter? Why should the box someone lives in be more private than in public?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 19, 2018 3:32:39 GMT
There has been some discussion on this board about micro chips and implantations, surveillance and perceived invasions of personal privacy and security. I am going to play the Devil's Advocate for a moment here and ask people why they fear this, what is the intrinsic harm, what could be the consequences of that perceived harm and how we can stop it. For my part, as a regular kind of law abiding citizen who has already come under some of this type of surveillance because I have a mobile phone, a computer an internet server, a credit card and I walk into public places such as malls, use the roads and have a car with an identifiable number plate etc..... In some ways don't these things protect me?I am innocent of wrongdoing, what harm is there? What can happen to me? Can someone tell me what the 'intrinsic' harm is, if you are a law abiding citizen? Wouldn't it be only criminals with something to hide that is seriously at risk of 'discovery', and isn't that good? All that information being collected is open to misuse. Also, there are legal things that people do that they might not want known about them. Would you be ok with cameras in your lounge, bedroom? Why not? If you arent doing anything illegal, what does that matter? Why should the box someone lives in be more private than in public? OK, I said I was going to be Devil's Advocate...so here goes. What legal things? You mean immoral such as cheating on partners etc etc? Other than that, we all poo and wee and have sex pick our noses and masturbate and do human stuff...some have fetishes etc etc...so what is so bad that it has to stay private?
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 19, 2018 3:54:37 GMT
All that information being collected is open to misuse. Also, there are legal things that people do that they might not want known about them. Would you be ok with cameras in your lounge, bedroom? Why not? If you arent doing anything illegal, what does that matter? Why should the box someone lives in be more private than in public? OK, I said I was going to be Devil's Advocate...so here goes. What legal things? You mean immoral such as cheating on partners etc etc? Other than that, we all poo and wee and have sex pick our noses and masturbate and do human stuff...some have fetishes etc etc...so what is so bad that it has to stay private? That's a hell of a question from someone who bragged about having a book published and then refused to tell us the title for fear that someone might find out your real name and infringe on your privacy. And, I'm still reeling with surprise that puvo finally said something I agree with.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Feb 19, 2018 3:59:40 GMT
So you think that 'consent' is the main issue? From the way you portray this problem, it could be readily fixed with the installation of a personal reader to vet the information on your chip...no? I also don't have a smart phone, and I'm not ever going to get one. It's against my religion. I don't have one either. It's also against my religion... the religion of "don't waste my money on things I don't need."
|
|