[& p.s. since HN doesn't like single word replies]
They are normalizing mechanisms of maximal control. Just like the perp walk of innocents in airports. Chipping is what we do to cattle. And of course, a simple hospital style bracelet would afford a substantially larger surface area for embedding of technology.
I doubt the companies care that much about convenience. What they're probably thinking is "oh, it's like a badge nobody can steal!" Which is wrong. The stealing is just a lot more painful.
I am not religious, but I got enough religious programming in Sunday school that this scares the shiznitz out of me. When this embedded human chip becomes a requirement, I'm moving to an underground bunker
Revelations 13:16: And the second beast required all people small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their forehead,
17: so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark—the name of the beast or the number of its name.…
Why do you think you aren't living in a modern Rome anyway? Revelations is (if you think Preterism[0] is a valid interpretation, which I tend to do) a survival manual for how to not get stomped down by the roman empire. The "mark of the beast", then, is basically a tax stamp and a document that proves you've made the correct sacrifices: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_the_Beast#Nero .
The problem with fast-forwarding these concerns into the present day is that, in general, "we" are the ones _issuing_ those stamps, not the ones upon whom they're forced.
I am not cynical, but I got enough rational programming in life to know that quasi-literate Roman demagogues had no idea what a microchip is, and were more worried about the threatening excesses of Nero than the bumptuous innovations of slightly more literate entrepreneurs whom, two thousand years later, history will regard as even less notable blips on the western cultural radar
There is a conspiracy theory that barcodes on products are marks of the beast because every single barcode allegedly contains the number 666. This claim is based on the barcodes’ guard bars and how to interpret their meaning. See http://www.av1611.org/666/barcode.html for an explanation.
Believing that the Book of Revelations has some sort of prophetic insight and that warnings about the Mark of the Beast or the Antichrist have any relevance at all does mean you must be religious.
What is the relevance, in this case? The only purpose for that section in Revelations is to warn believers about the Antichrist. There is no moral lesson there, no parable or psalm or tractable humanist lesson - it's just vague symbolism (which probably referred to Nero or the Roman Empire) that leads nowhere, unless you believe in Christian end-times prophecy.
When they get you in at an early age, the fear and paranoia they teach you can make deeper roots into the psyche. I don't claim it's a rational fear. I don't claim to be 100% rational either.
Does it really matter? For example, the books he laid out as exaple were probably edited multiple times before release. And most books written by foreign authors are translated and adapted to the language you are reading them in.
Most translations of the bible try to keep as close to the source as possible and manage to do so. And if you imply som morphing of the bible that happened during its existance, there is historical evidence that seems to prove that it remained quite constant.
I see diyseguy post quite interesting, in that he is aware of the priming that still is in his mind and the way that it influences his thinking. I see him not more excessive importance to the bible than many of the people that quote from works of fiction on HN.
This is as dumb as QR codes. Obviously there will be better ways to identify people for access control in the future. For example, face recognition is plummeting in cost. Systems should adapt to humans, not vice versa. This will be obsolete and the users will feel dumb for having gone through it.
And at what point is a well meaning company going to do this and have someone object on religious grounds (due to other comments in this discussion?). Then they'll be fired, and sue due to not wanting the mark of the beast.
This has all the trappings of a great popcorn worthy story.
>“On the other hand, I mean, people have been implanting things into their body, like pacemakers and stuff to control your heart,” he said. “That's a way, way more serious thing than having a small chip that can actually communicate with devices.”
People don't get pacemakers for fun. They get pacemakers because they're medical devices that ensure their hearts beat properly.
No, I think he means that putting something into the chest cavity is much more invasive than a rice-sized subdermal chip in your hand.
The point of that quote is to say that putting something unnecessary into your body is a big step, but that it's also a much smaller risk while still providing something interesting.
I can log into my Windows device just by looking at it. Surely there are less intrusive ways of authenticating a person before we start embedding technology.
It would be interesting if such a device had to be enabled for reading by, say, touching the tips of your thumb and finger together (like an "OK" gesture) so you had control over who could read it and when.
- Health complications, however rare [1], could arise from this.
- It sounds like microchips bond with your tissue. The implictations for removal should be obvious.
- They'll almost certainly need replacing, either due to failure or the technology becoming redundant.
- Far from being cool, early adopters are normalising the idea that employers can tag employees. I'm not OK with this.
That's even discounting the privacy issues:
- People you don't know will be able to scan you for a unique ID, without your consent.
- People will do so.
- Startups will emerge getting licensing deals to put NFC readers in public places and sell the data. And so on and so forth.
These things accomplish less than you can do with a phone. Which most of us never leave home without anyway. Or face recognition, or ID cards, or a pin attached to your coat/shoes.
I just read a NYT article that some breast implants were linked to causing cancer. So, while I appreciate your analysis of what the expected biological response is, there is still room for things to go wrong too, in ways we never foresaw - or simply neglected.
But yes, the privacy and precedent implications of this will far outweigh the medical ones.
The cancer you're talking about, Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), generally resolves with removal of the implants, though it's a new entity, so we're certainly still learning about it. The odds that breast implants are unique in causing this peculiar biological response seems low, from a basic science perspective.
I thought about mentioning it in my original comment, but it's so rare that it seemed somewhat sensationalist to even bring it up.
> The odds that breast implants are unique in causing this peculiar biological response seems low, from a basic science perspective.
which is why i mentioned it!
> but it's so rare that it seemed somewhat sensationalist to even bring it up.
fair enough. although there can be a sensationalist reaction to the news as well. I believe only 9 cases were found? I find it's worthwhile for my own expectations of reality, to respect that nothing is a sure thing, and that much comes with a big asterisk next to it.
- Complicated by changes in features and environment.
- Unique IDs are something you ascribe to faces, not something they hand to you on a plate.
- Sophisticated analysis needed.
Example: even Baidu uses custom tricks for their facial recognition office ID with a known database of mugshots. I.e. not an unknown number of people in various conditions.
RFID:
- AFAIK can read many tags at once.
- No need for line of sight.
- Tags hand over a (likely) unique ID on demand
- No need for deep learning experts at $100k>
Seems to me microchips would be far easier to achieve creepy levels of tracking with.
calling it "shit" that needs to be "normalized" without any basis for this claim whatsoever sorta makes it seem like the dystopianism is within you, and not in the thing itself, huh?
My value judgments are my own, yes. That's obvious (another value judgment). I'm not making any claim except that employees willingly submitting to having tracking devices implanted by their employer gives me the creeps. The potential for evil is just too great for me to want this to become mainstream.
Does it use active RFID, or passive? If the former, when does the battery die? If the latter, is it possible for someone to burn you from inside by emitting the right microwave frequency with enough power?
Not sure but it sits right under some thin skin so if they have a powerful enough microwave beam on that location it'd probably burn me equally from both sides.
My friend owned a piercing shop and put one in himself which he used with his front door lock (plus a pass code).I was interested in RFID so I asked him to give me one.
No maintenance. I don't even use it anymore so not sure it still works tbh. Another friend of mine had hers removed it wasn't a big deal her GP did it.
Implant procedure at the time was a large needle through a pinched flap of skin then another tool which held the chip (it looks like a grain of rice) is pushed into the hole. The person then pushed it around through the skin to position it and you get a bandaid.
In pets, the chips are just injected straight out of a large diameter needle into an area with loose skin (e.g. neck scruff). Millions and millions of pets have them.
Mine was never secure it just broadcasts an ID there is no key signing or anything.
My friend had hers removed after closer to five years. GP used a scalpel to make a small cut and pulled it out. The process seems to be the same for women who get Implanon.
I don't think this should be made illegal. If you can get an implant to make your job easier -- hmmm, maybe? However, making this a condition of employment should definitely be illegal. This crosses a significant line from non-invasive drug testing to invasive surgery.
But then... What happens when performance is used to determine hiring and firing and you can't perform as well without an implant.
I understand these are currently just for ID purposes (easy password). But these NFC chips already have a certain amount of storage. What happens when that storage is used to store context information that improves 3-5 operations rather than just login?
Every single one of the privacy concerns listed are exactly the same as for an ID badge. No one is up in arms about ID badges. If I worked somewhere where they said "you either have to carry your ID badge with you everywhere on campus, or you can get this implant", I'd get the implant. If they offered a ring instead I'd get that though assuming it wasn't hideous.
The difference is you can choose when you wear your ID Badge / ring outside of work hours.
The potential to have your location outside of work hours (by having readers secreted in places) is an invasion of privacy. Most likely requires cooperation from the 'other venues' and I'm not sure what their value proposition would be, but my lack of imagination doesn't rule out the possibility of nefarious uses.
64 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 130 ms ] thread[& p.s. since HN doesn't like single word replies]
They are normalizing mechanisms of maximal control. Just like the perp walk of innocents in airports. Chipping is what we do to cattle. And of course, a simple hospital style bracelet would afford a substantially larger surface area for embedding of technology.
Revelations 13:16: And the second beast required all people small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, 17: so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark—the name of the beast or the number of its name.…
The problem with fast-forwarding these concerns into the present day is that, in general, "we" are the ones _issuing_ those stamps, not the ones upon whom they're forced.
[0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterism
You appear not to understand how "not being religious" works.
Just think about how often Franklin's "Liberty vs Safety" is quoted here and around the rest of the internet.
Or how often people like to compare the world to 1984 or Brave New World.
When quoting the bible you're not quoting from the direct source, but a translated and interpreted version.
When quoting Franklin it is actually his words.
Most translations of the bible try to keep as close to the source as possible and manage to do so. And if you imply som morphing of the bible that happened during its existance, there is historical evidence that seems to prove that it remained quite constant.
I see diyseguy post quite interesting, in that he is aware of the priming that still is in his mind and the way that it influences his thinking. I see him not more excessive importance to the bible than many of the people that quote from works of fiction on HN.
https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/14/how-the-world-butchered-be...
This has all the trappings of a great popcorn worthy story.
People don't get pacemakers for fun. They get pacemakers because they're medical devices that ensure their hearts beat properly.
The point of that quote is to say that putting something unnecessary into your body is a big step, but that it's also a much smaller risk while still providing something interesting.
- Health complications, however rare [1], could arise from this.
- It sounds like microchips bond with your tissue. The implictations for removal should be obvious.
- They'll almost certainly need replacing, either due to failure or the technology becoming redundant.
- Far from being cool, early adopters are normalising the idea that employers can tag employees. I'm not OK with this.
That's even discounting the privacy issues:
- People you don't know will be able to scan you for a unique ID, without your consent.
- People will do so.
- Startups will emerge getting licensing deals to put NFC readers in public places and sell the data. And so on and so forth.
These things accomplish less than you can do with a phone. Which most of us never leave home without anyway. Or face recognition, or ID cards, or a pin attached to your coat/shoes.
[1] https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/FAQs/Pages/Microchipping-o... . Suggests 1 in 10,000 rate of adverse events. Suggest Epicenter gets a good lawyer ;)
Eh, not really. They stimulate a foreign body reaction from macrophages, creating a synovium-like cyst around the object.
> The implications for removal should be obvious
You'll end up a granuloma (collection of macrophages), which may calcify or slowly resolve down to collagenous scar tissue.
So, I wouldn't lead with the biology, at least not when pitching your concerns to scientists. The privacy implications are pretty horrific though.
But yes, the privacy and precedent implications of this will far outweigh the medical ones.
I thought about mentioning it in my original comment, but it's so rare that it seemed somewhat sensationalist to even bring it up.
which is why i mentioned it!
> but it's so rare that it seemed somewhat sensationalist to even bring it up.
fair enough. although there can be a sensationalist reaction to the news as well. I believe only 9 cases were found? I find it's worthwhile for my own expectations of reality, to respect that nothing is a sure thing, and that much comes with a big asterisk next to it.
I agree with your overall tone, but can't this be done already with facial recognition?
- Need unobscured face (crowds).
- Complicated by changes in features and environment.
- Unique IDs are something you ascribe to faces, not something they hand to you on a plate.
- Sophisticated analysis needed.
Example: even Baidu uses custom tricks for their facial recognition office ID with a known database of mugshots. I.e. not an unknown number of people in various conditions.
RFID:
- AFAIK can read many tags at once.
- No need for line of sight.
- Tags hand over a (likely) unique ID on demand
- No need for deep learning experts at $100k>
Seems to me microchips would be far easier to achieve creepy levels of tracking with.
Please do not normalize this shit and drag the rest of us down into your dystopian horror film with you.
Not sure but it sits right under some thin skin so if they have a powerful enough microwave beam on that location it'd probably burn me equally from both sides.
I guess this is always the case. No need for chips.
No maintenance. I don't even use it anymore so not sure it still works tbh. Another friend of mine had hers removed it wasn't a big deal her GP did it.
Implant procedure at the time was a large needle through a pinched flap of skin then another tool which held the chip (it looks like a grain of rice) is pushed into the hole. The person then pushed it around through the skin to position it and you get a bandaid.
I know friends who have had implant birth control just had the needle.
Do you know which chip you have in?
I saw the related Mythbusters episode and they mention it not easy to remove the chip after some years.
My friend had hers removed after closer to five years. GP used a scalpel to make a small cut and pulled it out. The process seems to be the same for women who get Implanon.
But then... What happens when performance is used to determine hiring and firing and you can't perform as well without an implant.
I understand these are currently just for ID purposes (easy password). But these NFC chips already have a certain amount of storage. What happens when that storage is used to store context information that improves 3-5 operations rather than just login?
Invasive idiocy.