The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Poll

Do computer chip implants and the internet, give others too much power over us?

Yes, the internet, the hi-tech chip implant gives the government and others too much power.
2 (100%)
Yes it gives them a lot of power, but it can be corrected or reversed if things go wrong.
0 (0%)
I don't care what happens as long as I can enjoy my time.
0 (0%)
No it gives them power, but we can fully trust the government and the public servants.
0 (0%)
No, the public need to be controlled, and the senate represents a higher level of intellect and morals, they can tally the costs, erring but better.
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 2

Voting closed: 26/06/2014 12:33:36

Author Topic: Too much power over individuals and the masses due to the net and chip implants?  (Read 4640 times)

Offline Europan Ocean

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Good day, if we look at the injectable chip implant possibility, that can carry tracking capabilities, medical data and replace hard currency, and even more as technology increases! If we look at smart phones getting smaller and more powerful and far reaching. And if we look at the surveillance industry, governmental and private enterprise and iris and face surveillance, and internet surveillance of data flow, and the South Korean ubiquitous society experiment, and the primitive computers in Germany between 1934 and 1944, and how effective they were, and how the government monitored it's citizens in the Former Soviet Union, and in the current North Korea and China, and consider the extreme reaction to 911, and the police demands for more power, and possible pro-actions to terrorism, does the injectable chip and the internet together give a few in the government and public service and to a lesser extent hackers, too much power?

Thinking of the government and public service with the power to cancel anyone's bank account. Leaving a citizen or group bartering and collecting vegetables. Closing one's communications. Possible changes to the constitution enforced this way. The Possibility of several "Indecent Proposal" situations of bullying to pretty young women. Could this give too much power to a few to pressure individuals, groups or entire masses?

Considering easier solutions to terrorism and tracking dangerous or obnoxious criminals, at least them to begin with at first. Considering conscription to the military. Or pressing people to religion or to be clear of religion. If a new election is postponed for months and months. Could this be a good or a bad thing? Or something to be considered with a view to ironing out faults in the system?

I have the sci-fi like idea of a chip that can cause cardiac arrest or unconsciousness, cause pain, pleasure, act as a phone and be a total replacement to hard currency internationally, securing people from theft and tax evasion and terrorism and or sex crimes, for quick arrest...

I consider the benefits don't out weigh the losses, but grips the attention of private enterprise for a solution or twenty, until it sells. But once they have a grip, free upgrades may be obnoxious and unacceptable but compulsory.

What do the scientists think?

« Last Edit: 06/11/2013 02:16:04 by Europan Ocean »


 

Offline SimpleEngineer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
What power would someone reading a chip in my head gain?.. the knowledge of how many times I go to the toilet a day?

The big brother theory has gotten way out of control and is based off a simple paranoid fantasy.. spying on me would be like spying on custard.. totally boring and completely unrewarding.. and them knowing what I had for brreakfast, would give them no power over me at all
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4695
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Knowledge is an excuse, if not power. Suppose you use the toilet 10 times a day and the government says the norm is 9. You are labelled as a deviant, possible extremist.

Right now you can kill a child when driving at 29 mph but if nobody sees you, you get away with it. But if you drive safely at 31 mph past a "safety camera" you will have to pay a fine. Deviation is not tolerated in the surveillance society, and common sense is no defence.

It all comes down to the purpose of government. In the bad old days of English law the state existed to serve the citizen by prohibiting behaviour that offended the citizen. Nowadays, under European law, the citizen exists to serve the state so you are prohibited from offending the state by challenging authority.
 

Offline distimpson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 118
    • View Profile
    • Kansas Meteorite Museum & Nature Center
For a while I was in favor of an implantable device to store medical history, you go to the doctor anywhere and they have your complete medical record, if you are conscious or not, maybe your real time ekg for the last few days. Now, given agencies like the NSA of the USA and their efforts to crack and hack any and every system, I'm not so sure. How could this be used against you? I don't know, but over the years I've been surprised at what people will come up with to manipulate just about anything.

I don't hate humanity so not a misanthrope, but I am disheartened so maybe a disanthrope (a new word I just made up)

(Misanthropy is the general hatred, distrust or disdain of the human species or human nature.)
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8122
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
For a while I was in favor of an implantable device to store medical history, you go to the doctor anywhere and they have your complete medical record ...

In the UK the plan is to have everyone's medical record on a database , access to this info is available for a price  ...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2396362/Your-confidential-medical-records-sale--just-1-Hunt-insists-plan-sell-details-private-firms-vital-combat-epidemics--critics-fear-unprecedented-privacy-threat.html
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
There certainly would be advantages of having an implant with one's credit card, drivers license, passport, medical history, library card, electronic car keys, electronic house keys, electronic vehicle ignition, computer password/decryption, whatever.

Never loose your wallet again.  Never have a stolen credit card again.  No need to carry a wallet or purse.  No John Does.  Immediate medical history available in case of an accident, etc.

The question is whether we will move closer towards a police state, or towards greater individual freedom. 

I don't see why it has to be a great negative.  But, there needs to be greater regulation. 

Do people really like traffic cams that ticket them for safely crossing an intersection on a "stale yellow"?  Speed Traps?  Illegal searches, etc?

As it is, with a search warrant, the police can view visa spending patterns, real-time credit card usage, and are building better and better video monitoring and facial recognition systems.

I believe most of my medical records have been lost or misplaced over time.  The only primary care physician that I could call "my doctor" is either retired, or deceased.  Dental records have been scattered around the country.  In my case, it probably doesn't make that much difference.  Just treat the condition at hand.  But, I did have a chest X-Ray a decade ago, which might be good for comparison if another is needed in the future.

And, where did I put that passport????

In a sense, this may all be a moot point, once more camera nets are put in place.
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2013/07/aclu_police_camera_network.html
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/08/08/new-york-police-launch-high-tech-camera-surveillance-system/

And, consider these as the early release prototype systems.
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8122
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
There certainly would be advantages of having an implant with one's credit card, drivers license, passport, medical history, library card, electronic car keys, electronic house keys, electronic vehicle ignition, computer password/decryption, whatever.

Or for keeping track of Granny ... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10029205/GPS-tags-for-dementia-patients.html  ?
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
GPS..
Perhaps for Alzheimer's patients.  Of course, they've been doing that with teenagers and cell phones for quite some time.

I assume most implantable devices would be passive, requiring a nearby scanner.  Although, I could imagine a wireless recharger for an implanted GPS.  Run the antenna wires up to the skull   ???
 

Offline SimpleEngineer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Knowledge is an excuse, if not power. Suppose you use the toilet 10 times a day and the government says the norm is 9. You are labelled as a deviant, possible extremist.

Right now you can kill a child when driving at 29 mph but if nobody sees you, you get away with it. But if you drive safely at 31 mph past a "safety camera" you will have to pay a fine. Deviation is not tolerated in the surveillance society, and common sense is no defence.

It all comes down to the purpose of government. In the bad old days of English law the state existed to serve the citizen by prohibiting behaviour that offended the citizen. Nowadays, under European law, the citizen exists to serve the state so you are prohibited from offending the state by challenging authority.

But then you have ot think about what deviations are worth the effort of the governement to take action upon.. even for a small country like the UK, there is 60 million people. because of the 'law' of statistics half of them will perform above the norm and half of them would be below the norm.

The deviations that would require action would be to eliminate the perperators of anti social behaviour (and no i dont mean playing music at loud volume or speeding) but those that actively break laws that are there to protect others..

I personally feel that under current government systems, over the top surveillance would lead to situations that counter freedom of conscience, however when the revolution comes.. and a technocratic society is formed where the possibilities of technology allow true democracy to control governments, there would be no such limitations to the application of complete surveillance.

If I went to the toilet above the norm, I could be automatically booked in for a doctors appointment (with option to comment ,maybe I just had a very hot curry) and potential health concerns could be spotted immediately.

It is sometimes worth seeing how the positive applications of surveillance could be used rather than worry that maybe the government will tell the toilet paper manufacturers of my toilet habits to get them to advertise to me more. 
 

Offline Europan Ocean

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
If we look at the two systems, China, North Korea and Vietnam... chips could be used to find worshippers, and round them up for execution, which is currently law over there. Christians are on death row in China.

The Nazis used non electronic computers and were so efficient at rounding up Jews, gypsies, mentally ill!

In our free countries, it was not so long ago that business men would threaten to fire working girls unless they spent time with the boss for the obnoxious romance. It is possible a working girl could find extra points on her chip and be warned of the loss of much more if she does not show up for the obnoxious romance.

As it goes, we can be fined by a judge's ruling. How much easier if you money is all points on a chip! Sure you could still do a private ballot. But it is not if you go to the toilet too much. It is church, or a political event, or a brothel, or book a flight, or travel to a rival business office, or they monitor how much you earn... they can out rule a payment, so must stay put. It reminds me of school, and my schooling system let me down. I remember students misbehaving so badly that the teachers could not control them. And the system was too slow or inadequate to stop serious bad behaviour and sometimes the teachers said they just wanted to do their jobs and no more, and didn't care. Problem students went hardly checked for years and graduated so.

I wish I could have changed schools or been home schooled. Imagine you can't leave or you have no where to go that is unmonitored?

You could be expected to have one child or allow a eugenics program choose who fertilizes your wife. And be chosen to donate cells.  Or be expected to move such as to Israel or refrain from marriage, to a priesthood or social services, or be neutered. The latter is something I heard of happening to gypsies in Slovakia.

From the Christian book of Revelation, either you worship a given concept, acknowledge the government strictly, or you cannot buy or sell. Only option then is bartering with other non conformers or gathering wild vegetables or stealing, and living off road kill... For Christians that could mean a concept that directly blames the old system and mocks it. So the concept is a flying spaghetti monster who espouses physics and mocks traditions. Or Satanism or something ancient. Somehow irreversible.

How could a chip and the net help true democracy?

True democracy does not crush the will of the minority.

In Germany unemployed house wives were expected to take any job available or lose their government benefits, this meant that when the only job available was in a brothel, the public servants had to act on their discretion not to press them into the sex industry. I might add at Australia's government college, I was advised by a student counsellor, that prostitution was not such a bad thing, to have to be... it was bad.

I think the crux for me is whoever is in power can empty your bank account unless...


« Last Edit: 06/11/2013 13:00:55 by Europan Ocean »
 

Offline SimpleEngineer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile

True democracy does not crush the will of the minority.


'True' democracy is... Majority rules... If the Majority decide to crush the wills of the minority.. would this not be a valid use of democracy? That is where the system breaks down.. as has been seen throughout human history. The power is either held by the minority or the majority and both are equally terrible.

When the minority take actions and decisions over the majority we are little better off than a dictatorship.

When the majority takes actions and decisions over the minority we are in a democracy.

Chips in heads would make finding out who the minority is.. but the system should prevent this information being used in a negative fashion.. mistrust of the system is what makes this unpalatable. 
 

Offline Europan Ocean

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Real democracy is not about the majority crushing others. Perhaps one could liken it to four lanes east, one lane west. We are thirty percent left wing, thirty right, thirty centre, ten percent socialist...

Five percent of people are enough to have a senator represent them. The government I hope keeps us from collisions, managing disagreements. That must be something good they do, that has gone unnoticed. The managing the difference between miners and greens...

The minority does not presently rule.

It's amazing, the conscienced people previously voted in a psychopath. The latter and other such are a minority to avoid.

It's a matter of the senators, keeping in touch with the public. Or they get voted out of office.
 

Offline SimpleEngineer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
I dont know how it works in the US.. do you have more than 1 representative from each party standing?

Here in the UK we have many parties yet, 1 from each party stands for each one (typically).. The person selected by the party to stand for that seat may or may not be suitable for the constituents, but if the majority there always voted 1 party.. it is irrelevant who stands for the party as they will get elected. And in the end the elected representative pays more attention to the party manifesto that they do for their local constituents.. (which so far has been beneficial because most people are stupid and stand in the way of progress)

Yet the parties listen to the vocal minority, which brings in a good balance as they will do what they can for the majority to retain votes, yet show that they are pandering to the minority.

Lets consider 2 parties.. if one party gained absolute majority, it could make a law to ban the other party.. the law would be passed because the majority votes pass it. reelection is then pointless as the other party is illegal (Zimbabwe anyone?)

We are lucky to have formed governments that act how they do. There is a barrier between the majority and the power, the people dont really have power in our countries, but we do have a voice.. actions such as the Edwin Snowden case, are examples where the government does things for the best interest for their country and have to hide it from the country as it is not 100% fair or democratic.

Surveillance would fall under this, its not fair or just that they should be able to monitor us constantly, but its for our best interests.. all the complaining against it remind me of the teenager kicking out because its parents have forbid them to hang out with criminals.
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
I dont know how it works in the US.. do you have more than 1 representative from each party standing?
The USA has a system that has generated a mostly 2 party system.

Votes are on a winner take all basis. 

So, say there were 2 large parties, and one small party, say with 10% of the vote, 44%, and 46%. 
The party with 10% of the vote gets nothing.
And, the parties that are close duke it out in the various states.  Everyone complains that the people voting for the minority party are wasting their votes, and should be voting for the majority party.

Senators and Representatives are voted on as individuals to represent specific seats.  So, for example, Oregon has 2 senate seats voted on by the whole state, and 5 house seats divided into local districts. 

So, in the next election in 2014, I will have the opportunity to vote on Oregon's 4th district congressional representative, and one of the two senators (the other will be up for reelection later).  It will mean choosing a single individual to fill the seats.  The next presidential election will be in 2016, so the congressional makeup may change before then.

Now, once the elected individuals get to congress, they've figured out that in many cases, it is beneficial to vote along "party lines".  So, it is not uncommon to see 100% of the Republicans voting one way, and 100% of the democrats voting another way. 

If the house, senate, and president all fall in the same party, then there is a chance that congress can enact legislation in a timely fashion.  However, if the house and senate have different majorities, then one ends up with a mess, and if the president falls in a different party than the congressional majorities, he can veto any legislation that gets to his desk.

It is exceptionally rare that an elected official gets ousted mid-term, and it is always just individuals, not everyone.
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
One thinks of Democracy as majority rule.  But, in a good nation, the government will choose what is best for the whole country, rather than what is best for half of the individuals. 

We haven't had any attempts to outlaw a political party. 

However, every decade, we have a census.  Based on population shifts, congressional districts are redrawn.  There is a process called gerrymandering in which the party with the most current power redraws the district lines to benefit their party.  I.E. creating districts designed to hold themselves in power.
 

Offline SimpleEngineer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Just 1 example... The National Socialism party.. (is a banned political party in many countries)..
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4695
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Quote
Here in the UK we have many parties

And there's the root of the problem. Political parties have no constitutional status in the UK. We vote under the Representation of the People Act for a constituency representative, not a party. The job of the monarch is to nominate the person most able to command a majority vote from whatever collection of constituency representatives we choose to elect. Clearly both that task and the task of the prime minister are made easier if all MPs are slaves of a few parties, but if we elected 630 independents each sworn to represent the interests of his constituency rather than a party line, the task of national government would still be feasible and the outcome would be a lot more sensible.   

Back to the main subject. There's an old story about Eisenhower complaining to Kruschev that the USSR was antisemitic. "Nonsense" says K. "30% of our scientists, 40% of our musicians, 25% of our poets and 33% of our doctors are Jews. What are the comparable statistics in the USA?"  To which Eisenhower replies "The constitution forbids the president from counting Jews".
« Last Edit: 08/11/2013 09:45:05 by alancalverd »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums