Slashdot Mirror


FDA Approves Implantable Microchips

phrontist writes: "Wired is running a story about the Federal Drug Administration ruling that an 'implantable microchip used for ID purposes is not a regulated device, paving the way for the chip's immediate sale in the United States.' Spooky."

197 of 318 comments (clear)

  1. If this doesn't qualify as The Mark of the Beast.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    How soon until this is mandatory? I've got plenty of room on my forehead now that I'm balding.

    Let loose the 7 years!

  2. and you thought the strips in $20 bills were bad by esoteric0 · · Score: 2, Funny

    now, not only can they see how much money you have, but they can see exactly who you are too.... scary (that's a joke, people).

    sounds like it's high time to start building some short range RF interference devices. oh wait, that would be a violation of the DMCA.

  3. duh. by tid242 · · Score: 1

    well duh if it were regulated it'd be harder for corporations to use in various $$$-making schemes.

    -tid242

    --

    With a few exceptions, secrecy is deeply incompatible with democracy and with science. --Carl Sagan

  4. Re:404? by Chicane-UK · · Score: 1

    I had the same thing briefly.. Squid gave me some weird (101) error or somthing.

    --
    "Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
  5. "Spooky" by Quirk · · Score: 3, Funny

    "...paving the way for the chip's immediate sale in the United States.' Spooky."


    That would be Spooky as in 'Spooky Muldur'

    --
    "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
    Cohen
  6. Can't Decide by squaretorus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wether it would be better to have this thing implanted in my little finger - so making it EASY to steal if anyone ever decides to steal my ID.

    OR. To implant it right deep in my guts as a deterent. Or maybe in the roof of my mouth!

    Wouldn't fancy losing my little finger - its handy when a little drunk for proclaiming my evilness. But I enjoy my mouth aswell...

    But hey - so long as I dont run for president or anything...

    1. Re:Can't Decide by jgarry · · Score: 1

      Well, if you have it implanted in your nose to thwart kidnapping, the kidnappers might...

      Cut off your nose to spite cyberspace.

      --
      Oracle and unix guy.
  7. Sign Me Up! by oliphaunt · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does this mean I don't have to get my mandatory patriotic tattoo?

    --




    Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
  8. Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If I had kids I'd seriously consider chipping them. I can think of many a time my little sister would pull a disapearing act and be gone for hours. Off with some new friend. This was at an age when she had no business being off alone, much less after dark. It would have saved everyone a lot of grief and the local cops no few hours if finding her just involved a simple querry to VeriChip.

  9. Potentially useful, though the legality will be in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Interesting, and potentially useful device, used in the right fashion, but I wonder how long it will take the overly litigious mood in the US to bring about legislation governing the circumstances under which these are to be implanted.
    It strikes me that certain bodies might like to have these implanted in the hospital when you're born, so that you may be IDed through your entire life.
    Is it feasible that government could prevent people from taking certain types of high-security job without first having one of these implants?

    On a more personal note, I think i woul be interesting to mandatorily implant these in every citizen, and use this as the first step towards ultimate accountability. I realise privacy advocates may find this a shocking and unpalatable notion (I too donate to EFF every year) but I think this could be a step in the right direction, provided that the first institutions to be fitted with reader devices are government departments. This would provide a unique method of ensuring accountability:Rather than the current governmental trend, where people who perform poorly or make grave an incompetent blunders are protected from public reaction by suppressing the detalis of the incident, we could have full, immediat public disclosure of all the particulars of any and every little indiscretion.

    This might be useful in reversing the embarassing (to anyone who knows) trend towards promotion of idiots with no chance of succeeding in the real world to positions where they can do maximum damage.

  10. Um headline error by cdf12345 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I believe that the FDA did not approve the implants, but rather decided that they are not medical and therefore not under the jurisdiction of the FDA. There's a big difference between being unregulated by the FDA and being approved by the FDA.

    Maybe a small update could clear things up.

    --
    Chicago2600.net more than a lifestyle, its a survival trait.
  11. Just call me a Luddite by Hostile17 · · Score: 2

    There is absolutly no way anyone is going to get me to put one of these things inside my body. This is a product which is ripe for abuse and I'm not having any of it. Hopefully no one will get the bright idea to make it mandatory, otherwise I will have to go live in the mountains of Montana.

    --
    Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power - Benito Mussoli
    1. Re:Just call me a Luddite by Saib0t · · Score: 2
      Hopefully no one will get the bright idea to make it mandatory, otherwise I will have to go live in the mountains of Montana.

      Or anywhere else in the world actually. There IS something outside of the US of A you know ;-)

      --

      One shall speak only if what one has to say is more beautiful than silence
    2. Re:Just call me a Luddite by Daimaou · · Score: 1

      Yes, there is something outside of the US, but it seems that whenever one country does something all the other ones can't seem to implement that thing fast enough.

    3. Re:Just call me a Luddite by Daimaou · · Score: 1

      What if they made it so you couldn't buy anything unless you had one of these things. Then it would be succumb or starve wouldn't it?

    4. Re:Just call me a Luddite by PeeOnYou2 · · Score: 1

      Which is what has been prophesized... the ones without the mark of the beast will be the ones who can't buy food, who can't do anything, who will be outcasts among the majority who will implant them...

      I'm not a religious freak, but this is just too uncanny.. I might have to go to church this weekend.. or at least get some Bible time in..

  12. How would this be used? by tuoppi · · Score: 1

    ID chips have been used with animals for a while already - it is rather handy way of registering pets, as they tend to be less verbal when they are asked where they live.

    With humans.. Well. The implanted ID chip that can be easily read without the carrier of chip knowing definately wouldn't be a solution to regocnition problems, fakes can be made as well as passports and ID cards can be faked.

    "Big brother" style monitoring could be one application, altough it would be really expensive to put in use - imagine the amount of monitoring terminals needed.
    It is far more convenient to get the monitored human to want to carry a unit with unique ID which is able to report its position and what the monitored human is saying. Motivation for carrying such unit could be, lets say, fashion or its benefits on making life easier.

    Really useful use could be to put the implant in if the carrier has a disease which must be taken in account in medical treatment - tattoos and jewellery do this task better though, as they don't require any fancy electronics to work.

  13. So who'll market one to hold your medical data? by jerde · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The concept here is that all ER technicians will have the simple scanning device that will pull important medical data off the chip.

    If you're unconscious, and the ER tech can just scan off you that you're diabetic and allergic to penicillin, that's a Good Thing.

    Of course, conspiracy theorists say that every time you have surgery, the Government is implanting these in us without our knolwedge, and using it to track us. Oooooh!

    Give me a break.

    - Peter

    --
    INsigNIFICANT
    1. Re:So who'll market one to hold your medical data? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      And how often do EMT's and hospital personnel check for MedicAlert bracelets? I assure you, it's way less than 100% of the time. What makes you think they'll check for the chip with any greater regularity?

    2. Re:So who'll market one to hold your medical data? by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 1

      Well, at some point they will put you in an ambulance. Imagine that an alarm bell (an monitor flashes red) goes off when a chip is detected that has -for example- allergies registred. Then send the data to the target hospital so that the doctors on duty can prepare.
      This of course would mean a minor upgrade in all ambulances, but the checking would be automatic and not dependant on the accuracy of the stress-laden emergency team members.

    3. Re:So who'll market one to hold your medical data? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      If you're unconscious, and the ER tech can just scan off you that you're diabetic and allergic to penicillin, that's a Good Thing.

      I have a friend alergic to certain kinds of nuts. He wears a metal braclet 24/7, ensures that its tight and never takes it off. Its also very unlikely to be easily broken. Seems to work fine, and perform the same function. Why do we need a chip implanted in our body, that WILL be abused once it becomes popular.

  14. Mark of the Beast (a sigh of relief) by cosmicg · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...all that wasted time, worrying about those three bleeding sixes on my chest.

    --
    Cache Rules Everything Around Me
  15. Re:404? by Pussy+Is+Money · · Score: 1

    You have been experiencing problems because Slashdot is run by a bunch of perverts that like to "plug in" by sticking CAT5 up their asses. You may experience brief intermittent service interruptions as a result of this. Thank you for your consideration.

    --
    Pushin' 'n dealin', shovin' 'n stealin'
  16. "Evil" Chip by laeraun2 · · Score: 1, Informative

    I love the way that religious groups believe that such advances are the "devils" work.

    Perhaps these people need to take a close look at all the good that can come of these devices, like the guy who wanted one so that if he had medical problems, the paramedics could quickly find out his details. Applications like that are fantastic, and can save peoples lives.

    Here is another link to another company that also makes a similar kind of chip.

    --
    Error: Erection reset by beer.
    1. Re:"Evil" Chip by JimPooley · · Score: 2

      Actually that would be useful. I have a medical conditon that requires daily medication for life, and something that carries my medical details for use in an accident would be useful.
      Of course, I do have a card...

      --

      "Information wants to be paid"
    2. Re:"Evil" Chip by Renraku · · Score: 2

      Don't get me wrong. I'm a technophile as well. But when the Bible of my religion says that this is a Bad Thing (tm) to have implanted, then I'm going to consider it a Bad Thing (tm) to have implanted. First off, we don't know everything. Some things are uncertain. Can you prove to me that this chip will have no adverse affects at all upon me?

      --
      Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    3. Re:"Evil" Chip by clarkgoble · · Score: 1

      Isn't the "Bible" aspects of this more limited to certain fundamentalists groups who have this tradition of 666 being something like a bar code you need to buy or sell? Thus anything even remotely like labeling a human they freak out about. Presumably they think that if such things become available it will be just a short hop skip and a jump to "implanted credit cards" and then the ban on real credit cards and cash.

      Personally I put that right up with worrying about black helicopters, but that's me.

    4. Re:"Evil" Chip by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Just like its easy to live day to day without a drivers license or SSN.

  17. Dick Size by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I'd like them to have guy's dick size on them.. that way we can know if the dude is worth it before we start talkin to him for real at the bars.. hell we'll even put our boob size(real one) on it for the guys ;)

    1. Re:Dick Size by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 1

      I'd actually be more interested in a "slut-factor". Oh, come one... it's alread hard enough to get dates (I don't get any) or get laid (doens't happen either) when they don't know the size of your dick. My chances are already hovering around 0%, so with such information I'd probably drop below 0%...and I always thought that would be mathematically impossible. Women of today are hard to get :-(
      I don't know how many girl-"friends" I have, but I do something wrong because it's always "oh, I just want you as friend". Yah, great, what use is that? I can "talk" on my own...thank you very much.
      (Yes, I''m frustrated....rejected *again* yesterday...I had to vent)

    2. Re:Dick Size by Rezalution · · Score: 1

      Take a hint man... If she's THAT interested in dick size then she's not lookin' to snuggle and watch Bambi with you. Slut-factor is probably high ;) Go for her!

    3. Re:Dick Size by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 1

      Right....that's true...but that "She" was an Anonymous Coward trying to be funny. Up until now I only met two girls that were interested in dick-size, but both had a boyfriend. (But look mighty slutty, if you get my drift). However knowing their boyfriends (US military and the other is inzto competition motorcycles), I don't think I'd take a risk....I'm not suicidial...

  18. This isn't good security by danny256 · · Score: 1

    Using this chips for ID is a horrible idea. You could (relitivly) easily make a copy of someone's chip to impersonate them. It wouldn't be too hard to remove your chip and give it to someone else (it dosn't have to be inside them, they just have to be holding it).

    For purposes of identification I think things like finger printing, retinal scans, and good old photo ID are the best choice.

  19. just an id number by Dr.+Tom · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I had an ID number engraved on my bicycle.

    It was stolen anyway.

    As near as I can tell, this thing just contains a number which can be read by any scanner you pass. So it's useless as a secure ID because anyone can get your code by scanning you and then using a programmable chip that sends out that code.

    They don't say how large the number is. Presumably it's a cryptographically strong random number chosen at manuf. time, but don't bet that the number isn't chosen via rand() % 10000000, either.

    It might be useful as a toy to open doors and stuff for you, but a face recognition system will do that without invasive surgery.

    Having a Lowjack or something like that might be cool if I thought I could be stolen, but I doubt you can fit a GPS + cell phone unit into a grain of rice. Though if I were going to implant something large it'd be a programmable telephone. Even so I think a StarTrek communicator would be better, and more fashionable. Really, who's gonna get "chipped" because they "think it's cool" to be treated like a herd animal? A tattoo is way cooler.

    1. Re:just an id number by rela · · Score: 1
      Really, who's gonna get "chipped" because they "think it's cool" to be treated like a herd animal? You might want to think about that statement a second time. Alot of people act just like herd animals in pursuit of 'cool', after all.

    2. Re:just an id number by Reziac · · Score: 2

      You're right, any data that can be read can be duplicated. There'd have to be some sort of key recognition system, I'd think.

      As to "invasive surgery" dunno about these ID chips, but ID microchips are implanted in animals with what amounts to a big syringe and large-gauge needle. No surgery required. The chips do tend to migrate with time, tho. Useful lifespan is current considered to be about 5 years.

      I still think it's a piss-poor idea and a BIG step down the slippery slope to total gov't control over every move you make.

      If they become mandatory, I forsee the emergence of a much more serious underground society (not just the trivial undergrounds of today, but one that means life or death, akin to what happened with the old Soviet system).

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    3. Re:just an id number by Winged+Cat · · Score: 2

      This chip is just an ID number. But, since the FDA has ruled that it doesn't regulate non-medical implanted devices, this clears the way for more functional implants - so long as they steer clear of medical functions.

  20. new types of problems? by xerph · · Score: 1

    Does this mean we'll see schoolchildren offering excuses like "I dont have the homework because I got rooted by a bully"?

    1. Re:new types of problems? by |DeN|niS · · Score: 1

      Heh, I can tell you are not from Australia :-)

  21. Re:Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So the time when kids used to be kids and could do whatever hell they wanted is over. Now, they're prisoners in their own family, and if they're abused there's nowhere to run or hide. They absolutely have to follow all the silly rules. There isn't really any moral dilemma for them to ponder either. Either they do as they're told, or get reeled in by their parents. Another victory for technology! It'll solve all our problems. Yeeehaw!

    Excuse me if I'm being sarcastic, but the more you limit a child instead of teaching what is a good idea and not AND WHY, the bigger chance they'll rebel straight into dope-hell. The problem today is that most parents are not fit to have a child at all. They're just too immature.

  22. Re:Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by atari2600 · · Score: 1

    you are right - if you had kids - you arent wise enough to know whats to be done with kids. Cmon dude grow up.

  23. Here's a tip... by evilviper · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here's a tip for all those who dare to make these chips...

    Don't EVER even THINK about implanting these in the forehead or right hand. You're just ASKING for trouble. Besides, there are many other places that you could implant such a chip that wouldn't raise the ire of the fanatics out there.

    And as soon as there's even a hint that this is going to be mandatory.... I'm moving to the moon.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    1. Re:Here's a tip... by Constrain_Me · · Score: 1


      Hand and forehead are ideal places as they are the places on your body where the temperature changes the most, and the constant temperature change could be used as a power source for the chip
      </hearsay>

  24. We have missed the first train by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1



    and now we are playing catching up.

    The first train that we have missed was when the implantable chip was introduced for household pets - to

    "aid the owners in indentifying their pets,
    in case their pets got lost"

    So said the media.

    As a member of ACLU, I tried in vain to get the attention of ACLU about this development, telling the higher-ups that if the animals are allowed to be implanted with microchips, one day the same chips will be used on humans.

    But the ACLU never care. All they care is to take away the guns from the people.

    Now we have this ... exactly as I've feared.

    I wonder what ACLU will say now ?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  25. First of all... by Dr.+Sp0ng · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's "Food and Drug Administration," not "Federal Drug Administration."

    Anyway, I don't think that implantable ID chips are a good idea by any stretch of the imagination, but to those of you who say "it just transmits a number, therefore it would be easy to clone somebody's chip," it would be possible to make a (much more) secure chip that accomplishes the same thing. Think public key crypto; if you want to check if this chip belongs to person X, you send the chip a bit of data, it signs it with a private key and only sends out the signed data, not the key itself. Then you check it against person X's public key. It would work on the same principle as digital signatures.

    Of course, it would have to have a large enough key that it would be infeasible to brute force any time in the forseeable future (barring quantum computing), and it would have to be based on a proven and time-tested encryption algorithm.

    That said, you won't catch anybody sticking one of these fucking things in me.

    1. Re:First of all... by Alsee · · Score: 2

      Think public key crypto; if you want to check if this chip belongs to person X, you send the chip a bit of data, it signs it with a private key and only sends out the signed data, not the key itself.

      Yes, that would be a million times more secure. No, it can't be done with current tech. These "chips" can't do any processing at all. They are more like colored paint that glows under a black light, except that these glow under radio waves. The pattern of the glow can be interperted as a number.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    2. Re:First of all... by hacker · · Score: 1
      It's "Food and Drug Administration," not "Federal Drug Administration."
      Actally, it's "U.S. Food and Drug Administration', and if you ever went to the website, it's fda.gov . Trust me, this body determines the standards by which the government enforces for many things, including almost every single drug you've ever taken, almost all the foods you consume. They are very much a "federal" body of the government arm.
    3. Re:First of all... by Dr.+Sp0ng · · Score: 2

      Actally, it's "U.S. Food and Drug Administration', and if you ever went to the website, it's fda.gov

      Yeah, yeah :)

      including almost every single drug you've ever taken

      Not really - my drug of choice is regulated by the DEA :) I don't take pills of any sort unless I have no other choice.

    4. Re:First of all... by Dr.+Sp0ng · · Score: 2

      No, it can't be done with current tech. These "chips" can't do any processing at all. They are more like colored paint that glows under a black light, except that these glow under radio waves. The pattern of the glow can be interperted as a number.

      Ok. But I wouldn't go as far as to say that it can't be done with current technology, just that these chips don't do it. Why would it be so hard, anyway? You just need to do a little bit of crypto and a little data transmission and reception. Granted, I know nothing about it, but it seems to me that current technology wouldn't really have too much trouble with it.

    5. Re:First of all... by Alsee · · Score: 2

      But I wouldn't go as far as to say that it can't be done with current technology

      I meant it couldn't be done in a comparable device. To handle encryption processing it would have to be much bigger, much more expensive, and would require much more energy.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  26. Neat by quantaman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Think of the possibilities, assuming that they couldn't tell if the chip was outside of your body you'd have the perfect alibi! What do you mean I wasn't at work honey? Just look at the chip records. Well Officer, as you can see from these records I was no where near the bank last night. Maybe you could just stick it on a rat like they did in total recall.
    The possibilities are endless!

    --
    I stole this Sig
  27. Revelation has a lot to say on this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    Like, you can't buy or sell anything without the mark of the beast or something. Its all a bit too scary for me these days. Mind you, some US Army workers are already implanted with these things.


    Its all a bit to close to the Terminator/Matrix scenario for my liking.

  28. Re:Speaking of Implantable Microchips.. by i_am_nitrogen · · Score: 2

    What a hilarious site!!! Orbs, contrails, UFO's, whee! LOL! It's a laugh a minute.

    If you really bite into this stuff, you've got WAY too much time on your hands.

    Sure, there's corruption and conspiracy in the government, but this stuff is just outrageous. We have a word for it: schizophrenia.

  29. Might this be a good thing? by AntiNorm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Without regulations on it, would it not be (significantly) more difficult for them to make it mandatory? Even if they were only making them mandatory for a select group of individuals, e.g. sex offenders, the fact that they specifically refuse to regulate them seems to indicate that they just don't want to have to mess with them.

    --

    I pledge allegiance to the flag...
    of the Corporate States of America...
    1. Re:Might this be a good thing? by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Interesting
      • Without regulations on it, would it not be (significantly) more difficult for them to make it mandatory?

      Hardly. Who exactly is going to object if (for example) judicial decides to start implanting these in offenders? It's on the FDA's "not our problem" list, so they won't block it.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    2. Re:Might this be a good thing? by simonb · · Score: 1

      Nah!

      exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis

    3. Re:Might this be a good thing? by Rezalution · · Score: 1

      Without regulations on it, would it not be (significantly) more difficult for them to make it mandatory?

      There doesn't need to be a hard fast rule to make something mandatory in our society. It just needs to be accepted enough to make your life miserable without it.

      Take this little tidbit I read in a related article Interesting and informative read, though some of it is a bit biased.

      After all, the government has never forced anyone to have a driver license, [but] try getting along without one, when everyone from your local banker to the car rental man to the hotel operator to the grocery store requires one in order for you to take advantage of their services, that amounts to a de facto mandate. If the government can force you to surrender your fingerprints to get a drivers license, why can't it force you to get a computer chip implant?

      I'm hoping politicians will take their time with this one.

    4. Re:Might this be a good thing? by BerserkDog · · Score: 1

      Heck, why not just take a "Running Man" approach to it and implant exploding chips in sex offenders?

  30. Re:Umm excuse me... by jo42 · · Score: 1
    > But since when does implanting something inside your body not constitute a medical procedure?

    When you stick it up a readily available orifice.

  31. The FDA ?? by Tensor · · Score: 1

    What does the FDA have to do with this ?

    All they said is that is not their ball park, that means, that its not a food, or drug, or medical procedure, or herb ... duh! Its a chip, and it does nothing to your body. (tho we COULD argue that having a radio emitter stuck inside our bodies could increase cancer odds)

    So far all they said was if they want to sell it the FDA woldn't bother them. And its a voluntary thing, hell you even have to pay to have it installed, i can imagine a load of things i rather spend $200 on !!!

    I guess that when these are mandatory in the us its going to be a sad day for all americans, anonimity down the drain, for good, for life.

    I dont think that any good that these might do outweigh that simple fact.

    I wonder if a stronng, but small, localized EMP would shut it down ... or at least erase the volatile info (medical records, id, etc) ...

    blah ... sometimes i feel that techonolgy sucks, and i have a quad xeon server in my bedroom ...

  32. Hitler by HanzoSan · · Score: 2

    I believe the mark of the beast idea has already been taken by hitler.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  33. So not FDA... by groupthink · · Score: 1

    But these things have to communicate with the outside, but what about the FCC? I'm sure they'll want a say...

  34. Name on Rice by cosmicg · · Score: 1

    Applied Digital Solutions thinks it can take on the industry juggernaut that is Vivianne Robinson? Her procedure is well established, non-evasive, and only $9.99 (plus $2.00 shipping).

    --
    Cache Rules Everything Around Me
  35. Not scary? Let me ask you this. by Vicegrip · · Score: 4, Informative

    Do you currently walk around with your driver's license, health insurance and every other piece of personal information helpfully pasted accross your clothes for anybody who cares to read?
    The problem with this chip concept is that anybody with the appropriate device can read the information without your consent because it broadcasts it. I quote:
    ...the VeriChip has been marketed as a medical aid which would allow hospital workers to access patients' health records with a simple wave of the wand, or reader...
    yes yes.... it's for medical purposes only.. it'll never ever be used to id/track/monitor/control people.. our ethical policians are there to protect our rights. The system will prevent abuses. Are you hiding something?
    Riiight... I strongly oppose any system that can broadcast sensitive personal data without my consent. Such a device is dangerous and undesirable in my mind.
    Next thing you know, your employer will insist you carry these things so they can monitor your productivity.

    --
    Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
    1. Re:Not scary? Let me ask you this. by ScaryPhil · · Score: 1

      A bit of self-publicity... my "nothing to hide" t-shirt was inspired by this sort of argument. Drop me an email (phr at doc.ic.ac.uk) if you want one. I might do a print run if there's enough interest.

    2. Re:Not scary? Let me ask you this. by Alsee · · Score: 2

      I strongly oppose any system that can broadcast sensitive personal data without my consent.

      This chip does not contain or broadcast any personal data. You shine radio waves on it and it "glows" in a way that can be read as a number. This number can be used to look up your data in the hospital's database. Exactly the same way someone can look up your data using your name.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    3. Re:Not scary? Let me ask you this. by cyclist1200 · · Score: 1

      That number can be used in more than just a hospital database.

      Exactly the same way someone can look up your data using your name.

      Except I can choose not to give out my name.

    4. Re:Not scary? Let me ask you this. by Vicegrip · · Score: 2

      Oh come now, how hard is it to imagine that number quickly being used to other purposes.

      Again, my dispute is with this kind of a system that universally identifies me in some manner and then allows the identifier to be obtainable on demand by anybody who wishes it.

      We've got enough problems with social security number management, credit card numbers, and other such innocuous numbers. Nobody would want to steal those right?

      --
      Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
    5. Re:Not scary? Let me ask you this. by PeeOnYou2 · · Score: 1

      Define limited scope? When do we draw the line? When we do draw then line, it's probably too late to stop it anyways so we're fucked.

      If it didn't give 'them' any more information than 'they' already had, what the hell is the point?

      The issue is that technology always grows in application. Sure right now it will only hold little bits of information. That's while the technology is in it's infancy. In 10 years God only knows what the hell these things will be used for and what they will store.

  36. Re:and you thought the strips in $20 bills were ba by yalla · · Score: 1

    You could use RF-transceivers as proximity fuses for bombs...

    --
    You look like a million dollars. All green and wrinkled.
  37. why the FDA? by potnoodle · · Score: 1

    shouldn't it be the FCC ?

  38. V-Chip! by abiogenesis · · Score: 1

    You fung res, remove this fng v-chip from me!

    --

    Donate free food to the hungry at The Hunger site.
  39. I can see it now... by TheCrunch · · Score: 1

    You visit your local pharmacy...
    "Hello, I'd like something for a sore throat"
    "Sure, take some FDAnadol"
    "Haven't you got anything else?"
    "No, the FDA have outlawed chipless drugs."
    "But I don't want 'chipped' drugs!"
    "Why? Are you a terrorist?"
    "Urm no... Well I guess I have no choice then."

    Later...
    "What's that buzzing in my ear? Hold on.. what?? No I do not want to consolidate debt! WTF?!? No I would not like to learn how to enlarge my penis! Get away!!"

    --
    My life is one big siesta in which I'm dreaming I wished my life was one big siesta.
  40. UNIX combating crop disease by richie2000 · · Score: 3, Funny
    Speaking of the FDA, I found this little snippet recently:

    This diagnostic tool will provide valuable information for treating plants with UNIX® and its co-formulations which have excellent activity against both strains of the pathogen.

    Source

    So, how long before someone combines these technologies and implants UNIX® into people? ;-)

    --
    Money for nothing, pix for free
  41. Damn the sandmen! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    So does this mean when I am 30 it will start to flash?

    1. Re:Damn the sandmen! by nytes · · Score: 1

      Mine turned black about 5 years ago.

      Is it like a mood ring or sumthin'?

      --
      -- I have monkeys in my pants.
  42. electronic high by guygee · · Score: 2

    Of course, as soon as somebody learns to use these to induce euphoria, hallucinations, or any pleasant alteration of consciousness, the technology will be immediately outlawed, 25 year minimum sentences imposed, and SWAT teams will be breaking down your door.

  43. what about viruses? by commodoresloat · · Score: 3, Funny

    Hi! How are you?

    I send you this false identity in order to have your advice.

    See you later. Thanks

  44. Even more glaring headline error by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 2
    I believe that the FDA did not approve the implants, but rather decided that they are not medical and therefore not under the jurisdiction of the FDA. There's a big difference between being unregulated by the FDA and being approved by the FDA.

    Also, FDA stands for "Food and Drug Administration," not "Federal Drug Administration."

    Come on, that's 8th Grade Civics material right there...
    --
    Who did what now?
  45. IDChip.com by bacchusrx · · Score: 2

    I'm sure this has crossed more than few minds: doesn't this "VeriChip" remind you of the IDChip hoax?

    Mind you, the nonexistant IDChip was billed as an instrument of convenient, universal commerce--not a tracking device for patient data and missing children... still, it conjures a lot of the same imagery.

    BRx.

    --
    Life after capitalism? The participatory economics project
  46. teenagers? by GutBomb · · Score: 1

    ADS has been inundated with inquiries from teenagers and other technophiles who are impatient to get the device.

    And we all know how concerned with accurate medical records teenagers can be...

  47. Who watches the watchmen? by shomon2 · · Score: 2

    1) Get one
    2) Get it out of your body (or never have it put in in the first place)
    3) Figure out how it works
    4) Figure out how to copy, erase sections, change data.
    5) write /dev/me interface, scanner, etc. GPL.

    Knowledge is for everyone.If this kind of data is kept in the hands of governments and organisations, individuals will lose out tremendously. Like steve mann, we should be counteracting the panopticon structured one-sidedness of modern surveillance and information networks.

    Nowadays we should do these things as a means to raise awareness of the dangers and set legal precedents, and in future, we could have a combined coexistent society of watcher and watched all intertwined.

    1. Re:Who watches the watchmen? by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      It's very bad form to cite Steve Mann as some sort of modern hero. He is a whack job with way too much money.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  48. medical procedure by commodoresloat · · Score: 2
    But since when does implanting something inside your body not constitute a medical procedure?

    The FDA lack of regulation apparently stems from it being used for non-medical use; the article admits that inserting it is a medical procedure: "The chip, which is slightly larger than a grain of rice, is inserted under local anesthesia during a quick outpatient procedure."

    Of course, that begs the question, how is the use non-medical, when the article talks about its medical uses (it can store information about needed medication, and they are talking about giving scanners to hospitals).

    On a related note, how long before someone hacks this thing and walks into a hospital .... "It says here he needs a shot of morphine and two joints of medical marijuana. And a dozen doughnuts."

  49. Re:Potentially useful, though the legality will be by Tim+C · · Score: 2

    I think i woul be interesting to mandatorily implant these in every citizen...I realise privacy advocates may find this a shocking and unpalatable notion

    Privacy nothing, what about my rights over my own body? The privacy implications pale into insignificance compared to that.

    Cheers,

    Tim

  50. Re:If this doesn't qualify as The Mark of the Beas by strictnein · · Score: 1

    Blah... come on now. Plesae, take his advice and mod it down. Any self respecting crazy knows that the US envoy in no way represents what the anti-christ is supposed to be.

    How will the envoy to the mid east turn everyone away from God/Jesus? Where is his mark on his head? I believe the anti-Christ is supposed to survive massive head trauma or have some sort of major marking on his head (which is why some people actually believed that Jim Brady (of Brady Bill fame) and Mikhail Gorbachev were the anti-Christ).

    The truth is, if you sit down and study the bible, you will see that you can predict anything you want from what it says, and interpret it a billion different ways.

    For example:

    Genesis 1:26 "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness..." (from the King James and Revised Standard Edition)

    God must be insane! He'll calling himself us and using "our" for "his" possesive! Insane! Or... there are multiple gods! I think it's pretty clear right there. "Let us make man in our image". Clearly God is referring to himself and his buddy gods (Zeus, Bast, Beelzebub, etc.).

    Another one:
    Matthew 24:38, 39: "For as in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage up to the day Noah entered the Ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away"

    It clearly states right there that we will have no idea that the "end times" are coming. And since I'm guessing that you would think I would not be one of the that would be saved, the very fact that you warned me, and that I now have knowledge of the "end times" coming, proves that it's not coming! Uh oh!

    Jesus will be coming for his people very soon

    Oh, yeah, because Y2K (y2khai?) is coming! Wait... wait a second... it's already happened... hmm... guess we'll just have to wait another millenia (as we all know, God bases all his decisions upon our calendar).

    I know probably most of my thinking is flawed here... but whatever... I'm sick of wack jobs like this guy. He's probably one of those guys who thinks that the perfect, blind, crippled, unbaptised non-christian 6 year old in the mountains of China will burn in hell for all eternity, just because he isn't a devout Christian, even though he's been as perfect a human being as anyone else in the world. If that's the case, then there's clearly no God... for if there is, he made quite the mistake with his little system, and I've always thought that most definitions of God included the idea that he's perfect.

    Well, enough of my flawed thinking. Back to studying CS...

    (and, btw, I am a Christian)

  51. Soon, forced by trumpetplayer · · Score: 1

    Soon, we will be forced to have one of these implanted. Oh, well, I mean only if we want that job, want to live in that block of flats or want our children to go to that specific school, or..

    This sig was generated by a Bunch of Goatse.cx Webmasters for trumpetplayer

  52. Makes life much easier.. by AftanGustur · · Score: 3, Insightful


    ... for the terrorists..

    Just think about it. Instead of having to find the passports of all the passengers of a airplane/bus/tourist group, and then find out all the Americans so they can be shot, you only have to wave a tag reader around the group.
    Much easier. You can even just take it out on a walk in some tourist place and when you get that 'beep' for an american he can be shot right there on the spot.

    This also solves problems of double nationalities when people have 2 passports and you only find the european one.

    Ahh, life vill be sweet ..

    --
    echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
  53. Oh great, another endless upgrade loop ... by torpor · · Score: 3, Funny

    So, right next to my Palm/Visor/Clie, while typing this on my tiBook/iBook/Versa, trying hard not to take calls on my Nokia/Ericsson/Motorola, I'll still be trackable by all my creditors ... you know the ones: VISA/Mastercard/etc. ... who I've gone into debt for, just to keep my gadgets upgraded.

    Whatever. Shit like this is far easier to deal with if you're stoned, so I guess its time for another cone ...

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  54. Is This Significant? by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 1

    I don't see how this is significant. Just because the FDA believe this product does not fall within their jurisdiction does not immediately mean that the US will become a "big brother" state (any more than at present, anyway).

    If the US government passed a law dictating that everyone had to wear a registered chip at all times, then that would be slightly more worrying.

  55. Carefully now. . ! by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1, Insightful
    if you really sit down and study it this is all predicted in the bible. even all the stuff thats going on over in isreal was predicted.

    Careful now. . .

    The Bible, by many accounts, is about 80% Roman propaganda, inspired by the same forces which are running things today, affecting our news agencies and textbook makers with just as much vigor as back then. There is a definite agenda at work here, and manufactured religions, (i.e. nearly all of them, including all of the big ones), are very much a part of the psychological programming at work.

    If people believe in the apocalypse according to King James, that it is pre-destined, it will make it that much easier for those who intend to harvest us.

    This is a free choice universe, a very powerful truth which some would like you to discard. While Jesus was very likely an enlightened teacher of great influence, his words have been massively corrupted. The Bible is a HUGE lie; it promotes a linear reality, a shutting down of the natural human thinking and questioning process, filling people with a fear of knowledge and individual thinking, and it indoctrinates people with programs like, "Turn the Other Cheek," and "The Meek Will Inherit", etc. --Exactly the kind of thinking you want people to have if you plan to harvest. Don't take over until people are ready to accept their "Shepherds" with open arms. It's all about efficiency and paths of least resistance.

    So you are right, stuff is starting to go down as predicted in the bible, but it is only because the whole damned thing is a set-up.


    -Fantastic Lad --Shepherds tend their flocks, but they also fleece and butcher them.

    1. Re:Carefully now. . ! by h4l0 · · Score: 1

      you seem to be contradicting yourself with this post. So you are right, stuff is starting to go down as predicted in the bible, but it is only because the whole damned thing is a set-up. but you also said The Bible is a HUGE lie so which is it? and what proof have you any of Jesus's words were corrupted? on a side note, i will defend your right to have this opinion till the day i die (or get taken up into heaven, whichever comes first) but your opinion is definatly wrong.

      --
      Avoid The Rush, Start Thinking NOW!
      --
      Any Spelling Or Gramatical Errors In This Post Are There On Purpose.
    2. Re:Carefully now. . ! by smirkleton · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Aint it the /. way. Your post makes claims to some sort of historical insight with great aplomb, substituting conviction for any actual substance (historical, logical or otherwise) to support your claims.

      - The Bible, by many accounts, is about 80% Roman propaganda...

      Of course it must be so. The New Testament was written by authors who were persecuted and imprisoned by the Roman Empire, of course, and is absolutely bursting with pointed criticisms of Rome- many uttered by the, er, 'enlightened teacher' Jesus (crucified by the Romans, as pointedly observed in all four Gospels you claim to be pro-Roman propaganda...). The last book of the Bible, 'Revelation', which predicts among other things the then unthinkable future cashless economic society and the Mark of the Beast (among other things also becoming manifest in our time) must also somehow be pro-Roman propaganda, too. Right? Even though the author was writing the book in exile on the Isle of Patmos by the Romans? Even though the Romans decimated Jerusalem in 70AD and persecuted the Christians for sport?

      The Old Testament was written prior to the existence of any dominant Roman empire, but I'll set those facts aside like any /. user who moderates you up, since you clearly seem to believe you know what you're talking about. I'll try not to be disturbed, of course, by the irrefutable evidence that the prophetic book of Daniel, written in the Babylonian captivity, specifically foretold of the coming of a dominant Roman empire because, you know, I trust your biased, unsupported claims more than any valid proofs that might contradict them.

      Calling the Bible "Roman propaganda", in the face of so many more facts than you would have the attention span to endure reading, is about as ludicrious as calling 'Uncle Tom's Cabin' a pro-slavery tract, or the Constitution of the United States a pro-Monarchy creed. It is flatly, even laughably ignorant. But if you say it with enough conviction, in a flurry of equally uninformed but impassioned errors, I'll simply but reason aside like any other child of postmodernism here and mod you up to +5 Insightful.

      Let me guess, too, while we're at it. You're 'pro-chip implant', right? I should ignore those pro-Roman ravings from that apostle John dude who warned that taking the 'Mark of the Beast' (some tattoo or implant required in the last days in order to buy or sell goods) was consigning oneself to eternal damnation. If his prophecy comes to pass in our lifetimes, I should trust your insights about the non-linear universe? I mean, if I'm wrong to trust you over him, its no biggie. It's just eternal damnation, separation from God for all eternity in a place where the fire isn't quenched and the worm does not die, right? It's not like I'd have anything better to do, forever. And ever. And ever.
    3. Re:Carefully now. . ! by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2
      Of course it must be so. The New Testament was written by authors who were persecuted and imprisoned by the Roman Empire, of course, and is absolutely bursting with pointed criticisms of Rome

      Quoth Spock, "He is demonstrating two dimensional thinking."

      The forces driving the ancient version of the CIA did not have Roman interests at heart. --Think about it: If you are trying to set up the human race over a multi-millenial period of time, then who cares how the Romans come off appearing in the history books?

      Consider, forwards and backwards the ramifications of such a statement!!!!


      -Fantastic Lad

    4. Re:Carefully now. . ! by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen the actual quote posted yet, so i figure i'll add it in here.

      "And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name"

      I suppose the name or number might be some kind of PIN or password kind of thing.

      Anyway, This sure looks like a match.

    5. Re:Carefully now. . ! by delta407 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, I think the Bible is much more anti-jewish than anti-Roman.

      Let's think about this for a moment. Who was Jesus? The son of Mary. Mary was a Jew. Jesus was a Jew. The New Testament is centered around Jesus, a Jew, and thus cannot be considered to be anti-Jewish. The Old Testament was written by and for Jews, so it can't by any means be called anti-Jewish. This statement has no validity.

      Even though the author was writing the book in exile on the Isle of Patmos by the Romans? Even though the Romans decimated Jerusalem in 70AD and persecuted the Christians for sport

      Well, from my undersanding, the gospels were written _after_ 70AD, with Luke (the most neutral to the Romans) written closer to 100AD.

      When the Gospels were written makes little difference; what the original poster is saying is that Roman propaganda is unlikely because the writer of Revelation was exiled because of them, and that the Romans destroyed the temple in Jerusalem as well as persecuting Christians for a few hundred years. For that reason, the idea that this is Roman propaganda simply does not make sense.

      For these books to gain in popularity (and be supported by the domant power) it would have to be quite favorable to the Romans at the expense of the previous rulers...

      This, again, is flat out wrong. Christianity was not favorable to the Romans -- it did not permit emperor worship (which was required by Roman law) and additionally cited a power above Rome. Christianity gained "popularity" in spite of the fact that Christians were getting tortured and killed daily.

    6. Re:Carefully now. . ! by Weh · · Score: 1
      The Bible, by many accounts, is about 80% Roman propaganda


      I think you meant probably meant "new testament" as the whole old testament was written mainly before Roman times. And even the New Testament mainly teaches to respect the authorities.

      As for the rest of your comment; you can neither prove that the bible is a huge lie nor that "this is a free choice universe". Incidentally freedom of choice is something that is biblical. Saying that the bible promotes shutting down natural human thinking shows a lack of knowledge of basic historical facts. You should study the enlightenment sometimes..
    7. Re:Carefully now. . ! by Reziac · · Score: 2

      I think you meant that the NEW Testament is mainly Roman propaganda (or to be accurate, rantings against the Romans by the self-proclaimed persecuted -- funny how the region's economy peaked during the Roman occupation). In his day, Jesus was a terrorist and a subversive -- NOT a leader of the masses.

      Whereas the Old Testament is primarily the Hebrews bragging "MY god can beat up YOUR god!"

      :)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    8. Re:Carefully now. . ! by Toshito · · Score: 1

      The problem is, given that there is no proof of the existence of the judeo-christian god (or zeus, or the tooth fairy etc.), why must I fear eternal damnation?

      What I fear from this is not based on mythology, but on the fact that the governements in some countries could use this to control the population, and that's scarier than what will happen after I die (wich is, nothing).

      --
      Try it! Library of Babel
    9. Re:Carefully now. . ! by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 1

      and that's scarier than what will happen after I die (wich is, nothing).

      Scarier for other people, maybe. Scarier for you? Well I really doubt you'll care since you're so set on the idea there is no afterlife.

      If this is all there is, what's the point anyway?

      --
      ± 29 dB
    10. Re:Carefully now. . ! by Fembot · · Score: 1

      It is interesting to note that if you think that what you read in the bible nowdays is what was writen approximatly 2000 years ago you are VERY much mistaken. What with translation and a couple of 1000 different versions it has changed meaning quite dramticaly to suit whoever translated it at the time. They might not even have realised it, but every transtaltion adds part of their optinions to it.

    11. Re:Carefully now. . ! by bitrott · · Score: 1

      *cough* Early Christianity was the religion of the poor, destitute. It's rise to dominance was largely due to the Roman adoption of it's texts and values. Roman nobless were quick to adopt, and scant centuries later roman generals and early church leader assembled the canon. So, yeah, actually he's not far off, despite the 'persecution' portrayed in the texts. Romans weren't pained by the persecution of early christians, or the hundreds of other civilizations they conquered. The ancient world was rife with pain/suffering, and the romans, like most other great civilizations adapted foreign ethnic values into their own cultural quilt. btw. You're a sodding loudmouth.

    12. Re:Carefully now. . ! by nytes · · Score: 1

      Just a thought...

      What if the idea of receiving a mark is a misinterpretation of what he saw?

      What if the thing he actually saw was a retina/iris and fingerprint scanner?

      It wouldn't be so much _receiving_ the mark, as it is letting them scan you and entering the key elements into the database that marks you.

      --
      -- I have monkeys in my pants.
    13. Re:Carefully now. . ! by tempest303 · · Score: 2

      It's just eternal damnation, separation from God for all eternity in a place where the fire isn't quenched and the worm does not die, right? It's not like I'd have anything better to do, forever. And ever. And ever.

      If God and all "his" true followers really are into threats and fear tactics like these, I think I'd PREFER going to Hell, thanks. ;)

    14. Re:Carefully now. . ! by Toshito · · Score: 1

      That's a common misconception about atheists. Everyone think we don't care about anything since we don't believe about a god or an afterlife.

      Actually, it's quite the opposite. Since I believe that this life i'm living right now is the only one I'll have, then I must do everything in my power to make it worthwhile. Since I have the same feelings as any human (I love my daughter for example), and that i'm smart enough to know that we must have rules so that everyone can live decently in our society, I don't need someone trying to scare me about going to hell just to be sure I will behave correctly. I don't need a religion to teach me about morality, I can think it myself.

      As any living being on this planet, our main goal is to survive. We are a social animal, just like wolves. In a wolf pack, there is nothing to gain if one of the wolf kill every other. The survival is best served by being in a group. So it is with humans, I would gain nothing by killing, raping, stealing every one in sight. It's so evident for me that I don't understand why someone would do it, maybe because of a mental disorder?

      Please excuse my poor english since it's my second language... but I think you can understand my point.

      Thanks for replying to my post.

      --
      Try it! Library of Babel
    15. Re:Carefully now. . ! by Grip3n · · Score: 1

      You're mixing two views together, science and faith, and they don't mix.

      A scientific "proof" is something tangible that you can look at. This does not work with God, imagine trying to observe everything in the universe, every atom, every thought at once, you couldn't, just as you couldn't view something that is as powerful as a God. It's hard to wrap your mind over it and it does require a higher level of thinking to understand Christianity, I know.

      You can't view God like you can view a ball falling, so your option of "proof" is inconsistent with the method of understanding your subject.

      --
      To make a pun demonstrates the highest understanding of a language
    16. Re:Carefully now. . ! by Grip3n · · Score: 1

      Who is this ancient CIA you're even talking about? Its not the Romans, since your sentence would make little sense. Are you trying to blabber nonsense in an attempt to win sides by confusion?

      Anyhow, the original reply which you're replying to still holds strong. Your original comment was that the bible is written basically by Romans with roman interests. He replys by saying these writers were persucuted by those that you identified them as writing for. Now you're saying it doesn't even matter, that they weren't writing for or against the Romans, but people in the future.

      You're extremely inconsistent in your arguments.

      --
      To make a pun demonstrates the highest understanding of a language
    17. Re:Carefully now. . ! by Grip3n · · Score: 1

      The fact is Revelation is writen in an interpretive form. It is not in chronological order and makes many allusions. This mark is most likely not a literal "mark".

      Really John (the writer) doesn't misinterpret, nor do its readers. Everyone can form an open option of this event since there is no true right nor wrong until you witness the gates of heaven yourself.

      --
      To make a pun demonstrates the highest understanding of a language
    18. Re:Carefully now. . ! by Com2Kid · · Score: 2

      which predicts among other things the then unthinkable future cashless economic society

      I believe that is called the barter system. . . .

      Been around for some time. In fact it was capitolism (or some eary varient there of) that was being promoted in such a way as to insult those "evil pagans" (meaning a ton of other cultures which DID use the barter system until either romans or later x-stians forced money upon them. You do NOT have to assign non-realworld value to things. Hell even communist countries use money, for some reason that compleatly escapes me. WTF?)

    19. Re:Carefully now. . ! by maxpublic · · Score: 2

      Any god who goes around threatening eternal damnation simply because you won't get on your knees and kiss his ass isn't worth the time of day.

      One of the things I really despise about fundamentalist religious zealots is their insistence that if you don't follow belief 942 of god 361 then you're going to get it good in the end - forever and ever and ever.

      Bite me, already.

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    20. Re:Carefully now. . ! by Fembot · · Score: 1

      When the Bible was originaly compiled there were many books that were omitted. What about them were they the word of god too? If no why did people even propose that they should be included?

  56. Re:Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by Mika_Lindman · · Score: 1

    (Sorry about the long post. Just had a lot of thoughs going in my head about the subject.)

    "I can think of many a time my little sister would pull a disapearing act and be gone for hours. Off with some new friend. This was at an age when she had no business being off alone, much less after dark."

    And what would this age be? 10? 14? 18? Before she gets married? (Last one would propably be the opinion of every father in the world, especially if the device reports when a man gets closer than 3 feet to his little daughter ;-)

    I'm not so worried about the government watching me, as I am of what parents might do to their kids. Yes, device like that WOULD prevent kidnappings and such evil things that happen to children. But at what cost? Generation of children, that are 100% of the time under their parents' eyes? Seriously, how many of you think that a child would get trough that without getting mentally damaged?

    Device like that would save lives and make life better for everyone, IF USED PROPERLY. One thing is, that parents themselves SHOULD NOT have the possibility to trace their children. Only police (or some other institute like that), when it is certain that the child really is missing. And not just hanging out with friends that his/hers parents don't like quite so much.

    But then again, there should be 100% trust between this tracing-able organization and people (especially those who are spooky.. Although those guys can never be quite satisfied ;). System that cannot be used for wrong purposes (and again, who is to decide those purposes?).

    I quess that most of the people writing comments here, have been "good" children. No doing what your parents tell you not to do, and behaving nicely even on your own. No rebellion, no drug use, no alcohol until 18 and so on. You don't understand what goes on in a mind of a child, who thinks that his/hers parents are trying to control his/hers (goddammit english sucks, why can't you have one word for human person, instead of words for both genders?!?! ;) life 24/7.
    A good friend of mine is a so called "bad" child. She started smoking about 11, cannabis and alcohol at 12, amfetamin, heroin and such at the age of 13-14.
    If someone (parents, childcare, me) tries to control her life, she freaks out. If her parents had had a device so that they could have tracked her down allways, she would propably have killed herself.

  57. Re:If this doesn't qualify as The Mark of the Beas by mgv · · Score: 2

    How soon until this is mandatory?

    Truth is, its going to happen for most people with or without having a chip inserted. Biometric identification (such as iris identification) will enable people to be tracked wherever they go, at least outside of their own homes. Your mobile phone lets you be tracked pretty much anywhere, as does your always connected PDA. Computer recognition of your car plates allows instant tracking of your travels, and its been around for years now. Some smart cards such as credit cards can be activated from a distance (so you don't have to swipe them at a checkout). The list goes on.

    The most difficult issue here is the recognition that we need a bill of rights to protect our privacy. This information will be collected on all of us, whether or not we like it, and even if you don't get a chip implanted in you.

    We need to accept that this information is being collected now. We need legislative protection, ideally at the constitutional level, so that even if a company has this information, they are limited in what they can do with it. This has been needed probably since the first day a telephone book was published, but it is certainly needed now.

    My 2c worth,

    Michael

    --
    There is no cryptographic solution to the problem where the intended receiver and the attacker are the same entity.
  58. Finding the six-fingered man... by fleeb_fantastique · · Score: 2

    Maybe this sort of thing could help Inigo Montoya find that man who killed his father.

    --
    And so it goes.
  59. Precision Antipersonnel Strike by jvonk · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It seems apparent that the scanning range on the device is limited by its passive design; however, consider the possibilities which abound if these become ubiquitous identification devices--bombs programmed to detonate only upon decoding the correct (supposedly unique) ID, etc.

    Want a confirmed kill? Seems reasonable... assassination devices could be implanted in everyday items or places, merely waiting for the intended target to enter proximity. This could open a whole new world for precision, stand-off assassination!

    1. Re:Precision Antipersonnel Strike by Winged+Cat · · Score: 2

      The problem is detection range. These chips don't broadcast; you have to get a reader up close. OTOH, I could certainly see some other design rigged up with a low power transmitter (low enough to run on batteries for months, and way lower than levels that might possibly cause cancer problems) forced by some government into its citizens, to make it easier for those who wish to find and (kill/rape/rob) them...possibly even with government permission.

    2. Re:Precision Antipersonnel Strike by daveisoverlord · · Score: 1
      Barring the conspiracy theories about the US assassinating it's own citizens, if you're close enough to implant this chip in somebody - wouldn't you just kill him/her then?

      I can't see Osama rushing off to get one of these.

      --
      The perception of reality is more important than reality itself.
  60. A conspiracy of ignorance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Bible, by many accounts, is about 80% Roman propaganda, inspired by the same forces which are running things today, affecting our news agencies and textbook makers with just as much vigor as back then. There is a definite agenda at work here, and manufactured religions, (i.e. nearly all of them, including all of the big ones), are very much a part of the psychological programming at work.
    >>>>>

    Huh? Roman propaganda? Gentile (as opposed to Jewish), perhaps, but not Roman--early Christians were persecuted for a long time; it only stopped around the time of Constantine. Even then; you have to realize that most of the NT was written by Jews... Paul, [the writers of] Mark, Matthew, Hebrews, etc. are clearly Jewish. Granted, they no longer represented the Jewish orthodoxy; but if they did, they wouldn't be Christians any more...

    >>>>>
    If people believe in the apocalypse according to King James, that it is pre-destined, it will make it that much easier for those who intend to harvest us.
    >>>>>

    If you have any expectations whatsoever which are known to another party, they can be used to manipulate you. If you have no expectations whatsoever, you are out to lunch... I should hope that you expect the sun to rise tomorrow, or gravity to remain in effect (the mathematical descriptions thereof notwithstanding).

    >>>>>
    This is a free choice universe, a very powerful truth which some would like you to discard. While Jesus was very likely an enlightened teacher of great influence, his words have been massively corrupted.
    >>>>>

    Since theologians have been using the 'free will' defense for ages, I'm not sure who is asking whom to discard what. Are you talking about Calvinists here?

    "Massively corrupted" is rather nebulous. If you mean that the quotes of Jesus are likely not word-for-word, okay; if you mean something else, please explain (and give examples from the text). The ancients weren't so willy-nilly in quoting people as some suppose, however. I refer you to the beggining of _The_History_of_the_Pelophonesian_War_ for how one ancient historian got his quotes. It should be available on classics.mit.edu, IIRC.

    >>>>>
    The Bible is a HUGE lie; it promotes a linear reality, a shutting down of the natural human thinking and questioning process, filling people with a fear of knowledge and individual thinking, and it indoctrinates people with programs like,
    >>>>>

    The Bible does no such thing; people do. What, pray tell, is "linear reality"? If you mean the notion that all issues are black & white; I disagree. Even the Apostles debated various things amongst themselves, according to Acts...

    >>>>>
    "Turn the Other Cheek," and "The Meek Will Inherit", etc. --Exactly the kind of thinking you want people to have if you plan to harvest.
    >>>>>

    *Who* is planning to "harvest" whom??? Non-violent resistance *does* work, however. I refer you to MLK & Ghandi... not to mention the eventual Christianization of the Roman Empire...

    >>>>>
    Don't take over until people are ready to accept their "Shepherds" with open arms. It's all about efficiency and paths of least resistance.
    >>>>>

    Who is taking over what??? Do you think that silly "Jewish conspiracy" plans to take over the financial sector? Explain!

    >>>>>
    So you are right, stuff is starting to go down as predicted in the bible, but it is only because the whole damned thing is a set-up.
    >>>>>

    By whom? Who is in a position to 'set it up'? Do you think that someone decided that the best way to reform Israel was to convince Hitler to make war with everyone, then impose the 'Final Solution' so that afterwards, those who ended his tyranny would have sympathy & give them back their ancestral homeland? If it wasn't known beforehand, it could not be prophecy; if it was, everyone just says "it was obviously self-fulfilling" without bothering to explain who it influenced in what way & how said events would not have occured without it...

    > Shepherds tend their flocks, but they also fleece and butcher them.

    Historical context: in the time & place where those sayings were composed, sheep were too valuable to butcher. Sorry. The 'fleecing' bit is just wordplay.

  61. Tamper-proof ? by LJPeixoto · · Score: 1

    Hmmm...tamper-proof, huh ? Yeah...
    Crackers, anyone ?

    -- The world was built in six days. The seventh wa spent looking for the undo button ... --

  62. Aha! by Alien+Being · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think i've had a bunch of these things in my head for a long time. I never realized that my cluster headaches were of the beowulf variety.

  63. Recognise the design of the chip? by Pembers · · Score: 1

    Is it just me, or does the chip in the photo look rather like the tracker that Agent Smith sticks into Neo near the start of The Matrix?

    1. Re:Recognise the design of the chip? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2

      Looks more like the thing "Rollergirl" used on Fat B*stard...

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  64. Never by Perdo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Are you all fucking kidding me? You are all the guys that get hung up about so much as MAC addresses being seen as personnally identifiable on the internet. And none of you are ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGED that the FDA has approved IMPLANTED ID CHIPS? I will DIE before I end up with some fucking chip inside me. I don't have so much as a tattoo on me, I shure as hell don't need my life story on some fucking piece of flash memory inside my ass.

    Watch this story catch sub-1000 posts when it is more important and outragous than any five stories on the hof. I can deal with not being annonymous on the internet. I can choose not to use it if it comes to that. But if I cannot so much as walk down the street without every Corporation, Government and Asshole knowing more about me than I know myself, I am certainly no longer free, not by the greatest stretch of the imagination about "the good of mankind" or "medical miracles" or "protection from kidnapping"

    Gimme a fucking break. Have you seen the first test case family? They are freaks! the son is some 180 iq juvie with dreams of becoming arnold in terminator because he is fat and his lips are too big. Daddy has been smoking weed for 30 years. Mommy a vacant follower who does everything fat assed sonny says because he's smarter than she is. Their fucking quote is "It's all Derik's idea, he is so bright that we are taking his advice on this". Jesus Christ, the kid is still wet behind the ears.

    Derek's list of accomplishments at 14 (the wired article got it wrong):

    He's an MCSE/MCP/A+

    and is the owner of a fucking counsulting business

    You tell me, does everyone here want to follow this jackasses lead?

    --

    If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.

  65. Re:If this doesn't qualify as The Mark of the Beas by darien · · Score: 1

    Yeah. It'll be like a driving license, or a credit card. It won't be compulsory, just eventually you'll cave into having one because you'll get so much less hassle that way.

  66. Been there... by SkyLeach · · Score: 1

    said this...

    --
    My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so :-p
  67. Use DNA as the private key... by SkyLeach · · Score: 1

    Sure: a govm't agency or sufficiently large medical facility could sequence your DNA and thus steal your private key, but then they would have to get a look-alike for you, implant a false-broadcast chip in them and send them out to do their bidding.

    That would be a monumental, though not impossible feat.

    I wouldn't doubt that they could build a chip which grabbed a sample strand of dna and used it as the private key. I don't even think it would actually have to sequence all the chromosomes, just one should be long enough.

    --
    My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so :-p
    1. Re:Use DNA as the private key... by zenyu · · Score: 1

      Not a good idea, there are lots of repeats in the average strand of DNA and within a species the strands are practically identical. Even if you just used the bits that differed from the average people could just look at you and your family medical history and get a lot of the key.

  68. Scientologist? by Performer+Guy · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Harvest us?

    This sounds like a B-Movie script, you're not one of them Xenu hating folks are you?

    Your posting history suggests more of an MJ12 / illuminati freakery, but then you go on about all this programmed & harvesting stuff. So which is it. Give us the synopsis? What's your poison? Us poor dumb chickens need a label.

    1. Re:Scientologist? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      Make no mistake: Scientologists are a creeped out cult of assholes and suckers based on lame & confusing channeled crap from 'higher beings' which for all their superiority can't even conjugate a sentence.

      As for, "MJ12 / illuminati freakery". . .

      Sounds like your mind is already made up.

      Though it is interesting that you made note of my posting history. . .

      If you're truly seeking, then keep bugging me and perhaps I'll put on my tinfoil hat and talk 'crazy' just for you.

      In the mean time, I suggest you do some hunting around on your own. It's all out there if you have the courage. Castaneda is a good place to start. If you can't deal with that, then this path obviously isn't for you. Nothing wrong with being a chicken. I wouldn't opt for it myself, mind you. . .


      -Fantastic Lad

  69. bugs by fabiolrs · · Score: 1

    I hope microsoft doesnt touch a finger on these chips! :) Can anyone imagine human beings causing fatal errors or bsod? :))))

    sorry, i couldnt resist it!!

    --
    Fabio - Sumare/Sao Paulo/Brazil/South America/Earth/Solar System/Milky Way/Universe
    http://www.morroida.com.br
  70. Re:Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by tdye · · Score: 2

    MAybe if your friend's parents had been able to find her smoking at age 11, she might not be so mentally disturbed that she might kill herself if her parents could find her shooting heroin on the street at age 13. For fuck's sake, can we have some priorities? Assuming your friend's parents aren't abusive, they ought to have an eye on her 100% of the time, for her own good, until she can demonstrate she's able to control her own life.

  71. Demolition Man Anyone? by shoptroll · · Score: 1

    Gee, doesn't this sound like something out of the movies?

    --
    Insert Sig Here
  72. crypto? by yerricde · · Score: 1

    As near as I can tell, this thing just contains a number which can be read by any scanner you pass. So it's useless as a secure ID because anyone can get your code by scanning you and then using a programmable chip that sends out that code.

    How do you know it doesn't use a challenge-response system based on public-key crypto?

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  73. Want to build a reader??? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Here's a link to a great 2MB PDF on the subject. At 125kHz, it's really simple to recover the data. Note that antennas at that frequency are pretty large, and could, say, be wrapped around the trim of a doorway, or around the opening in the floor for a staircase, etc... you'd never know who was reading your key. Match a doorway reader with a digital camera, and poof! You've got an automatic ID database generator!

    --
    Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  74. Is the info on the chip editable? by Teko · · Score: 1

    If I have a chip implanted when I'm 5 years old, my address and medical history is most likely going to change half a dozen times by the time I'm an adult.

    How will information on the chip be changed or added to? Can they zap the info to it wirelessly, or will they have to dig the bugger out of my body when they want to change my phone number or add a medication to it?

  75. Now if I could just.... by zin · · Score: 1

    get this satalite out of my ass and replace it with a chip.... Damn aliens...

    --
    -ZiN-
  76. Encryption? by PerlPo8 · · Score: 1

    In the absence of any security, it seems like these devices could make identity theft even easier. I hope there will be be controls on who can access the information contained in these microchips. I for one have chosen to not wear a sign around my neck proclaiming my medical history for anyone who can read.

    --

    --
    "I'm don't know exactly what an AS/400 is, but I'm pretty certain I wouldn't want one up my ass" --Lou

  77. Unnecessary Implants by Sunkist · · Score: 1

    Creeping Zombie Jesus, why do these things always have to be IMPLANTED IN A PERSON?

    I mean damn, why can't this thing be a ring or (wonder of wonders) like a credit card.

    And another damn thing...for those of you who say this is good for medical emergencies, What the hell ever happen to those ID bracelets for medical emergencies!

    --
    No, Vern. They just let him in.
    1. Re:Unnecessary Implants by RetroGeek · · Score: 1

      mean damn, why can't this thing be a ring

      Oooooh, a secret decoder ring.....

      I got one of those in a CrackerJack Box :-)

      --

      - - - - - - - - - - -
      I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
  78. tattoo as id's by HighTeckRedNeck · · Score: 1
    Tattoos will be favored over an implantable chip for a variety of reasons.

    1. An implantable chip will become the target of electronic counter measures a. faraday shield to get past scanner undetected b. installed on/off switches c. reprogrammable ID's d. multiple chips implanted

    2. The more a system is trusted, the slacker human oversight becomes a. Lower paid workers are easer to bribe b. More intelligent workers take better paying jobs c. The innocent are assumed guilty, not the system (as if they care until it happens to them) d. The lower the probability of bypass the less alert the scanner e. Maintenance is ignored, and mean time to repair rises

    3. Tatoos have certain advantages a. They don't break and can't be turned off b. You can't claim it is was stolen without showing a large patch of missing skin c. Only the very evil will try to steal a tattoo and the punishment will be severe d. Everybody and their brother will work hard to find the thief e. A stolen tattoo won't last long f. Much harder to spoof the person scanning one. g. Not easy to reprogram and many modifications will be permanent

    Thankfully, due to the Bible, it will be a dark day before Big Brother gets to use them. You can understand why those that get one, and make it more socially acceptable, will be considered enemies of humanity and God.

    So, what they will do is set up a system with smart cards or implantable chips and let people get accustomed to the intrusion. Then there be a big media push about all the problems of the present system and the advantages of the tattoos. And it is down hill from there (assuming you don't think Bush's never ending "war on terrorism" isn't the first shot).

  79. Re:Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by cyclist1200 · · Score: 1

    she's been in control

    Yes she has been in control. Too bad she is obviously not ready to be in control.

  80. Re:Totally off-topic... by AftanGustur · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    Some tiem ago the /. signature system limited linelength so that now there is an extra space in my .signature

    Remove it and you will see..

    --
    echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
  81. DOH!! by Ghengis · · Score: 1

    It's the "Mark of the beast" ... and another way for the "authorities" to invade our privacy.

    --

    "The best laid plans of mice and men gang oft agley..." - ROBERT BURNS

  82. Don't need a chip by Catbeller · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You could wear a braclet with the chip embedded, or your fingerprint could be matched to a database, or your DNA, or your retinal pattern.

    The chip is a device to monitor movement. All other uses are an obfuscation of this fact.

    1. Re:Don't need a chip by Winged+Cat · · Score: 2

      Actually...in light of the current airport security, implanted may be almost the only way you can be sure you can carry electronics around. (Don't get me started about the "cyborg" who had his stuff ripped out - that was removable gear, as evidenced by the security staff removing it forcibly. I'm talking about stuff completely embedded inside one's skin.)

    2. Re:Don't need a chip by phossie · · Score: 1

      Old-style pacemakers are easily removable too... that series of events is just fucked up.

      --

      [|]
    3. Re:Don't need a chip by Winged+Cat · · Score: 2

      I remember someone saying that the first time someone dies because a pacemaker was removed, or turned off and on, security policy will be rewritten. Possible as in, "not until then will security policy be rewritten".

  83. Spooky? Finally! by mindhaze · · Score: 1

    It's about damned time! Now I can finally stop signing my cheques, or using PINs, or anything... just wave my hand over the register, and money is taken out of my account... Finally!

  84. This is how it will go down by Catbeller · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At first, the implantable chips will be used, just like now, to contain medical info and some identification. And for paranoid parents, living in the safest communities in the history of the human race, it will be used as an anti-milk carton safety device.

    The use for medical info is silly. Such a chip could be put into a watch, or a bracelet, or an earring, or a pendant.

    The use for children will endear the tracker to parents, but think: if the chip responds to a radio signal, than a rather cheap device can be built to find the chip on the child's body. A person sick enough to kidnap a child would have no problem cutting the chip out of the body. They might even think it an extra dollop of fun.

    So, I ask, why a chip...

    Well, first of all, it's going to make its developers rich, as it becomes more widely used, and eventually, mandatory.

    The first effect of the the chip's existence is the acclimatization of people to the idea that a device can be implanted into them which will enable others to track their movements. Our generation will balk, but the next will be okay with it, and the one after won't even question it. Think of urine tests for jobs, and endless civil rights violations commonly committed today in the name of fighting drugs, and now, terrorism.

    Next, the chip will be implanted involunarily into former felons, and later into 'lawbreakers' at a judge's discretion. All these uses will be applauded in the name of public safety. Of course, the number of people now regarded as "felons" is swelling, now that the drug laws are being enforced in a draconian fashion. There are probably millions of people qualified today to wear a chip by legislative or judicial decree.

    Of course, a real criminal will find a way to circumvent the device, or remove it entirely. Only moderately law-abiding people will continue to carry it.

    next up, you guessed it, Businesses! In the name of preventing terrorism, monitoring employee theft of materiel or company time, and just plain convenience, lower level employees (NEVER executives, unless there is a security reason to do so) will find that having the chip implanted is a requirement for employment. At first, we'll see defense-related companies requiring trackers, but after that gains acceptance, then other companies will follow... eventually most of them, or at least the ones that pay well, will require some sort of tracker.

    Of course, Schools!! Thinking Of The Children, we will of course require our threatened kinder to wear these devices as a condition of even having an education. It'll start out small, somewhere -- a schoolyeard killing with no way of finding the killer, or a child molestation, crimes that will make a privacy proponent think hard when it comes to protesting. but like metal detectors, drug testing, strip searches, and the like, it'll be accepted. As the majority of the current SCOTUS opines, if you are underage, you have no constitutional rights. And if you protest, you are a DRUGGIE parent who should send your kids to a DRUGGIE school. (I'm not making that last part up. It's staggering.)

    Let's see: next up, consumer convenience. A chip, in addition to tracking, can give you e-cash abilities. Buy a coke, pay for it by swiping your hand into a detector. That may be a killer app.

    The chip can be used for national ID, eliminating all the birth certificates, social security cards, drivers' licenses, company ID's, resumes, credit histories... endless stuff. People will find this liberating.

    But it also means: anyone who wants to, will be able to track your movements for the totality of your life, at least the parts where you interact with society.

    It means that, increasingly, to get an education, to get student loans, to enter the country, to get a job, to have a career, to get a passport, you will have to surrender your body to an implant gun. And now since the FDA has so conveniently taken medical people out of the loop, anyone can demand to shove one into you, literally.

    And since the U.S. is now forcing other countries to change their constitutions (think Norway, I recall, and the Scientologists) to reflect our laws, there will be increasingly no place to go to get away from this. Hell, the U.S. may be one of the more relaxed implementations.

    If any of you think that this is acceptable, then there is nothing I can say that will change your mind. And I will attempt to establish a new country on a Pacific island, I swear.

    1. Re:This is how it will go down by pcs305 · · Score: 1

      Can you say "identity theft"? Any nut with a scanner can walk past you, take your info and replace his own chip with your info. You wont feel a thing, although your bank account may feel it.

    2. Re:This is how it will go down by Reziac · · Score: 2

      Mod this guy up. This is the first time I've seen anyone consider ALL the implications of such a device.

      And when you start your new country, it's gonna get REAL crowded REAL fast. Unless you prohibit immigration, of course. Maybe stop all the microchipped folk at the border.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    3. Re:This is how it will go down by greymond · · Score: 1

      a little far fetched but whats to stop me (lets say im a medical student or doctor) from killing someone (who looks similar to me) and cutting there chip out putting it into me - then even though i look different who's to say im not that person....

    4. Re:This is how it will go down by Perdo · · Score: 2

      "And I will attempt to establish a new country on a Pacific island, I swear."

      I'll help.

      --

      If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.

    5. Re:This is how it will go down by cyb3r0ptx · · Score: 1

      What's to stop you?

      How about ethics and morality... errr, I mean nothing..

    6. Re:This is how it will go down by PeeOnYou2 · · Score: 1

      I with you 100% on this one... more and more lately I'm wishing that the entire Earth hadn't been mapped, or some big continent was out there not discovered yet.. I would love to just start everything from scratch, and try to do it right for once...

    7. Re:This is how it will go down by dadragon · · Score: 1

      And when you start your new country, it's gonna get REAL crowded REAL fast. Unless you prohibit immigration, of course. Maybe stop all the microchipped folk at the border.

      I nominate Quebec as that country. They want to leave, and if they outlaw such shit, I'll be one of the first to immigrate.

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
    8. Re:This is how it will go down by evilmrhenry · · Score: 1

      I have thought about this, and have some ideas.

      Uninhabited wasteland. Either Antarctica or just buy the northern part of Russia. (Cheap, but still costs money. Also rather cold.)

      Tropical islands/oil rigs. (Not enough room for everyone.)

      Mars/Moon. (Harder to get to/live on.)

      As most of the people going for this would likely be involved in computers or other high knowledge industries, the lack of farmable land should not be a problem.

      I would consider Mars or the moon to be the best candidate in the long run, (~200 years) although technology is not good enough yet.

      While waiting for Mars to become usable, I would look very closely at Russia, as it has a fairly good climate, enough land area, and an easally (sp) bribed government short on money who might be persuaded to let go of a small chunk of land.

      I wish I had no reason to talk about this seriously, but it is too late for America.

    9. Re:This is how it will go down by Reziac · · Score: 2

      Ah! that gives me an idea: Let Quebec secede, then ship all the residents off to France (since they have such a love for 18th century French culture) and we geeks can take over the newly-created and newly-emptied country!! :)

      "For Our first act as Alpha Geek, We decree that there shall be a new hard drive in every pot!"

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    10. Re:This is how it will go down by maxpublic · · Score: 1

      And I'll be one of the last, shoving my (now illegal) .38 into the face of the government implanter saying "over my fucking dead body...".

      Which will be soon enough, as anyone who actually goes armed and refuses the chip Must Have Something To Hide(TM), and therefore is a terrorist. Or a drug dealer. Or whatever the hell we're at war with then.

      By all that's holy, let Canada resist this brand of obscenity. I'd hate to run there only to find that they're acting the lap-dog to American politicians....

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    11. Re:This is how it will go down by maxpublic · · Score: 1

      Jesus man, you actually *want* to live in a country where half the population thinks it's French???

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    12. Re:This is how it will go down by dadragon · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's closer to 85%, it's just 50-50 in Montreal. Anyway, yes.. living there is better than living in a "free" society that forces implantable id chips on its citizens.

      I'd rather be a CITIZEN of Quebec, than a SUBJECT of the ROC or America.

      (for those of you who don't know, there's two main parts of Canada, Quebec & Ontario, and the ROC (Rest of Canada))

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
    13. Re:This is how it will go down by Reziac · · Score: 2

      I guess you don't mind the fact that many schools in Quebec forbid children to speak anything but French, eh? And that there have been cases of children being taken away from their parents because the immigrant parents spoke some other language at home. Or that you don't have the right to sign your business in just English -- French must predominate.

      Yep, Quebec is real free, all right. The French Revolution finally comes to North America. Can the guillotine be far behind??

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  85. See your vet first by RNLockwood · · Score: 1

    The Applied Digital Solutions chip sounds nearly identical to the one produced by a company in Corona, CA, for implantation in animals, especially pets, for identification. I think that the vets charge about $40 and there is not yearly database fee. The insertion process takes less than 5 minutes including registering the data.

    I don't suppose that the chip costs more than a dollar so the markup from Applied Digital Solutions is really high so their stock should rise.

    Nate

    --
    Nate
  86. Its not going in me- I'll desert first... by BoneFlower · · Score: 2

    First, the FDA did not approve the device. They simply made an administrative determination that they do not posess the authority to approve or deny the devices use.

    Second... All biblical stuff aside, this is disturbing. Installation is a simple procedure according to the artice, but what about removal? I assume its probably simple, but who knows?

    Thankfully, its an opt in device.

    I can see a handful of legitimate uses for such a device being mandatory. Well, one. Special operations forces could use a similar device with a GPS reciever for coordinating with other teams and higher headquarters. Those sorts of operators must travel light and can't lose equipment or they could give their position away, so there would be significant tactical benefit to it being mounted internally. For regular troops, external GPS will work just as well if not better with less privacy concerns. Remember, while joining the Armed Forces means giving up some of your constitutional rights, the general doctrine for such things is constitutional rights may only be sacrificed when ABSOLUTELY necesary for building an effective force and maintaining military discipline. An implanted ID card like this just goes too far for anyone but special operations.

    Still, while I don't like it, as long as it remains optional, its ok. For most people though, SMART cards will probably be better, and if you need emergency notification of the hospital in the event of emergency, a heart rate monitor(they should be smaller than the one I used when I was a kid) attached externally to the waist with a transmitter shoudl work just as well...

    1. Re:Its not going in me- I'll desert first... by phossie · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'd guess that if this becomes worst-case prevalent (IMO), members of the military would probably be the only people *not* required to have this crap implanted. Think about it for a second. As a tactician, would you really want this easily detectable identification device that can't be removed at any given moment?

      I wouldn't... "special forces" are special because they are trained well enough that they *don't* require the kind of support other troops do.

      Of course, I have no idea what I'm talking about.

      --

      [|]
  87. From Then On, Kidnappers... by istartedi · · Score: 2

    ...would make it a point to do a little amature surgery shortly after the abduction. I mean, many of them are just going to rape and kill the kid anyway, what difference does a little scanning and cutting make? If they hit an artery, no biggy, just find another kid.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  88. If you're going to think carefully... by HiThere · · Score: 2

    What evidence is there that there ever existed a historical character corresponding to Jesus?
    This is all based on second had sources, but I tend to believe it:
    1) The Essenes had similar stories years before 1 AD. I seem to remember that the time from their records was 300 or 400 BC.
    2) The records of the trial were not preserved by either the Jews or the Romans, both of which were carefull record keepers.
    3) Much of the work, when read from a certain perspective, seems to be more a radical political party manufering in a theological society than anything that we'd currently call religion.
    4) John the Baptist was a political revolutionary on the model of Elijah.
    5) Jesus was called a rabbi, and I believe that the rules of the time required that a rabbi be married with children. (Prophet seems more accurate, but the prophets were at least as much political as religious ... the two tended to be mixed.)
    N.B.: I acknowledge that this point doesn't directly address the historical nature, except to indicate an inconsistentcy, but it certainly indicates that any historical figure who might have been there didn't closely match the current conception.
    6) For a miracle to be believed in, any alternate explanation should be less probable. For me, at least, the belief that the story was the work of an underground political group attempting to stir up popular sentiment is at least as plausible as accepting that it is historically valid.
    7) Large parts of the New Testament were purged at the Council of Nicea. Largely because they would make it too difficult for the Bible to be believed as truth. (There may well be other reasons, as we don't know all of what got purged, but only a few examples.)
    8) The Bible was for centuries under the control of a central authority that proclaimed which versions were valid and which were not. Much of what is in the bible is known to be from a prior period, but much isn't, also. I expect that a great deal of "editing for consistency" was done during this period.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    1. Re:If you're going to think carefully... by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 2

      We do not have original texts for, well, any of it, but we DO have many copies of most books, or at least major sections of most books.

      These copies have been dated to ~100-200 AD, and are in geographically disparate locations. Even though they are far apart, they are nearly identical. Most scholars who have looked at the evidence agree that for somethign to spread so far and change so little is a rather impressive accomplishment for the time. It stands to reason that very little "editorial slant" has been added to the New Testament books over time.

      (Most of this post is what I remember from The Case for Christ by Lee Sobel. It's a darn good book for the non-history-major who wants to know more about the evidene behind Christianity.)

      --
      ± 29 dB
    2. Re:If you're going to think carefully... by HiThere · · Score: 2

      But just from the title, you know in advance that it's a work of advocacy. This doesn't mean that it is necessarily a tissue of lies, but it does mean that all opinions will be presented from a "believing" perspective, and that contradictory evidence will tend to be ... ignored.

      Of course, there is also the matter that even if you established that there was a singleton radical social-religious philosopher of the time who came to a bad end, and that he was called Joshusa, and that his mother was named Mary, and that his mother was married to a carpenter named Joseph ... etc. That still wouldn't establish a diety. But I don't believe that the foregoing "generally accepted characterisations" can be established. The tax records, e.g., seem to be missing. They don't show up in the census that is the ostensible reason for their making the trip to Bethlehem.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:If you're going to think carefully... by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2
      The problem with all of this thinking is that you are assuming that just because a document exists, and because the, "Jews and Romans were meticulous record keepers," that the information must be honest by virtue of its existence.

      Look at how the media today is skewed on purpose, not through editorial slanting, not through errors in translation, but because there are people who want certain views to be broadcast. And yes, one could ask, "Why would the Romans want any information which is so anti-Roman as the bible to be distributed? It makes no sense!"

      Well, think. . .

      Does today's CIA have America's best interests at heart? --Think about things like their covert support of the hard drug trade. --And plans like this whole microchips in people thing which has 'secret service' stamped all over it. In the most utterly simple terms, it pays in huge returns in both arms sales, and for reasons of political leverage for them to spread hatred of Americans in other nations. Gee! This crap with the middle east has vaulted Bush's popularity to all time highs? No shit? (And that's the MOST simple application of the idea.)

      Now think: Is it not reasonable to believe that the Romans had their own secret service? (A centuries old empire? They MUST have!) --And is it not reasonable to believe that it was corrupt? --Democracy certainly doesn't work to control such agencies today, and the same forces which would wish to corrput such an agency were just as real then as they are now. Quite simply, the same way the American secret agencies manipulate CNN and public thought patterns, the Roman counterparts were involved in similar activities aimed at shaping the public psyche. The various books of the bible would without question have been prime targets.

      The place where people are getting derailed in this thinking is that they are allowing the 'impossible' to prevent the pieces to fall together in a meaningful way. This is the primary lie you are being distracted from noticing. All you need do is climb out of the neat little boxes. If you are going to think archeology, you must also think geology. . , and that's a very very simple example. You must be willing to go against the flow and put several VERY VERY obvious areas of current news, history and scientific disciplines together in order to form the whole picture. The fact that such a simple task is found practically impossible by nearly everybody is a tribute to just how effective the programming has been.

      Are you up to it? Try it just for fun and see where it leads you. You might want to start with a word like, 'Abductions'.

      But then, you might not. Makes no difference to me.


      -Fantastic Lad

    4. Re:If you're going to think carefully... by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 1

      All I can say is read the book. The book does not address the issue of tax records (that I've seen yet, I'm only halfway through) but everything else you mentioned is covered.

      With a title like that, you could see it as an advocacy book from the start, but the author was a noted atheist before he started researching for the book.

      --
      ± 29 dB
  89. Hmm... reminds me of something. by Vernalex · · Score: 1

    Oh yeah. It sounds like a bad cyberpunk movie. I guess it's almost time to become a decker...

    --
    "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, and the pessimist fears this is true." --James
  90. Great for theives by Muttonhead · · Score: 1
    Just drive up and down the highway scanning people with your implant scanner and your hacked credit card database on your trusty laptop. Now you know which motorists to pull over and rob: those making $100,000 or more.

    Seriously, the reason for all this is that the U.S. is losing power. The international community is asking the U.S. to be a participant, rather than a world bully as exemplified by the Kyoto summit. The U.S. is as distrustful as an Israeli in the Middle East in giving up even a little power though. So we (the U.S.) are wrenching all over the place trying to find new sources of power, e.g. these goddamned hair-brain chip implant ideas.

  91. FDA's stance? Inconsistent? by GungaDan · · Score: 2
    FDA's decision that these are not medical devices and thus don't fall under FDA regulations strikes me as odd. Here's how FDA defines "medical device:"

    "The definition of a medical device appears in section 201(h) of the FD&C Act. A device is "...an instrument, apparatus, implement, machine, contrivance, implant, in vitro reagent, or other similar or related article, including a component, part, or accessory, which is recognized in the official National Formulary, or the United States (U.S.) Pharmacopeia, or any supplement to them, intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, in man or other animals, or intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals, and which does not achieve any of its primary intended purposes through chemical action within or on the body of man or other animals and which is not dependent upon being metabolized for the achievement of any of its primary intended purposes."

    So why is a silicone bag under the skin a medical device and a rice-grain-sized electronic gizmo is not? Contact lenses are FDA regulated devices. Tampons and pads are regulated. Band-aids are regulated. This thing is being marketed as something to facilitate access to medical information, and it certainly affects the function of whatever body part it's implanted in by making that part suddenly able to produce information through interaction with radio waves. How is that not, "intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, in man or other animals, or intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals?" Someone? Anyone? This strikes me as FDA saying, "ooh, controverted issue. Run away! Run away!"

    --
    Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
  92. OPTIONAL by greymond · · Score: 1

    as long as its optional i dont care, but the minute it because similar to gattica - as in i can only get a decent job if i have an implant because there to lazy to do a background check on me or whatever then this is problem

  93. A bit of background on the chips. by toothless+joe · · Score: 1

    The Verichip is nothing more than a passive microchip that is implanted in the subject. This technology has been used since 1985 to track livestock and is currently being marketed to the upscale, urban pet markets. Strays are often routinely chipped, in order to see how often they end up in the pound. If they're in-and-out, then well, they're put down.

    The reason that the FDA determined that the Verichip is not a medical device is because it really isn't. It is rather small and is implanted through a large syringe. It leaves a small scar, not horrible but noticable. The chips are coated with a special protein to avoid rejection; the host's cells assume that it is native organic material. (Interestingly, sometimes this is ineffective and the chip will "migrate" throughout the host's body)

    As speculated in the thread, the only information a particular chip contains is a single, unique number. Anytime the chip's circuit is activated by a scanner, it will reply with this number. It is not encrypted in any form at this point. It should be noted, however, that now that these chips are approved, other, more secure chips could be brought to market. Think of this ruling as a "foot in the door".

    The company that makes the Verichip already sells GPS tracking chips that are not implantable (used in bracelets, watches, etc.). It is reasonable to assume that the Verichip 2.0 will contain this functionality. They are currently marketing this technology as a "cure" for corporate kidnappings in South America, which are much more common than you might imagine.

    The company swears (at this point) that they will not sell the chips to anyone who makes them mandatory, including corporations, prisons, and governments.

    This technology is upon us. It is important to understand it and make strides to avoid its abuse.

  94. It;'s the Digital Angel people again by Animats · · Score: 2
    This seems to be the Digital Angel people again. They've been hyping various GPS-based locator gadgets, for both humans and vehicles, for a year or two now. But they haven't shipped them. And their vaporware products are being overtaken by those of others. Digital Angel's people locator requires a wristwatch device plus a pager-sized box to be carried around. Slashdot carried a story last week about a unit that does the whole job in the wristwatch.

    Digital Angel talks about vehicle location systems, while others have been shipping them for years. Big deal.

    Implanted ID chips for pets have also been around for years. There are at least three vendors, (Digital Angel is one) and they're not compatible. So they're of limited use. They're just short-range RF tags, anyway.

    If anybody had a good method for powering an implanted device, it would be used for pacemakers.

  95. supermarket checkout by Alien+Being · · Score: 1

    People will need these things so they can avoid paying a 100% surcharge on groceries when the food vendors make them mandatory.

    Jolt Cola:
    with the chip: $1.29
    regular price: $2.59
    YOU SAVE : $1.30 WOW!!!

    Year-to-date saving $1700 DOUBLE-WOW!!!

    -----------------

    Notice from your health insurance provider. "Our records" indicate that your diet...
    Estimated surcharge...

  96. Re:Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by ReidMaynard · · Score: 1

    You are too stupid to live.

    This is not a human Lo-Jack.

    The best this does is say (when a severed limb is found) ... "Oh, we found Suzy Smith's arm!"

    However, I imagine a human Lo-Jack is just around the corner.

    OTOH, the reason this works for pets is because they are to stupid to use the spoken language and say "I'm Spot and it sucked being in the woods for two days, take me home to 325 Spring Lane please".

    If you have a child with simular spoken language problems, and you let them roam free for hours, I guess this implant is right for you....

    --
    -- www.globaltics.net

    Political discussion for a new world

  97. Re:Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by Yakko · · Score: 1
    they ought to have an eye on her 100% of the time

    I would've jumped off the nearest bridge the moment my father's back was turned if he had tabs on me 100% of the time (and thus, would beat me mightily for -every- little thing I did).

    I'll never have kids partly because of him, and partly because of crap like this. And mostly because I know I won't be an effective parent.

    --

    --
    Me spell chucker work grate. Need grandma chicken.
  98. Re:Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 1

    wtf is dope-hell....

    And no, the time kids can do whatever they want is NOT over. Parents have things called white lies. If you were smart you would carefully 'monitor' the location with this chip and let the growing person never know about the chip, only making it known if and when it was absolutely necessary. SO please, don't be paranoid about it, it's disgusting.

    --
    I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
  99. Who let the bitch speak? by PeeOnYou2 · · Score: 1

    "And Jacobs' wife, Leslie, believes the chip could become a tamper-proof way to identify people in an increasingly insecure world. "

    tamper-proof my ass.. if i ever got one of these in my goddamn body you can bet your life that I would be tryin to hack that shit...

  100. Re:Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by PeeOnYou2 · · Score: 1

    Uhm... yeah... how long do you think its going to take some kid to realize that he's got a goddamn chip in his fucking right hand when he goes to the airport and the ID scanner pulls up some info on him... and then he's going to be all the more fucking pissed that you never told him, and will hate you for life... besides all his friends will probably know too and you can damn well bet he'll ask you if he's got one too.. lie to him about that one and there goes the trust for life...

  101. Re:Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by PeeOnYou2 · · Score: 1

    (Sorry about the long post. Just had a lot of thoughs going in my head about the subject.)

    It's fine.. happens to us all...

    Don't we all put controlled substances into our bodies?

  102. You're Reacting, not Thinking. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2
    You're extremely inconsistent in your arguments.

    Nope. You're just knee-jerking without thinking this through.

    Does today's CIA have America's best interests at heart? --Think about things like their covert support of the hard drug trade. --And plans like this whole microchips in people thing have 'secret service' stamped all over it. The CIA is just a pawn of hidden forces which don't care about the U.S., and yet, the CIA remains an agency peopled by Americans. --Thus, their actions are 'American' in the most nuts and bolts sense. This is how I meant it when I said the bible was 80% Roman propaganda. Perhaps this was misleading, since it wasn't strictly a Roman born idea, but they enacted and enforced it; they mass-burned the clearer writings, put false prophets into place, and allowed easy distribution of the twisted materials. So who the hell else am I going to pin all this Roman funded activity on? Lizards? Sheesh.

    Now think: Is it not reasonable to believe that the Romans had their own secret service? (A centuries old empire? They MUST have!) --And is it not reasonable to believe that it was corrupt? --Democracy certainly doesn't work to control such agencies today, and the same forces which would wish to corrput such an agency were just as real then as they are now. Quite simply, the same way the American secret agencies manipulate CNN and public thought patterns, the Roman counterparts were involved in similar activities aimed at shaping the public psyche. The various books of the bible would have been prime targets.

    The place where people are getting derailed in this thinking is that they are allowing the 'impossible' to prevent the pieces to fall together in a meaningful way. This is the primary lie you are being distracted from noticing. All you need do is climb out of the neat little boxes. If you are going to think archeology, you must also think geology. . , and that's a very very simple example. You must be willing to go against the flow and put several VERY VERY obvious areas of current news, history and scientific disciplines together in order to form the whole picture. The fact that such a simple task is found practically impossible by nearly everybody is a tribute to just how effective the programming has been.

    Are you up to it? Try it just for fun and see where it leads you.


    -Fantastic Lad

    1. Re:You're Reacting, not Thinking. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2
      id be interested to hear about your theory in more depth. i could write a shitty scifi novel with it.

      Doubt it. Writers must have the ability to think beyond popular pre-set parameters.

      But your attempt to snicker at the different kid has paid off in gold! --You can now return to the highschool cafeteria and play at being 'cool' with your pose or whatever.

      Now, be off with you! Go make a poorly designed juvenile attempt at a counter culture website or whatever it is you think you do. --Hint; griping about gender differences and actually considering it clever content says more about you than you should ever want people to know. (Can't believe I bothered to check your site! You got me at a low-energy point this evening. Feel blessed.)


      -Fantastic Lad

  103. Good thinking, unfortunately you missed the point. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2
    It is currently no trouble whatsoever for secret agencies to track and watch anybody they want. --Not the CIA, FBI, NSA, etc. --I'm talking about the real secret agencies with no letters who have access to the real high tech systems currently available only to the true shadow agencies.

    This whole implanted chip thing is WAY too obvious. As such, its true nature is almost certainly meant primarily to be psychological. It's designed to piss people off and increase their tension level. (Especially among southern law enforcement agencies and right wing anti-government types who love their guns.) Why do you think they would make something like this line up with the whole 'independantly related' number of the beast crap?

    Try this on for size:

    Practically EVERY fascist government in history has begun the same way: People were rioting or revolting or what have you. This gave whatever leadership available at the time the context and excuse underwhich to bring in the heavy forces and do away with all semblance of civility and personal rights.

    Think about this, and don't thunder about and get angry with what I'm saying, because this is not a direct course of manipulation designed to be open to immediate interpretation. If it were obvious, it wouldn't work. When the camel's back breaks, it will not be because of this whole chip thing, but it wouldn't be able to happen without it and other such methods by which the temperature has quietly been raised to boiling for the poor frog!

    Watch and listen. . .

    Hey! Did anybody else notice how for the first time they slipped the word, "FEMA" into Martin Sheen's mouth on "The West Wing" this Wednesday. . . (My current favorite source of mind control and propaganda!)

    Look, watch and learn. . . You don't get to see the end of the world unfold every day. There is some really clever work going on right now.


    -Fantastic Lad

  104. The next step by Ogerman · · Score: 2

    This is ultimately a pretty silly device, but it wouldn't be such a bad idea to make a big public fuss over it either way--simply on principle. A real danger would be some sort of next generation id-chip that injects nano-tech transmitters that cannot be removed with a scalpel and tweezers. The next step after that would be some sort of mind control functionality by interfacing nano-tranceivers with neurons. Think "a Clockwork Orange" meets the Borg..

  105. Re:Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by geekoid · · Score: 2

    You make good points, but how many times does you young daughter sneak out before you need to take extreme actions?
    Not all rebelious children are the result of bad parenting.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  106. Can of worms... by Gerbil912 · · Score: 1

    Just wait until the right wing Baptist preachers hear about this one!

  107. Re:If this doesn't qualify as The Mark of the Beas by j3110 · · Score: 2

    Actually, that came with the King James translation. Royalty address themselves in plural.

    --
    Karma Clown
  108. silly rabbits, public safety is not the concern by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

    Why is it that the most contrived situations (kidnappings, medical situations involving odd alergic reactions, etc) are accepted as valid when considering this technology yet we'll outlaw every gun on the planet despite a large number of situations where they might be useful (ie if someone is breaking into your house the mere sound of a pump shotgun will make them flee)? When we're willing to allow our every movement to be tracked but unwilling to stop laws from eroding our existing rights we know that the end is near. As the saying went, those who trade freedom for security lose both. And deserve neither.

  109. Exodus, diaspora by SimCash · · Score: 1
    And I will attempt to establish a new country on a Pacific island, I swear"
    Wake up and smell the masses my friend. Several posts have said that they will escape to a better place, but until we can move to the moon (any bets?), or further, you can no longer run away from governments that will tax you beyond any reason (95% rates in UK, 105% rates in some Scandanavian country, so I've heard). In the USA at least, the "victim-jockeys" have discovered that 51% of the voters can make it so the other 49% have to support them, and the tax burden is spiralling hopelessly in that direction. Be careful that you do not confuse privacy with freedom, they are not the same at all. Being required to prove who you are before you can access a bank account (buy something) or see someone's medical records (prove to the information-holder that you are authorized to see these private records) is not solved by anything that you can hold (or have injected like a subcutaneous piercing --- no doctor required). It is only solved by a true live biometric measurement. It is not an infringment on your privacy to expect you to present positive ID before you access this sort of information.

    On the other hand, just as there are Web sites that specialize in letting you hide your true identity, there will be debit cards that perform exactly that function, so you will be able to buy your pr0n and eat it too.

  110. That Kid has a chance by GreenHairedDave · · Score: 1

    When God said "our" it is referring to the Trinity - God in three persons - The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

    I agree - you can twist the Bible's words anyway you want to, but as Paul said, if you're preaching anything other than the truth, then you are a deciever and God takes care of them, it's not our job.

    The third thing is, if that little 6 year old kid doesn't see the sacrifice of Jesus when He took our places on the cross, then yah, he will spend eternity separated from God. The sad thing is, we all fall short. We all can't make it on our own, we need Him. But don't be forlorn, everyone gets a chance to accept Him. The bible says "Even the rocks and the trees will cry out" if we don't go out and be His witnesses.

    This kid, who has lived a perfect life as any other human being, has sinned. So have we. We can't judge, it's not our job. We're in the same lot with that kid. The bible also says we can't get into Heaven by works alone. If we could get into Heaven by following the laws of God, then Christ would have died in vain, and preaching and witnessing would all be pointless, because God came down to Earth, put limits on his perfection and unbounded strength and power to be one of us, so we would trust Him.

    On one weekend, what we now celebrate as Easter, Christ was beaten, spit upon, speared, pierced with a crown of thorns, and then finally nailed to a cross on the place called Calvary. There, He recieved shame and guilt, though he was sinless. He lived through everything we lived through, and never sinned - because the sacrifice needed to pay for our sins had to be pure.

    Back in the days of the Law of Moses, when people sinned they went to the altar and burned the best animals they owned in place of them as a sacrifice, because The Sacrifice had yet to come. Why? Because God said "The wages of sin is death," and in this case death means "eternal separation from God." God came down as God the Son, in human form, to be the sinless ultimate sacrifice.

    When Jesus was hanging on the cross, he felt the pain and agony, but also the shame and guilt of every pedophile, murderer, rapist, liar, bigot, you, me, our families, our christian and non-christian friends and enemies alike. All of us. Every sin ever committed or ever will be committed. All of that, all at once. He lifted his head and said "Father, why have you rejected me!?", then He says "It is finished," and he dies. And He did it all for you. And me too.

    Now Satan is throwing a party, the battle is over, he's got it in the bag now, Jesus is dead!

    A couple days later, the stone blocking the tomb is rolled away, Jesus folds the graveclothes up all nice and neat, and then He walks out of the tomb and looks at Satan and says "Is that all you got?"

    That's my faith. That's my religion. It's not a list of dos and don'ts, it's a personal relationship with the only God who was big enough to conquer death and my shortcomings; the God who forgives - the God who died for me and by whom I am able to be dead to the world and through Him have life.

    The world tells you things like going to church religiously (no pun intended) and praying, caring for others, believing in God and trusting Him to lead my life according to His will, and standing up for what I believe without becoming an obstacle for someone else by arguing, are all ways that I am in bondage because of my faith. But surely today, I am telling you the truth when I say that I do not do these things to buy my way into Heaven, and I am in no prison. On the contrary, in Him I have my freedom from the things of this world that would tempt me to separate myself from God: sexual immorality, vulgarity, lust, lying, violence, getting angry and saying things I don't mean, cheating, any other number of things the rest of the world doesn't even usually give much of a second thought to. The things that separate us from God are what we call sin, that's what it means. Any of you ever had a question of what defines a sin, then there's your answer. If something separates you from God and His will, then it's a sin. And because God is perfect, He can't hang out with sin.

    So comin down to earth as one of us, to take our places, was the only way He could keep His own standards of perfection that He demands of us (ie, the wages of sin are death) was to take our places.

    But God is bigger than death, and that's why He rose again and why Easter is not just for kids or "devout Christians", it's for everyone. It's victory day.

    I celebrate my renewal, my redemption from myself that I am ashamed of, that even though I'm no saint He walks and talks with me everyday, and because He wore my clothes of shame and guilt for all the things I've done, I can wear His coat of righteousness and Holiness. God's love is for everyone, not just the good kids, not just the bad kids, not just the fat kids or kids who climb on rocks. Everybody. All you have to do is come to Him and you don't even have to use pretty words or include "Thee's and Thou's" or even "Thy's", just say in your own words, however you say them or in whatever language you speak or think comfortably:

    Dear God, I know I'm not perfect, none of us are. I know the only way I'm going to be whole and pure again is something I can't do on my own. I don't want to live this life where I feel ashamed of what I am, unsure and uncertain about just about everything. Lord please, I need you in my life, to help close the gap between my shortcomings and your perfection. Come into my life Lord, and I'll let you take the wheel. Thank you Father for taking my place, for wiping my slate clean, and I ask that for the rest of my days my eyes stay on you. Amen. (Or you can even say "bye", God doesn't mind, it's like I said before, you don't need fancy words, God wants you to be personal with Him.)

    Anyway, that's my .02 - If you said that prayer just now, and you have asked God to do that for you, then guess what, you've just been saved. Being a Christian means you're saved and you *want* to be Christ-like. E-mail me if you made this decision, and I'll do my best to point you in the right direction. I don't have all the answers, and I don't pretend to, but I will search with you so that we both can grow in Him.

    Matthew 28:19-20 "Therefore go and make disciples of ALL nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." - Holy Bible, NIV

    --
    The Raging Tech - an IT professional's take on love, life, gaming, tv, movies, technology, entrepreneurial woe, and blog
  111. Re:Spooky? Not if you're a parent. by tdye · · Score: 2

    Right... I'll note that you didn't bother to quote what I said about abuse. The fact is, you'd have jumped off a bridge because of fear of beatings, not because you were being monitored. Let's talk about the real issue here and not cloud it with spillover from other areas. A child who's parents don't abuse him has wou;dn't be driven to suicide by constant monitoring. Likewise, a child that can be trusted not to shoot heroin (Heroin! For fuck's sake, is that *ever* okay?) doesn't need constant monitoring.

  112. Re:If this doesn't qualify as The Mark of the Beas by NumbThumb · · Score: 1

    afaik, the plural appears even in hebrew version of the Bible (which is as original as it gets, isn't it ?)

    btw: Maybe someone could give me a little bible-lesson ? Where in the Bible does it say that the antichrist has a Mark on his head ? I thought, the one with the "T" on his forehead was Kain... What does that stand for, anyway ?

    --
    I have discovered a truly remarkable sig which this 120 chars is too small to contain.
  113. Re:If this doesn't qualify as The Mark of the Beas by j3110 · · Score: 1

    I wasn't aware that it was in hebrew. I should go back and see if he speaks before he makes an atmosphere, because that would be funny :)

    BTW, I'm 90% sure that it says that the antichrist has 666 writen on his forhead in revelations. I used to be X-tian, but there are only so many contradictions that you can tolerate. It's not all that devine. Perfect beings don't contradict themselves.

    --
    Karma Clown