Slashdot Mirror
Indonesians Want To Microchip AIDS Patients
Lawmakers in Papua, Indonesia have thrown their support behind a bill requiring some HIV/AIDS patients to be implanted with microchips in order to better monitor the disease. In addition, legislator John Manangsang said by implanting chips in "sexually aggressive" patients, authorities would be in a better position to identify, track and punish those who deliberately infect others. Health workers and rights activists sharply criticized the plan. It would make the dating scene a lot less scary if you could carry your AIDS chip reader into the club.
i'd expect this to lead to a false sense of security, causing a rise in the casual encounter rate, followed rapidly by a huge growth in the infection rate.
but, i'm paranoid.
will they be installing everyone else with RFID readers>?
Tattoo it to their genitalia. That way, nobody would know except for the people they deliberately tried to infect.
If this were to happen the amount of people who actually get tested for AIDS or HIV would drop. Just being marked like that would make people hesitate, and that is not something we want. I would rather have everyone get tested than have the number of people tested drop dramatically but know for sure those who did test positive have it.
That's pretty ridiculous, it is one thing to prevent discrimination against individuals but not when it endangers public safety or the general benefit of the REST of the society. Somehow we need to turn the tides on the all pervasiveness of being political correct (why are such instances even considered as PC, I have no idea), there are cases when it is actually doing more harms than goods. (p.s. I should've been a lawyer myself seeing all these ridiculous laws.)
Prior to the 1950s an epidemic to the magnitude of AIDS would have had those infected with it quarantined and provided with free medical care. That is free drugs, and a clean sterile environment so they could live as pain-free as possible.
Today we let them go about their business and charge them extravagant rates for medications which is beyond the ability of many to pay.
This microchip stuff is really frightening. It reminds me of the tattoos that the Nazis used to track their prison camp inmates. I fear that we are moving to a society where to participate you must be microchipped, and the government will have complete knowledge of your whereabouts and activities.
I'm not a end-times Christian or a conspiracy theorist ( okay, a *sometimes* conspiracy theorist ), but I see this as a stepping stone to a path of complete control over the individual. If you can be electronically identified against your will at a distance, you lose a basic freedom not to be surveilled. You lose a fundamental right to privacy and anonymity.
If the power were in the hands of the individual -- say, I could remove the chip any time I wanted, I could identify anyone I wanted, I could know where the president was and who he was with at any time, then it would be a different story. But of course you can't remove the microchip -- that goes against the whole idea of the thing. To be monitored without your consent. It's power-over. If everyone were microchipped, we would live in a pan-opticon society, where our invisible overlords know our every move.
First it was pets, now it's dangerous disease-spreaders, next criminals and predators, after that children and elderly, in case they get lost, finally everybody, just to walk down the street and buy a drink at the corner store.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
Unethical is knowingly sentencing someone to die. There is not difference between sleeping with someone if you think you have AIDS and pulling out a revolver with a single bullet in it, spinning the chamber and then firing at someone.
It is true that some people are innocent who have AIDS. However, these are the victims. It is a horrible chain reaction which may sentence several innocent people to death because of the irresponsible actions of a single individual.
Why would you fear an invisible chip when you are innocent? If you do not intend to pass on this terrible disease which will take your life then why worry? This isn't a small matter of convenience. This is life and death. It is true that some people may find out that an innocent person has AIDS and this may hurt their ability to connect with their family. But this is not likely, and it's completely understandable to someone who has AIDS. What is the cost that others will not die in the way that you have?
Any other view would would be akin to a protecting a serial killer because you used to room with the guy and you're afraid of the social stigma.
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. - Hunter S. Thompson
Yes, which is why it is being used in Africa and not in North America, Europe, etc.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
99% is not good enough for something as rare as AIDS.
It completely depends on the way you use the information.
If you decide to forgo sex with anyone who shows a positive reading, whether a true or false positive, you've just cut down your rate of exposure by 99%. Sure that still leaves the other 1%, but as long as you don't take a negative reading as justification to have unprotected sex, you are no worse off than you would be without the tester.
Is everyone smart enough to use a test like that? No, but you can only do so much to cater to the stupidest people of society,I say the chances are those are the same people that would have unprotected sex anyway.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
It would make the dating scene a lot less scary if you could carry your AIDS chip reader into the club.
It shouldn't. It would be extremely foolhardy to assume that all people infected with AIDS will be chipped. Hell, many people don't even know it themselves (yet). You would be no better off relying on a chip, or a tattoo because of the false negative effect. You still have treat everyone you meet as potentially infected.
The only thing this chip would do is make it easier to persecute the people who have sought medical help for their condition. One obvious side-effect will be that people who suspect they are infected will be reluctant to get tested in order to avoid the stigma of the chip. That's the same reason we have doctor-patient confidentiality - if you can't trust your doctor not to rat you out, then people will seek black-market treatments and the social health problem becomes worse over the long run.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
To paraphrase from Donnie Darko, You can take this and shove it right up your anus! Unless you totally don't care about freedom, because this would mean nearly UNLIMITED control of your life by overlords who would dictate more and more of your life, and you couldn't do a thing to stop it because you already consented to becoming a sheep, so you would then have to take everything a sheep will take, which is anything and everything the elite overlords want. Kind of science fictiony yeah, but I will not willingly live in that sort of dystopia.
Don't they know you are supposed to start with Pedophiles and TERRORISTS, not AIDS patients. AIDS may be scary, but you are never going to get a color coded threat system out of it.
Only after you stop the terrorists and save the children do you require it for AIDS patients, and senior citizens, and prisoners, and high school students. Then, you require it for "discounts" at the grocery store. That's where the irony starts, I suppose, when you need the chip to get a discount on a box of condoms, because you don't don't trust the chip on the patients.
I'd complain about a slippery slope, but it's much too late. That started when all you people had your dogs and cats chipped. Now it's just a matter of time. Shame on you for bringing about the end times. I hope Fluffy was worth it.
To prove that, when the antichrist shows up, I bet he gets a microchipped pet for his kids. Unless they are alergic, I suppose.
What we really need is a ten day waiting period and a background check before you can buy a congressman.
The stigma associated with HIV/AIDS is so great in Indonesia that many people who are infected with the disease refuse to seek medical assistance because they are too ashamed - I know because I am Indonesian and have met such people.
What the Indonesian government needs to work on is to remove the stigma of HIV testing and the use of condoms and to educate people about the disease.
Threatening HIV positive people with a chip implant will achieve exactly the opposite and instead and will simply put HIV positive people into hiding and make it that much more difficult to educate these people about how the disease is transmitted - think about people who believe that having sex with virgins heals you of HIV or the South African minister who admitted to having sex with an HIV positive woman but took a shower afterwards to reduce chances of infection - these are the exact same people who need to be educated and not alienated
99% accuracy in a non-invasive, cheap test is quite enough for a screening test anywhere.
...foreheads, not their foreskins. If an AIDS-infected person is being "sexually agressive", then everybody else around them deserves to be overtly warned about them.