|
I don't have much of a problem with what you describe, scaeagles, so long as people can opt out.
Everything you describe is already done in some form today. So you aren't objecting the tracking, you're objecting to the attaching of it to the body. Every time I leave the house I have attached to me (in my left back pocket) something that identifies me, contains my social security number, my home address, my work address, connections to my financial records, information on whom to contact for my medical records. In my front left pocket is a cell phone constantly tracking my current location. We do the felon thing today with ankle bracelets, which unlike an implanted RFID chip has the power source and transmission capability to remain in essentially constant contact with a central server.
Most of this is information that the government can get on me without ever having to come near me and without subpoena or warrant. Thieves could get it almost as easily if they wanted to. I don't really see a big difference in this if I move the information 1/4 of an inch from my jeans pocket to my under the skin of my left buttock.
However, the usefulness of the information need not be the same since the chip need not actually possess any of that information but just enough proof of identity to authorize access to it (just like my ATM card does not contain any information on my actual bank account). And, if at some point I thought it really important to block it, it wouldn't be that difficult (and much more secure than leaving my wallet in the glove box because I'm worried about pickpockets at the street fair).
The frog was put in the kettle when electronic databases were first connected to phone lines for easy access.
Betty: RFID is mostly used at Wal-Mart and most massive distribution systems for tracking the product from warehouse to shelf. Theoretically it could be used in individual products to speed check-out at the cash register (a scanner could simultaneously read everything in a cart and total it) but there are significant logistical difficulties with that. It would require every product in the store be individually chipped (even most places that use RFID use it at the case or pallet level) and there'd be difficulty for things that couldn't easily be individually chipped (the produce section of Super Wal-Marts, for example). That is also the purpose Michelin uses the chips for in their tires, to track the movement of individual tires (tires are never packaged so the chips would have to be in the tire). But say that some snoop ran a scanner over your tire and read that chip. What would they learn?
All they'd get is some long number. More information would require access to a central database. Maybe something in it would be enough to identify that it is a Michelin tire (which, conveniently enough is written on the outside of the tire they just scanned). Maybe they can even tell it is a Michelin model XX-YY steelwall (also conveniently written on the outside of the tire. If they took the information to Michelin itself the company could look it up and probably tell that the tire was manufactured on X date, that it was ships to a Sears auto shop on Y date. If Sears provides tracking then maybe Sears would be able to say "we sold that on Z date to persona A."
But all of that information isn't available just by scanning the product (unless the person scanning the product has access to the relevant databases). Plus, the exact information is similarly retrievable using the serial number that is probably on the tire itself somewhere.
I don't really care about having a chip that ties in to my medical information because, such information should only be available to people who are authorized to retrieve medical history. If I am in a car accident the ER doctors can take my Aetna card out of my wallet, use the information on their to call and get medical information about me. If I have a chip they use that to get medical information about me.
But if someone steals my wallet out of the car and Aetna just gives my information to any person who calls then that is the problem. Not that there was information connecting me to a medical file.
|