Would you remove your RFID chip?

[DrkHelmet]

Several stated in that RFID thread that they would short out the chips in the event that they were forced in said persons' bodies.

I was wondering, how many on this board would purposely disable their RFID chip in the event that the chip was mandated by law?

EDIT: As requested, clarifying. The chip referenced is this chip, containing a serial number referencing you to a medical database entry. It does not contain your SSN or anything else besides said serial number.

[Wicked Pilot]

You might want to be a little bit more specific. Does the chip contain just pertinant medical information, or does it contain your SSN also? Does the person taking the poll have serious allegies or conditions? If not would they change their stance if later on those types of things developed? I'm not sure the issue is simple enough to fit into the two options offered.

[Zoink]

The only way the chip is getting into me is if they kill me first.

[gizmojumpjet]

I'd respond to any attempt to implant me against my will with deadly force, but if they slipped me a mickey or something I'd remove/disable it as soon as possible after waking up.

[Chmee]

Working where I work? Somebody would help me hack the shit out of it ... med-techs that scanned me would be surprised at how tall Bill Gates has gotten ...

[Darth Wong]

Ooooh, look at the "give me liberty or give me death" wankers! Such tough talk! Such courage and bravery behind your keyboard!

Face it, if it actually were mandatory and a G-man said "put this in or you're going to jail", you would roll up your sleeve and take it. Nobody can even explain what the harm is, except for vague paranoid fears that there will be tons of unnecessary extra secret information on it because the government has an ulterior motive of secretly desiring to make it easier to commit identity theft).

"Deadly force ..."

[HemlockGrey]

Guys, the chip is the size of a grain of rice and implanted into joint tissue in your arm. If you want to amputate yourself in order to get rid of it you have some far more pressing personal problems.

[DrkHelmet]

Guys, the chip is the size of a grain of rice and implanted into joint tissue in your arm. If you want to amputate yourself in order to get rid of it you have some far more pressing personal problems.

I think most of them would prefer to erase the data on it using a large electromagnet or something. I didn't see anyone suggest removing a limb, did you?

[Darth Wong]

This reminds me of a thread I posted a while ago where the police solved a horrific child kidnapping/rape/murder case by going around the entire neighbourhood where she lived and asking for DNA samples from every single adult male. The "give me liberty or give me death" idiots would have refused to give the sample on the same vague principles they always blabber about in lieu of demonstrating any real harm that would be done.

But this happened in Toronto, not WankerLand USA. So everybody rolled up their sleeves and gave DNA samples, because they understood that the police were cutting down the suspect list. Sure enough, only a half-dozen men refused to give samples, thus giving the police a manageably small list of suspects to work with. And they eventually nabbed the bastard.

Moral of the story? We got the son of a bitch. But if we were like you wankers, he'd still be walking around free.

[HemlockGrey]

I think most of them would prefer to erase the data on it using a large electromagnet or something. I didn't see anyone suggest removing a limb, did you?

Ok, it's a grain of rice implanted deep in your tissue that is not actively powered. Do we even know if an electromagnet would work?

[dworkin]

Do you have a link to that story Mike. I'm currently doing a similar topic in my senior bio class at the moment. It sounds like a good example of DNA profiling to eliminate the innocent and find the guilty.

[DrkHelmet]

I think most of them would prefer to erase the data on it using a large electromagnet or something. I didn't see anyone suggest removing a limb, did you?

Ok, it's a grain of rice implanted deep in your tissue that is not actively powered. Do we even know if an electromagnet would work?

I cannot say unequivocally, but I don't see why not. You can erase a floppy disc with a magnet, and that's not actively powered. I'm not an expert on technological implants, so I can't say for sure if they same effect would take place.

EDIT: corrected a spelling error.

[bilateralrope]

I think most of them would prefer to erase the data on it using a large electromagnet or something. I didn't see anyone suggest removing a limb, did you?

Ok, it's a grain of rice implanted deep in your tissue that is not actively powered. Do we even know if an electromagnet would work?

I cannot say unequivocally, but I don't see why not. You can erase a floppy disc with a magnet, and that's not actively powered. I'm not an expert on technological implants, so I can't say for sure if they same effect would take place.

EDIT: corrected a spelling error.

You can't erase usb disks with magnets, and those are writable. Since the chip basically only contains a number which links with a database elsewhere (which can be exanded to cover more data later), there is no reason why the chip won't be read only.

[DrkHelmet]

You can't erase usb disks with magnets, and those are writable. Since the chip basically only contains a number which links with a database elsewhere (which can be exanded to cover more data later), there is no reason why the chip won't be read only.

Interesting. Even if the chip cannot be erased with a very large magnet however, the people here still were not suggesting amputation as a way to get rid of the chip. I don't think any of them are THAT self destructive.

[Alyeska]

This reminds me of a thread I posted a while ago where the police solved a horrific child kidnapping/rape/murder case by going around the entire neighbourhood where she lived and asking for DNA samples from every single adult male. The "give me liberty or give me death" idiots would have refused to give the sample on the same vague principles they always blabber about in lieu of demonstrating any real harm that would be done.

But this happened in Toronto, not WankerLand USA. So everybody rolled up their sleeves and gave DNA samples, because they understood that the police were cutting down the suspect list. Sure enough, only a half-dozen men refused to give samples, thus giving the police a manageably small list of suspects to work with. And they eventually nabbed the bastard.

Moral of the story? We got the son of a bitch. But if we were like you wankers, he'd still be walking around free.

In the US, the police departments have historicaly kept the blood samples longer then they were supposed to and used these blood samples without permission agaisnt other cases. Ultimately it comes down to the 4th ammendment. The police can not search you without your permission unless they have a warrant.

[Darth Wong]

Do you have a link to that story Mike. I'm currently doing a similar topic in my senior bio class at the moment. It sounds like a good example of DNA profiling to eliminate the innocent and find the guilty.

Look up the names "Holly Jones" and "Michael Briere". That are the names of the victim and the killer, respectively.

[Darth Wong]

In the US, the police departments have historicaly kept the blood samples longer then they were supposed to and used these blood samples without permission agaisnt other cases.

Could you explain what the actual harm is there?

Ultimately it comes down to the 4th ammendment. The police can not search you without your permission unless they have a warrant.

Yes, of course, I know, you can cite various legal texts to support your absolutist position. It doesn't change the fact that such absolutism does no demonstrable good, and some demonstrable harm.

[Alyeska]

Could you explain what the actual harm is there?

The police now have your DNA on file and they can automaticaly use it in every single DNA case they have. Like having hidden cameras within your home. Privacy is non existant in this matter. Your now permanently on file. Sure, only those who break the law have something to worry about. And yet it leaves a uneasy feeling inside you knowing your sample (well at least me) is permanently on file. Would I give a DNA sample myself? Probably, though it depends on where I'm at. If I'm in New Orleans, no fucking way (ask Einy why). If I'm in New York City? Sure.

Yes, of course, I know, you can cite various legal texts to support your absolutist position. It doesn't change the fact that such absolutism does no demonstrable good, and some demonstrable harm.

It comes down to where do you draw the line? Do you automaticaly take DNA samples of people at birth? That would certainly create a very large user database of samples and without a doubt would be very useful in dealing with crime. In the US the requirement is probable cause. You don't invade someones privacy without probable cause. That or a warrant.

[sketerpot]

Ok, it's a grain of rice implanted deep in your tissue that is not actively powered. Do we even know if an electromagnet would work?

I cannot say unequivocally, but I don't see why not. You can erase a floppy disc with a magnet, and that's not actively powered. I'm not an expert on technological implants, so I can't say for sure if they same effect would take place.

There are two major ways of storing data on RFID tags: it can be etched into the silicon at the factory, or it can be written to EEPROM (which can be changed). Neither of these can be erased by magnets. Not even if you have really good magnets.

Implanted RFID tags would almost certainly be passive: externally powered by radio signals. Such tags have a maximum range of about 6 meters.

Now, at high-security places like airports you have no reason to expect anonymity, RFID tags or no. Perhaps you're worried that all your movements would be tracked. However, I estimate that, in order to cover all of the US with RFID readers with a range of 10m would require on the order of 10^10 RFID readers.

Movement tracking within very dense cities would be more practical, but I don't see the big problem when you can slip out of the tracking network just by going almost anywhere else in the whole country.

If I were forced to get an RFID tag implanted, I would grumble about the inconvenience. Then I would be happy, since that would make automatic RFID-based supermarket checkouts more feasible. Wouldn't it be cool to just walk out of a supermarket with your groceries and be automatically billed without standing in line? I think so.

[DrkHelmet]

Ok, it's a grain of rice implanted deep in your tissue that is not actively powered. Do we even know if an electromagnet would work?

I cannot say unequivocally, but I don't see why not. You can erase a floppy disc with a magnet, and that's not actively powered. I'm not an expert on technological implants, so I can't say for sure if they same effect would take place.

There are two major ways of storing data on RFID tags: it can be etched into the silicon at the factory, or it can be written to EEPROM (which can be changed). Neither of these can be erased by magnets. Not even if you have really good magnets.

All right. It will be more difficult than previously thought. I was just curious.

Implanted RFID tags would almost certainly be passive: externally powered by radio signals. Such tags have a maximum range of about 6 meters.

18 feet? That's more than enough distance to be a security problem.

Now, at high-security places like airports you have no reason to expect anonymity, RFID tags or no. Perhaps you're worried that all your movements would be tracked. However, I estimate that, in order to cover all of the US with RFID readers with a range of 10m would require on the order of 10^10 RFID readers.

Ok, granted.

Movement tracking within very dense cities would be more practical, but I don't see the big problem when you can slip out of the tracking network just by going almost anywhere else in the whole country.

Yeah that's a slippery slope fallacy. The government doesn't currently intend on tracking people this way.

If I were forced to get an RFID tag implanted, I would grumble about the inconvenience. Then I would be happy, since that would make automatic RFID-based supermarket checkouts more feasible. Wouldn't it be cool to just walk out of a supermarket with your groceries and be automatically billed without standing in line? I think so.

Slippery slope is going the other way now. There is no plan for one of these RFID tags to be used in any manner other than medical procedures.

EDIT: fixed a quote tag.

[Zoink]

"put this in or you're going to jail", you would roll up your sleeve and take it.

No I wouldn't.

People go to jail all the time by saying "no" to authority over issues they have with their gov't. The idea that some people would say no is not absurd. No, I'm not just another internet forum wanker.

I wouldn't have given a DNA sample either. The police can put me on their suspect list if they want. Since there is no reason for me to be on the suspect list, it'd be there own stupidity for doing so.

...harm...

Harm isn't the issue for me, it's the fact I don't want to live in a country where the gov't can do anything to me as long as they can justify it's not harmful. I don't live to serve the gov't.

A medically implanted chip goes beyond the realm of what I want to do to myself. It may be in part because I choose not to trust the manufacturer of the chip and health Canada as to its long-term health effects. It may have something to do with the fact I simply don't want an implant, or a tattoo, or permanent jewellery or whatever the gov't thinks I should alter myself with.

The 'best interest' for me is for the gov't to leave my body's best interest in my hands.

[aerius]

Depends on the consequences of disabling the chip. If there's no repurcussions other than that the chip doesn't work anymore, then sure, I'm disabling it. I'm not a fan of being chipped and the idea doesn't sit well with me. If there's jailtime, loss of priviledges, or something like that, then I suck it up and deal with having a working chip in me. I'm not going to fuck over my own life over a chip.

[Edi]

If it's the type of medical chip as per the discussion in the N&P RFID thread (i.e. contains only a reference pointer to your medical history in a massive medical history database), no, I wouldn't remove/disable it. Wouldn't go so far as to say that it is necessary, but it is beneficial. And I don't mind added benefits.

I happen to have an allergy to amoxycillin, which is one of the most common antibiotics and is also related to penicillin, so I can't have that either. Would be shitty to suffer throuh a week of looking like you had three different types of pox with scarlet (and I mean, literally, scarlet) splotches all over your body just because some doc didn't know that. Worse, the allergic reaction might be more severe next time around, and possibly kill me. No thank you.

The only question I do have is what implicationss would the chip have for some medical treatments/diagnostic operations like MRI which involve a lot of powerful magnetic forces that would affect the chip due to its materials? Could it cause damage like Schiavo would have got if she'd been MRI'd (electrodes in brain acting like microwave transmitters and frying the surrounding tissue) or similar?.

Edi

[sketerpot]

Let's consider an implanted RFID tag for people who are diabetic or allergic to penicillin or some such thing, meant to be read by medical people like paramedics. This could save lives. Some people, however, might think it's a privacy risk.

So let's think of how this would be done sensibly. A proper arrangement would be a passive chip with an ID number, which could then be looked up in a database. Unauthorized scanning, data spoofing, and various other malfeasence can be prevented (or at least made very difficult) using cryptographic methods recommended by the ICAO guidelines (explained nicely in this paper) for e-passports. The tag doesn't need to be readable from a great distance, so it would probably have a range of only about a foot or two.

Can anybody think of problems with this? Now, suppose that you were forced to have one of these tags implanted if you are diabetic, allergic to penicillin, et cetera. Would you take it out, destroy it, or otherwise prevent it from doing its job? If so, why?

[dworkin]

Look up the names "Holly Jones" and "Michael Briere". That are the names of the victim and the killer, respectively.

Thankyou. One of my students asked what could be done with their genome the other day. I mentioned that it could be used as an alibi since it would not match a DNA sample found at a crime scene and that the criminal's would match. An actual example is however, even better than some hypothetical, rar type scenario.