GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Experts cautiously embrace adoption of wireless ID tags

• 17580
  

  Does anyone know what the mark of the beast is? Do not want a chip... No chip no existence, no ability to purchase food, or other needed goods, you are not here. Sound radical? You better give it a lot of thought -- these things were predicted centuries ago. Nothing this administration has done or proposed has been good for us. Why would a person think this is good, unless it puts money in their pocket?

  Dave Posted June 29, 2006 8:41 AM
• 17573
  

  Like any other technology, it can be used to make work more efficient and accurate or it can be used to take away more personal freedoms. I foresee a day when federal employees will be given the subcutaneous RFID in their arm as a kneejerk response to some other security disaster. Then the government will be able to track a federal worker's every move, maybe even how may times they flush, when, where, how much, content, etc.

  Robert M. Posted June 29, 2006 7:02 AM
• 17568
  

  While I cannot deny the benefits RFID technology will have on business practices, I have a vastly different opinion on the Orwellian aspects. Like the genie-in-the-bottle of nuclear technology; once loosed, RFID technology is poised to assume aspects never conceived by Joe Public.

  Once RFID technology begins to spread, the only thing preventing the actual day-by-day and step-by-step tracking of the world's commerce and population is the current lack of infrastructure. And as the song goes "It's just a matter of time."

  Good or bad, the results remain to be seen, but you may not wish to hear my humble opinion. Current GPS technology required in all new cellular phones has been heralded as the enabler of emergency response teams and the FBI, but is the bane of individual privacy advocates. And, yes, I'm still debating security versus privacy.

  As in Isaac Asimov's "I, Robot" and his three laws of robotics, I propose the following laws, or their ilk, be considered:

  1. GPS and RFID technology be legally bound as optional. This would offer merchants the opportunity to diversify by niche market.

  2. Once sold, like passenger side air bags, merchandise having GPS and RFID technology must be capable of being disabled if so desired by the purchaser. Exceptions may be desired for "controlled" items.

  3. Humans will not be unknowingly or involuntarily equipped with such technology, unless they have otherwise forfeited their civil rights.

  Your turn, think about it. Please feel free to point out my erroneous thinking.

  Tip off.

  Tip Posted June 28, 2006 11:52 AM
• 17560
  

  This is more a confirmatory question. How close to a quote is the following: "Richards said the private sector has done a good job quashing the public's privacy and security concerns."

  He didn't say addressing or answering the public's concerns...he said "quashing?"

  Dictionary definitions (source: www.dictionary.com):
  1. To set aside or annul, especially by judicial action.
  2. To put down or suppress forcibly and completely: quash a rebellion.

  Think about that.

  David Bott, Jr. Posted June 28, 2006 8:36 AM