Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
At my school, I am Vice President of the Philosophy Club. The other day we got off on an, erm, interesting topic concerning the looming technological advance of doing away with credit cards and cash by way of the installation of a small chip under one's skin, etc.
My school, Catholic as it is, of course jumped to the initial conclusion that this was the deadly "Mark of the Beast". Though none of the members or moderators of the club are aware of my rather colorful religious affiliations, the teacher on hand was quick to pick up my mental eye-rolling, and in turn supplied the debate with a more secular argument. Apparently, the implantation of such a chip is a bad idea, because it allows the government to track each of us individually and at will.
*more mental eye-rolling*
What do you guys think about this? It would be a great convenience to merely swipe your hand to pay for your goods, or identify yourself, or even to be used as a key to your house, or to start your car. People would never have to worry about losing this or that, or getting different things stolen.
It is true to assume that the government could use such technology to track people--they already can track people using cell phones--but is the 'risk' enough that we should impede the progress of such advances? Sure, the government could track us, but whyever would they want to? Along those lines--if the government had a good reason to be tracking someone, wouldn't you want them to be able to, aka, crimes could be solved much quicker in some cases? One part of me agrees with all I've alluded to thus far, (this 'conspiracy theory' is a bunch of bunk), and the other half of me dramatically cries, "That's what they'll put on your tombstone!"
For a last thought, the city of New York has already employed some of this technology. A New York hospital was having problems with people stealing babies from the maternity wards, and then selling them on the black market, or whatever else. The hospital remedied this by planting small chips under the skin of each newborn, to the effect that if it is carried beyond certain limits within the hospital, (without the complimentary, chip-containing medical bracelet worn by the mother), maximum security would be employed, and a world of pain would be rained down upon he who carried the baby. The controversy here, is that the chip is not inserted into the part of the belly-button of the babie that falls off eventually, but in a permament location, and that it is not removed before the baby leaves the hospital. As my teacher explained, this is of course so that the evil government can track them all.
I argued here, that it is a ridiculously simple medical procedure to remove something which is merely embedded beneath the skin.....to dubious expressions, unfortunately. Also, if the chip had been implanted in the part of the belly-button that eventually falls off, it is quite possible that the theif could remove that part of the baby, effectively removing the chip as well. (I actually forgot to say that last bit. Dang it! That would have been good!)
Anyhow, to wrap up, what do you guys think of all of this?
My school, Catholic as it is, of course jumped to the initial conclusion that this was the deadly "Mark of the Beast". Though none of the members or moderators of the club are aware of my rather colorful religious affiliations, the teacher on hand was quick to pick up my mental eye-rolling, and in turn supplied the debate with a more secular argument. Apparently, the implantation of such a chip is a bad idea, because it allows the government to track each of us individually and at will.
*more mental eye-rolling*
What do you guys think about this? It would be a great convenience to merely swipe your hand to pay for your goods, or identify yourself, or even to be used as a key to your house, or to start your car. People would never have to worry about losing this or that, or getting different things stolen.
It is true to assume that the government could use such technology to track people--they already can track people using cell phones--but is the 'risk' enough that we should impede the progress of such advances? Sure, the government could track us, but whyever would they want to? Along those lines--if the government had a good reason to be tracking someone, wouldn't you want them to be able to, aka, crimes could be solved much quicker in some cases? One part of me agrees with all I've alluded to thus far, (this 'conspiracy theory' is a bunch of bunk), and the other half of me dramatically cries, "That's what they'll put on your tombstone!"
For a last thought, the city of New York has already employed some of this technology. A New York hospital was having problems with people stealing babies from the maternity wards, and then selling them on the black market, or whatever else. The hospital remedied this by planting small chips under the skin of each newborn, to the effect that if it is carried beyond certain limits within the hospital, (without the complimentary, chip-containing medical bracelet worn by the mother), maximum security would be employed, and a world of pain would be rained down upon he who carried the baby. The controversy here, is that the chip is not inserted into the part of the belly-button of the babie that falls off eventually, but in a permament location, and that it is not removed before the baby leaves the hospital. As my teacher explained, this is of course so that the evil government can track them all.
I argued here, that it is a ridiculously simple medical procedure to remove something which is merely embedded beneath the skin.....to dubious expressions, unfortunately. Also, if the chip had been implanted in the part of the belly-button that eventually falls off, it is quite possible that the theif could remove that part of the baby, effectively removing the chip as well. (I actually forgot to say that last bit. Dang it! That would have been good!)
Anyhow, to wrap up, what do you guys think of all of this?
