deliteful
|
posted on October 1, 2001 03:43:05 PM
Toke,
Thanks for answering. As you wish. I agree we all need to laugh sometimes. Expecially these days. I would much rather be laughed at for my spelling and typos.
I got the distinct impression that I was being ridiculed on the other thread but I am clueless as to how or why?
I suppose I need to apologize to some one for voicing some unpopular opinion but I am not exactly sure to whom or for what?
Proud American!
|
hjw
|
posted on October 1, 2001 03:45:23 PM
Just think! Maybe just a microchip could be implanted in every individual. Personal data could be availabe to the IRS and financial institutions. Health insurance and medical records could be stored on the same chip.
The government could have databases rich in personal data and a means to facilitate the flow of data between the databases of IRS, Insurance, Employers, Banks etc. Even travel plans would be available to everyone...Impossible to get away from your relatives. LOL!
This information could be shared by everybody!
WOW
Helen
|
toke
|
posted on October 1, 2001 03:51:19 PM
deliteful...
Your opinions were ridiculed by those (myself among them) that did not agree. If this shocks you...you are in the wrong place. No one needs to apologize for an opinion.
Of course, you know these things. Don't play this card again, if you want an answer. 
|
deliteful
|
posted on October 1, 2001 04:07:11 PM
Toke,
You said, "Of course, you know these things. Don't play this card again, if you want an answer."
I am afraid that I do not understand that comment.
Thank you though for acknowledging that you were in fact ridiculing my opinion. At least my instincts were correct on my take of that thread.
Yes I may be in the wrong place. We will see. However, if I leave it will be because I want to leave and not because anyone here wants it. I once said I was uncomfortable here, but have no doubt that I will post where ever I like. I have never allowed group mentality to rule me.
HJW,
I think you are mixing up a fictional book with the subject of this thread.
Proud American!
|
hjw
|
posted on October 1, 2001 04:20:45 PM
Deliteful
It may sound fictional now, but it illustrates how privacy invasiveness can escalate.
I based my thoughts on one of the sources to the linked article that you recommended.
Helen
|
bunnicula
|
posted on October 1, 2001 04:27:05 PM
deliteful: as "comforting" as the use of biometrics might be in the short run, it is the use of it in the long run that is chilling.
It would be incredibly naive to think that it's use would be limited to tracking known terrorists. Human & government nature being what it is, you would soon find the definition of "terrorist" expanding and before too long the thought of using it against *anyone* who disagreed with popular policy would be deemed OK, because what if...
you see how it goes. Historically, governments do not give up power willingly.
In fact, HJW's little essay just highlighted the next "logical" step after biometrics. After all, such a system would be a big step to keeping us all "safe" and regulated, wouldn't it?
|
mrpotatoheadd
|
posted on October 1, 2001 04:33:26 PM
It's always a lot easier to do something than to undo it.
IOW, what bunnicula said: Historically, governments do not give up power willingly.
|
deliteful
|
posted on October 1, 2001 04:34:26 PM
bunnicula,
I find the idea of my palm print identifying me for a flight no more fearful than I did my fingerprints for a gun permit. I find the idea of an eye scan for admittance into a foreign country no more scary than I did submitting my mug for my passport.
I guess I am just not as subject to the fear factor that some live in.
Proud American!
|
Microbes
|
posted on October 1, 2001 04:37:05 PM
I find the idea of my palm print identifying me for a flight no more fearful than I did my fingerprints for a gun permit.
I do. It's the first step to needing "travel permits" to cross state lines.
|
mrpotatoheadd
|
posted on October 1, 2001 04:37:25 PM
I find the idea of an eye scan for admittance into a foreign country no more scary than I did submitting my mug for my passport.
How about when eye scans are found to be useful for other things, too?
Or do you think that it would never come to that?
|
bunnicula
|
posted on October 1, 2001 04:37:41 PM
I guess I am just not as subject to the fear factor that some live in
Actually, your fear factor seems to be greater than other's. I and many others are not so fearful of terrorist attacks that we are willing to give up personal and civil liberties in order to feel "safe."
|
gravid
|
posted on October 1, 2001 04:45:00 PM
"I have never allowed group mentality to rule me. "
Interesting self view from somebody that is willing to be tracked 24 hours a day for the safety of the herd.
It is for your individuality then that you will be electronically teathered to the data net by your face?
I don't think you thought this through.
|
deliteful
|
posted on October 1, 2001 04:53:41 PM
I actually don't think that I will be tracked 24 hours a day. I'm pretty sure with the billions of people in the world, no one is going to waste their lives watching me.
I do go outside every so often and wave to the sattelites taking my picture from above. Just making sure they know I am friendly.
Proud American!
|
deliteful
|
posted on October 1, 2001 04:55:52 PM
Pondering what other things my eye scan could be used for...
Maybe to check for cataracts? 
Proud American!
|
Microbes
|
posted on October 1, 2001 05:00:57 PM
I actually don't think that I will be tracked 24 hours a day.
If this was set up with cameras on every corner, YOU would be tracked 24/7. With millions of people in the database, until /unless you gave someone in power a reason, you would probably be just a few bytes in memory somewhere, but the first time you gave someone a reason, they could pull your history of everywhere you've been, and what you did.
Hackers could have a feild day with this. Blackmail big time.
|
bunnicula
|
posted on October 1, 2001 05:08:29 PM
I actually don't think that I will be tracked 24 hours a day. I'm pretty sure with the billions of people in the world, no one is going to waste their lives watching me.
Ah, but how could you ever be sure? That's how insidious things like this are. What if you were to check out library books that were thought to be "subversive"? Visited relatives in a state known to harbor large numbers of hate group members (Idaho, say). Listened to or perhaps defended someone who held politically incorrect views? Voiced your own politically incorrect views? Had a family member whose actions were suspect & under investigation?
What if, once "targeted" that fact was leaked--would be able to keep your job? Get another? (Don't say that can't happen--it did right here in the US during the late 40's & into the 50s).
Once things like this get a toe hold they are very hard to stop.
|
deliteful
|
posted on October 1, 2001 05:15:44 PM
I was shot on several cameras just today. They tracked me pumping gas, cashing a check, buying groceries and yes there was a camera on the toll booth.
As for my subversive reading, every book I check out at the libarary is entered into a computer database. If they want to know what I read, they already know it.
If I get in trouble for talking with suspicious characters it will be for chatting in boards like this.
I have no doubts there is an FBI report already on me and they have already concluded that I may be whacky but I am harmless.
Proud American!
|
hjw
|
posted on October 1, 2001 05:52:14 PM
Already, we have library cards, grocery cards, credit cards, drivers license cards, bank cards, health insurance cards, social security cards....
guess we just need to get all of this info on one card with photo ID and we will be in business. LoL
We have traffic cameras on major intersections,
and soon the phones will be tapped.
Did I forget anything?
Helen
ed to add one preposition
[ edited by hjw on Oct 1, 2001 05:56 PM ]
|
krs
|
posted on October 1, 2001 05:55:54 PM
The classification term might be "compliant".
|
hjw
|
posted on October 1, 2001 06:05:04 PM
Right...and then we will be submissively compliant.
Helen
|
chococake
|
posted on October 1, 2001 06:34:08 PM
deliteful - Suspicious Characters? Please address the issue not the people.
You should also be careful about pondering here.
|
deliteful
|
posted on October 1, 2001 06:42:40 PM
Chococake,
I get the feeling that you are giving me advice in a friendly way. I may be new to this board but I'm not new to internet chatting. Thus I usually go along with my gut feelings about posts.
Thank you
Proud American!
|
gravid
|
posted on October 1, 2001 06:53:44 PM
I actually don't think that I will be tracked 24 hours a day. I'm pretty sure with the billions of people in the world, no one is going to waste their lives watching me.
You don't understand that people do not sit and study this data. It is built up year after year and only if you fit a search pattern do you get called up as an individual for consideration as a potential problem. However there is no perfect model - so you are always in danger of being picked as a danger fom circumstance. And if you are marked that way you will probably never even know why you were passed over for a job or the way things are going why you were not issued that internal passport to vacation in Florida this winter.
When this sort of thing becomes common you can even be suspect if you have too many gaps where they can't place you. Were you really off hiking and why don't you show on the camera at the trail head parking lot that day? Maybe you were off conspiring with someone.
Crazy? How many people have had police ask where were you on such and such a night? As if it is up to you to prove yourself innocent?
|
bunnicula
|
posted on October 1, 2001 08:13:14 PM
deliteful: the security cameras that took your pictures, the library computer that recorded the books you chose, and the gas card records are all separate. The world you seem to wish for would be one where all those records would be sent to a central agency--the government--which would & could use that data against you. In that world, which you'd feel so "safe" in, your every move every minute of the day would be observed and judged by the government.
In that "safe" world failure to comply with "norms" would be a "bad" thing, something to be stopped or changed.
There is a juvy book, high on the list of those who like to censor or challenge books, that describes the kind of world you'd like to live in, it seems. The Giver by Lois Lowry. Makes interesting reading.
|
deliteful
|
posted on October 2, 2001 04:28:15 AM
To be honest, Bunnicula, I have not described the world I wish to live in. You have simply assumed that you know what I want. I should hope, that unless I say I want the world you describe, you would not presume to know anything about me or my wants.
That seems to be a big problem in the chat world. Lumping people into neat little boxes based on one's perception of where they fit into the boxes in one's mind.
If you would like to ask questions as to certain aspects of what I think about things, feel free to do so. But do not presume to think you know me or how I feel about anything.
Thank you for, hopefully in the future, allowing me to have my own thoughts and my own opinions and the opportunity to speak those thoughts and opinions for myself.
Proud American!
|
gravid
|
posted on October 2, 2001 04:56:08 AM
"We need to invest heavily on this new form of security for our nation."
"that is the price one has to pay in order to be safe again"
"using whatever means we have at our disposal"
Sounded like a pretty firm personal endorsement to us.
|
rancher24
|
posted on October 2, 2001 04:57:11 AM
Whether or not we agree with using this technology for security, I do believe that investing in the biometric tech industry will be profitable. Like it or not, is it already in use (last year's Super Bowl, airports for frequent travelers, banks etc) and will only expand in use as the government looks for answers to keep the "homeland" secure.
~ Rancher
|
deliteful
|
posted on October 2, 2001 05:08:24 AM
Rancher24,
Thank you for having the first intelligent and open minded response to this thread. You are right, this technology is already in use and will be more so in the future.
I've been looking into what companies are providing what type of services. Things like face recognition software is going to have limited use and I think will saturate the market very quickly.
However software such as palm print or retina scan recognition could have a much broader scope in the future.
Jess (who has changed their sig line due to so many thinking they know my thoughts)
Before you presume to know me, you must realize that I am a unique American with many facets of my personality and life!
|
gravid
|
posted on October 2, 2001 05:14:28 AM
There are ways to get around the technology but it is hard to fool the camera AND not look unnatural to a naked eye observor. It takes the resources of a Hollywood make up department. I wonder if anyone would notice if I went through LAX as a Klingon?
Women or men in drag should have an easier time as women can do amazing things to their face and go unchallenged. Who is going to stop Tammie Faye Baker?
There are already laws against covering your face. In Minniapolis there was an arrest and big todo about middle eastern women not being allowed to cover their full face in the indoor city park and mall. They were stopped and ticketed by police.
Edited to add - Perhaps I can have a full "face" of another person put on and knock off an armored car. The cameras don't lie do they?
[ edited by gravid on Oct 2, 2001 05:17 AM ]
|
julie321
|
posted on October 2, 2001 05:16:41 AM
I really find this new technology facinating and would love to talk with anyone of an open mind.
Sure the technology is fascinating. I'm fascinated by the advancements in bio-tech in just the past 10 years. Imagine if this technology could become mainstream for consumers? No keys (or cards) to enter your house or car. Never have to worry about locking yourself out of your car again. yay.
That said, I do not trust the government to keep itself on a leash. I am more in fear of the government overstepping their bounds in the "name" of safety than I am of the events they are trying to protect me from. I feel like the current government agencies are working very hard to keep the level of fear up very high in order to suggest changes that could very very well lead to an absolute reduction in the very freedoms that make you an american.
Could the suggested technology have possibly averted the current tragedy? Yes, perhaps.
Could other less invasive measures that should already have been in effect have possibly averted the current tragedy? Yes, perhaps. What I mean here is consistent tighter control of NON-nationals attempting to enter the country.
Personally, I would like to see the latter problems fixed and then deemed ineffective in insuring americans safety before I give up more of my rights to privacy.
|
