Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Cashless Society

«1345

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,772 ✭✭✭meathstevie


    I'm convinced people are a bit more creative than that. During WWII in Belgium my grandparents couldn't officially buy anything outside the Nazi enforced rationing system. That's the official story but if their stories are anything to go by nearly everyone was at the smuggling and blackmarketeering and they just developped a parallell economy where money or ration books had hardly any significance. It was like : a pound of coffee is worth 40 english cigarettes. The farmer killed a pig behind the shed and the railway worker paid for a ham with a 50 kilo bag of coal he was after stealing in work.

    Today it's probably it bit more difficult going under the wire for the ordinary Joe as there's a further and deeper reaching possibility of technological monitoring of people's activity but still. Nobody is as unruly as people who don't want to be ruled.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 24 mckenna45


    Where would people get the products to trade. Remember Ireland has a service economy, nothing is produced. You would need to hijack a ship coming from China before you had anything to swap, and then consider that all products will have RFID chips and can therefore be tracked.I have seen no evidence so far that people are in anyway worried about this imminent development.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    mckenna45 wrote: »
    Where would people get the products to trade. Remember Ireland has a service economy, nothing is produced. You would need to hijack a ship coming from China before you had anything to swap, and then consider that all products will have RFID chips and can therefore be tracked.I have seen no evidence so far that people are in anyway worried about this imminent development.

    All products will have RFID chips... WHAT?!?! You mean in your paranoid version of the future they will.

    meathstevie isn't talking about the latest widescreen tv he's talking about the basics, like food. Food we can produce.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 215 ✭✭zippy 99


    meglome wrote: »
    All products will have RFID chips... WHAT?!?! You mean in your paranoid version of the future they will.

    meathstevie isn't talking about the latest widescreen tv he's talking about the basics, like food. Food we can produce.

    Yeah, in the window pot of your 4th storey flat?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 24 mckenna45


    meglome wrote: »
    All products will have RFID chips... WHAT?!?! You mean in your paranoid version of the future they will.

    meathstevie isn't talking about the latest widescreen tv he's talking about the basics, like food. Food we can produce.

    Where would you produce food in a city, where the vast majority of people now live. Look into the use of terminator seeds and the problems indian farmers have has. Monsanto has also been copyrighting all seeds, previously used for thousands of years. Again independence removal.As for the RFID issue, I suggest you do some research.See this IBM advert below:http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-462154477350023981&q=rfid&total=2362&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=2


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    Monsanto copyrighted genetically engineered seeds that they created, didn't they? You can't copyright an indigenous organic, otherwise all plants would be the property or companies.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 24 mckenna45


    humanji wrote: »
    Monsanto copyrighted genetically engineered seeds that they created, didn't they? You can't copyright an indigenous organic, otherwise all plants would be the property or companies.

    Cross pollination. Once a gm seed is introduced its pollinates other farmers crops and so on. These people are not stupid. Now every farmer will have to go cap in hand to monsanto to get their seeds.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    In which case you'd have a crossbread that they wouldn't own.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 24 mckenna45


    humanji wrote: »
    In which case you'd have a crossbread that they wouldn't own.

    No, they have this covered as well. If any part of a seed is gm, even 1%, it falls under their authority. The whole thing is totally wrapped up.http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0115-04.htm


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    Eh, that article is about people using GE seeds and getting caught. It's nothing to do with cross pollination (which I don't even think can happen with those crops, only that the non-GE seeds can be mixed with GE seeds).


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 24 mckenna45


    Maybe you missed these parts:The other problem is that some non-GE seed is now contaminated by Monsanto's patented genes, Nelson saidEven if a farmer decides to stop using Monsanto seeds, the GE plants self-seed and some will spring up of their own accord the following year. These unwanted "volunteers" can keep popping up for five or more years after a farmer stops using the patented seeds. Under U.S. patent law, a farmer commits an offense even if they unknowingly plant Monsanto's seeds without purchasing them from the company. Other countries have similar laws.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    zippy 99 wrote: »
    Yeah, in the window pot of your 4th storey flat?

    1st Floor actually. There were big cities in the second world war and there was still a thriving black market. Did they all have window pots I wonder?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    I didn't miss it, I pointed out that it's non-GE seeds mixing with GE seeds. It's not cross pollination. It's in my post.

    It's a bugger to get rid of the old seeds, but it is possible. If I made something and somebody ripped me off, I'd sue them too.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 215 ✭✭zippy 99


    meglome wrote: »
    1st Floor actually. There were big cities in the second world war and there was still a thriving black market. Did they all have window pots I wonder?

    Not sure what your getting at here.

    But you say that you can produce food from your flat on the first floor. Im intrigued how you would do this?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 24 mckenna45


    humanji wrote: »
    I didn't miss it, I pointed out that it's non-GE seeds mixing with GE seeds. It's not cross pollination. It's in my post.

    It's a bugger to get rid of the old seeds, but it is possible. If I made something and somebody ripped me off, I'd sue them too.

    I don't doubt that a bit. Lets get back to the main issue. A cashless society, I take it you see no problem with this?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    Actually, (and this might come as a surprise :D ) but I do! It has it's pro's and con's. The main problem with this is that you never really have direct control over what you would pay.

    Say for example, we get to the stage where we've chips in our hands that we swipe by a reader to pay for things. It would be handy, but you can never be sure if €5 for you pint was taken out, or €500 and you're handed a receipt for €5.

    People have been scamming creditc ards easily enough and so I couldn't be too keen on the idea of trusting ordinary people with this technology. People like ripping off others.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 215 ✭✭zippy 99


    humanji wrote: »
    It has it's pro's and con's. quote]

    Yeah, CONS mostly.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 24 mckenna45


    humanji wrote: »
    Actually, (and this might come as a surprise :D ) but I do! It has it's pro's and con's. The main problem with this is that you never really have direct control over what you would pay.

    Say for example, we get to the stage where we've chips in our hands that we swipe by a reader to pay for things. It would be handy, but you can never be sure if €5 for you pint was taken out, or €500 and you're handed a receipt for €5.

    People have been scamming creditc ards easily enough and so I couldn't be too keen on the idea of trusting ordinary people with this technology. People like ripping off others.

    I'd trust "ordinary people" long before i'd trust these hungry corporations. As for the chip in the hand, good to see you have already accepted that situation. If you do accept the chip, the scenario mentioned would be the least of your concerns.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    I said it as a toungue in cheek remark, but paranoia has no humour it seems. Anyway, I see you're banned. Casey again, was it?


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    humanji wrote: »
    Casey again, was it?
    Yup.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    zippy 99 wrote: »
    Not sure what your getting at here.

    But you say that you can produce food from your flat on the first floor. Im intrigued how you would do this?

    I thought what I said was obvious. There have been many wars, in many countries over many years. Most of, if not all of those countries had large cities. I would suggest that in every case there was a thriving black market, it's certainly been well document in many of these conflicts. I never for a moment suggested I'd be growing food in my window box but that doesn't mean I wouldn't have anything to barter. There is a black market in every country I've ever been in and no state in history has been able to stop it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 215 ✭✭zippy 99


    meglome wrote: »
    I thought what I said was obvious. There have been many wars, in many countries over many years. Most of, if not all of those countries had large cities. I would suggest that in every case there was a thriving black market, it's certainly been well document in many of these conflicts. I never for a moment suggested I'd be growing food in my window box but that doesn't mean I wouldn't have anything to barter. There is a black market in every country I've ever been in and no state in history has been able to stop it.

    The state we are entering, the super totalitarian state will make a good stab at it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 38 NP14


    from Associated Press.



    Here's a vision of the not-so-distant future:

    _Microchips with antennas will be embedded in virtually everything you buy, wear, drive and read, allowing retailers and law enforcement to track consumer items — and, by extension, consumers — wherever they go, from a distance.

    _A seamless, global network of electronic "sniffers" will scan radio tags in myriad public settings, identifying people and their tastes instantly so that customized ads, "live spam," may be beamed at them.

    _In "Smart Homes," sensors built into walls, floors and appliances will inventory possessions, record eating habits, monitor medicine cabinets — all the while, silently reporting data to marketers eager for a peek into the occupants' private lives.

    Science fiction?

    In truth, much of the radio frequency identification technology that enables objects and people to be tagged and tracked wirelessly already exists — and new and potentially intrusive uses of it are being patented, perfected and deployed.

    http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5horCnXwgKPtGux2O2AuN6aeBXjbAD8UDMN980


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 459 ✭✭Offalycool


    UK 2017: Under Surveillance
    By Neil Mackay

    IT is a chilling, dystopian account of what Britain will look like 10 years from now: a world in which Fortress Britain uses fleets of tiny spy-planes to watch its citizens, of Minority Report-style pre-emptive justice, of an underclass trapped in sink-estate ghettos under constant state surveillance, of worker drones forced to take on the lifestyle and values of the mega-corporation they work for, and of the super-rich hiding out in gated communities constantly monitored by cameras and private security guards.

    This Orwellian vision of the future was compiled on the orders of the UK's information commissioner - the independent watchdog meant to guard against government and private companies invading the privacy of British citizens and exploiting the masses of information currently held on each and every one of us - by the Surveillance Studies Network, a group of academics.

    On Friday, this study, entitled A Report on the Surveillance Society, was picked over by a select group of government mandarins, politicians, police officers and academics in Edinburgh. It is unequivocal in its findings, with its first sentence reading simply: "We live in a surveillance society." The information commissioner, Richard Thomas, endorses the report. He says: "Today, I fear that we are, in fact, waking up to a surveillance society that is already all around us."

    The academics who compiled the study based their vision of the future not on wild hypotheses but on existing technology, statements made about the intentions of government and private companies and studies by other think tanks, regulators, professional bodies and academics.

    The report authors say that they believe the key theme of the future will be "pervasive surveillance" aimed at tracking and controlling people and pre-empting behaviour. The authors also say that their glimpse of the future is "fairly conservative. The future spelled out in the report is nowhere near as dystopian and authoritarian as it could be."

    Here's how 2017 might look...

    BorderGuard The Jones family are returning to Britain from holiday in America. "It's hard to know the difference between the two countries by what the family experience at the border," say the Surveillance Report authors. Britain, America, all EU countries and all members of the G10 have outsourced their immigration and border control services to massive private companies. In this vignette, the futurologists give the company the name BorderGuard.

    Thanks to the never-ending war on terror, these governments have developed "smart borders" using hidden surveillance technologies. Cameras and scanners at passport control monitor faces, irises and fingerprints checking them off against records of biometric passports, or the British ID card system. BorderGuard has access to state and transnational databases and can also data-mine information on individuals - such as consumer transactions - via a paid-for service provided by specialist companies trading in information held on every individual in the land.

    For families like the Joneses, crossing borders is relatively swift and painless. The wealth of information held on them means they can be quickly identified and processed. But citizens of nations not signed up to the BorderGuard scheme face hostile and lengthy investigations while crossing frontiers.

    Racial profiling is now the norm. Asian features inevitably mean being pulled to one side - whether or not you carry a biometric passport or ID card.

    Brandscapes Retail chains and mega-malls now use huge shared databases - which began with data-mining reward card information - to create a "brandscape" for every shopper.

    Smart tags buried in a shopper's clothing "talk" to scanners in shops. The system then connects to consumer databases, revealing where the clothing was bought and by whom and what other purchases the person has made. The system knows who you are, where you live, what you like and don't like. Intelligent billboards at eye level then immediately flash up adverts dove-tailed to the consumer profile of the individual.

    The wealthiest consumer-citizen can even become a "cashless shopper". For £200, a chip can be implanted in the human body which is loaded with a person's bank and credit details. From then on, it's their arm that will be scanned in a shop, not their credit card. "Cashless shoppers" also get first-class service in mega-malls, with special lounges, spas and massage facilities reserved only for them. Urban myths, however, are springing up that muggers are targeting these elite consumers and cutting the chip from their arms. There are also concerns about hackers being able to upload viruses to the chip or empty the chipholder's account.

    Tagged Kids Scandals about child abductions and murders during school hours mean teachers prefer tagging a child to facing legal liability for their injury in a court. Drug testing in schools has also become an accepted part of life following pressure by the government to identify problem children earlier and earlier in life. What children eat in schools is also monitored by parents, as boys and girls are required to swipe their school card every time they visit the canteen. The card contains information on school attendance, academic achievement, drug-test results, internet access and sporting activities. The card's records are used to assess whether the child has passed or failed their citizenship programme.

    Shops are also monitoring children in order to tap into the lucrative youth market."Children," the report says, "are gradually becoming socialised into accepting body surveillance, location tracking and the remote monitoring of their dietary intake as normal."

    Elites and Proles Most cities are divided between gated private communities, patrolled by corporate security firms (which keep insurance costs to a minimum) and high-crime former council estates. On most estates, private companies are tasked to deal with social evils.

    Offenders have the option of having a chip voluntarily implanted in their arm so they can be monitored at home using scanners and sensors. Estates can be subject to "area-wide curfews", following outbursts of antisocial behaviour, which ban anyone under 18 from entering or leaving the estate from dusk until dawn.

    Community wardens armed with Tasers enforce the law. CCTV cameras can be viewed by residents at home on their television's security channel.

    In gated communities, meanwhile, no-one can get in or out unless their car's number plate is authorised by the automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) devices located on gates. There are now so many ANPR cameras across the land that it's almost impossible to drive the length of a street without details of your car being logged by the state.

    The aesthetics of surveillance Security has been "aestheticised" - incorporated into the design of architecture and infrastructure - so that it is almost unnoticeable now. "It is ubiquitous but it has disappeared," the report authors say. Anti-suicide-bomber bollards outside embassies and government buildings are secreted in the ground, only being activated in an emergency when passers-by breach the range of security sensors.

    Anti-government protesters are monitored by small remote-control spy-planes, which were introduced for the 2012 London Olympics but remained a permanent fixture.

    CCTV is now embedded at eye level in lamp-posts to enable the use of facial recognition technology.

    Protest and virtual surveillance Following protests, individual demonstrators can be monitored by camera until private security contractors for the local authority in which the demo took place get a chance to question them. Helmet-mounted cameras scan the biometrics of anyone being questioned. All guards and police are also now monitored by surveillance devices in their handheld computers. Ironically, this has triggered civil liberties concerns within the police union.

    The report uses two "protesters", Ben and Aaron, as an example of how police might treat dissenters. When they are taken into custody by private security guards in Westminster, Ben undergoes the usual DNA swab, which is analysed instantaneously, and hands over his ID card for scanning. ID cards are still theoretically voluntary, but not having one makes life almost impossible. Aaron is a refusenik and doesn't own a card. That means he can't apply for a government job or claim benefits or student loans. He can't travel by plane or even train. To make matters worse, Aaron is a young black man - meaning he is deemed a "high category suspect" and is routinely stopped and brought in to the nearest police station for questioning.

    Once Ben is released, police monitoring systems piggy-back on his hand-held device to track him as he travels across the city. He's also been put on a communications watchlist which means all his internet and e-mail traffic is saved by his ISP and passed to police. As most phone calls are online now, police also get access to these communications as well.

    Call centre drones Call centres monitor everything that staff do and surveillance information is used to recruit staff. Potential employees are subjected to biometric and psychometric testing, as well as lifestyle surveys. "Their lives outside work," the authors say, "and their background, are the subject of scrutiny. It is felt to be increasingly important that the lifestyle profile of the employee match those of the customers to ensure better customer service." Recruitment consultants now frequently discard any CV which does not contain volunteered health information.

    Once hired, staff are subjected to sporadic biometric testing which point to potential health and psychological problems. Thanks to iris-scanning at a gym connected to the company, employees can be pulled up at annual assessments for not maintaining their health. Periodic psychometric testing also reveals if staff attitudes have changed and become incompatible with company values.

    Big Brother is looking after you Homes in the ever-growing number of retirement villages are fitted with the "telecare" system, with motion detectors in every room, baths with inbuilt heart monitors, toilets which measure blood sugar levels and all rooms fitted with devices to detect fire, flood and gas leaks. Panic buttons are also installed in every room. Fridges have RFID scanners which tell the neighbourhood grocery store that pensioners are running short on provisions. The goods are then delivered direct to the doorstep.

    Huge databases in hospitals are able to compare tests on patients throughout the country. This allows doctors to red-flag risk factors earlier than ever before, meaning that a patient's statistical risk of suffering, for example, a heart attack, are predicted with much greater accuracy. The NHS will be locked in a battle with insurance companies who want access to health information for commercial purposes. The temptation for the NHS is the large amounts of money on offer. The authors point out that Iceland sold its national DNA database to private companies for research and profit in 2004.

    The data shadow Those rich enough can sign up to "personal information management services" (Pims) which monitor all the information that exists about an individual - a person's so-called "data shadow". The Pims system corrects incorrect information held by government or private companies.

    Those who can't afford Pims have to live with the impact that incorrect data can have on their lives, such as faulty credit ratings. "Some are condemned to a purgatory of surveillance and an inability to access information," the report authors say.

    But for other people total surveillance has become an accepted way of life. Some voluntarily carry out surveillance on their whole lives - so-called "life-logging" where an individual uploads online details in realtime about everything they do.
    From http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=23975

    Here's a link to the report. http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/surveillance_society_full_report_2006.pdf


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 215 ✭✭zippy 99


    Offalycool wrote: »

    And there you have it. Yet most people wont be happy until all this is in place.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 220 ✭✭esskay


    To be honest, I'd sell everything I have and move countries if it was made law that I had to have a RFID chip implanted. Plus, it not like its science-fiction http://www.verichipcorp.com/.

    Here is some FOX chip propaganda to entertain you http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=MAI2-_hnFH0

    Admittedly, it has it's uses, but I am vehemently opposes to its use for a cashless ecenomy.

    Esskay


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,388 ✭✭✭Kernel


    esskay wrote: »
    To be honest, I'd sell everything I have and move countries if it was made law that I had to have a RFID chip implanted. Plus, it not like its science-fiction http://www.verichipcorp.com/.

    Here is some FOX chip propaganda to entertain you http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=MAI2-_hnFH0

    Admittedly, it has it's uses, but I am vehemently opposes to its use for a cashless ecenomy.

    Esskay

    No doubt it would have it's uses (particularly in the area of crime reduction), but the potential for abuse is significant. I remember in the late 80s and early 90s when CTists spoke about NWO, globalisation and chip implants they were portrayed (as usual) as kwazy kooks, but sure enough, it's happening. A new world order since the fall of the iron curtain is being sculpted, with the Middle East being a prize turkey for carving (as predicted by Brzezinski). Globalisation is a fact which governments openly discuss as an agenda. And verichip/rfid.

    In years to come, I believe CTists will be proven to be mostly correct again, and yet, at that stage the smokescreens will have served their purposes and The Agenda will be further complete.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 53 ✭✭thetaxman


    http://www.blacklistednews.com/iNP/view.asp?ID=5437Just like the M50 toll bridge, increased prices for those who dont accept the tracker technology. But if you have nothing to hide................. You still need to look after tour privacy, well whatever piece remains.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,820 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    That article is about B2B technology. It's got nothing whatsoever to do with ordinary consumers. The extra charge is to encourage suppliers to adopt the technology - it's nothing more scary than barcoding products was.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Kernel wrote: »
    I remember in the late 80s and early 90s when CTists spoke about NWO, globalisation and chip implants they were portrayed (as usual) as kwazy kooks,
    Considering that globalisation was very much the next big thing in business at that point, I very much doubt that anyone was dismissed as a kwazy kook for saying that globalisation was coming.


    As for chip implants...still not here. Not likely to be here, either....certainly not for anyone who doesn't want them. They're just about getting to the point where we have chips carried on us and already the problems are showing up. Suggesting that we're on a fixed path to being implanted is a bit precipitous.

    Incidentally, chip implantation, like so much of the stupidity we see masquerading as security today won't help with security. It may, for a short period, make some people feel safer, but it won't make any real difference to security. Its just more of what Bruce Schneier refers to as "security theater".
    And verichip/rfid.
    Neither of which are implanted. Neither of which you have to carry in a form where you can't trivially block them from being scanned.


    And the NWO? Well, if you redefine the term to mean "a globalised economy", then yes, there's a NWO. If you take it in the more traditional sense, then you'll be dismissed today as much as in the 80s and 90s for talking about it.
    In years to come, I believe CTists will be proven to be mostly correct again,
    Again? Your own examples show that teh CTs were wrong in the 80s and 90s. They predicted implants, and we're not implanted. THey predicted NWO, and there isn't one in the form they predicted. They "predicted" globalisation, but no-one denied it was coming in the first place, so it wasn't really a conspiracy theory to begin with.


    So if you're saying that they'll be "as correct", can we take it that whatever they're predicting won't come to pass, with the exception of where they're 'predicting' something that no-one disagrees with?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 53 ✭✭thetaxman


    So you believe in globalisation. Clearly you have no understanding of what it entails, or more likely you think that it you play the game it will favour you. You are only a pawn as is Oscarbravo, thinks he is a nazi dictator. Joke.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 53 ✭✭thetaxman


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    That article is about B2B technology. It's got nothing whatsoever to do with ordinary consumers. The extra charge is to encourage suppliers to adopt the technology - it's nothing more scary than barcoding products was.

    This article is about changing perceptions towards this technology. I don't know what viewpoint you are coming from. Do you think that if you are a good guy and toe the line you will get ahead. Are you on the square?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    the technology is ready to be rolled out en-mass.

    They just need to change the public perceptions of it.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,450 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    the technology is ready to be rolled out en-mass.

    They just need to change the public perceptions of it.
    Phone calls can be recorded. Internet traffic can be recorded. The govt already knows how much you earn. they can know what you spend on rent/mortgague through tax relief, flights / holidays you take through airport taxes, they could look your credit card details too.

    Most of us can be tracked to within a few meters at any time. So they can tell who you are with and who you may have met. And it didn't cost the government a penny and we willing carry the transmitters with us every day.

    So you have a second hand ready to go ? Just make sure you never use it near a CCTV camera or use your credit card in shop while the phone is on. Or ring anyone that they might have an interest in, because they they will have an interest in you too.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    This subject was discussed in the Christianity forum. 666 is coming.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055122906&highlight=mark+beast

    The groundwork is in place, i.e. a global digital integrated network, biometric technology, RFID smart cards used in all aspects of transit from trams, trains, busses, passports, flights, toll plasa passes. The CCTV to enforce this system is now almost complete. With modern digital cameras that can pan tilt zoom and recognise biometric data. They are being placed throughout the city, public parks, car parks, shopping malls, lanes, trains busses etc. you cannot escape!

    Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler would have given their right arms to have such a global surveilance system that leaves a digital fingerprint on every single movement, phone call and purchase you make on this planet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wszslxt9NLM


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 459 ✭✭Offalycool


    Very scary article here. The body of it is concerned with automated military hardware and the relevance of "military omniscience". I thought this quote might be of particular interest.
    Eight square miles of Jakarta have been digitised and simulated in three dimensions. That will not surprise computer gamers, but Urban Resolve goes much further: the detail extends to the interiors of 1.6 million buildings and even the cellars and sewers beneath, and it also includes no fewer than 109,000 moving vehicles and people. Even the daily rhythms of the city have been simulated. The roads, says one commentator, "are quiet at night, but during weekday rush hours they become clogged with traffic. People go to work, take lunch breaks and visit restaurants, banks and churches."

    Digitise any target city and integrate this with the flow of data from many thousands of sensors and cameras, stationary and mobile, and you have something far more powerful than the regular snapshots today's satellites can deliver. You have continuous coverage, around corners and through walls. You would never, for example, lose those mortar bombers who got out of their car and ran away.
    Link


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,388 ✭✭✭Kernel


    bonkey wrote: »
    Incidentally, chip implantation, like so much of the stupidity we see masquerading as security today won't help with security. It may, for a short period, make some people feel safer, but it won't make any real difference to security. Its just more of what Bruce Schneier refers to as "security theater".

    Of course it will help with security. If everyone is implanted with an rfid chip and is tracked 24/7, with movements stored on a central database, it makes it very difficult for a criminal to claim that they were not the ones who perpetrated a crime at xx time, on xx date at xx location. It's no more outlandish a thought than cameras monitoring your every move in the city centre was 40 years ago. ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,749 ✭✭✭CCCP^


    It could happen, but I'm sure an Economist or such would say no. What would it achieve? See I have this belief that the world and its reality can be split into two camps. Camp A is a 1984-style outcome. The other is Camp B and that's A Brave New World. The world, well the western world, is more like A Brave New World, governments don't need to be clued in 100% to their people's movements - if they're not in work, they are buying stuff, having intercourse or alseep. Society's in the western world are passive and apathetic. They don't need to be monitored. That's my theory and im not drunk.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Kernel wrote: »
    If everyone is implanted with an rfid chip and is tracked 24/7, with movements stored on a central database, it makes it very difficult for a criminal to claim that they were not the ones who perpetrated a crime at xx time, on xx date at xx location. It's no more outlandish a thought than cameras monitoring your every move in the city centre was 40 years ago. ;)

    Well, lets see.....

    If everyone was implanted, and if those implants were monitored 24/7, here's what I'd do:

    1) Go somewhere out of range / shielded against RFID tracking. This is trivial, given the nature of RFID and the distances over which it works (24/7 tracking, therefore, is an impossibility, wherein lies the complete failure of the system)

    2) Have my chip removed/shielded/disabled/broken, and potentially have a chip cloned from Joe Q Public put in instead.
    3) Commit crim
    4) Go somewhere out of range / shielded against RFID tracking
    5) Have my own chip re-inserted / unshielded / re-enabled.

    In the case where I simply had the chip broken, I'd leave it broken until such times as officials contacted me to tell me that my chip was broken, then I'd feign surprise and ask to have it repaired / replaced.

    Seriously....it offers nothing that straight-forward identity-theft cannot leverage. Indeed, if we become reliant on the chip content, then identity-theft becomes even more powerful as once you're chipped to appear as someone else, any crime you commit will be pinned on them.

    Now...if you happen to have a tamper-proof, infinite-range, unblockable, unbreakable RFID chip, then these problems become a bit harder to crack (but not impossible). On the other hand, we don't have such things, nor are we likely to (especially the "unblockable" and "unbreakable" bits.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    bonkey wrote: »
    Well, lets see.....

    If everyone was implanted, and if those implants were monitored 24/7, here's what I'd do:

    1) Go somewhere out of range / shielded against RFID tracking. This is trivial, given the nature of RFID and the distances over which it works (24/7 tracking, therefore, is an impossibility, wherein lies the complete failure of the system)

    2) Have my chip removed/shielded/disabled/broken, and potentially have a chip cloned from Joe Q Public put in instead.
    3) Commit crime
    4) Go somewhere out of range / shielded against RFID tracking
    5) Have my own chip re-inserted / unshielded / re-enabled.

    In the case where I simply had the chip broken, I'd leave it broken until such times as officials contacted me to tell me that my chip was broken, then I'd feign surprise and ask to have it repaired / replaced.

    Seriously....it offers nothing that straight-forward identity-theft cannot leverage. Indeed, if we become reliant on the chip content, then identity-theft becomes even more powerful as once you're chipped to appear as someone else, any crime you commit will be pinned on them.

    Now...if you happen to have a tamper-proof, infinite-range, unblockable, unbreakable RFID chip, then these problems become a bit harder to crack (but not impossible). On the other hand, we don't have such things, nor are we likely to (especially the "unblockable" and "unbreakable" bits.
    The most probable location of the chip will be in the right hand or forehead; this is the suitable place for several reasons.

    Most people are right handed.
    Dual biometric scanners can read your thumb print and RFID implant in the
    right hand simultaneously to counter fraud.
    Dual biometric readers that can read your retina and RFID implant in the
    forehead simultaneously to counter fraud.
    All Oyster card touch pads are on the right as you enter the turnstiles.
    Many Arabs would find it offensive to have an implant in their left hand.

    For the above reasons it would be no point in tampering with the chip. When you are allocated with the chip it is matched with your thumb print and retina details. Authorities can check your details they match the biometric data against the chip. You try tampering with it and every portal scanner you pass will trigger off alarm bells.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    .
    Dual biometric scanners can read your thumb print and RFID implant in the
    right hand simultaneously to counter fraud.

    At which point, you've obviated the need for the RFID chip, because you're requiring physical interaction with a thumb-print reader.
    Its simpler and more secure to reference the thumb-print scanned against a central store, rather than in one carried on the person.
    Dual biometric readers that can read your retina and RFID implant in the
    forehead simultaneously to counter fraud.
    Again, if you're going to read someone's retina, its safer and more secure to compare against a central store.
    For the above reasons it would be no point in tampering with the chip.
    Of course there would.

    If you can create/hack a chip with your thumbprint, but someone else's name and address, then for any scan that compares what is read from your biometrics against what is on the chip, you pass the test.
    When you are allocated with the chip it is matched with your thumb print and retina details. Authorities can check your details they match the biometric data against the chip. You try tampering with it and every portal scanner you pass will trigger off alarm bells.
    If you leave your biometrics unchanged, and alter the details for name/address, then you automagically become someone else....unless the name, address etc. are also being pulled from a central database...at which point, the eye- or thumbprint- scan has already obviated the need for an RFID chip in the first place.

    There's a very simple comparison here...

    Imagine if all of your bank a/c details were stored on your bank card instead of in the bank.
    The ATM would read your card, check if the PIN was right, (based on whats on the card), check if the you had enough money for a withdrawal (based on whats on the card), and then give you the money if you said yes, updating the balance (on the card).

    What you are suggesting is that this would be as secure or more secure than the current system, where basically all that is stored is the a/c no. This is used to identify the bank & account to send a query to. This query, itself encrypted, says "here's the a/c no, a one-way-encryption of the PIN, and a withdrawal request. Is that ok". Now, there's nothing useful to hack/steal. You can't usefully modify the card, because you still need a PIN which isn't on it. You can change the bank/ac listed on it, but then you still need to know the PIN for the account you're trying to hack.

    RFID doesn't meaningfully add to security...because ultimately, you need to compare what is on it against a secure data store and against the carrier in order to trust its information...but if you have the secure data store and biometrics for the person carrying the chip, you don't need the chip in the first place.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    bonkey wrote: »
    At which point, you've obviated the need for the RFID chip, because you're requiring physical interaction with a thumb-print reader. Its simpler and more secure to reference the thumb-print scanned against a central store, rather than in one carried on the person. Again, if you're going to read someone's retina, its safer and more secure to compare against a central store.
    The thumb print or retna scan is only to link the identy of the person to the assigned chip. Both the implant chip and print could give the key number to access to the database. The advantage of the chip is that it can transmit data unknowingly to the person unlike the thumb print.
    bonkey wrote: »
    If you can create/hack a chip with your thumbprint, but someone else's name and address, then for any scan that compares what is read from your biometrics against what is on the chip, you pass the test. If you leave your biometrics unchanged, and alter the details for name/address, then you automagically become someone else....unless the name, address etc. are also being pulled from a central database...at which point, the eye- or thumbprint- scan has already obviated the need for an RFID chip in the first place.
    Dont forget the whole system is totalitarian, every country in the world is linked up via airports, RFID passport database, transit systems, If someone messes with the system they can be totally isolated from society and will incur severe penalties. No one with a chip is going to risk tampering with it unless they are locked out of the system over some offense .
    bonkey wrote: »
    There's a very simple comparison here...
    Imagine if all of your bank a/c details were stored on your bank card instead of in the bank. The ATM would read your card, check if the PIN was right, (based on whats on the card), check if the you had enough money for a withdrawal (based on whats on the card), and then give you the money if you said yes, updating the balance (on the card).

    What you are suggesting is that this would be as secure or more secure than the current system, where basically all that is stored is the a/c no. This is used to identify the bank & account to send a query to. This query, itself encrypted, says "here's the a/c no, a one-way-encryption of the PIN, and a withdrawal request. Is that ok". Now, there's nothing useful to hack/steal. You can't usefully modify the card, because you still need a PIN which isn't on it. You can change the bank/ac listed on it, but then you still need to know the PIN for the account you're trying to hack..
    The biochip-transponder consists of 4 parts, computer microchip, antenna coil, capacitor and glass capsule. It stores and update your financial, medical, demographic data, basically everything about you. 128 characters 40 words 6 lines. A hand-held scanner can activate the passive capacitor with 125 khz. Not very much data but plenty to access a database that has everything about you. The thumb print scan is just a fail safe "key" and an additional security measure. We now see more of them being used, Dell are fitting them as standard on many of their laptops, we will soon see them at ATMs, clock out machines, ignition switches for cars etc.
    bonkey wrote: »
    At which point, you've obviated the need for the RFID chip, because you're requiring physical interaction with a thumb-print reader. Its simpler and more secure to reference the thumb-print scanned against a central store, rather than in one carried on the person..
    My point being that whats stopping some back street surgery removing or tampering with an implant. With combined RFID/Thumb print scan they have one form of non positive ID and another form of positive id, combine them together and both of them are fool proof forms of non transferable ids.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    Run to da hills, you are correct in everything that you say. Bonkey "RFID will not add to security". Well if you overlook the fact that everyone and everything will be tracked at all times, then I suppose you have a case. This technology is being gradually introduced as we speak. In two years it will be common place unless people educate themselves.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    The thumb print or retna scan is only to link the identy of the person to the assigned chip. Both tre chip and print could give access to the database. The advantage of the chip is thaty it can transmit data that can be received unknowingly by passing scanners.
    And the disadvantage is that remote scanners have absolutely no way of knowing whether or not the information read off the chip matches the biometrics of the person in possession of that chip. The only way you can confirm that is to take the biometrics from that person....at which point having RFID gains you nothing.
    Dont forget the whole system is totalitarian, every country in the world is linked up via airports, RFID passport database, transit systems, If someone messes with the system they can be totally isolated from society and will incur severe penalties.
    Leave out RFID, work only with biometrics, and the same logic applies....except that there's less for the criminal to even try and mess with.
    With combined RFID/Thumb print scan they have one form of non positive ID and another form of positive id, combine them together and both of them are fool proof forms of non transferable ids.

    No. Combine them together, and at best you get exactly the same security as you get with the thumbprint alone.

    If you scan RFID remotely, you've no way of knowing that it matches the biometrics. Indeed, if you make this assumption, then you're less secure than if you had thumbprints alone, because RFID chips are easier to hack than thumbprints are to modify.

    If you read the biometrics and compare them only against the RFID, you've no way of knowing that the RFID hasn't been tampered with and isn't giving a different identity to match with the thumbprint.

    Consider a system where you have mandatory ID...like, say, France. Now...put biometrics onto the ID, in the form of an embedded chip, magnetic strip, or computer-optical-readable strip.

    This system is 100% as effective as what you propose in security terms, but offers the individual better protection against identity theft (as their ID cannot be read without them knowing), and better privacy (no-one can, for example, track movements). In short, it is a better solution all round.

    RFID brings nothing to the mix. Biometrics offer some capability of improving security, but storing the details (or the key to the details) on RFID only weakens the system, at the additional cost of a loss of privacy.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Bonkey "RFID will not add to security". Well if you overlook the fact that everyone and everything will be tracked at all times, then I suppose you have a case.

    But everyone and everything won't be tracked at all times....and until its made a crime to not be trackable, it'll never happen. If you require everyone to be trackable, then you don't need embedded RFID in the first place...there's plenty of other ways to do it.
    This technology is being gradually introduced as we speak. In two years it will be common place unless people educate themselves.

    I agree entirely.

    People need to realise that its not - as we're told - a tradeoff between security and privacy and that sacrificing privacy does not automatically make one more secure.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    While checking up on some of this stuff, I happened across an interesting discussion on another site.

    Bruce Schneier was describing a possible alteration to the RFID-in-Passports-hooked-to-biometric-database idea that the US want to introduce.
    Basically, to "alleviate security concerns", the system was going to additionally have the following:

    1) The data on the RFID chip would be encrypted
    2) The data on the RFID chip could only be encrypted using a key which was encoded optically on the passport cover.

    Now...think about that for just a second...the only way to read the RFID data is to scan a portion of the physical passport. This, then, completely removes any security argument for having the information readable at a distance. You could ditch the RFID chip entirely and have the key to your actual biometrics database stored in the ssme optically-readable format.

    So again, its clear that the introduction of RFID in passports isn't about security. The same level of security can be obtained, with the same level of convenience, omitting the use of RFID entirely.

    So why use RFID? Because you can track the chip at a distance, even if you can't decode the data. And once the thing is scanned once, you have the ability to map the encoded data to a person, so you know who is who! Of course...you can only do that to the people who don't realise this and haven't (for example) wrapped their passport in some form of shielding...which of course anyone who doesn't want to be trackable will do....

    So Joe Q Public loses anonymity and privacy, while anyone who wants to (including criminals) can trivially get around the implications of carrying an RFID-chipped passport.

    The lack of additional security only supports the argument that RFID is being pushed for reasons other then security. The public are being conned into thinking that it makes them safer when it doesn't. Whatever security they get could be implemented without the loss of privacy inherent in RFID implementations. So in effect, people are trading privacy against, well, nothing.

    You want a conspiracy? Well, thats one right there. We must either believe that no-one in government can understand the fundamentals of security, or that they are knowingly putting forward systems to erode privacy for no additional security.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    So lets get this clear, Bonkey is against the government on RFID. There is a first time for everything.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    So lets get this clear, Bonkey is against the government on RFID.

    I'm against the introduction of RFID for the (claimed) purpose of increasing security.
    There is a first time for everything.
    This isn't one of them. You've based your beliefs on faulty research.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    So lets get this clear, Bonkey is against the government on RFID. There is a first time for everything.

    Wow for a poster with 34 points who's been on this forum for a good nine days you sure know so much about it's users, casey.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    bonkey wrote: »

    This isn't one of them. You've based your beliefs on faulty research.
    I am one of the few who appear to be against a survelliance society. If you were to believe the media, no one would leave their house, what with all those terrorists.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement