Verichip Corporation selected by Microsoft

Mahatma coat

yeah I looked at that, and his official website, dont say what seat he's in tho

WhaLofShi

javaboy wrote: »

Won't mean much getting me to admit it! As RTDH will tell you, I'm the last person to hop aboard the conspiracy train.

I still recognise that this is the conspiracy theories forum. That by definition necessitates a lot more leeway as far as proof goes.

It looks like someone finally understands what this forum is really all about.

WhaLofShi

javaboy wrote: »

If you clicked the link in oscarBravo's first post about the guy you might have seen that he misspelled him in his post. His name is Sebastiano Musumeci and here's his Wikepedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nello_Musumeci

Haven't found a source to tie him to seat 666 yet.

Is this oscarBravo's first post regarding this subject? There's no link.

oscarBravo wrote:

Really? What seat is assigned to Béatrice Patrie in Brussels? And to Sebastien Musumeci in Strasbourg?

Answers on a postcard...

As for the Ian Paisley reference; surely when the page was being written, the writer had a list of names and seat numbers in front of him. I'd find it hard to believe that someone of Ian Paisley's stature would allow something untrue to be put on his web site. Having said that, he does go on about the potential for the anti-christ to take the seat later.

javaboy

WhaLofShi wrote: »

Is this oscarBravo's first post regarding this subject? There's no link.

No he had an earlier post where he named him.

oscarBravo

I've taken this up on the other thread.

Run_to_da_hills

thecommander wrote: »

Quote : You may get away with tampering with your chip for smaller commercial activities like shop purchases and local transit travel but if you wanted to cross a border, make a bank transaction, enter a federal building, travel on a plane you would be caught out as these may require additional finger / retina security scans. The authorities may then have the power to check your implant against a thumb / retina scan at any time.

That isnt fact, its something you made up. Made Up = Fiction

I am not making it up.

Technology released to_day 18th December. Combined Thunbprint / RFID card reader / writer.



FS82 The Futronic FS82 Fingerprint Smart Reader combines USB2.0 Fingerprint Scanner and an RFID smart card reader into one device

It can be used as purely fingerprint scanner with all Futronic's standard software. The smart card reader in FS82 can handle any ISO7816compatible smart card and can also be used as a standalone smart card reader

http://www.contactlessnews.com/2008/12/18/futronic-launches-fingerprint-mifare-card-reader-writer

thecommander

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I am not making it up.

Technology released to_day 18th December. Combined Thunbprint / RFID card reader / writer.



FS82 The Futronic FS82 Fingerprint Smart Reader combines USB2.0 Fingerprint Scanner and an RFID smart card reader into one device

It can be used as purely fingerprint scanner with all Futronic's standard software. The smart card reader in FS82 can handle any ISO7816compatible smart card and can also be used as a standalone smart card reader

http://www.contactlessnews.com/2008/12/18/futronic-launches-fingerprint-mifare-card-reader-writer

Just because it can be done doesn't mean that it will become law to do.

King Mob

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I am not making it up.

Yes you are.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Technology released to_day 18th December. Combined Thunbprint / RFID card reader / writer.



FS82 The Futronic FS82 Fingerprint Smart Reader combines USB2.0 Fingerprint Scanner and an RFID smart card reader into one device

It can be used as purely fingerprint scanner with all Futronic's standard software. The smart card reader in FS82 can handle any ISO7816compatible smart card and can also be used as a standalone smart card reader

http://www.contactlessnews.com/2008/12/18/futronic-launches-fingerprint-mifare-card-reader-writer

You do know thumbprint scanners have been around for ages right?
And that they explicitly say that the fingerprint isn't stored in any database but rather on the card?
Nor is there any indication that this system will be used by anyone other than private companies.
But hey that wouldn't fit into your conspiracy theory would it?

humanji

thecommander wrote: »

Just because it can be done doesn't mean that it will become law to do.

You obviously haven't been paying attention to this forum. If it's possible or is you can imagine it, then it must happen.

Run_to_da_hills

Both the Smart Card and the subdermal chip must be verified by biometric identification.



True identification of an individual today consists of a two part system two different ID Systems confirming one another. One system is a biological identifier ( fingerprint, iris scan ) and the other system is an arbitrarily assigned unique number implanted in the right hand or forehead or embedded within a smart card.




A scan across the chipped-hand or chipped-card must match up with one's digital fingerprint already stored in a prearranged database and thus be confirmed. Or else, a scan across the chipped-forehead or chipped-card must match up with one's iris print stored in a database. Together, the two different identification systems must match up in order for verification, authentication or substantiation can be confirmed.

thecommander

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Both the Smart Card and the subdermal chip must be verified by biometric identification.

True identification of an individual today consists of a two part system two different ID Systems confirming one another. One system is a biological identifier ( fingerprint, iris scan ) and the other system is an arbitrarily assigned unique number implanted in the right hand or forehead or embedded within a smart card.

A scan across the chipped-hand or chipped-card must match up with one's digital fingerprint already stored in a prearranged database and thus be confirmed. Or else, a scan across the chipped-forehead or chipped-card must match up with one's iris print stored in a database. Together, the two different identification systems must match up in order for verification, authentication or substantiation can be confirmed.
]

Blah blah blah blah, blah. Do you ever concede that you are wrong?

King Mob

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Both the Smart Card and the subdermal chip must be verified by biometric identification.

True identification of an individual today consists of a two part system two different ID Systems confirming one another. One system is a biological identifier ( fingerprint, iris scan ) and the other system is an arbitrarily assigned unique number implanted in the right hand or forehead or embedded within a smart card.



A scan across the chipped-hand or chipped-card must match up with one's digital fingerprint already stored in a prearranged database and thus be confirmed. Or else, a scan across the chipped-forehead or chipped-card must match up with one's iris print stored in a database. Together, the two different identification systems must match up in order for verification, authentication or substantiation can be confirmed.

And has any of this nonsense to do with the thumbprint scanner you linked to?
You really have to back up your posts with something other than ridiculous propaganda images.

Run_to_da_hills

King Mob wrote: »

And has any of this nonsense to do with the thumbprint scanner you linked to?
You really have to back up your posts with something other than ridiculous propaganda images.

Get the connection, they all operate onl the same frequency and are ISO 14443 –A, -B, -4 compliant :rolleyes:

Reality images :eek:

Smart card of ISO 14443 –A, -B, -4. 125 kHz to 134 kHz
ICAO refers to the ISO 14443 RFID chips in e-passports as "contactless integrated

Verichip for humans implamts 134 kHz

The combined Futronic F582 is also a 134KHZ FID interface that is compliant with ISO specifications 14443 A/B and 15693. Understand now?

Ah, but the NWO wouldn't see this connection, so the sheeple can all relax now.

thecommander

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Get the connection, they all operate onl the same frequency :rolleyes:

Reality images :eek:

Smart card of ISO 14443 –A, -B, -4. 125 kHz to 134 kHz
ICAO refers to the ISO 14443 RFID chips in e-passports as "contactless integrated

Verichip for humans implamts 134 kHz

So?

Microwaves, cordless phones and video senders work on same freq, what does that tell you?

Run_to_da_hills

thecommander wrote: »

So?

Microwaves, cordless phones and video senders work on same freq, what does that tell you?

The Authorities are hardly going to issue us with a microwave, cordless phone or a video sender as a form of personal identification. :rolleyes:

thecommander

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The Authorities are hardly going to issue us with a microwave, cordless phone or a video sender as a form of personal identification. :rolleyes:

My point is, it doesn't matter that they are on same frequency, like the examples about. More flawed logic from you

Run_to_da_hills

thecommander wrote: »

My point is, it doesn't matter that they are on same frequency, like the examples about. More flawed logic from you

"Flawed logic" that a system is developed that can read both finger prints and134 kHz smartcards/ chippedd passports or Verichip implants. Whats "flawed" about that?

Of course sheeple couldn't see the connection, they would look as an advanced tool to "counter terrorism" that would make our airports and financial institutes "more secure".

thecommander

I hope they take you first.

King Mob

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

"Flawed logic" that a system is developed that can read both finger prints and134 kHz smartcards/ chippedd passports or Verichip implants. Whats "flawed" about that?

Of course sheeple couldn't see the connection, they would look as an advanced tool to "counter terrorism" that would make our airports and financial institutes "more secure".

But that system cannot read rfid chips in the hand.
Only thumbprints stored on the card.

Also what leads you to believe that that system will be adopted by any government.

And those pictures you keep posting are the definition of propaganda.

Run_to_da_hills

King Mob wrote: »

But that system cannot read rfid chips in the hand. Only thumbprints stored on the card.

The FS82 The Futronic will read ANY compatible and 134 kHz smart chip and thumb print simultaniously. how often do I have to explaain this. :rolleyes:

King Mob wrote: »

Also what leads you to believe that that system will be adopted by any government. .

It will assist the government with achieving a more positive identification on medical patients that choose Verichip. :rolleyes: (So the sheeple will be led to believe. )

King Mob wrote: »

And those pictures you keep posting are the definition of propaganda.

Pictures speak 1000 words.

King Mob

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The FS82 The Futronic will read ANY compatible and 134 kHz smart chip and thumb print simultaniously. how often do I have to explaain this. :rolleyes:

Yes but a chip in the hand.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

It will assist the government with achieving a more positive identification on medical patients that choose Verichip. :rolleyes: (So the sheeple will be led to believe. )

So no, you have no reason to believe that any government will use that system.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Pictures speak 1000 words.

So propaganda is ok in your book?
It sure explains alot.


Oh btw still ignoring my question: what reasons do you have that crime will be dealt with zero tolerance after the chip are introduced?

Oracle

Interesting subject the whole Verichip, RFID, face recognition and thumbprint scanning technology. What they all have in common is a biological or biologically implanted means to check identity. That is more secure, making online transactions less prone to impersonation and fraud. It usually means the person requesting authentication and authorisation is present. But also there may be a more sinister side to it, as critics believe. Because the technology is checking the presence of someone it effectively can be used as a tracking device. Also because the technology in many cases requires no contact, it may allow the unauthorised reading of implants, chips and RFID cards.

I was watching television recently, and seen an advertisment for a Toshiba laptop with built-in web cam and face recognition. It suddenly dawned on me why virtually all new laptops have these new tiny web cams built-in. Finally I could join all the dots; is the next big computer idea that in the future we all login to our computers via face recognition? That means we could be tracked, our computer and internet use monitored and our location pin pointed anywhere on earth. It could also mean that face recognition parameters, accessed from a personal computer, could be used in other locations to track anyone while out and about via CCTV. I don't remember millions of computer users wanting tiny web cams in laptops, and it's unusual that all the manufacturers seem to have put them in across the board in the last 12 months. In my opinion thats more sinister than RFID and Verichip.

GhostInTheRuins

Oracle wrote: »

I was watching television recently, and seen an advertisment for a Toshiba laptop with built-in web cam and face recognition. It suddenly dawned on me why virtually all new laptops have these new tiny web cams built-in. Finally I could join all the dots; is the next big computer idea that in the future we all login to our computers via face recognition? That means we could be tracked, our computer and internet use monitored and our location pin pointed anywhere on earth. It could also mean that face recognition parameters, accessed from a personal computer, could be used in other locations to track anyone while out and about via CCTV. I don't remember millions of computer users wanting tiny web cams in laptops, and it's unusual that all the manufacturers seem to have put them in across the board in the last 12 months. In my opinion thats more sinister than RFID and Verichip.

But what happens if you're involved in a face mangling car crash? Will it mean you can't be tracked?

King Mob

Oracle wrote: »

Interesting subject the whole Verichip, RFID, face recognition and thumbprint scanning technology. What they all have in common is a biological or biologically implanted means to check identity. That is more secure, making online transactions less prone to impersonation and fraud. It usually means the person requesting authentication and authorisation is present. But also there may be a more sinister side to it, as critics believe. Because the technology is checking the presence of someone it effectively can be used as a tracking device. Also because the technology in many cases requires no contact, it may allow the unauthorised reading of implants, chips and RFID cards.

I was watching television recently, and seen an advertisment for a Toshiba laptop with built-in web cam and face recognition. It suddenly dawned on me why virtually all new laptops have these new tiny web cams built-in. Finally I could join all the dots; is the next big computer idea that in the future we all login to our computers via face recognition? That means we could be tracked, our computer and internet use monitored and our location pin pointed anywhere on earth. It could also mean that face recognition parameters, accessed from a personal computer, could be used in other locations to track anyone while out and about via CCTV. I don't remember millions of computer users wanting tiny web cams in laptops, and it's unusual that all the manufacturers seem to have put them in across the board in the last 12 months. In my opinion thats more sinister than RFID and Verichip.

So what leads you to believe that computers will log you in through facial recognition? That stuff is fairly unreliable and would be pretty pointless.
What leads you to believe that just because a laptop would have facial recognition that would mean that your internet use and such would be tracked? it doesn't follow.
Why would they use facial recognition anyway when they just use your password or whatever.

Oracle

Facial recognition has greater potential for tracking you because your facial recognition measurements are unique to you, and usually mean that you're actually present at whatever computer you're currently using. Whether that's say, a public internet kiosk at Sydney airport, or your home computer in Ireland. The same doesn't necessarily apply for login passwords, they can be shared between users. The facial recognition software available on personal computers may be unreliable now, but since governments are using it on passport systems worldwide, I'd say it's only a matter of time before the facial recognition systems on home computers are very accurate and reliable.

King Mob

Oracle wrote: »

Facial recognition has greater potential for tracking you because your facial recognition measurements are unique to you, and usually mean that you're actually present at whatever computer you're currently using. Whether that's say, a public internet kiosk at Sydney airport, or your home computer in Ireland. The same doesn't necessarily apply for login passwords, they can be shared between users. The facial recognition software available on personal computers may be unreliable now, but since governments are using it on passport systems worldwide, I'd say it's only a matter of time before the facial recognition systems on home computers are very accurate and reliable.

And what leads you to believe that government will bother using this system when it's easily defeated by placing a bit of tape over your web cam?

Cow Moolester

Manufacturers put webcams in laptops because hundreds of millions of people use things like MSN and AIM and don't want to splash out on an extra webcam. And it defeats the purpose of having a mobile laptop by having a webcam with a big wire coming out of it. How easy would it be to use that in an airport as opposed to an in-built webcam?

Run_to_da_hills

Cow Moolester wrote: »

Manufacturers put webcams in laptops because hundreds of millions of people use things like MSN and AIM and don't want to splash out on an extra webcam. And it defeats the purpose of having a mobile laptop by having a webcam with a big wire coming out of it. How easy would it be to use that in an airport as opposed to an in-built webcam?

Off topic on Verichip however

Im sure In time to come the webcam and built in condensor microphone in any pc could be activated and used against you by remote access by the up and coming "super state" authorities if they had suspicion of you being involved in "terrorist activities". :rolleyes:

3G mobile phones have known to be used as "roving bugs" even when switched off. You can always stick insulation tape over the webcam or wear a balaclava when on line.