Latest News Article

[KEK Inc.]

CreATiveHippo, on 05 February 2013 - 05:13 PM, said:

The biggest problem is that you can be tracked by having that chip inside your body.This means no privacy.

Yes and no.  It's not a GPS tracker, but it will be detected if you go by an RFID scanner.

[sircheesy2]

I bet all of these people or most of them have face books or twitters, too.

[sgtnoa]

The government can already track every single piece of information about you this will only make it easier and faster.

[Sting_Auer]

sgtnoa, on 06 February 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

The government can already track every single piece of information about you this will only make it easier and faster.

Anyone can already track 90% of everything about you by simply keeping within earshot.

[TheEvanCat]

Sting_Auer, on 06 February 2013 - 04:43 PM, said:

Anyone can already track 90% of everything about you by simply keeping within earshot.

Or by looking in your Internet history over your shoulder.

[MaGicBush]

It's probably a hoax, but I could see it happening down the road eventually. I will absolutely refuse to do such a thing if it happens in my life time even if it's required.

[Habanero]

MaGicBush, on 09 February 2013 - 12:53 AM, said:

It's probably a hoax, but I could see it happening down the road eventually. I will absolutely refuse to do such a thing if it happens in my life time even if it's required.

I sincerely doubt the government is ever going to implant hundreds of millions of people with tracking chips. The logistics alone would be absolutely insane.

[MaGicBush]

Habanero, on 09 February 2013 - 01:50 AM, said:

I sincerely doubt the government is ever going to implant hundreds of millions of people with tracking chips. The logistics alone would be absolutely insane.

While yes the logistics would be if someone constantly monitored it, but it could just be looked at to find a criminal/etc and implanted on birth/required for existing citizens.

[Travuersa]

It's funny how arrogant people are. The government doesn't care what 99% of us are doing. You're not being targeted, and there aren't FBI agents in your bathroom.

[MaGicBush]

Travuersa, on 09 February 2013 - 02:41 AM, said:

It's funny how arrogant people are. The government doesn't care what 99% of us are doing. You're not being targeted, and there aren't FBI agents in your bathroom.

Then why did Britain add tons of cameras over their entire country? Why do we constantly keep seeing the government in the US trying to invade our privacy by things like SOPA? Obviously they do care, or such things would have not been done/proposed.

[Sting_Auer]

MaGicBush, on 09 February 2013 - 04:37 AM, said:

Then why did Britain add tons of cameras over their entire country? Why do we constantly keep seeing the government in the US trying to invade our privacy by things like SOPA? Obviously they do care, or such things would have not been done/proposed.

SOPA was created to try to help to corporations, not to restrict the people.

Cameras in public areas != invasion of privacy. I guess somebody watching you walk around the park is an invasion of privacy now :/

[Travuersa]

MaGicBush, on 09 February 2013 - 04:37 AM, said:

Then why did Britain add tons of cameras over their entire country? Why do we constantly keep seeing the government in the US trying to invade our privacy by things like SOPA? Obviously they do care, or such things would have not been done/proposed.

The government cares to arrest people. What I'm saying is that they don't care about YOU though. They don't care that citizen #12,135,821,302 ate a sandwich and then walked his dog.

Edit: Phrasing

[Staonopao]

Quote

Then why did Britain add tons of cameras over their entire country?

Newsflash: when you're in a public space, people can see you. What difference it makes that there's also the odd camera about, I honestly do not understand.

[MaGicBush]

Travuersa, on 09 February 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

The government cares to arrest people. What I'm saying is that they don't care about YOU though. They don't care that citizen #12,135,821,302 ate a sandwich and then walked his dog.

Edit: Phrasing

Obviously they don't care about me or any citizen and that was not my point(besides our money). The point was they could implement chips in order to use them when someone does commit a crime, or for other government reasons.

Quote

Newsflash: when you're in a public space, people can see you. What difference it makes that there's also the odd camera about, I honestly do not understand.

Yes people can see you, and what your doing when in public. My point was they implemented those cameras to track any criminal activity, as they would use the chips for. Regardless it's still an invasion of privacy if you do not want your every movement known about whether it's in public or in your own home. I would not like the idea of someone basically stalking me wherever I go. There are also many faults with using cameras to determine one's activities(and the chip could be abused as well), one such case happened in my own town. They started using traffic cameras to catch people running red lights and would then mail a ticket to the car owners home. The problem was when someone driving a friends car got the friend a ticket for running a light while the owner was at home and not in the car. The city was sued and the cameras removed about a month after they were used.

[Trexmaster]

You do realize all the governments and secret services could know everything by wiring our phones; unless they're doing it already?
As for the RFID chip, more or less, it's a wallet and an ID card chip. So, it's detectable 24/7 with or without a scanner.

We're doomed, in our backside, right in the down under...

[Sting_Auer]

MaGicBush, on 10 February 2013 - 09:09 PM, said:

Obviously they don't care about me or any citizen and that was not my point(besides our money). The point was they could implement chips in order to use them when someone does commit a crime, or for other government reasons.

[/background][/size][/font][/color]

Yes people can see you, and what your doing when in public. My point was they implemented those cameras to track any criminal activity, as they would use the chips for. Regardless it's still an invasion of privacy if you do not want your every movement known about whether it's in public or in your own home. I would not like the idea of someone basically stalking me wherever I go. There are also many faults with using cameras to determine one's activities(and the chip could be abused as well), one such case happened in my own town. They started using traffic cameras to catch people running red lights and would then mail a ticket to the car owners home. The problem was when someone driving a friends car got the friend a ticket for running a light while the owner was at home and not in the car. The city was sued and the cameras removed about a month after they were used.

OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD THEY SEE ME DOING STUFF IN A PUBLIC AREA WITH THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE AROUND ME SEEING ME DOING STUFF AAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH

[Bagelking37]

No.  Not only is it a hoax, but it is unconstitutional.

[MaGicBush]

Sting_Auer, on 10 February 2013 - 10:16 PM, said:

OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD THEY SEE ME DOING STUFF IN A PUBLIC AREA WITH THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE AROUND ME SEEING ME DOING STUFF AAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH

You completely ignored my point with that post making yourself look ignorant.

[TYTHERDGOON]

MaGicBush, on 09 February 2013 - 04:37 AM, said:

Yes people can see you, and what your doing when in public. My point was they implemented those cameras to track any criminal activity, as they would use the chips for. Regardless it's still an invasion of privacy if you do not want your every movement known about whether it's in public or in your own home. I would not like the idea of someone basically stalking me wherever I go. There are also many faults with using cameras to determine one's activities(and the chip could be abused as well), one such case happened in my own town. They started using traffic cameras to catch people running red lights and would then mail a ticket to the car owners home. The problem was when someone driving a friends car got the friend a ticket for running a light while the owner was at home and not in the car. The city was sued and the cameras removed about a month after they were used.

So what your saying is that you'd rather have no cameras in public space that can be used to catch criminals because you're a bit paranoid? Why on Earth would you care what they see you do outside unless you are doing illegal things.

[toast_burner]

MaGicBush, on 10 February 2013 - 09:09 PM, said:

Yes people can see you, and what your doing when in public. My point was they implemented those cameras to track any criminal activity, as they would use the chips for. Regardless it's still an invasion of privacy if you do not want your every movement known about whether it's in public or in your own home. I would not like the idea of someone basically stalking me wherever I go. There are also many faults with using cameras to determine one's activities(and the chip could be abused as well), one such case happened in my own town. They started using traffic cameras to catch people running red lights and would then mail a ticket to the car owners home. The problem was when someone driving a friends car got the friend a ticket for running a light while the owner was at home and not in the car. The city was sued and the cameras removed about a month after they were used.

So you don't understand the purpose of security camera's and therefore they're bad?

Camera footage and helped catch countless numbers of thieves and murderers.  They don't use them to stalk people.