Prof. August Wilhelm Shir at the opening ceremony of Savit 2010, last week in Hanover and tried to allay fears about the unknown future of technology and announced that according to a recent survey Germans are interested in anything that will shorten their queues at the supermarket
The head of BITKOM, Germany's IT organization, said at the opening ceremony of the Svit exhibition that one in four Germans would be happy if a chip was implanted under their skin for identification purposes.
Prof. August Wilhelm Shir spoke to an audience that included the world's top IT industry executives as well as German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Spanish Prime Minister Jose Spetro. According to him, implanting a chip in humans will become common. "The speed of progress is not going to decrease in the current decade. "Some developments are already visible on the horizon - the CD and DVD are going to disappear as a source of information. Wallpaper on the walls will be replaced by flat screens, and many of us will agree to have a chip implanted under our skin by the end of the next decade.
Shir announced that the Bitcom organization conducted a study that showed that a quarter of Germans would be happy to implant such a chip if it meant faster and easier access to services.
"We have just completed a survey that showed that one in four Germans would agree to have chips implanted under the skin for trivial uses such as going through gates - for example in discotheques, and that they would be able to pay for the products they would easily purchase in the supermarket," Shir said. "The desire of our population to receive our technology is self-evident."
Electronic implants in the body are already used in the fields of medicine. Last August, a pacemaker was installed in the US that communicates with the external systems via RF. A combination of remote sensing capabilities will allow doctors to monitor the patient while the patient is at home and not connected to devices in the hospital.
19 תגובות
I assume that the intention of the Germans who agreed to the (theoretical for now) proposal is for cases where the chip will shorten processes and make life much more convenient.
For example: I enter a clothing store, choose a selection of clothes, and leave the store with the bags I chose. The store door identifies who took the adults, the clothes taken are marked and therefore their price is taken from my bank account. I saved time and brain confusion of naughty saleswomen.
I can also assume that in an elaborate market, such a store would be able to sell clothes at a cheaper price than a staffed store because of the great savings in KA.
Another inclusion that comes to my mind is an option to determine for this chip in advance in which stores I want to be sold in this way and in which stores I don't. For example, if I'm an alcoholic, I assume that part of the detoxification will be the refusal of a liquor store to let me leave the liquor store with a bottle, if that's what I requested in advance.
At the "Milky 2" crime scene they found that
============================
According to DNA the criminal is Moshe
According to blood tests, the criminal is Eli
According to the chip that separated those entering the crime scene according to the hours when the criminal aka Ami entered
According to the wallet and T. XNUMX they found that it was actually my father
According to the visa card it was proven beyond any doubt that it was a deer
According to the health insurance card, Amri was linked to the crime
Baruch, who was at the scene of the crime at the time, was released
After failing to link to the crime itself.
And the accomplices Moshe, Eli, Ami, Avi, Amri and Zvi are still being sought today.
Anyone can live on the basis of cash bills, a phone with a calling card, public transportation, cloud computing and regularly change the places where they purchase products.
If they don't care about you, then you're probably just paranoid..
A few points to consider:
1 If part of the code of the identification chip will be parts of the chip bearer's DNA it will be difficult to duplicate and copy.
2 When the chip transmits information out - like a credit card - how would it be possible to introduce a virus into it or change it from the inside? Can you put a virus on a credit card?
3 If I look like a bum and can't get into any club, even though I have a doctorate in mathematics, the chip can contain the fact that I don't have any case with the police, that is, as far as the club is concerned, I'm free of problems and therefore not expected to cause any. In this situation, they won't be able to leave me out because of the law.
4 The difference between the chip and the smart card that almost every high-tech person keeps on during the day is that it is on you, and you cannot lose it.
5 It can be assumed that the rest of the chip will be efficient and reliable, will be based on it only and people will not use credit cards or identity cards (how many of you still buy a watch to see the time? After all, the time is available on a mobile phone, computer, car). The danger is based on technology that binds a person's identity as well as his financial capacity. If someone passed out, when I take the chip from them can I use their identity and bank account, as if I stole their wallet? Would I even be wise to do this, because I leave a trail of every use of his identity just like a credit card?
6 The question arises, would I really want to be recognized every time I enter a supermarket, a grocery store, or a supermarket? Are the needs of a customer overwhelmed by the marketing systems of each chain? After all, even today a chain like Super Pharm can transfer my credit card and know exactly which medicines I use regularly, which are seasonal in nature, how old my children are (according to the sizes of diapers, medicines, bottles, gifts). Another question is, why would they even care how old my children are? What do I have to hide? Does Facebook reveal less? Doesn't Google keep articles written 7 years ago about each and every person?
The era of privacy has long since faded, and those who are jealous of it, do not have to install any chips, do not have to use credit cards, and do not have to purchase a cell phone with a monthly charge through a credit card.
A quarter of Germans would be happy to have such a chip implanted if it meant faster and easier access to services.
But if there are no toilets nearby, even a chip won't help unless it's a GPS chip that can direct you to the nearest toilets.
I completely agree with Roy...perhaps a ring or some kind of watch with an expanding screen...after all, it's all going to be something like this in the future...that every person will go with some kind of device that functions as a laptop and wears like a watch and its screen can stretch (by the way, you can build one Today it's just time for life and processing..let's not talk price is not that worthwhile)
...why the hell would I want a chip implanted that would give someone information about me
Who knows where it could end.
Lior:
Sometimes you should read the article that is being commented on:
"Shir announced that the Bitcom organization conducted a study that showed that a quarter of Germans would be happy to implant such a chip if it meant faster and easier access to services."
As a German, I protest against the words of the Honorable August and that he is stupid enough to agree to a chip under his skin. This means nothing about the rest of the population, neither a quarter nor an eighth
I don't know if it's a coincidence, but when I saw the red logo on the podium in the picture, I thought it was the logo of the Lego company (game).
The day they start labeling us like robots or clothes in a store, we will become statistics, numbers.
Paley and Gill:
Passwords, passwords, and more passwords (plus quite a bit of science fiction).
You don't know what the chip is but you know it won't be a problem to duplicate it.
I recall that people said here that it would encourage identity theft and it is not clear to me how it can be argued that something that adds another task to the process of identity theft can encourage identity theft. It's a simple matter of logic that even password nerds should understand.
I suggest you read what I wrote and notice that I also wrote that I am not saying that I am in favor of the chip, but I am still in favor of separating justified reasons from false slogans. What is not clear here?!
Of course there are two ways to present the same figure. In the same way it can be said that 75% of Germans are against microchip implantation.
But the demagogy…
An additional means of identification on top of the existing ones (not really) only increases the bureaucracy.
Degrading the chip will be child's play.
You are welcome to put a chip, just don't forget to put the leash too.
to Michael Rothschild
Stealing people's identity will not become more difficult for people that it is their job nor for me terrorist organizations and criminal organizations. The chip is simply meant to mark the common people in order for the government to control them. The chip reduces your control over your life and your privacy. With the chip, people become marionettes. In addition, the chip is a small electronic particle and what will prevent someone (a body or a single person with enough knowledge) to affect the people who carry the chip. It's just a matter of time. Therefore it is understandable why people oppose, it is about the most basic freedom!!!
With them, it was natural that the SS men were also required to have means of identification engraved under their skin.
And the residents of Auschwitz destined for extermination were numbered with subcutaneous markings.
The article says they need quick access to the bathroom probably because of all the beer they've been drinking.
There is a conditioned reflex in our society against this kind of thing and this reflex prevents people from treating things critically.
Such a chip will reduce and not increase the possibility of identity theft because it is an additional means of identification on top of the existing ones. No existing means is canceled because of the chip and you simply have to steal something else to steal an identity.
The fact that the chip is under the skin makes it very difficult to steal and forge it.
For tracking the person it contributes almost nothing because it doesn't work at large ranges.
Organ trafficking has nothing to do with it.
I'm not saying I'm in favor of it, but the automatic rant seems excessive to me.
That's how it is with the Germans. Super efficient.
The harm is much greater than the benefit.
Maybe the line at the supermarket will be a little shorter, but they won't gain anything from it
Because there will be less cashiers.
What's more, they will receive SMS messages to the phone and additional harassment for every turn in the mall.
will lose their privacy, and become another oiled screw in the system of the sales industry, and this is only the legal side.
From the criminal side, the damage is insane
Starting with impersonations, surveillance, organ trafficking, and the list goes on...
This whole idea of implanting chips under the skin seems just silly to me, why does the chip have to be implanted inside the body? What's wrong with a magnetic card that includes all the information? Or a ring with a chip that is worn on the finger? Why do they insist on pushing this chip into my body, what is the logic here? What are we dogs?