Mark of the Dumbass. (888 hits)
Category: NoneRating: -0.64 on 42 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by resignator <resignator7.at.hotmail.com> (View user info) at 2006-06-12 21:01:01 EDT
So it has finally happened...some jackass family went out and got microchips with their personal information stored on it.
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,50187,00.html
"Derek stood up and said, 'I want to be the first kid to be implanted with the chip,'" Leslie Jacobs said. "For the next few days all he did was talk about the VeriChip." from the wired article
*vomits all over himself*
While you are at it why dont you just tattoo a number ID on your wrist and shave your head. Just make sure IBM is there to catalogue you. They ran the machines that decided which numbers lived or died in WW2. I am sure they want their hands in this. Oh wait, VeriChip is backed by IBM. Good work ole chap. Good fucking work.
We have "key congressional leaders" saying they want guest workers tagged like cattle:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/6/7/05015/29458
If you want to get sick take a look at Applied Digital's website:
http://www.adsx.com/
"Infant Protection, Food Supply Protection, ANIMAL TRACKING, WANDER PREVENTION, ASSET PROTECTION"
Straight from their website...it's no secret what these filthy bastards have in mind.
*vomits all over himself again*
How long before my job requires it?
http://www.rfidgazette.org/2006/02/citywatchercom_.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2005/230405chiefofpolice.htm
And look at these happy sheep:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5545802.html
How long is it before every American is required to have one? How long before you are tracked by satellite everywhere you go? How long before police officers scan people that walk down the street or drive by in a car? How long before theives chop off hands or arms so they can steal your money?
Do people actually think these things make them safe? YOU ARE FUCKING CATTLE!
Three letters...E.M.P.
https://events.ccc.de/congress/2005/wiki/RFID-Zapper(EN)
User Reviews
Submitted by fluff (user info) at 2006-06-21 16:55:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-15 00:01:02 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by forthewin (user info) at 2006-06-14 00:14:42 (#)
Ranking: 0
Wow, most boring reviews ever.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Considering my last post:
http://www.ubersite.com/m/89020
I am kind of glad.
Submitted by forthewin (user info) at 2006-06-14 00:14:42 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Wow, most boring reviews ever.
Submitted by MrSparkle847 (user info) at 2006-06-13 23:33:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Er, the family chip one.
Submitted by MrSparkle847 (user info) at 2006-06-13 23:33:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Yeah, that happened four years ago. As a result, I didn't read all that.
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-13 23:19:29 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-13 15:25:01 (#)
Ranking: -2
"Right there you didn't, HOWEVER right here you did:
How long is it before every American is required to have one? How long before you are tracked by satellite everywhere you go?"
No, that was implying in the FUTURE ALL implants WILL be tracked by GPS. Huge difference from saying they all do right now.
"Well if you think about it, if everyone had one the range would have to be tiny, considering the holder would have one to, it would HAVE to be about the range of the hand held metal detectors, and I'd doubt that the government would allow scanners to be sold to anyone, or what is just as likely is that the 'scanners would be machines that would only provide the person scanning information needed, and not all of your personal information."
I could hook a scanner up to my laptop or pc right now and read RFID chips.
It is common technology and easy to build.
http://www.makezine.com/blog/archive/2006/05/how_to_homemade_rfid_reader.html
http://www.zapped-it.net/workshops.html
Is the government going to outlaw thought?
"For example, if you were to go buy a beer, you'd stick your arm in the scanner, it would trigger a response that would identify if you were over 21 or not, and the cashier would have no part in the interaction, but of course paranoid people, like yourself, will always be afraid that big brothers watching, and that the matrix exists, and your whole life is just a dream, so it doesn't much matter either way as there never will be a law requiring you to this."
The rest of this is some speech about how much easier my life will be if I get an implant. I will pass. I dont need some punk ass bitch scanning my arm and throwing the data back on another chip so they can do whatever they like in my name.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-06-13 21:13:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
We have "key congressional leaders" saying they want guest workers tagged like cattle:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/6/7/05015/29458
-----------------------
best idea i heard all week.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-06-13 21:00:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:46:48 (#)
Ranking: 2
The idea of requiring people to be implanted was brought up by Applied Digital Solutions CEO Richard Sullivan in an interview with the Palm Beach Post, in which he suggested microchips be used to track foreigners visiting the United States. (The company has since downplayed his comments.)
===
Jesus H. Christ. Is it not enough that I have to have my fingerprints and picture taken every single fucking time I enter or leave the country? It's fucking retarded. Fuck these people, and fuck the stupid bitch who said "The world would be a safer place if authorities had a tamper-proof way of identifying people"
===========
Jesus Henry Aloysius Mahoney Johnson Christ on a power-driven Chariot!!
Filty butt was right!!!
Submitted by darko (user info) at 2006-06-13 20:37:51 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Look what you fucking did http://www.ubersite.com/m/81849#2016079
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-13 16:31:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-13 15:25:01 (#)
Ranking: -2
"Right there you didn't, HOWEVER right here you did:
How long is it before every American is required to have one? How long before you are tracked by satellite everywhere you go?"
Which was simply asking two questions, when WILL all RFID devices be MANDITORY AND GPS enabled. It was not implying all RFID devices are GPS enabled.
You may not have a problem with anyone being able to scan all of your information, no matter if they are the police or a criminal after your bank info, but I do.
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-13 15:25:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-13 15:07:50 (#)
Ranking: 0
Tell me where in this sentence I proposed this is a GPS device:
"We have "key congressional leaders" saying they want guest workers tagged like cattle."
BTW, this company does make GPS enabled devices as well. Which are used to track, you guessed it....livestock.
"So if you have a problem with a chip carring all that information, than you should have a problem with all hospitals, police stations, tax forms, licenses, education systems, and jobs. Becasue all of them send the same shit to the same place, this would just be an easier way to do it."
And how is this anywhere near the same as having a chip implanted in you that ANYONE can scan when you are within range? THERE IS A HUGE FUCKING DIFFERENCE.
---
Tell me where in this sentence I proposed this is a GPS device:
"We have "key congressional leaders" saying they want guest workers tagged like cattle."
Right there you didn't, HOWEVER right here you did:
How long is it before every American is required to have one? How long before you are tracked by satellite everywhere you go?
And how is this anywhere near the same as having a chip implanted in you that ANYONE can scan when you are within range? THERE IS A HUGE FUCKING DIFFERENCE.
Well if you think about it, if everyone had one the range would have to be tiny, considering the holder would have one to, it would HAVE to be about the range of the hand held metal detectors, and I'd doubt that the government would allow scanners to be sold to anyone, or what is just as likely is that the 'scanners would be machines that would only provide the person scanning information needed, and not all of your personal information.
For example, if you were to go buy a beer, you'd stick your arm in the scanner, it would trigger a response that would identify if you were over 21 or not, and the cashier would have no part in the interaction, but of course paranoid people, like yourself, will always be afraid that big brothers watching, and that the matrix exists, and your whole life is just a dream, so it doesn't much matter either way as there never will be a law requiring you to this.
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-13 15:07:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-13 14:14:20 (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-13 00:02:00 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:45:08 (#)
Ranking: -2
I can read past the bias, I just want the facts that I'd get from Fox.
----------------------------------------------------------
That is so funny you should say that.
http://www.spychips.com/press-releases/silverman-foxnews.html
Read the top section:
Transcript of the Fox & Friends interview with Scott Silverman, Chairman of the Board of VeriChip Corporation.The interview took place Tuesday May 16, 2006, between 6 and 7 AM on the Fox News Channel.
---
Explain exactly the relevence between that and you're post. You're post being 'the government is going to implant a chip into your brain and big brother is always watching, oh noes!1!on!'
And here is a quote about the actual chip:
" No, that's correct, Tiki. This is not a locating device; this has no GPS capabilities in it whatsoever. It is purely an identification device that reads a unique 16-digit identifier with a proprietary scanner within a very short range. It's a passive device with no power source under the skin that ties to a database where the relevant information is stored."
So here are some possible benifits from having that implanted in everyone:
ID distorted bodies
Quick criminal records check for an employeer
Driving/Fishing/Hunting/Gun/anything else license
It would make it almost impossible to have your identity stolen.
So now, what exactly do you have a problem with? Having to have an identity? Possibly the government haveing a file on you, because I can assure you they already have files on you're name, wage, home, job, criminal record, if you're married, if you are disabled and just about everything else. So if you have a problem with a chip carring all that information, than you should have a problem with all hospitals, police stations, tax forms, licenses, education systems, and jobs. Becasue all of them send the same shit to the same place, this would just be an easier way to do it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tell me where in this sentence I proposed this is a GPS device:
"We have "key congressional leaders" saying they want guest workers tagged like cattle."
BTW, this company does make GPS enabled devices as well. Which are used to track, you guessed it....livestock.
"So if you have a problem with a chip carring all that information, than you should have a problem with all hospitals, police stations, tax forms, licenses, education systems, and jobs. Becasue all of them send the same shit to the same place, this would just be an easier way to do it."
And how is this anywhere near the same as having a chip implanted in you that ANYONE can scan when you are within range? THERE IS A HUGE FUCKING DIFFERENCE.
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-13 14:14:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-13 00:02:00 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:45:08 (#)
Ranking: -2
I can read past the bias, I just want the facts that I'd get from Fox.
----------------------------------------------------------
That is so funny you should say that.
http://www.spychips.com/press-releases/silverman-foxnews.html
Read the top section:
Transcript of the Fox & Friends interview with Scott Silverman, Chairman of the Board of VeriChip Corporation.The interview took place Tuesday May 16, 2006, between 6 and 7 AM on the Fox News Channel.
---
Explain exactly the relevence between that and you're post. You're post being 'the government is going to implant a chip into your brain and big brother is always watching, oh noes!1!on!'
And here is a quote about the actual chip:
" No, that's correct, Tiki. This is not a locating device; this has no GPS capabilities in it whatsoever. It is purely an identification device that reads a unique 16-digit identifier with a proprietary scanner within a very short range. It's a passive device with no power source under the skin that ties to a database where the relevant information is stored."
So here are some possible benifits from having that implanted in everyone:
ID distorted bodies
Quick criminal records check for an employeer
Driving/Fishing/Hunting/Gun/anything else license
It would make it almost impossible to have your identity stolen.
So now, what exactly do you have a problem with? Having to have an identity? Possibly the government haveing a file on you, because I can assure you they already have files on you're name, wage, home, job, criminal record, if you're married, if you are disabled and just about everything else. So if you have a problem with a chip carring all that information, than you should have a problem with all hospitals, police stations, tax forms, licenses, education systems, and jobs. Becasue all of them send the same shit to the same place, this would just be an easier way to do it.
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-13 14:00:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-06-12 23:40:07 (#)
Ranking: 0
Fox was a bad choice, Doodles. There's more opinioning on Fox than any other news channel, and that's a fact. Bill O'Reilley's the most obvious, and Hannity and Colmes, but the majority of their stuff is discussion and interview rather than real coverage.
---
That was exactly my point, I can normally tell the difference from the opinion and the fact, and I'm not talking about O'Reilley, that is almost utter bullshit, I'm talking about the actually 'news' show, even though I might bet on O'Reilley being SLIGHTLY more correct than a blog site.
MIGHT.
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-13 00:02:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:45:08 (#)
Ranking: -2
I can read past the bias, I just want the facts that I'd get from Fox.
----------------------------------------------------------
That is so funny you should say that.
http://www.spychips.com/press-releases/silverman-foxnews.html
Read the top section:
Transcript of the Fox & Friends interview with Scott Silverman, Chairman of the Board of VeriChip Corporation.The interview took place Tuesday May 16, 2006, between 6 and 7 AM on the Fox News Channel.
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-06-12 23:40:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Fox was a bad choice, Doodles. There's more opinioning on Fox than any other news channel, and that's a fact. Bill O'Reilley's the most obvious, and Hannity and Colmes, but the majority of their stuff is discussion and interview rather than real coverage.
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:56:10 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:48:35 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:45:08 (#)
Ranking: -2
I can read past the bias, I just want the facts that I'd get from Fox.
====
"Facts"? "Fox"?
Are you fucking retarded? Do you have any idea at all how the media works?
---
Would be why I said 'bias' it doesn't change the fact that there ARE facts in news regardless from what source, so long as that source is credible and physical. All sources will give facts, opinions, and half truths; therefore anybody who can THINK for themselves can get (for the most part) the same information from any source, just in a different light.
Honestly FA you're not the best person to berate anyone when it comes in news sources.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:48:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:45:08 (#)
Ranking: -2
I can read past the bias, I just want the facts that I'd get from Fox.
====
"Facts"? "Fox"?
Are you fucking retarded? Do you have any idea at all how the media works?
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:46:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The idea of requiring people to be implanted was brought up by Applied Digital Solutions CEO Richard Sullivan in an interview with the Palm Beach Post, in which he suggested microchips be used to track foreigners visiting the United States. (The company has since downplayed his comments.)
===
Jesus H. Christ. Is it not enough that I have to have my fingerprints and picture taken every single fucking time I enter or leave the country? It's fucking retarded. Fuck these people, and fuck the stupid bitch who said "The world would be a safer place if authorities had a tamper-proof way of identifying people"
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:45:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:37:47 (#)
Ranking: 2
Don't Trust the news Doodles. The facts are sometimes good, but the articles are always going to be biased. Same with the government. Ultimately, science and educational websites are the only really trustworthy sources on the internet.
---
There's really no trustworthy sites on the internet, but I'm gonig to believe some credible news site that has the authors name under the story, more than some random websites that anybody can use/change.
Like Uber, I'll never take the advice I'd get on here without researching it a bit, because there is no credibility to what anyone says. I can read past the bias, I just want the facts that I'd get from Fox.
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:37:47 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Don't Trust the news Doodles. The facts are sometimes good, but the articles are always going to be biased. Same with the government. Ultimately, science and educational websites are the only really trustworthy sources on the internet.
Submitted by ih8u2man (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:37:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
for your ego.....if you have one.
Submitted by ih8u2man (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:36:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
hey everybody look at meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
you should go away now. stop looking at me and read something else.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:35:11 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Stupid, stupid bastards.
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:32:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Never heard of any of them, get us a 'real' more creditable site. Preferably a government (I'll take anything that is .gov) or NBC, ABC, Fox, etc. site.
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:32:16 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Doodles: we had a rather reasonable debate on the ratings area of his last post, he and I.
I like him, let's keep him.
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:21:33 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Oops, that last one was suppose to be:
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=67264
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:20:27 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:13:36 (#)
Ranking: -2
I don't know that I would consider an article written by "Duke1676" on a website I've never heard of a valid source.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Here you go then:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1965110,00.asp
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50462
http://www.spychips.com/press-releases/verichip-immigration.html
http://scoop.epluribusmedia.org/story/2006/6/7/1812/02533
http://www.boomantribune.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2006/6/7/173915/8134
http://migramatters.blogspot.com/2006/06/microchip-implant-might-be-used-on.html
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1965110,00.asp
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2006-06-12 22:13:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
I don't know that I would consider an article written by "Duke1676" on a website I've never heard of a valid source.
Submitted by Ingsoc (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:59:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by Jeanneee (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:55:06 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
You're even more paranoid and incoherent than ETS. Seek help.
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:48:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:38:18 (#)
Ranking: 0
Not true; he's like ETS only more reasonable. He's not quite as geniusy though. It's a trade-off
---
If you can show me places where he's been reasonable, I might consider retracting my previous statement. However, what I've read in his latest posts has been mostly pointless mutterings about the US government being evil and terrorists, and 'identity chips' that will almost differently play no important role in your average person's life. That alone is ETS-like but throw in links to websites most people have NEVER heard of, make it read like he is enlightening us, and then the evading of comments makes him almost ETS. I say almost because at least with ETS, most of the posts were well written, thought out, and made an iota of sense.
If you don't like something, work in the system to change the system. Don't post it on Uber because, chances are, the majority here won't give a rats ass.
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:47:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:41:55 (#)
Ranking: 0
My opinion of you is currently at neutral to slightly positive. Don't drag it under by condescending me. I like to like people
--------------------------------------------------------------
It wasnt meant to condescend.
"he's like ETS only more reasonable"
is funny
"He's not quite as geniusy though"
stings a bit
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:41:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
My opinion of you is currently at neutral to slightly positive. Don't drag it under by condescending me. I like to like people
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:40:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:38:18 (#)
Ranking: 0
Not true; he's like ETS only more reasonable. He's not quite as geniusy though. It's a trade-off
----------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know if this makes me laugh or cry.
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:38:18 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Not true; he's like ETS only more reasonable. He's not quite as geniusy though. It's a trade-off
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:38:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by nephilim (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:33:03 (#)
Ranking: 0
Yes, there is. They can force them to carry tagged cards or something to that effect, but can not force an implant.
The law I'm refering to is a clarification to an older law that makes it illegal to force anyone into a surgery unless the public health is at stake. It does apply to workplaces.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Then why are states like Wisonsin having to pass laws making it a crime?
http://www.spychips.com/press-releases/verichip-wisconsin-ban.html
Submitted by Doodles (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:36:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Proving once again that you are a fucking retard. Jesus, you're like ETS only much more annoying.
Submitted by nephilim (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:33:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:28:30 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by nephilim (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:24:42 (#)
Ranking: 0
It is illegal to force american's to get implanted RFID tags.
I wish I remembered the details of the bill it was in, but I don't. Thing is I did a report on the subject four years ago and at that time there was already a law in place. I know, they could always change it, but ummm yeah. That's true for any country, at any time, but I'm not going to sit around fearing that bleak future.
-------------------------------------------------------------
There is no law saying employeers cannot require this. Welcome to the brave new world my friend.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, there is. They can force them to carry tagged cards or something to that effect, but can not force an implant.
The law I'm refering to is a clarification to an older law that makes it illegal to force anyone into a surgery unless the public health is at stake. It does apply to workplaces.
Submitted by resignator (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:28:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by nephilim (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:24:42 (#)
Ranking: 0
It is illegal to force american's to get implanted RFID tags.
I wish I remembered the details of the bill it was in, but I don't. Thing is I did a report on the subject four years ago and at that time there was already a law in place. I know, they could always change it, but ummm yeah. That's true for any country, at any time, but I'm not going to sit around fearing that bleak future.
-------------------------------------------------------------
There is no law saying employeers cannot require this. Welcome to the brave new world my friend.
Submitted by nephilim (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:24:42 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
It is illegal to force american's to get implanted RFID tags.
I wish I remembered the details of the bill it was in, but I don't. Thing is I did a report on the subject four years ago and at that time there was already a law in place. I know, they could always change it, but ummm yeah. That's true for any country, at any time, but I'm not going to sit around fearing that bleak future.
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-06-12 21:13:40 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
That's scary. I always said that implanted data chips were a sign of the apocolypse... when people become numbers 'his number will be 666' makes sense. Wait, I'm not a Christian, I don't believe Revalations... it's still a bad idea.