NationStates

This last The Economist had a few scary sentences, from robots making shirts in China to the problems of the US unilaterally pulling out of trade deals with no back up and others but this..

"A few firms, such as Mindshare, a media agency in Sweden, and Three Square Market, a tech firm in Wisconsin, have already moved onto the next stage: implanting a chip under a worker's skin. Employees gain a way to open canteen doors and pay for meals in the canteen.."

Essentially there's been a move to provide employees with rewards for improving their health. At a more benign end they provide Fitbit and reward for walking certain distances but the above..

..I find it highly unethical to even offer this, to provide additional benefits on the condition you implant a fucking chip under your skin to monitor you. I find it as odd that there isn't outrage among employees about this. The extent to which we'll acquiesce to things for minor convenience..

..and before you judge too harshly remember that a mobile phone is effectively this, for zero real benefit. We provide companies with all sorts of information from exactly where we are to what we're doing.

Shouldn't we be taking back our privacy?

We already don't have privacy, why draw a line here?

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Silicon Valley needs to be burned to the ground, the CEOs arrested, and the companies Nationalized

I'd like this instead of carrying those damn cards or key fobs when I go skiing.

It's exactly as you said, a phone already does this.

So getting a chip really doesn't lose you any privacy, but if it gets you company benefits, I'm all in.

Internationalist Bastard wrote:We already don't have privacy, why draw a line here?

I mean it is possible to have some modicum of tech privacy with the right knowhow, as I have tried to do, but it isn't absolute, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain.

Why do I feel like this is the beginning of a movie where everyone is mind controlled by some evil genius

Internationalist Bastard wrote:We already don't have privacy, why draw a line here?

I think there needs to be a wake up call - if nothing else this creates a disturbing trend towards discrimination, that if you're not some made up ideal of a good worker then you're denied.. what does walking a particular amount of steps have to do with your work (unless of course your job specifies walking around of course..).

Bombadil wrote:

Internationalist Bastard wrote:We already don't have privacy, why draw a line here?

I think there needs to be a wake up call - if nothing else this creates a disturbing trend towards discrimination, that if you're not some made up ideal of a good worker then you're denied.. what does walking a particular amount of steps have to do with your work (unless of course your job specifies walking around of course..).

My employer changed something tech-related fairly recently, and it's some grade A shit that I think is far less private and secure than what I was using before. Unfortunately I can't say what it is for obvious reasons, but trust me I wasn't happy about it.

Deutschess Kaiserreich wrote:Why do I feel like this is the beginning of a movie where everyone is mind controlled by some evil genius

A long time ago in a train station in Switzerland I was approached by these people who launched into this conspiracy theory that the two long lines at the beginning, middle and end of any barcode was the symbol for the number 6, and that we'd soon all have barcodes implanted in our skin that literally meant the mark of the beast and foretold the end times.

How I laughed..

The only chips going into me are potato!

I mean, in 50 years we all will be technologically hyperintegrated and ruled by AI Supreme Ruler MuskNet. The New Cultural Revolution will probably get rid of things, it was traditional values and inviolability of the church in the past, in the future it's very possibly privacy. As long as it is voluntary, it will continue (as opposed to if an NWO global government starts stopping people on the streets and injects people with miniature machiny capsules).

The New California Republic wrote:

Internationalist Bastard wrote:We already don't have privacy, why draw a line here?

I mean it is possible to have some modicum of tech privacy with the right knowhow, as I have tried to do, but it isn't absolute, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain.

A little legislation, as the Europeans have passed, goes a long way.

Northwest Slobovia wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:I mean it is possible to have some modicum of tech privacy with the right knowhow, as I have tried to do, but it isn't absolute, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain.

A little legislation, as the Europeans have passed, goes a long way.

Yeah, except people so willingly give up data anyway, if anything GDPR has annoyed people in having to click 'I accept you taking all my data and using it how you see fit' when opening a website.

Thermodolia wrote:I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Silicon Valley needs to be burned to the ground, the CEOs arrested, and the companies Nationalized

Calm down 'ere Allende!

Yes, this is a privacy concern. I wouldn't consent to something like this.

Bombadil wrote:

Northwest Slobovia wrote:A little legislation, as the Europeans have passed, goes a long way.

Yeah, except people so willingly give up data anyway, if anything GDPR has annoyed people in having to click 'I accept you taking all my data and using it how you see fit' when opening a website.

And this is my problem how? California's privacy law has a perfectly good solution, though: requiring web sites to work exactly the same way whether they can spy on people or not. At that point, there's no advantage to giving up anything.

If such a law was widespread (US law) and required sites to obey "do not track" headers browsers send, the problem entirely vanishes, except for sites which make it worth people's while to give them information. (I've forgotten the details of how the law works with sites that need people to log in to accounts, but it apparently works fine for anonymous users.)

Wunderstrafanstalt wrote:I mean, in 50 years we all will be technologically hyperintegrated and ruled by AI Supreme Ruler MuskNet. The New Cultural Revolution will probably get rid of things, it was traditional values and inviolability of the church in the past, in the future it's very possibly privacy. As long as it is voluntary, it will continue (as opposed to if an NWO global government starts stopping people on the streets and injects people with miniature machiny capsules).

Nah, I'll be dead. Y'all have fun, though.

You'll have a chip in you. You won't own anything at all. You'll have everything leased to you from your dinner plates to your car. You'll just have the right to use your fork and knife, use your dishwasher, and other things. You'll have to sign an agreement when get your new computer that you don't own it. It belongs Bestbuy.net and has to be returned after five years of use for recycling and you have to pay $10 a month for it to be in your living room. If it gets moved to your neighbors house, you have to pay $15 a month, and he has to pay $5 a month because of unauthorized sharing...

UniversalCommons wrote:You'll have a chip in you. You won't own anything at all. You'll have everything leased to you from your dinner plates to your car. You'll just have the right to use your fork and knife, use your dishwasher, and other things. You'll have to sign an agreement when get your new computer that you don't own it. It belongs Bestbuy.net and has to be returned after five years of use for recycling and you have to pay $10 a month for it to be in your living room. If it gets moved to your neighbors house, you have to pay $15 a month, and he has to pay $5 a month because of unauthorized sharing...

If you don't fit the proscribed weight and lifestyle you can't get on the bus.

Thermodolia wrote:I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Silicon Valley needs to be burned to the ground, the CEOs arrested, and the companies Nationalized

so the Silicon Valley workers can starve thanks to the US government being shut down.

At least nobody has tried to develop ctOS yet...

Bombadil wrote:This last The Economist had a few scary sentences, from robots making shirts in China to the problems of the US unilaterally pulling out of trade deals with no back up and others but this..

"A few firms, such as Mindshare, a media agency in Sweden, and Three Square Market, a tech firm in Wisconsin, have already moved onto the next stage: implanting a chip under a worker's skin. Employees gain a way to open canteen doors and pay for meals in the canteen.."

Essentially there's been a move to provide employees with rewards for improving their health. At a more benign end they provide Fitbit and reward for walking certain distances but the above..

..I find it highly unethical to even offer this, to provide additional benefits on the condition you implant a fucking chip under your skin to monitor you. I find it as odd that there isn't outrage among employees about this. The extent to which we'll acquiesce to things for minor convenience..

..and before you judge too harshly remember that a mobile phone is effectively this, for zero real benefit. We provide companies with all sorts of information from exactly where we are to what we're doing.

Shouldn't we be taking back our privacy?

The mobile phone is different. I can leave my mobile phone at home.

I cannot leave my skin at home.

Northwest Slobovia wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:I mean it is possible to have some modicum of tech privacy with the right knowhow, as I have tried to do, but it isn't absolute, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain.

A little legislation, as the Europeans have passed, goes a long way.

Some tech companies have a very cynical and time-consuming opt-out system as a response to GDPR that isn't user-friendly at all. I had to help out some family members with such an opt-out system for a well-known email provider a few weeks ago, because it wasn't intuitive at all.

A subcutaneous RFID tag you use to pay for food with company credit really isn't a privacy concern. It's silly, but it doesn't mean that the company can track you any more than they were already doing.