• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Saudi 'Killer Chip' Implant Would Track, Eliminate Undesirables

I very much doubt this.

I don't, it may not be done on a large scale, but on a smaller one I definitely could see this being used by a government.
 
I don't, it may not be done on a large scale, but on a smaller one I definitely could see this being used by a government.

Holey carp, me and TNE agree on something... stop the presses!! :mrgreen:
 
I really don't get you sometimes, bud.

The patent was denied for legal reasons, not technical ones.

There is no information in the article on whether the device was technically feasible or not, granted... you choose to assume that is isn't, and chide people for worrying over it.

We have Verichip already. We have GPS already. A cyanide capsule breakable by remote means is hardly outside our ability to produce. It seems very logical that something like this is do-able, but you decline to acknowlege the possibility at all.

You doubt that some dictator, somewhere, isn't salivating at the thought of putting one of these devices, if he can obtain them, into someone whose loyalty is under question, or someone he wants to force into a course of action, etc?

I just don't understand why people are so riled about this. This is not new ****. The idea behind this has been around since James Bond. Nobody knows **** about what this guy's designs showed, nor is it likely that they included anything that a basic engineer couldn't put together in a short time.

The reason why it's not a big deal isn't because it's not technologically feasible, it's because there's no ****ing way this would ever happen.

Set aside the "oh noes dictators are evil" for a second and see if you can name a scenario in which some dictator will have the infrastructure and control necessary to manufacture, implement and monitor such a program. I can't. Do you realize how insanely difficult that would be - implement the chip in everyone, make sure they don't remove it, monitor every single person's movements and actions, decide when to kill them, etc. Ridiculous.

The chances of this happening are absolutely insignificant. Perhaps even more important, they are no less insignificant than they were yesterday or 5 years ago.

Your position doesn't seem very logical. I have to wonder if it stems from your apparent determination to appear moderate in all things... even things that anyone ought to flatly condemn.

Re-read my posts - where did I indicate that I'm not condemning the idea behind this? My point all along has been that it's stupid to get riled up about this because it ain't happening. This reminds me of when there's some article about how google has developed a new technology and all the chicken littles come out of the woodwork to rant about how google is trying to control our lives.

Seriously, this is not a big deal.

I don't, it may not be done on a large scale, but on a smaller one I definitely could see this being used by a government.

I don't, and I think you'd be hard pressed to come up with a reasonable scenario in which it could be used.
 
I agree entirely with RightInNYC. Any government with the will and ability to do this would have an easier time just using firing squads for this stuff.
 
I agree entirely with RightInNYC. Any government with the will and ability to do this would have an easier time just using firing squads for this stuff.

Firing squads don't get a government what they want. They could easily use this chip on a person of interest to do what they want that person to do.

Again, I don't see this as a large scale application, but on a smaller scale, you betcha it's possible.
 
Firing squads don't get a government what they want. They could easily use this chip on a person of interest to do what they want that person to do.

Again, I don't see this as a large scale application, but on a smaller scale, you betcha it's possible.

1) Do what we want or we shoot you and your family.

2) Do what we want or we release cyanide into the blood of you and your family.

I can't see the difference, large or small-scale. If a citizen could flee a country to escape a firing squad, they could presumably find someone to remove/disable the chip in their new nation as well.
 
1) Do what we want or we shoot you and your family.

That's great if they have a family, if not they can screw you when they are out in the field. A chip in the head will solve that. Or worse a chip in their families head.


Again, small scale, but it could happen.

To say it could never happen is living in denial. One would think a country wouldn't test the effects of nuclear radiation on a person, but as we have seen that happened.

I never put it past any government to do something behind the curtains that they feel benefits them.
 
Back
Top Bottom