Post by thread:[OT] Colombia's president ... (suggests) ... putti

> Why would anyone consider doing this? > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4976816.stm If they could get away with it, sure they'll try it !! Then you have to enforce it.......and that's going to look ugly If you remember the South Park episode "Goobacks", which was about Mexican immigrants, the something Stan learned today is that you make their country better so they don't want to leave. AIUI, a major problem of several countries in the region is that there is no substantial middle class. The class that tends to be the backbone of a country In a similar vein/fat deposit, it is now mandatory, with some exceptions, for all dogs in NZ to be chipped Will do nothing to reduce dog attacks or strays. As usual the responsible owner will comply, another cash cow for the govt to milk. Something very like that will happen re chipping people We bought a new toilet pan once that amazingly had a chip in it. But it flushed away quite satisfactorily, good job it wasn't a burger

Catching illegal immigrants is not the problem. They are not hard to catch. The problem is what to do with them. Most are not bad people, just unfortunate. Like most of us, they are continually seeking a better life. Very few are inclined to criminal activity. They do get hungry and like you and I they will do desperate things to care for their families. If there were just a few, it would be a lot easier. There are millions! BTW, some make great citizens... John Ferrell W8CCW "My Competition is not my enemy" http://DixieNC.US ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carey Fisher" <spam_OUTcareyfisherTakeThisOuTncsradio.com> To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <.....piclistKILLspam@spam@mit.edu> Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 5:08 PM Subject: [OT] Colombia's president ... (suggests) ... putting microchips inseasonal workers. > Why would anyone consider doing this? > > news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4976816.stm > * > * > -- > Carey > --

On Sat, May 06, 2006 at 11:05:28AM +1200, Jinx wrote: > In a similar vein/fat deposit, it is now mandatory, with some > exceptions, for all dogs in NZ to be chipped > > Will do nothing to reduce dog attacks or strays. As usual the > responsible owner will comply, another cash cow for the govt > to milk. Something very like that will happen re chipping people Actually... In a roundabout way it *does* help reduce strays, a lot. See, if they get a dog in that's *not* chipped they can be pretty sure it's a stray with no owner. So it's a lot more feasible to distroy (IE kill) the dog sooner and get away without pissing off owners who's dogs have just gotten lost. Saves money overall. This is from a teacher of mine who volunteered with the humane society too. Remarkably level-headed woman, to be volunteering like that, yet completely see the nessesity of putting animals down like that. How that applys to illegal immigrants though... er... -- peteKILLspampetertodd.ca http://www.petertodd.ca

> See, if they get a dog in that's *not* chipped they can be pretty > sure it's a stray with no owner Well, yes, but they can do exactly that at present with dogs that are _supposed_ to wear a collar and tag Now, people are _supposed_ to have travel documents. But they deliberately lose them (to become no-fixed-abode refugees), have forged ones, get smuggled across borders in containers then live in the underworld of the immigrant societies, and so on. Even if you could get people chipped, it wouldn't be too long before a way is found around it. Wouldn't be too much of a procedure to remove the govt chip and stick in a counterfeit Chinese one, or none at all As usual, the honest would play by the rules, and pay for the privilege. The dishonest couldn't give a crap. Same with guns. It's a ridiculous premise to licence owners or guns to keep them out of the hands of crims. Crims don't care. It's just another way for a govt to extract money out of people who do

On Sat, May 06, 2006 at 09:00:47PM +1200, Jinx wrote: > > See, if they get a dog in that's *not* chipped they can be pretty > > sure it's a stray with no owner > > Well, yes, but they can do exactly that at present with dogs that > are _supposed_ to wear a collar and tag Of course, it's just a more reliable mechanism. Dogs can get out of collars, heck, the collar breaking may well be why the dog is out loose... Microchips, once implanted, are pretty much there for life. Anyway, I'm not trying to argue that the microchips really will help, rather, that they'll likely "help" in some really bad ways. > Now, people are _supposed_ to have travel documents. But they > deliberately lose them (to become no-fixed-abode refugees), have > forged ones, get smuggled across borders in containers then live > in the underworld of the immigrant societies, and so on. Even if you > could get people chipped, it wouldn't be too long before a way is > found around it. Wouldn't be too much of a procedure to remove > the govt chip and stick in a counterfeit Chinese one, or none at all Quite frankly I see that as incredibly naive. Encryption technology is *good* It will *not* be long before counterfeiting implated microchips is something even foreign governments will find very difficult to do. A microchip with an embedded public key encryption system will be something that will requiere thousands of dollars of decapping and probing tools. Sure it'll be hackable, but not cheaply. And that's with technology already availble right now, just wait a few years. I do *not* see effective, cheap, technological countermeasures for some of the security tech coming down the line. It's just too hard. And with publickey encryption, cracking once device only allows you to clone one identity, you still can't create an identity at will without breaking into the centralized identity lists. -- .....peteKILLspam.....petertodd.ca http://www.petertodd.ca

On 5/5/06, John Ferrell <EraseMEjohnferrellspam_OUTTakeThisOuTearthlink.net> wrote: > Catching illegal immigrants is not the problem. They are not hard to > catch. > The problem is what to do with them. Most are not bad people, just > unfortunate. Like most of us, they are continually seeking a better life. > Very few are inclined to criminal activity. They do get hungry and like > you > and I they will do desperate things to care for their families. > > If there were just a few, it would be a lot easier. There are millions! > BTW, some make great citizens... Yes, they do. If you can get past your fear factor, you can find good people anywhere, and good employees. Back when I was doing manucfacturing in LA, we had a guy and his wife working for us, both ex gang members. We couldn't have asked for more concientious and professional folks. They eventually became crew bosses for about 50 people of similar background, with NO "shrinkage" or other problems you might worry about in a warehouse. We worked with them after hours to get their high school diplomas with some tutoring as well. > -- > Feel the power of the dark side! Atmel AVR

On Sat, 6 May 2006, Peter Todd wrote: > How that applys to illegal immigrants though... er... One that scheme would start it would take all of about sixty seconds for a black market in counterfeit ID chips to flourish. They would be pitting a dumb piece of silicon approved by a commitee against a couple of millions of hungry people whose IQs are likely as high as anyone else's, over years and years. It's a game that was lost before starting. Peter

On Sat, 6 May 2006, Peter Todd wrote: > On Sat, May 06, 2006 at 09:00:47PM +1200, Jinx wrote: >>> See, if they get a dog in that's *not* chipped they can be pretty >>> sure it's a stray with no owner >> >> Well, yes, but they can do exactly that at present with dogs that >> are _supposed_ to wear a collar and tag > > Of course, it's just a more reliable mechanism. Dogs can get out of > collars, heck, the collar breaking may well be why the dog is out > loose... > > Microchips, once implanted, are pretty much there for life. In dogs, yes. But 'in there' and 'functional' are different issues. Also in motivated people 'in there and working' does not mean it is *his* (or her) chip, as long as swapping it (willing or unwilling, knowing or unknowing) for another yields some gain to someone (not necessarily to the wearer). Peter