(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

For those who weren't paying attention, fears of child abduction and abuse are fairly overblown.

Although statistics show that rates of child abduction and sexual abuse have marched steadily downward since the early 1990s, fear of these crimes is at an all-time high. Even the panic-inducing Megan's Law Web site says stranger abduction is rare and that 90 percent of child sexual-abuse cases are committed by someone known to the child. Yet we still suffer a crucial disconnect between perception of crime and its statistical reality. A child is almost as likely to be struck by lightning as kidnapped by a stranger, but it's not fear of lightning strikes that parents cite as the reason for keeping children indoors watching television instead of out on the sidewalk skipping rope.

Why is this important? Because companies that want humans to accept RFID implantation will try to use fears of child abduction to sell their products. The industry wants this badly (and possibly the government too), because once people begin implanting children, no one will get them removed as adults and eventually, every citizen will have them. Once we are all tagged, we can be tracked wherever we go and whatever we do.

(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

From the "don't forget we're people, not products" department, North Dakota is the second state to ban forced RFID implantation. However, even if this is a step in the right direction, does it do enough? It doesn't ban voluntary implantation and last I checked a lot of things that aren't really "voluntary" are treated such under law:

But Michael Shamos, a professor who specializes in security issues at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, believes the law is too vague to do much good. For instance, it only addresses situations where a chip is injected, even though RFID tags can also be swallowed. And it doesn't clearly define what a forced implant really is; someone could make chipping a requirement for a financial reward.

"Suppose I offer to pay you $10,000 if you have an RFID [chip] implanted?" he asked. "Is that 'requiring' if it's totally voluntary on your part?"

It's a poor example, but the right idea. Instead, what if you are offered a high paying job and move your family to a new state, get settled and begin the orientation process for your new job. You find out that they require RFID implants for "security" (which has been proven to weaken security). How much free will do you have in this instance? Can you really afford not to take the job now?

Another example, perhaps not so drastic. Companies push and push and finally get most everyone to use RFID implants as identification and method of payment. Because you're smart enough to know what a bad thing this is, you refuse, but find yourself inconvenienced everywhere. You can only shop at certain stores that still have non-RFID checkout. You pay an extra "cash handling" fee for not using the new methods. You have to drive 20 miles away to the only gas station around that's equiped to take non-RFID transactions.

Is it still a choice?

Note that both Spychips.com and Privacy.org are carrying this story and that Spychips lists Ohio, Colorado, Oklahoma, and Florida as more states with anti-implantation bills in the works. The first state to pass such a bill was Wisconsin (note the same flaw as the ND bill).

Watch lists have serious downsides that need to be addressed if we're going to use them

Now the terrorist watch list is making it to our everyday lives.

Private businesses such as rental and mortgage companies and car dealers are checking the names of customers against a list of suspected terrorists and drug traffickers made publicly available by the Treasury Department, sometimes denying services to ordinary people whose names are similar to those on the list.

…

Yet anyone who does business with a person or group on the list risks penalties of up to $10 million and 10 to 30 years in prison, a powerful incentive for businesses to comply.

…

"It prohibits anyone from doing business with anyone who's on the list. It does not have a minimum dollar amount. . . . The local deli, if it sells a sandwich to someone whose name appears on the list, has violated the law."

This might be a good thing if it actually worked. Judging on how the no-fly list works, I'm guessing it doesn't.

So what happens when the terrorists start using names like:

• John Smith
• Mike Brown
• Chris Anderson
• Mary Jones
• Beth Miller

(Image source is unknown)

Wisconsin may have refused to help the RIAA, but the U of N actually took it all the way:

If there were any doubt that the university is really irritated by the RIAA's requests, it has requested that the RIAA pay the university to reimburse its expenses from dealing with this

That's so awesome 😀

(Image is in the Public Domain)

In my last experience buying a car, they tried to take my Social Security Number even though I had financing from someone else. I fought them for a half hour and nearly left the place until a manager got involved and saw the writing on the wall.

Now, it's getting worse. Public Citizen's blog points to an article about a car dealership that data-brokerings customers for their thumbprints before selling them a car. First seen at banks, the practice seems to be spreading.

(Image is in the Public Domain)

This article talks about a company who designs workplace monitoring software. This isn't new technology, but the reason I point it out is how human they make these guys seem. Check out the Star Wars and Battlestar Galactica references 😀

(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

Now that Google is getting in the game (so-to-speak), the chance of seeing in-game advertising has just skyrocketed. Would a company like Google who tracks your searches match your ads to your search habits? Hmm…I guess Penny Arcade was right.

(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

Thanks to the good work of the people over at Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering - CASPIAN, a plot by American Express to patent technology that would "identify people, track their movements, and observe their behavior" has been exposed. According to their article:

That patent application, titled "Method and System for Facilitating a Shopping Experience," describes a Minority Report style blueprint for monitoring consumers through RFID-enabled objects, like the American Express Blue Card

The funny part is that when American Express top brass learned that they'd been discovered, they scrambled into damage control mode and met with the leaders of Caspian promising to "ensure that any people-tracking plans be accompanied by language requiring consumer notice and consent". They also promised to make a spychip-free version of the card if a customer asks for it.

(Image used under: Creative Commons 2.0 [SRC])

The Consumerist found a Walmart PowerPoint presentation outlining their new focus on profiling customers into value groups and treating them accordingly. This is not new (read my Angel/Demon Customer Profiling article for details), but the funny part of it is that WalMart is so mad that it's dirty laundry was aired, that they sent a DMCA takedown notice to the Consumerist.

Walmart, "seemingly" embarrassed by having their "allegedly" sinister plot exposed, threatened the Consumerist into removing it from their site. So here's a copy.