11-06-2013, 02:14 PM
"Big Brother" may end up being very, very small
June 11, 2013
In yesterday's news: The body electric: Researchers move closer to low-cost, implantable electronics![[Image: grey-goo-lolz.jpg]](https://lilithlela.cyberguerrilla.org/wp-content/uploads/grey-goo-lolz.jpg)
What is wrong with this picture?
True, nanotechnology can make supercomputing on a tiny scale possible, serving detection of substances, analysis of genomes, and implantating microchips into humans. These technologies can probably be extremely helpful in promoting economic progress, health, and environmental preservation. With nano-sensors guarding, it would be very difficult to impossible to sneak a bomb into a highly secured place. And as the article above mentions, chips implanted in humans could track and perhaps even help heal various diseases.
But these technologies also come with a darker side: they will open up new opportunities for governments, people, and personal interests to violate privacy. Nano-technology can have a very serious effect on our privacy.
Microchips as described in the above article can become a tool for surveillance. By reading DNA, tracking an individual's location would be possible. And nano-sensors that can detect minute amounts of chemicals in the air, make it possible to track eating habits, smoking, drug use, any activity that leaves a chemical trace. Another nano-surveillance innovation may be extraordinarily tiny cloaked cameras, watching every move a person makes, undetected.
Of course, nobody in their right mind would advocate implementing such surveillance at the moment. Or ?!? The "war on terror" has steadily continued and may drive widespread use of nano-sensors, in the USA, maybe even globally as globalisation has not stood still either. And history teaches us that once a technology is ubiquitous, it becomes politically feasible to suggest that it be used to keep tabs on activities.
Such privacy violations will not only come from govts. What about parents and corporations? Insurance companies? What are the current legal settings in which countries?
These applications are not necessarily bad, for instance keeping track of your toddler certainly isn't, but they can bring enormous shadows and raise some serious questions that IMHO need to be addressed first. I for one, would not want my toddler to learn to associate "being tracked" with "safety". It might train him or her into accepting "tracking by authorities" that, unlike me, do not have his or her best interests at heart.
And recent events show that we can not trust govts to take the initiative in addressing the important issues that need to be resolved before such technologies become omnipresent and its management troublesome and a substantial threat to our civil liberties.
More Information
On Nano-Panopticism: A Sociological Perspective
Owlstone Nanotech (see FAIMS)
Cloaking Device Makes a Cat Disappear
DNA-like robotic nanoscale assembly devices
NNI Strategic Plan and the [URL="http://www.nano.gov/node/681"]NNI Environmental, Health, and Safety Research Strategy
[/URL]https://lilithlela.cyberguerrilla.org/?p...um=twitter
June 11, 2013
In yesterday's news: The body electric: Researchers move closer to low-cost, implantable electronics
(Phys.org) New technology under development at The Ohio State University is paving the way for low-cost electronic devices that work in direct contact with living tissue inside the body.
The first planned use of the technology is a sensor that will detect the very early stages of organ transplant rejection.
Paul Berger, professor of electrical and computer engineering and physics at Ohio State, explained that one barrier to the development of implantable sensors is that most existing electronics are based on silicon, and electrolytes in the body interfere with the electrical signalsin silicon circuits. Other, more exotic semiconductors might work in the body, but they are more expensive and harder to manufacture.
[...]
The first planned use of the technology is a sensor that will detect the very early stages of organ transplant rejection.
Paul Berger, professor of electrical and computer engineering and physics at Ohio State, explained that one barrier to the development of implantable sensors is that most existing electronics are based on silicon, and electrolytes in the body interfere with the electrical signalsin silicon circuits. Other, more exotic semiconductors might work in the body, but they are more expensive and harder to manufacture.
[...]
What is wrong with this picture?
True, nanotechnology can make supercomputing on a tiny scale possible, serving detection of substances, analysis of genomes, and implantating microchips into humans. These technologies can probably be extremely helpful in promoting economic progress, health, and environmental preservation. With nano-sensors guarding, it would be very difficult to impossible to sneak a bomb into a highly secured place. And as the article above mentions, chips implanted in humans could track and perhaps even help heal various diseases.
But these technologies also come with a darker side: they will open up new opportunities for governments, people, and personal interests to violate privacy. Nano-technology can have a very serious effect on our privacy.
Microchips as described in the above article can become a tool for surveillance. By reading DNA, tracking an individual's location would be possible. And nano-sensors that can detect minute amounts of chemicals in the air, make it possible to track eating habits, smoking, drug use, any activity that leaves a chemical trace. Another nano-surveillance innovation may be extraordinarily tiny cloaked cameras, watching every move a person makes, undetected.
Of course, nobody in their right mind would advocate implementing such surveillance at the moment. Or ?!? The "war on terror" has steadily continued and may drive widespread use of nano-sensors, in the USA, maybe even globally as globalisation has not stood still either. And history teaches us that once a technology is ubiquitous, it becomes politically feasible to suggest that it be used to keep tabs on activities.
Such privacy violations will not only come from govts. What about parents and corporations? Insurance companies? What are the current legal settings in which countries?
These applications are not necessarily bad, for instance keeping track of your toddler certainly isn't, but they can bring enormous shadows and raise some serious questions that IMHO need to be addressed first. I for one, would not want my toddler to learn to associate "being tracked" with "safety". It might train him or her into accepting "tracking by authorities" that, unlike me, do not have his or her best interests at heart.
And recent events show that we can not trust govts to take the initiative in addressing the important issues that need to be resolved before such technologies become omnipresent and its management troublesome and a substantial threat to our civil liberties.
More Information
On Nano-Panopticism: A Sociological Perspective
Owlstone Nanotech (see FAIMS)
Cloaking Device Makes a Cat Disappear
DNA-like robotic nanoscale assembly devices
NNI Strategic Plan and the [URL="http://www.nano.gov/node/681"]NNI Environmental, Health, and Safety Research Strategy
[/URL]https://lilithlela.cyberguerrilla.org/?p...um=twitter
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.
“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.
“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.