Why don't we Lojack everyone?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-06-09 04:31pm

For those unfamiliar with the name, Lojack is a theft prevention and recovery system for cars in which a transmitter inside the car can be used by the police to track its location at all times.

In "Demolition Man", they had subdermal implants which the police could use to track the locations and life signs of every person in the city. Police notification of a murder was nearly instantaneous, and detective work was vastly simplified (imagine if OJ Simpson had such a device in him on the night of Nicole's murder).

Of course, this was derided as "fascist" in the movie, and is universally derided as such when the movie is discussed among movie fans. But what, precisely, is wrong with it? Is it an invasion of privacy? It's not as if they have cameras pointing into your bedroom; they only know your geographical location. Is it such a huge secret where you happen to be at any given time? What's the big harm?

Think of the lives that could be saved from instant dispatch of paramedics to heart-attack victims, for example, or the quick resolutions to child abduction cases, not to mention countless other crimes. Why would it be so bad?

We occasionally hear similar arguments about cameras facing public areas; is it really such an intrusion into your privacy for people to see you walking down a public street? When you're in your home, the only thing the police would know is that you're in your home; they wouldn't be watching you masturbate in the shower.

Thoughts?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-06-09 04:35pm

It's odd, because Neal Boortz was talking about this exact subject this morning on his radio show (about OnStar, which is similar to Lojack). He was using slippery slope reasoning in explaining his fears of these technologies, though.

I think it's a great idea, but I should also think it ought to be voluntary, because forcing something into the body of a person that he/she does not desire is quite a violation of the right to privacy, among other things.

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2003-06-09 04:38pm

They're about to do this with mobile phones anyway (they can currently get your location to 30m).

Of cours,e it'll be used comercially - shop chains will send you texts justas you approach a shop for example.

Personally, I've always been pro-survellance, on a I've-got-nothing-to-hide basis, so...

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2003-06-09 04:48pm

Assuming that the doohickeys actually work, which is a pretty big assumption. If it can somehow tell that I'm being beaten over the head with a brick and get help to me before it's too late, if it can tell that I'm having a stroke and send an ambulance to me in time, if it can tell that my kid has been snatched and find him, if only the cops, medical & fire services, and anyone I personally clear can track me, then I'd grudgingly accept one.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-06-09 04:53pm

aerius wrote:Assuming that the doohickeys actually work, which is a pretty big assumption.

It's kind of a hypothetical scenario. I'm not actually saying we've achieved "Demolition Man" capability yet. We don't have the three seashells.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-06-09 04:57pm

I'm not real keen on getting several speeding tickets a day. Other than that, it sounds like a good idea.

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2003-06-09 05:06pm

I certainly wouldn't want one. Do I want the government to know every political rally I happen to attend? Do I want them to know if I attend religious services that aren't in the main stream, or just whether I go to church on Sunday morning? Do I want them to be able to identify all of the friends that I visit? Do I want them to be able to tell how often I visit the liquor store? Do I want them to know if I visit a strip bar or nudist camp? If I were to ever run for public office, would somebody be looking up records of my movements?

A private company might be able to provide this capability as a service, with appropriate privacy guarantees included, but it's way too much information for the government to have automatically. I don't trust the government not to abuse whatever power you give it, hence I don't believe in giving it any more than necessary.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2003-06-09 05:09pm

Durran Korr wrote:I think it's a great idea, but I should also think it ought to be voluntary, because forcing something into the body of a person that he/she does not desire is quite a violation of the right to privacy, among other things.

But if it's voluntary and people choose not to have them implanted it raises another problem. What if a non-chipped person kills a person that has the implant? Unless the victim's implant can somehow ID the killer or the authorities can be on the scene instantly, it would still be a bitch to track down the killer and we're back to where we are now. We'd still need to use detective skills to piece everything together and somehow track the killer down.

And if a non-chipped person gets killed we'd have a similar problem, except in this case no one would even know about the killing. And if the crime involves only non-chipped people then things get real fun and once again we're back to where we are today. I'd also think that the lawyers will be going apeshit with laws concerning the rights of chipped vs. non-chipped people, and no good is going to come out of that.

Nova Andromeda · Post by **Nova Andromeda** » 2003-06-09 05:12pm

Darth Wong wrote:For those unfamiliar with the name, Lojack is a theft prevention and recovery system for cars in which a transmitter inside the car can be used by the police to track its location at all times.

In "Demolition Man", they had subdermal implants which the police could use to track the locations and life signs of every person in the city. Police notification of a murder was nearly instantaneous, and detective work was vastly simplified (imagine if OJ Simpson had such a device in him on the night of Nicole's murder).

Of course, this was derided as "fascist" in the movie, and is universally derided as such when the movie is discussed among movie fans. But what, precisely, is wrong with it? Is it an invasion of privacy? It's not as if they have cameras pointing into your bedroom; they only know your geographical location. Is it such a huge secret where you happen to be at any given time? What's the big harm?

Think of the lives that could be saved from instant dispatch of paramedics to heart-attack victims, for example, or the quick resolutions to child abduction cases, not to mention countless other crimes. Why would it be so bad?

We occasionally hear similar arguments about cameras facing public areas; is it really such an intrusion into your privacy for people to see you walking down a public street? When you're in your home, the only thing the police would know is that you're in your home; they wouldn't be watching you masturbate in the shower.

Thoughts?

--I would support such a thing if the appropriate governmental safe gaurds were in place, HOWEVER, they are not in any nation on this planet nor will they be in the forseeable future. Do you really want to give the right wingers yet another tool to subvert to their own ends? In addition, what right do you have to know my location at all times? What if I don't want you to know I attend Ice Cream Nut meetings? In theory, that type of information could be protected, but I doubt any such protection would be put in place given events like the unveiling of TIA.

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2003-06-09 05:12pm

Darth Wong wrote:
aerius wrote:Assuming that the doohickeys actually work, which is a pretty big assumption.
It's kind of a hypothetical scenario. I'm not actually saying we've achieved "Demolition Man" capability yet. We don't have the three seashells.

What the hell is up with those seashells anyway?

Back on topic, I don't fear the government having technologies that allow them track our locations or monitor our actions in public, as so long as they don't use the information to violate your civil rights.

The folks I do fear having access to such technology are the corporations. You think spam is bad now? Look at Minority Report's tracking technology and what the ad companies did with them. Imagine if the MPAA or RIAA was able to see what you DVDs and CDs you looked at in a store and then monitored your Internet traffic to make sure you weren't illegally obtaining those items (everything that goes across the lines and/or is stored on an ISP server is up for grabs, and it helps to know what your looking for). And I'm quite sure many other uses can be thought of...

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-06-09 05:13pm

We have subdermal implants on pets that can store information on everything from their name to who owns them and vetinary info. Tagged prisoners have ankle or wrist bands with GPS transmitters in that keep track of them, true they may be able to take them off, but it's just a case of miniaturisation for current tech.

Along with the Galileo project that will surpass the abilities of the American GPS system, such capabilities will be viable in the near future.

It's not the technology though, it's the ethics, it always is. People will see this as another 1984 parallel and shun it, it's bad enough getting people to accept that their workplace can view their emails without prosecution, how do you get them to allow tagging? It's a very intimidating thought.

That said, I'd be for it, it would help with missing persons and, if given medical technology to monitor ECG or Alpha waves, even determine the person's state of health.

Jawawithagun · Post by **Jawawithagun** » 2003-06-09 05:16pm

Well, I would not want them to know where I get my porn (it's enough if my dealer and I know) or how many nights of the week I'm too busy elsewhere to be with the Mrs

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2003-06-09 05:17pm

But if it's voluntary and people choose not to have them implanted it raises another problem. What if a non-chipped person kills a person that has the implant? Unless the victim's implant can somehow ID the killer or the authorities can be on the scene instantly, it would still be a bitch to track down the killer and we're back to where we are now. We'd still need to use detective skills to piece everything together and somehow track the killer down.

It would help to find any witnesses and could also be used to eliminate any chipped suspects (since your could confirm there whereabouts), it would also although murder scenes to be find even in cases where people are killed then moved.

It would certainly be beneficially in crime fighting but measures for preventing misuse (monitoring where public figures spend their off hours for example) would need to be installed.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-06-09 05:26pm

Darth Wong wrote: Thoughts?

Sounds like something out of a Stalinist wetdream. The NKGB and NKVD would
have creamed their pants to have such an efficient system for tracking
everyone...

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-06-09 05:29pm

It has two much potential for abuse. And I would oppose such a measure.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-06-09 05:31pm

And of course, it would be really fun if we made these transmitters a sort
of "Smart ID" that replaced money...

Instead of simply mugging you and swiping your purse or wallet, the
thief would simply get a knife out and CUT it out of
you...

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2003-06-09 05:32pm

True it would simplify police work to a degree unprecidented, but due to the corruptable nature of the government, our personal information might get sold to be used against us, or to advertise toward us. This is how it works on the internet, I'm sure Wong has reported kojikun's activities countless times, so porn sites can keep track of his online time.

At any rate it would be a potential source of huge amounts of revenue to whomever controlled the information, to sell to the highest bidder. Before it could be morally sound, we'd have to first genetically engineer honest bureaucrats, which would be much harder than simply sticking a chip in every person in a city.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2003-06-09 05:37pm

MKSheppard wrote:And of course, it would be really fun if we made these transmitters a sort
of "Smart ID" that replaced money...

Instead of simply mugging you and swiping your purse or wallet, the
thief would simply get a knife out and CUT it out of
you...

I hope you're kidding. However, if they have the ability to track vital signs, the implant could be programmed to deactivate the financial parts of it in the event of theft.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-06-09 05:43pm

Darth Servo wrote:I hope you're kidding.

I'm not.

However, if they have the ability to track vital signs, the implant could be programmed to deactivate the financial parts of it in the event of theft.

Yea, and a hacker would come up with a way to do that, a little device
that would be held over the implant to make it generate false readings
as they cut it out

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2003-06-09 06:05pm

I can't imagine being in a place that I didn't want the government to know about. It's not like I get a hard on by thinking about how much the government doesn't know about me.

I don't see any real disadvantages to the system.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-06-09 06:05pm

I think hell has frozen over again...

Drooling Iguana · Post by **Drooling Iguana** » 2003-06-09 06:08pm

I don't like being stalked, electronically or otherwise.

Unless they could make it 100% completely secure, which is impossible, then anyone with the right connections could know where I am at any time, and if they make logs then they'd know everywhere I've ever been since I've had the chip installed. If I did someone to piss someone off and they wanted revenge, I'd no longer have any means of escape. And if someone with access to the logs thought I could be a threat, then they'd be able to take advantage of the fact that with our laws pretty much everyone ends up doing something illegal on a semi-regular basis (copyright violations, in my case) to make my life very difficult.

If I was able to turn the transmitter on and off whenever I wanted to, then this sort of thing could be useful, but if not then I'll have to invest in a bit of black market signal-jamming equipment (which would almost certainly become very easy to find if people were ever forced to wear transmitters.)

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-06-09 06:18pm

I find it very terrifying to know that someone in the government would have active knowledge of whether or not I am infact in my house. I mean, they might be watching me or something. For all I know, they have cameras in my room right at this very moment which would entirely negate any fear from the GPS system! SHIT ::puts on tinfoil hat::

Honestly, its a great idea. Its not as if the government doesnt know where you live, who you work for, where all your relatives live, what kind of car you drive, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc. The only problem I can see is that it would have to be mandatory from birth in a place which makes easy removal or deactivation nigh impossible, which means either in your skull or in bone. And that doesnt change the fact that the signals won't penetrate anything and everything. Mobile phones dont work if you cover them with tinfoil, whats to make anything else better?

NapoleonGH · Post by **NapoleonGH** » 2003-06-09 06:19pm

Robert Treder wrote:I can't imagine being in a place that I didn't want the government to know about. It's not like I get a hard on by thinking about how much the government doesn't know about me.

I don't see any real disadvantages to the system.

Ohh so just because you have nothing to fear from the current government right now you intend to assume that no one has anything legitimate that they wish to hide from the government?

Remember the big controversy with the secret ballot. Basically until the secret ballot you were told "vote for y, or we break your arms" didnt harm anyone who would vote for Y anyway, but what if you wanted to vote for X?

Now take it in this concept, I am an anti-war person, and i attend rallies which later the government uses to connect me to an anti-war act of terrorism, when my only connection is being anti-war. Basically this is the argument that I dont trust the government not to abuse this data and use it to quite dissent, imagine the mcarthy witch hunt if the government knew exactly where people were "we know that on June 5 of 1943 you were within 5 feet of John Doe, known communist so, are you now or have you ever been a commie?" It would allow for the next McCarthy to do even more damage to liberty. IE ascroft.

thecreech · Post by **thecreech** » 2003-06-09 07:17pm

I think that it would fine if you commited a crime and were forced to have one. I think that it would be good for kids too, make sure they are in school or if they get kidnapped. Now i personally wouldn't want one, there should be someway to have the government disable it after you turn a certain age

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Why don't we Lojack everyone?

Why don't we Lojack everyone?

Re: Why don't we Lojack everyone?

Re: Why don't we Lojack everyone?

Re: Why don't we Lojack everyone?

Re: Why don't we Lojack everyone?

Re: Why don't we Lojack everyone?