As I pointed out... we already have small transmitters which can be implanted under the skin. We just do not have ones that explode! And personally I think that people will not object to having known criminals tracked. I hate to go back to the news for examples again but... In the UK a known criminal was bailed waiting his trial for murder. And surprise surprise, he went missing. It took a couple of weeks to find him. If he were being tracked, he could have been found straight away.
That is why having everyone tagged is dangerous. Now you thinking? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Just teasing. I have already stated that in my first post, of course only for criminals that have done serious crimes.
Yes, I pointed that out too. I also pointed out that their range is a couple of feet. May I add that you dont need technology to track people over a range of a few feet, all you need is a short chain. Well, stop releasing people on bail then. Bail is an extremely stupid concept anyhow. Hans
Wrong. The article clearly states that it uses mobile phone masts to do the tracking. Is there a mobile phone mast every few feet? nope. Agreed.
Well, whatever the article, i'ts no good: 1) The cell-phone net has the potential to trace and record the whereabouts of a device similar to a cell-phone, but only to cell level. The size of a cell varies from some hundreds of meters in cities to several kilometers in open country. Also, there is some uncertainty: A device chooses which cell to log into based on signal strength; its not unusual for cellphones to log to neighbooring cells due to local conditions. 2) A cellphone contains a fairly powerful transmitter (0.5-2W). This requires power, which is derived from a battery that needs recharging every few days. An implantable chip can have no power source, its tiny transmitter gets power from radio waves beamed at it from a short distance and even then its weak signal can only be picked up over a very short range, I wrote a few feet; this might without too much trouble be extended to several meters, still --- The essense of the matter is: If, like you suggest, a severe punishment sceme is to be based on electronic tracking, it requires a very precise and reliable system. Otherwise you wont get the feeling of safety and security by the general public which I assume you are aiming at, in spite of your bloodthirsty attitude. The ability to prove that somebody has been in the neighboorhood of a crime will at best serve as circumstantial evidence, and you cannot punish people for eluding tracking as long as there are numerous blackouts in the net, like in the cell-phone net. There are a number of purposes where electronic tracking of persons can be useful and beneficial, but not as the basis of a "kill'em all" penalty system. And, I might add, such penalty systems, regardless of enforcement method, has not been shown very successful for abolishing crime. There was a time when they used to hang pickpockets, but that didnt guarantee a low crime-rate.
Good point... I am sure that I posted it. If you see something completely unrelated in another thread, I apologise now. here is the link here.... ------------------------------------------------------- In reply to your numbered points... 1)I do not work in the phone industry, but I know enough to know that what you have said is true. However, With small alterations to the mobile phone network would it not be possible to measure the strength at each of the cells. Could you then not pinpoint the location? 2) I do not know about that either. But as the article states she is having it implanted. Of course blackouts would be a problem. However if you know who is in the neighbourhood you could narrow it down from 56 million people to a few. Perhaps it could work hand in hand with door way scanners allowing the police know what building you are in. Alas you are correct. Without 99% efficency it isn't practical. True. However would you not agree that there were alot less repeat offenders?
I just saw on the news that a childs graveyard in South Bristol (UK) has been damaged by thugs.Around 150 graves were damaged. This was a disraceful act. If the people who did this want to own up to me, I will personally hit these idiots into next week. If they had been tagged we would know the area, and know who was in there. We could now string these buggers up. sorry but thats just my view.
Yes, it would be possible to measure the signal strength. No, it would not help pinpoint the source. Imagine you stand 50 meters from a cell mast (the cell surrounds the mast), but between you and the mas happens to be some large concrete structure which shields you from most of the signal of that mast. One kilometer away is another mast, to wich you happen to have a clear line of sight. Chances are your cell-phone (or tracking device) will log to the farther cell because that is where the best signal is. And to confound that problem (its only a problem for tracking), to ensure good coverage, cells are placed so they overlap each other, at least in denselt populated areas. Typically, in any spot, your phone will have the choice of 3 cells. OK, I read the article, but I dont believe it. If that guy has invented a chip-sized unpowered device that can be tracked through the cell-phone network (even with the limited precision involved), I want to buy shares in his business! Just think of all the (non controversial) possibilities! Have all your valuable properties tagged! WOW! ---- But I havent heard of such a thing, and to the best of my knowledge (I'm an electronic engineer), it is not possible at present. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Youp! -- You got me there! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Hans
Just did a bit of reaserch and found... from http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,9502,00.html. However as you stated 125 meters is not good enough. and that was through mobiles, using a triangulation technique. I would imagine that the range problems are related to what you said about line of sight etc. However the artical clearly states that the childs location is shown as a cross on a street map. I will send some e-mails and try to find out some more information.
I guess the article gets the idea from GPS devices. A type of tracking device which is a combination of a GPS navigator and a cell-phone has been built, which can be tracked within a meter. They are used, among other things to track cars, and actually the article mentions that. But in cars, there's no shortage of power or space. The device has also been built as a hand-held set, which can be used for tracking persons, but it requires recharching of batteries and cen easily be disabled (or left behind), so it has little use in crime prevention. Also, GPS, which is a navigation system based on sattelite signals, is not reliable indoors (because the sattelite signals cannot penetrate most building structures). On cellphone tracking: Triangulation will work reasonably well in open country, but in built-up areas it will be more uncertain. 125 meters sounds attainable, though. This method will be a great boon for emergence calls (even with limited reliability). For crime prevention, it has to hold in court, and thats a different matter. Mind you, we are really discussing three things in this thread: 1) The technicalities of a person-tracking system. If we want such a system bad enough, those problems can be overcome. But it will take some years and the costs will be considerable. 2) The effectivity on crime-rate of a harsh punishment scheme. Past experience does not indicate that there has to be a connection between the two. 3) The desirability to give up a part of personal freedom in exchange for a higher crime solve rate. A high conviction rate has an effect on crime rates and public security wether the penalty policy is harsh or not. Hans
OK; been fact finding a bit: This page shows what is probably state of the art in GPS tracking: http://www.wherifywireless.com/corp_home.htm This is what we can currently (or soon) do in implantables: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/1/10/145805.shtml And this is under development. Mind you that for medical safety reasons, implantable devices have a long time to market because of the extensive testing required. For device made available to the general public, 5-6 years is realistic, barring technical problems: http://www.cnn.com/1999/TECH/ptech/12/20/implant.device/ Hans
Chip Implants. If you look at how everything regarding tracking systems and satellite systems and so on work,it would only take a small modification to track someone with a chip to a very small margin of error.GPS uses intersecting timers on satellites to compute coordinates,they pulse at a certain rate,and the GPS unit computes the time it takes the time pulse from the satellite to reach the Gps unit,from two or more satellites,That would be at least intersection,but usually there are 3 satellites within range which would give a very,very accurate reading. And cell-phone masts are laid in with GPS coordinates so they are used as survey control points on the ground,and in conjunction can be used in combination with sattelites (GPS/other) to track cell-phones/chip implants,on the ground also. And whether you like it or not,you will probably be pressured into getting a chip implant eventually.And anyone who is willing to give up their rights so that the world is safe from crime should consider that the government even taking rights away is a crime,funny how all you sheeples are ruled by fear . The government seemed to work better in the past,but that was before everyone forgot about what hitler did,they did not take rights so blatantly as they do now . History will repeat itself in different words than before,the government is the enemy of the people,and if you let them chip you,you are just plain stupid.
Oh sorry the great unbalanced, knower of all, thinker of nothing... what would you recommend in place of a chip? You cannot just come in and tell me that I am an idiot and not give me an alternative.
why do you need? do you need to give up your rights?,do you know you are ruled by fear?,do you realize that if you didn't have a TV you would have no idea what was going on and it wouldn't make a difference anyway?. How is it that people become convinced that they are in danger?,by having the media tell them repeatedly that they are,the only real danger is no danger,it,s inevitability ,someday you are going to be dead,all the worrying about criminals and terrorists through your life won't make any difference to anyone but the people you give your rights away to,because until you die,you have to live with the fact you are becoming a slave to fear. News travels too fast,what has already occurred can't be changed,and what the future holds is beyond our control,so enjoy your freedom while you have it,and preserve this freedom for the future generations,all mortals forget lessons learne3d in the past through their passing.
"do you realize that if you didn't have a TV you would have no idea what was going on" How? Even if you do have a TV, you wouldn't realize what's really going on. Only what's falsely going on. "enjoy your freedom while you have it" Freedom can be so relative. In some ways yes I am free. But for the most part, I'm not.
Whoa. Here's an old thread. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! A novel idea, but I feel more comfortable knowing I'm not tagged. I recognize it would reduce crime ... but if we allowed tagging like that, it would simply open the door for too much else.
Lucky for you those around you don't share your sentiments, otherwise you probably wouldn't be here to give themPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Don't see what the technical objections are, ... all that is needed is a transponder that works at cellphone frequencies, and a little bit of maths to work out the triangulation. Anybody who doubts such an item could be made, is obviously not aware of currently available commercial products; http://www.breitling.com/en/models/professional/emergency/
depending which culture you're from, the death penalty is debatable for reasonable crimes. I like the idea of criminals with a tracker. I mean, it can be part of their punishment, giving up a part of their human rights. Or those that are on probation ect. If everyone had one, there would be too much power to one authority, and you'll have to forgive me about being a skeptic, but i don't trust the government or a commercial association with THAT much power. Power gets abused. It's the 21st C, it happens. On a daily basis.
