Beast System: Laying The Foundation Of The Beast

[oneofmany]

Operation Lie and Deceive Verichip Style

Operation Lie and Deceive Verichip Style

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/bKHtyuzuKUA"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/bKHtyuzuKUA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

 

[oneofmany]

RFID Embedded Discs to Stop Piracy for Good Says Ritek

RFID Embedded Discs to Stop Piracy for Good Says Ritek

According to reports, DVDs, CDs, Blu-ray discs and HD DVD discs may soon have RFID chips embedded into them to prevent illegal copying of movies and music. The chip is currently in development by a company called U-Tech, which is a subsidiary of Ritek, the world's largest manufacturer of DVD discs -- both stamped and recordable. The company developing the actual RFID chips is IPICO, and both U-Tech and IPICO have announced production at one of U-Tech's main production plants located in Taiwan.

The technology will also find its way into drives and players. When a user places a disc inside a player, the RFID reader will verify whether or not a disc has been copied or whether or not a movie is being played in the correct geographical location. Unfortunately, this also means that users will be unable to make home backups of discs and store away originals for safe keeping.

Ritek's chief executive officer Gordon Yeh said "this technology holds the potential to protect the intellectual property of music companies, film studios and gaming and software developers worldwide." Apparently, a new RFID equipped DVD drive will perform the security check by hardware, and not require system drivers or specialized software. The intent is to prevent users from creating software to circumvent the RFID mechanism. The online enthusiast community however, has been successfully modifying driver firmware for a number of years.

 

[oneofmany]

The ID Chip You Don't Want in Your Passport

The ID Chip You Don't Want In Your Passport

If you have a passport, now is the time to renew it -- even if it's not set to expire anytime soon. If you don't have a passport and think you might need one, now is the time to get it. In many countries, including the United States, passports will soon be equipped with RFID chips. And you don't want one of these chips in your passport.

RFID stands for "radio-frequency identification." Passports with RFID chips store an electronic copy of the passport information: your name, a digitized picture, etc. And in the future, the chip might store fingerprints or digital visas from various countries.

By itself, this is no problem. But RFID chips don't have to be plugged in to a reader to operate. Like the chips used for automatic toll collection on roads or automatic fare collection on subways, these chips operate via proximity. The risk to you is the possibility of surreptitious access: Your passport information might be read without your knowledge or consent by a government trying to track your movements, a criminal trying to steal your identity or someone just curious about your citizenship.

At first the State Department belittled those risks, but in response to criticism from experts it has implemented some security features. Passports will come with a shielded cover, making it much harder to read the chip when the passport is closed. And there are now access-control and encryption mechanisms, making it much harder for an unauthorized reader to collect, understand and alter the data.

Although those measures help, they don't go far enough. The shielding does no good when the passport is open. Travel abroad and you'll notice how often you have to show your passport: at hotels, banks, Internet cafes. Anyone intent on harvesting passport data could set up a reader at one of those places. And although the State Department insists that the chip can be read only by a reader that is inches away, the chips have been read from many feet away.

The other security mechanisms are also vulnerable, and several security researchers have already discovered flaws. One found that he could identify individual chips via unique characteristics of the radio transmissions. Another successfully cloned a chip. The State Department called this a "meaningless stunt," pointing out that the researcher could not read or change the data. But the researcher spent only two weeks trying; the security of your passport has to be strong enough to last 10 years.

This is perhaps the greatest risk. The security mechanisms on your passport chip have to last the lifetime of your passport. It is as ridiculous to think that passport security will remain secure for that long as it would be to think that you won't see another security update for Microsoft Windows in that time. Improvements in antenna technology will certainly increase the distance at which they can be read and might even allow unauthorized readers to penetrate the shielding.

Whatever happens, if you have a passport with an RFID chip, you're stuck. Although popping your passport in the microwave will disable the chip, the shielding will cause all kinds of sparking. And although the United States has said that a nonworking chip will not invalidate a passport, it is unclear if one with a deliberately damaged chip will be honored.

The Colorado passport office is already issuing RFID passports, and the State Department expects all U.S. passport offices to be doing so by the end of the year. Many other countries are in the process of changing over. So get a passport before it's too late. With your new passport you can wait another 10 years for an RFID passport, when the technology will be more mature, when we will have a better understanding of the security risks and when there will be other technologies we can use to cut the risks. You don't want to be a guinea pig on this one.

 

[oneofmany]

Big Brother is shouting at you

Big Brother is shouting at you

Big Brother is not only watching you - now he's barking orders too. Britain's first 'talking' CCTV cameras have arrived, publicly berating bad behaviour and shaming offenders into acting more responsibly.

The system allows control room operators who spot any anti-social acts - from dropping litter to late-night brawls - to send out a verbal warning: 'We are watching you'.

Middlesbrough has fitted loudspeakers on seven of its 158 cameras in an experiment already being hailed as a success. Jack Bonner, who manages the system, said: 'It is one hell of a deterrent. It's one thing to know that there are CCTV cameras about, but it's quite another when they loudly point out what you have just done wrong.

'Most people are so ashamed and embarrassed at being caught they quickly slink off without further trouble.

'There was one incident when two men started fighting outside a nightclub. One of the control room operators warned them over the loudspeakers and they looked up, startled, stopped fighting and scarpered in opposite directions.

'This isn't about keeping tabs on people, it's about making the streets safer for the law-abiding majority and helping to change the attitudes of those who cause trouble. It challenges unacceptable behaviour and makes people think twice.'

The Mail on Sunday watched as a cyclist riding through a pedestrian area was ordered to stop.

'Would the young man on the bike please get off and walk as he is riding in a pedestrian area,' came the command.

The surprised youth stopped, and looked about. A look of horror spread across his face as he realised the voice was referring to him.

He dismounted and wheeled his bike through the crowded streets, as instructed.

Law-abiding shopper Karen Margery, 40, was shocked to hear the speakers spring into action as she walked past them.

Afterwards she said: 'It's quite scary to realise that your every move could be monitored - it really is like Big Brother.

'But Middlesbrough does have a big problem with anti-social behaviour, so it is very reassuring.'

The scheme has been introduced by Middlesbrough mayor Ray Mallon, a former police superintendent who was dubbed Robocop for pioneering the zero-tolerance approach to crime.

He believes the talking cameras will dramatically cut not just anti-social behaviour, but violent crime, too.

And if the city centre scheme proves a success, it will be extended into residential areas.

The control room operators have been given strict guidelines about what commands they can give. Yelling 'Oi you, stop that', is not permitted.

Instead, their instructions make the following suggestions: 'Warning - you are being monitored by CCTV - Warning - you are in an alcohol-free zone, please refrain from drinking'; and Warning - your behaviour is being monitored by CCTV. It is being recorded and the police are attending.'

Mr Bonner said: 'We always make the requests polite, and if the offender obeys, the operator adds 'thank you'. We think that's a nice finishing touch.

'It would appear that the offenders are the only ones who find the audio cameras intrusive. The vast majority of people welcome these cameras.

'Put it this way, we never have requests to remove them.'

But civil rights campaigners have argued that the talking cameras are no 'magic bullet', in the fight against crime.

Liberty spokesman Doug Jewell said: 'None of us likes litterbugs or yobs playing up on a Saturday night, but talking CCTV cameras are no substitute for police officers on the beat.'

 

[oneofmany]

Film Shows Youths Training to Fight for Jesus

Film Shows Youths Training to Fight for Jesus

Sept. 17, 2006 - An in-your-face documentary out this weekend is raising eyebrows, raising hackles and raising questions about evangelizing to young people.

Speaking in tongues, weeping for salvation, praying for an end to abortion and worshipping a picture of President Bush — these are some of the activities at Pastor Becky Fischer's Bible camp in North Dakota, "Kids on Fire," subject of the provocative new documentary, "Jesus Camp."

"I want to see them as radically laying down their lives for the gospel as they are in Palestine, Pakistan and all those different places," Fisher said. "Because, excuse me, we have the truth."

"A lot of people die for God," one camper said, "and they're not afraid."

"We're kinda being trained to be warriors," said another, "only in a funner way."

The film has caused a split among evangelicals. Some say it's designed to demonize. Others have embraced it, including Fischer, who's helping promote the film.

"I never felt at any point that I was exploited," Fischer said.

"I think there is a push right now in a lot of evangelical churches to definitely keep the teenagers and keep the children in the faith," said Heidi Ewing, co-director of "Jesus Camp." "And this is one version of that attempt."

A Growing Movement

This camp is, by many accounts, a small — and perhaps extreme — slice of what some say is a growing, intensifying evangelical youth movement.

Over the past decade and a half, enrollment at Christian colleges is up 70 percent. Sales of Christian music are up 300 percent. Tens of thousands of youth pastors have been trained.

Young people are targeted through Christian music festivals, skateboard competitions and rodeos.

"This is an enormous youth movement," said Lauren Sandler, a secular, liberal feminist from New York City who spent months among the believers researching her new book, "Righteous."

Sandler says the evangelical youth movement will have a negative impact on the country's future, because even the most moderate young evangelicals are inflexible on issues such as abortion and gay marriage.

"It's an absolute, straight-up us-against-them," Sandler said. "It's, you're either with us or you're against us. … Not only are you a sinner, but you are working for the enemy — the enemy being Satan."

Chap Clark, an associate professor at the Fuller Theological Seminary who's trained youth pastors for decades, said people who see "Jesus Camp" should not come away with the idea that evangelizing to youth consists mainly of political indoctrination.

Clark said youth pastors focus much more on providing meaning to kids who can't find it in a materialistic culture or in their family lives — "which is going to translate into much healthier adults who are more able to be into respectful dialogue and come alongside people who disagree with them.

"I think this is a very hopeful time because of the youth ministry movement," he added.

There's disagreement about whether this movement is good for the country and whether the movie is an accurate portrayal of the movement.

But there's growing agreement that these children will have a real impact. One child in "Jesus Camp" goes so far as to say, "We're a key generation to bringing Jesus back."

 

[GET YOU HOT]

It's difficult to not buy into many of the products and services listed here, as above mentioned into the digital cable box, who would have thought that they were equipped with internal microphones

Also, swiping your drivers licence on a register to see if you are old enough? what happened to good old date of birth visual checks? typing in of the month/date/year?

 

[M81]

I would delete this thread than die laughing...

 

[African Herbsman]

Excellent thread.

 

[oneofmany]

‘Universal’ ID Card Part Of Federal Security Upgrades

‘Universal’ ID Card Part Of Federal Security Upgrades

WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2006 – New identification cards to be issued to Defense Department employees beginning next month will help standardize workforce identification and security access systems across the government, a senior Defense Department official said here Sept. 15.

The new common access card eventually will be issued to all federal employees and is part of a standardized, secure credentialing system that was mandated after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Mary Dixon, deputy director of the Defense Manpower Data Center in Arlington, Va., said during a joint interview with American Forces Press Service and the Pentagon Channel.

Starting Oct. 27, the new “super CAC” ID cards will be issued to employees over the next three years as the old cards reach their expiration dates, she said.

The new cards interface with a secure, encrypted credentialing database and are interoperable for personal identification as well as access to federal buildings and facilities, she said.

However, each facility will still determine who is authorized access, Dixon pointed out. Information embedded on the cards is quickly referenced and compared to centrally stored personnel security clearance data, she said.

“It is an effort to try to improve the security in the federal government,” Dixon explained. The new cards also help employees secure their computer networks, she said, as well as providing improved security for federal buildings, military installations and campuses.

“So, I can use this card, not just in the Department of Defense, but it can be read in other agencies,” Dixon said. “If they choose to give me access, they can then read my card,” she said.

The new card features the user’s photograph, like other cards now in circulation, Dixon said. But its computer chip also will contain two encrypted fingerprints, as well as a unique personal identification number.

The new card can be read, either by swiping it or by waving it near a special card reader, she said.

Issuance of the new card has the potential of reducing the number of agency security badges, Dixon said, because federal agencies will refer to a standardized credentialing system. However, agency security administrators still have the authority to approve or deny access.

“The card, on its own, does not entitle you to any access to anything,” Dixon explained. “It is an authentication token.”

“Every time you use the card, it is authenticated, meaning somebody checks to make sure that that card is a ‘good’ card issued in the Department of Defense to you, and that it is still valid,” Dixon said.

As always, employees who believe their government-issued ID card has been lost or stolen are required to notify security administrators, Dixon said, who then deactivate the card.

This ensures that cards reported stolen or missing can’t be used in DoD, she said.

 

[VegasGuy]

It's never about fear. What it's about is keeping yourself more than generally informed on these topics, so that you are precisely informed. That said, there is nothing funny with this thread. The rise of this technology has nothing to do with our beliefs or what we buy into. Whether we love or hate, believe or disbelieve in these things, the system is going into place (unless the people rise and engage in the action necessary to stop it).

I disagree. When you got to the 3 post on the same shit, "being informed" was done. Now you are venturing into fear mongering with the 19th post with yet another take of the same premise; that premise being that you've discovered governmental control based on this chip. Now brothers should suspend all reason and focus on a perceived threat we'll have no say or control over. Now don't get me wrong, it's fun shit to read but unless you have some proof this chip CAN control thoughts, it's bad form to suggest you are just keeping us in the loop. In other words, show me some proof.

Just to keep it on the level, do you have a formal professional technical, environmental or medical background? Or do you just have a tacit interest in this kind of shit and read allot of web stuff?

-VG

 

[oneofmany]

When you got to the 3 post on the same shit, "being informed" was done.

Being informed can go beyond making 3 posts, especially when the topic is ongoing. While some of the articles are about the same thing, many are from different countries and parts of the world.

Now you are venturing into fear mongering with the 19th post with yet another take of the same premise; that premise being that you've discovered governmental control based on this chip.

Since fear mongering is spreading information designed to (as with the specific purpose) induce fear, I hope this thread doesn't venture into that realm much, if at all. If a person reads an article, gets afraid or panics, then that reaction would be totally against what I'd want to happen. I just want to follow these topics as much as possible. In fact, there have been several articles I avoided posting because they seemed on the dark side (in other political threads on this site, I've seen what happens when you go too far, so I'm holding back a little). But if I get too cautious, then I'm not following the issue like one should, so it's about finding the median.

Now brothers should suspend all reason and focus on a perceived threat we'll have no say or control over.

Focusing on something should not cause/require brothers to suspend all reason. I don't want anybody following this thread to get bent out of shape or obsessed about these things. Heck, I don't want that to happen to me either.

Now don't get me wrong, it's fun shit to read but unless you have some proof this chip CAN control thoughts, it's bad form to suggest you are just keeping us in the loop. In other words, show me some proof.

I haven't come across the smoking gun in the form of a web article (I'll be sure to post it here first thing) but from reading a few books and following the so-called "transhumanism movement," I've found it stated that the ability to control one's mind is possible with proper technology. Of course, from there people debate on how much incentive people would have about doing such a thing and from there, how far in theory could it go.

In regards to my form, I'm posting this because I think it's important and interesting. Well, maybe I'm eccentric and a little on the strange/nerdy side, so perhaps I'm kinda alone out there. Whether somebody agrees with some of it, none of it, or even all of it, it's about people researching things and reaching their own conclusions. I've reached some conclusions on these topics and in other areas, I'm still raw and don't know the deal. For example, if a person says microchipping is a good thing, we'd probably debate in the thread a little but I wouldn't chew the guy's head off. He'd have his views, I'd have mine and I'd be cool with that.

Just to keep it on the level, do you have a formal professional technical, environmental or medical background? Or do you just have a tacit interest in this kind of shit and read allot of web stuff?

-VG

I keep tabs on these sort of topics but it's not my favorite thing in the world. But with recent developments, I follow this because it's beginning to become more of a reality (at first, I didn't take this stuff seriously and didn't like it). I'm a pre-med student seeking to enter medical school in a year. If I get deep into the medical field one day, I doubt I'd want to have a career based in this kind of stuff.

 

[VegasGuy]

If you get into med school, I wouldn't back away from this if you are interested in knowing IF this shit even works as it's described in the articles. I'm a skeptic when it comes to controlling a man's thoughts not to mention directing a mans actions based on a chip implanted under the skin. We don't plug in like that.

For that to have any effect at all, it would need to either be embedded in your brain or if it's under the skin, it would need to release something "biological". Something like Depo-Provera or Norplant women use which in some cases affect their mood. That isn't what these chips are from what I read about their design, capability and/or use. A lot of science fiction but that's about it.

-VG

 

[oneofmany]

The funny thing about this topic is the closer to get to transhumanism, the more people tend to step away. Even conspiracy theorists shrivel up like raisins in the hot sun when you mention the word "transhumanism." Either this stuff is so bizarre, even conspiracy theorists won't talk about it, or that on some level, guys are afraid of this stuff but won't admit it. So to simply put it, any person who studies this stuff will be pretty much alone and probably be seen as a nut. I mean, medical school lasts a while and my thoughts could change. But even when I bring this topic up around doctors, they get real stiff. It's like you shouldn't even be talking about this stuff.

I'm not exactly sure of all the nuts and bolts of the technology, but the idea is eventually to make the technology "living" on some level. Such as the far-fetched idea (don't laugh, I'm deadly serious here) of living computers (machines with consciousness) and all other sorts of things. I'm skeptical of some of these ideas but I've always wondered and you probably have too, about how much technology has been supressed. Some guy gave a speech a few years ago and claimed some guy in the 18th or 19th century built a wireless power plant and named other inventors who had incredible ideas from the past with stuff equally as amazing (stuff that would impress us today, so imagine rolling stuff out like that a long time ago). Well, to make a long story short, I've encountered a belief among many people that the ability to make some of the bizarre transhumanistic/nanomachines/far out technology already exists and some of it will be possible in the next decade (plus the belief that some of it already exists in the here and now).

But when it comes to these issues, the news is tight-lipped about it. It's like a web link here or a new story there but it's over microchips or other relatively low-level (at least in the grand scheme of things) technology.

 

[GET YOU HOT]

There is someone on board who knows about the subject, let's see if he cares to talk about it though...

 

[oneofmany]

^ So there's a person who into transhumanism here? I hope he comes out and posts, because I'd like to ask him a few questions.

 

[Spectrum]

The ability to control thoughts and actions presupposes that we completely understand cognition. You have to understand cognition on a biological atomic level before you can implement a technology to control it. Cognition is analyized in neurology, psychology, philosophy, systemics and computer science. The concept of cognition is closely related to such abstract concepts as mind, reasoning, perception, intelligence, learning, and many others that describe numerous capabilities of human mind and expected properties of artificial or synthetic intelligence.

However, since we are speaking about microchips to control human thoughts and actions. We are speaking about artificial intelligence software that would be inbedded in these chips. More specifically, we are speaking of strong A.I. In order to create Strong A.I..the ability to create human mind-like intelligence in inanimate objects that could pass THE TURING TEST, we would need to fully understand cognition, memory, emotion, etc. Our understanding of the human mind is extremely rudimentary at this point scientifically speaking. The concepts of the MIND and Memory are still extremely illusive...especially memory. What makes the human mind different from computer intelligence is pattern recognition tied to memory. The ability to scan a picture and abstract the semantics..not just identify objects..but actually abstract the semantics. Computer intelligence has not evolved to that point. Pattern Recognition is an easier problem to solve than creating human-like parellel memory mechanisms or tackling the abstract nature of emotions...much less applying that to action.

Beyond the technical understanding of the human mind, there is something very important lacking in order to reproduce human-like responses to stimula in decision making and pattern recognition: Parrelism. The brain gets its power from performing many parallel operations, a computer from performing operations very quickly.The human brain has roughly 100 billion neurons operating simultaneously and connected by roughly 100 trillion synapses. Although estimates of the brain's processing power put it at around 1014 neuron updates per second, it is expected that the first unoptimized simulations of a human brain will require a computer capable of 1018 FLOPS.

The best person to read..who makes this most readable in laymens term is Ray Kurzweil.

RFID chips have very limited functionality...we are decades away from the possibility of mind control. RFID is evolutionary bar-scan technology

 

[Spectrum]

I'm not exactly sure of all the nuts and bolts of the technology, but the idea is eventually to make the technology "living" on some level. Such as the far-fetched idea (don't laugh, I'm deadly serious here) of living computers (machines with consciousness) and all other sorts of things. Well, to make a long story short, I've encountered a belief among many people that the ability to make some of the bizarre transhumanistic/nanomachines/far out technology already exists and some of it will be possible in the next decade (plus the belief that some of it already exists in the here and now).
.

I have read these books. They are excellent introductions to Strong AI and transhumanism. I would suggest you read them. Also, just to let you know, even proponents of Strong AI say we are several decades away at best. Opponents say that we may never be able to create Strong AI applications..the AI community has produced nothing substantial...creating human-like intelligence has been extremely allusive. You are talking about one of the most difficult problems in science.

Are We Spiritual Machines?: Ray Kurzweil vs. the Critics of Strong A.I.

The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology by Ray Kurzweil

The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence by Ray Kurzweil

 

[oneofmany]

Real Big Brother

^ Thanks for your posts and I'll definitely check those books out. Thanks a million.

Real Big Brother

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/HAuZi8ZiJOg"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/HAuZi8ZiJOg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

 

[QueEx]

Re: Real Big Brother

Interesting post One. Certainly adds to fodder to the question
where the line should be drawn with respect to electronic intrusion.

QueEx

 

[Spectrum]

Re: Real Big Brother

One,

That last video is bananas man....

 

[oneofmany]

American Barcode and RFID Announces TETRAGATE

American Barcode and RFID Announces TETRAGATE, Which Links Biometric Facial Recognition and RFID, Creating Formidable Security Solution

PHOENIX, Sept. 25 /PRNewswire/ -- American Barcode and RFID (AB&R) is pleased to announce the creation of a new technology -- TETRAGATE -- which combines UHF RFID (radio frequency identification) technology inside an employee ID card with biometric facial recognition. TETRAGATE recognizes people approaching from 60 feet away in a fraction of a second, reading up to 60,000 faces in a single second -- without people knowing their images are being scanned. In a world where security and surveillance issues create uneasiness on the best of days, a team of innovative security and technology experts have come together to create what is the most secure access control solution available for tracking human as well as physical assets on the same network.

TETRAGATE's any asset - one network solution combines the technical expertise of global industry leaders, including Symbol Technologies, epcSolutions, Infinova, Fulcrum Biometrics, Zebra Technologies and American Barcode and RFID, to make this a reality.

"Imagine hundreds of people passing through a 'portal' as powerful long-range, unobtrusive cameras capture facial images that are matched against a data archive at a rate of 60,000 images per second," explained Mike Stryczek, President of American Barcode and RFID. "Secondary identification is made as individuals' RFID credentials are read and matched to biometric records. Any exception to the match-ups triggers a security situation, based on business rules in place, focusing on the specific individuals, while others continue on uninterrupted."

All assets, human or physical, can be linked into and managed by a single, formidable database that provides effective and total flexibility of configuration and integration. Global standards for data synchronization, automatic identification, biometric technology and (RFID) ensure that TETRAGATE will scale to meet the specific needs of any organization.

Development on the system began five years ago, after the events of September 11, 2001, when an insurer emphasized the critical importance of knowing who the people are onsite at a particular location and time. What might seem like an uncomplicated task under normal circumstances had its problems. For example, employees and contractors politely holding a door open as other people pass through might not know if one or more of those "others" has the proper ID card or authorization.

The best methods of identifying people are retina scanning, fingerprinting, and face mapping, clearly methods not usually possible with large groups of people moving through entryways at once. Using an Infinova surveillance camera and Fulcrum biometric software, TETRAGATE focuses on the challenge, providing a solution in which even a laptop, iPod, or other RFID tagged assets can be tied to a human asset to match people who are authorized to be on the property at a given time.

Today, corporate, public and personal security, privacy, efficiency and cost effectiveness have all converged as a single issue. TETRAGATE believes it represents a single answer.

About American Barcode & RFID:

American Barcode & RFID (AB&R) is a nationally-recognized provider of Automatic Identification and Data Collection (AIDC) solutions for virtually any commercial, industrial, retail or governmental application. The company is a total solutions provider, specializing in barcode, RFID and access control technologies. Based in Phoenix and with sales offices throughout the U.S., AB&R helps medium-to-large companies realize cost savings, operational efficiency and increased security. The company is privately owned. To learn more, visit http://www.amerbar.com.

 

[oneofmany]

Nanotechnology Risks Unknown

Nanotechnology Risks Unknown

The United States is the world leader in nanotechnology -- the newly blossoming science of making incredibly small materials and devices -- but is not paying enough attention to the environmental, health and safety risks posed by nanoscale products, says a report released yesterday by the independent National Research Council.

If federal officials, business leaders and others do not devise a plan to fill the gaps in their knowledge of nanotech safety, the report warns, the field's great promise could evaporate in a cloud of public mistrust.

"There is some evidence that engineered nanoparticles can have adverse effects on the health of laboratory animals," the congressionally mandated report said, echoing concerns raised by others at a House hearing last week. Until the risks are better understood, "it is prudent to employ some precautionary measures to protect the health and safety of workers, the public, and the environment."

The 176-page report, "A Matter of Size," was prepared under the auspices of the National Academies, chartered to advise Congress on matters of science. It focuses on the National Nanotechnology Initiative, which coordinates and prioritizes federal research in nanotechnology -- the fledgling but potentially revolutionary science that deals with materials as small as a billionth of a meter.

At that size, even conventional substances behave in unconventional ways. Some materials that do not conduct electricity or are fragile, for example, are excellent conductors and are extremely strong when made small enough. But nanoparticles can also enter human cells and trigger chemical reactions in soil, interfering with biological and ecological processes.

The report concludes that the U.S. research effort is vibrant and almost certainly the strongest in the world, though a few other countries are close behind. Among the more important unmet needs, it says, is stronger collaboration with the departments of Education and Labor to boost the supply of scientists and technicians with the skills the sector needs.

The report's concerns about the lack of a federal focus on nanotech health and safety were foreshadowed at a House Science Committee hearing Thursday at which Republicans and Democrats alike took the Bush administration to task over the lack of a plan to learn more about nanotech's risks.

Committee Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-N.Y.) accused the administration of "sauntering" toward solutions "at a time when a sense of urgency is required."

Ranking Democrat Bart Gordon (Tenn.) went further, calling the administration's latest summary of nanotech research needs, released at the hearing, "a very juvenile piece of work."

Andrew Maynard, chief science adviser for the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, funded in part by the Smithsonian Institution, said the government is spending about $11 million a year on nanotechnology's potential harms when industry and environmental groups have jointly called for at least $50 million to $100 million a year.

Equally important, Maynard said, is the need for a coordinated strategy to spend that money wisely.

About 300 consumer products already contain nanoscale ingredients, Maynard said, including several foods and many cosmetics, with little or no research to document their safety.

The industry is expected to be worth about $2 trillion by 2014.

Norris Alderson, associate commissioner for science at the Food and Drug Administration and chairman of the working group that created the administration's summary research plan presented to Congress last week, said the document -- which was supposed to be delivered six months ago -- was meant as "a first step."

Asked by Boehlert if he understood that much more is expected of him and his working group, Alderson responded: "I think your message is loud and clear."

 

[oneofmany]

U.S. deploys first e-Passport readers

U.S. deploys first e-Passport readers

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have deployed the first e-Passport readers into production, even though that have faced enough criticism from privacy advocates and security experts concerned about the technology.

In a statement released today, the DHS said that it had completed deployment of the first U.S. e-Passports at the San Francisco International Airport. The move is the first in a series of deployments required to meet the October 26, 2006 congressional deadline requiring all U.S. ports of entry to compare and authenticate data in e-Passports.

The American e-Passport movement has been criticized by security and privacy experts concerned about identity theft, the tracking and surveillance of individuals, and cloning of the passports for nefarious purposes.
New U.S. e-Passports contain a 64 kbit RFID chip with personal information about the passport holder. DHS officials claim that the passports must be held within ten centimeters of a reader to have their data read, a limitation widely disputed by RFID experts, who use high power antennas to read RFID data up to 50 feet away.

It is believed that the e-Passports can also be cloned. In August of this year, security researcher Lukas Grunwald demonstrated the cloning of a European Union e-Passport at the Black Hat and DEFCON security conferences in Las Vegas. The EU passport uses similar RFID technology to the American passport. Proponents of the e-Passport have responded to the cloning issue by claiming the Black Hat and DEFCON demonstrations did not actually break the security of the information on the chip.

In 2004, the American Civil Liberties union raised alarm over the proposed use of e-Passports, citing an erosion of civil liberties in the United States and the ease at which the data may be stolen, manipulated, or used for other purposes.

The U.S. completed a live test of the e-Passports in April 2006.

 

[oneofmany]

Police want pawn shops to fingerprint

Police want pawn shops to fingerprint

CHARLOTTE -- Anyone hoping to sell an item to a local pawn shop could soon be forced to leave their fingerprints.

“On a weekly basis what we see is people break into houses, steal things and go pawn them at a pawn shop,” said Captain Andy Leonard.

In an attempt to curb this trend, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department has urged city leaders to adopt an ordinance requiring pawn shops to fingerprint customers hawking items for cash.

“We already have an ID on the pawn ticket,” said Leonard. “It’s just one more piece to help prosecute whoever has stolen the property.”

Thursday, the Community Safety Committee unanimously voted to take the matter in front of the full city council.

If passed, pawnbrokers who fail to fingerprint their customers could face fines, and even jail time. Repeat offenders would risk losing their license.

While police are excited about the prospect of gaining another tool in their fight on crime, some owners of pawn shops are less than pleased.

“Look just because I use pawn shops for a loan, I shouldn’t be expected to leave a fingerprint,” said Barbara O’Brien of Cash America.

Cash America has nine locations within greater-Charlotte, and O’Brien said her costumers have already begun signing a petition protesting the law. She would not say whether or not the stores were worried that the proposed law would hurt their business.

O’Brien said that she is worried that if passed, the law would unfairly profile someone who pawns items as a criminal. “They’re good hardworking people who are in need of a short-term loan,” she said.

O’Brien said she believes that mandatory video surveillance would be as affective as fingerprinting, and would not leave her customers feeling like criminals.

Police said that while cameras would be a valuable tool, fingerprinting cannot miss when it comes to identifying a suspect.

“If you’re a legitimate business, you should want to work with police and make sure the property people are pawning is lawfully theirs,” said Leonard.

City council could vote on the pawn shop ordinance as soon as next Monday. If passed, the law could be in place as early as January.

 

[Mofoman]

I've just come to the realization, that this shyt is gonna happen. It may take a hundred years, it may take ten, but it's gonna happen whether we fight it or not. Now will it be used for good or bad is the question...the possibilites for something really negative to happen if it is used in the wrong way are great.

I just say learn how to counter it...learn how it works.

 

[oneofmany]

^ I've had similar thoughts. Ideally, I wouldn't want any of these things to happen. As in being caught by cameras up to 300 times a day on an average day out on town, or being fingerprinted in various places you may go... When I was thinking about these things, people who are old enough to remember what things were like before the changes will probably be more resistant to these measures. But some young people who will be born/raised in the midst of these things, this sort of surveillance will be all they know and they might be less likely to resist than you or I.

 

[Mofoman]

I try to remain optimistic. Can it end like a situation in 1984 yeah, but hopefully it won't, I try to believe that most folks, even the ones creating this technology are genuinely good in nature, and wouldn't allow something bad to happen. I am more afraid/perturbed by the fact that they will probably use this to make psychological profiles on everyone. Advertising and other shyt will be customized for an individual and we will be constantly bombarded with shyt. And constant policing. Of all the links you posted the one that annoyed me the most was the cameras with loudspeakers in London. Really is that even fukking necessary. LOL and they had the nerve to be in Britain, that's 1984 all the way baby. We as a people don't need to be constantly monitored and policed.

 

[oneofmany]

All this information gathering is only leading up to the next logical step: an ability to effectively comb through all of it. Once information can be combed through quickly, you can pretty much have a report of indepth and detailed information on anybody on the planet in an instant. You always have to ask yourself, "How far into invasion of privacy and voyeurism can you go?"

Your belief of holding onto positivity is similar to the video posted on the main forum about the universe following the "Rules of Attraction." Meaning the more positive you think, generally the more positive/empowering your life is and the smoother things go. And with the things you dislike, the less you actively hate and fear those things by placing your energy into them, the less you empower the things you dislike (but by putting a good part of yourself into the things you dislike, you push against those things and give them more power to push back against you).

 

[King23]

I try to remain optimistic. Can it end like a situation in 1984 yeah, but hopefully it won't, I try to believe that most folks, even the ones creating this technology are genuinely good in nature, and wouldn't allow something bad to happen. I am more afraid/perturbed by the fact that they will probably use this to make psychological profiles on everyone. Advertising and other shyt will be customized for an individual and we will be constantly bombarded with shyt. And constant policing. Of all the links you posted the one that annoyed me the most was the cameras with loudspeakers in London. Really is that even fukking necessary. LOL and they had the nerve to be in Britain, that's 1984 all the way baby. We as a people don't need to be constantly monitored and policed.

Yea... the people who create these technologies are Good in Nature.. BUT THE PEOPLE WHO FUND THESE PROJECTS ARE VARIOUS PARTS OF GOVERNMENT. Psychological profiles have been done since the Early 90's. Nothing New. We had the technology to colonize the moon 20 years ago. We have the Technology to use electro-magnetic fields to create WATER IN THE MIDDLE OF DESSERTS. Heck most of the survalience equipment ie cameras,rfid, chips. We're all being developed 30 years ago. Its a part of the conditioning to make the population BELIEVE that all this is new and to accept its upbringing. This isn't a conspiracy when i say we are more advanced then you think. But the 10% who actually run OUR WORLD are suppressing these advancedments..

Btw George Orwell & Aldous Huxley were both inside men who saw the "plans" our governments had in store for us all. They weren't writing science fiction. They were futurist basically showing how the world WILL be in the future.

This new control grid is just another way to keep the people of the world in ignorance and supress the individual's thought process

And.. I like to say some of these chips are SMALLER then ants. And can alter mood

 

[oneofmany]

Invention | Invisible Drones

Invisible Drones

Can a surveillance drone be made virtually invisible? VeraTech, based in Minnesota, US, thinks so. And patent applications filed by the company explain how.

"Persistence of vision" turns the fast-moving rotors of any helicopter into a near-transparent blur, while the slow-moving body looks solid. Inventor Michael Dammar has come up with a way of making the whole body of an aircraft spin as it flies, turning it into a single blur in the sky. This would not evade radar but should help the aircraft avoid visual identification.

The so-called Phantom Sentinel aircraft is Y-shaped, consisting of a single long wing attached to two short aerodynamic extensions which each end in a propeller. And the weight is carefully balanced so that the centre of mass is positioned between the two extensions. When the motors are running, the solid part of the aircraft spins around this centre of mass, and the longer wing generates lift. The whole thing moves so fast that persistence of vision turns it into a single blur.

Making the plane sky blue, or largely transparent, should help conceal it further, Dammar claims. He adds that a camera can be placed near the centre of mass and used to build a panoramic picture of the ground below, after software processing.

The company’s website has streaming video footage of early prototypes in flight.

Read the full invisible drone patent application.

Hot-foot computing

The idea of wearable computing is appealing. A head-mounted display can show information processed by a small portable computer while speech-recognition software can replace keyboard typing. But how do you move a cursor without a holding a mouse?

Simply move those feet, say three researchers working for Hewlett Packard in the UK. A magnetic sensor can be attached to one foot and a transmitter emitting pulsed magnetic signals clipped onto the other one. As the sensor foot is moved around it continually calculates its position relative to the other foot, using these magnetic pulses.

So, moving each foot can correspond to movements of a cursor on the head-mounted display. Foot-twisting can be used for right or left mouse clicks and sliding one foot over the ground can be translated into dragging and dropping. This would allow someone to use a wearable computer while keeping their hands free for other tasks.

Read the full hot-foot computing patent application.

Self-healing cables

Threading a cable through the chassis of a car, boat or plane can be tricky. Sharp metal edges can cut the cable insulation, shorting power and even starting a fire.

Researchers at the University of Vermont, US, have been working with NASA on a type of cable insulation that heals itself when breached. The healed section also adds a protective layer against further damage in future.

The central live wire within the cable is surrounded by a layer of insulation laced with a soft resin. Glue hardener is also sealed inside microcapsules that are dispersed within the insulation layer.

Under normal circumstances the microcapsules keep the hardener away from the resin, so the cable remains soft and easy to thread. But if the cable insulation is chafed or breached, the microcapsules break open to release the hardener. This heals the insulation and adds a solid section that should prevent further damage.

Read the full self-healing cables patent application.

 

[oneofmany]

Schwarzenegger Vetoes RFID Privacy Bill

Schwarzenegger Vetoes RFID Privacy Bill

On Saturday, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed SB 768, the Identity Information Protection Act of 2006, which would have been the first state bill to address how RFID technology may be used in identification documents issued by state and local governments and agencies.

Before passing through both houses earlier this year, the bill, written by California State Senator Joe Simitian (D), had gone through a couple of significant amendments. These included a downgrade from a moratorium on the use of the technology to a set of interim, security-based conditions users would need to meet. It was then sent to the governor's office on Sept. 7 after the California Senate approved it in a 30-to-7 vote.

In a statement, the governor called the bill premature, saying it could make it more difficult for law-enforcement officers to "impose requirements in California that would contradict the federal mandates soon to be issued," referring to the Real ID Act, which President Bush passed last year to establish a federally approved ID card that would be electronically readable. RFID technology may be used in these cards, though a decision to do so has yet to be made. The governor's concerns echo those related in letters presented to him within the past six weeks from a number of California law-enforcement agencies. These letters also claim the law-enforcement agencies were not "seriously consulted" about the bill.

"We had reached out to law enforcement over a year ago," Simitian says, "so I think law-enforcement's reaction [to the bill's passage through the legislature] was unfortunate and inaccurate." He added that the bill had been part of a "vigorous, two-year debate," and that people concerned with the bill could have expressed their concern during that time.

As for how the Real ID Act would have impacted SB 768 had the governor signed it into law, Simitian said California would most likely be obliged to follow the Federal government's lead on a national ID card. The bill, however, would still have provided regulations on how RFID would be used in state-issued IDs not impacted by Real ID Act regulations.

The security rules had a sunset date of Dec, 31, 2012, and were designed to be put in place while the California Research Bureau (CRB) would have conducted a research study into the use of RFID in government-issued "remotely readable identification documents," as well as the security and privacy implications of the technology's use. The CRB would have also called for an advisory board composed of government officials and representatives from industry and privacy-rights organizations. This board would have advised it on the technology and its application in identity documents—everything from driver's licenses to library cards.

The security rules called for the incorporation of tamper-resistant authentication tools to prevent duplication, forgery or cloning of the ID. Mutual authentication between the interrogator and tag embedded in the ID would have been required if any personally identifiable information—such as an individual's picture, Social Security number or name—were transmitted between the tag and reader. The IDs would have also needed to employ encryption or some other method of making such information unreadable or unusable by an unauthorized person, as well as offer an on/off switch or similar means of giving the ID holder direct control over any data transmission.

In vetoing the bill, Schwarzenegger said it could "inhibit various state agencies from procuring technology that could enhance and streamline operations, reduce expenses and improve customer service to the public, and may unnecessarily restrict state agencies."

Roxanne Gould, a senior vice president of government and public affairs for the American Electronics Association (AEA) and a spokesperson for the High-Tech Trust Coalition, said she anticipates that Sen. Simitian will reintroduce the bill in January. The coalition levied strong opposition against earlier versions of the bill, but removed its opposition to the final bill. Gould says the bill "gives us [the High-Tech Trust Coalition] more time to really look through the bill that was sent to the governor and see what further refinements need to be made before it's reintroduced."

"We need to talk to the governor's office and get some more perspective on why he vetoed the bill," says Simitian, "and talk to folks in the [RFID] industry. We worked with representatives from the Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) and the AEA to try to craft a bill they could live with," he adds, "but apparently, that wasn't enough."

While both the ITAA and the AEA removed or neutralized their opposition to the bill before it was sent to the governor, not all industry groups followed suit. The Security Industry Association (SIA), based in Alexandria, Virginia, asked Schwarzenegger to veto the bill. The group supported the bill's call for a comprehensive study by the California Research Bureau, but opposed its call for interim protocols regarding how RFID would be deployed during the study period. The SIA felt the interim rules would make it more difficult for law-enforcement officials to protect Californians, because they would require state agencies to make public the location of all RFID readers and hamper the ability of those agencies to reveal the location of some individuals to emergency first-responder units.

Lee Tien, senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a privacy-rights advocacy group supporting SB 768, said the EFF and the other bill sponsors "worked hard to address industry concerns over the life of the bill." He thinks the withdrawal of opposition from the AEA was significant in that it showed both sides of the issue were committed to a compromise. "You can't satisfy everyone," he says. "We gave up things that we would have preferred not to give up—but at the same time, there was an understanding that there are security and privacy issued raised by RFID, and both sides are making an effort to take positive steps to address them."

As for whether the bill's sponsors should revise the bill before submitting it next year, Tien says he's not sure its language is the reason it didn't pass. "I think there was some misunderstandings on what the bill would do," he states.

 

[oneofmany]

San Francisco RFID ready

San Francisco RFID ready

San Francisco International airport has been the first site in the US to install RFID chip readers for new e-passports, according to reports.

The airport will be the test location for the new chipped documents that carry information on an RFID chip unique to the document.

Countries that are part of the visa waiver scheme with the US will also have to participate in the programme, with chips imbedded in all passports.

Anna Hinken told AirportBusiness.com that passenger's information would be protected and would only be read by the e-passport scanner.

There had been concerns in mainly consumer campaign groups, that RFID chips were insecure and vulnerable to hacking.

A presentation at the Black Hat show in Las Vegas highlighted this issue, with one expert showing how to clone an RFID chip.

However, officials from the department of homeland security (DHS) have staunchly defended the technology since the e-passport programme began.

TUV Product Service, part of the TÜV SÜD Group of companies with 1bn Euros turnover, in excess of 9,500 employees and 500 locations worldwide, is a leading provider of Compliance and Assurance Solutions for the IT sector. Please contact us (info@tuvps.co.uk) for further information

 

[oneofmany]

Court temporarily OKs domestic spying

Court temporarily OKs domestic spying

CINCINNATI - The Bush administration can continue its warrantless surveillance program while it appeals a judge's ruling that the program is unconstitutional, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.

The president has said the program is needed in the war on terrorism; opponents argue it oversteps constitutional boundaries on free speech, privacy and executive powers.

The unanimous ruling from a three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals gave little explanation for the decision. In the three-paragraph ruling, judges said that they balanced the likelihood an appeal would succeed, the potential damage to both sides and the public interest.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit ruled Aug. 17 that the program was unconstitutional because it violates the rights to free speech and privacy and the separation of powers in the Constitution.

The Justice Department had urged the appeals court to allow it to keep the program in place while it argues its appeal, claiming that the nation faced "potential irreparable harm." The appeal is likely to take months.

"The country will be more vulnerable to a terrorist attack," the government motion said.

The program monitors international phone calls and e-mails to or from the United States involving people the government suspects have terrorist links. A secret court has been set up to grant warrants for such surveillance, but the government says it can't always wait for a court to take action.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit seeking to stop the program on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say it has made it difficult for them to do their jobs because they believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets. Many said they had been forced to take expensive and time-consuming overseas trips because their contacts wouldn't speak openly on the phone or because they didn't want to violate their contacts' confidentiality.

Similar lawsuits challenging the program have been filed by other groups, including in New York and San Francisco. The issue could wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

 

[oneofmany]

Iran seeks to fingerprint all US visitors

Iran seeks to fingerprint all US visitors

TEHERAN - Iran’s conservative-controlled parliament is to debate a bill that would make digital fingerprinting compulsory for all US citizens seeking to enter the country, lawmakers said on Tuesday.

According to the bill, which is expected to be voted on in the next days, “all US citizens should be controlled and subjected to digital fingerprinting when they enter Iran,” said lawmaker Kazem Jalali in a debate broadcast on state radio.

“This law comes in response to the American practice of taking digital fingerprints of sportsmen, political officials and other Iranians, sometimes with an insulting attitude,” he added.

Until now, only US journalists have been subjected to digital fingerprinting on arrival in Teheran.

Diplomatic relations between the United States and Iran have been frozen since Washington broke off ties in 1980 in the wake of the seizure of the US embassy in Teheran in 1979.

According to Jalali, the bill is also a reaction to the law voted on Saturday by the US Congress for sanctions against foreign countries, which assist in Iran’s nuclear programme and supply sophisticated missile technology.

 

[oneofmany]

Fingers do the paying after grocery shopping

PERSONAL TECHNOLOGY
Fingers do the paying after grocery shopping
Sensor pad at checkout scans, registers identity and discounts before debiting bank account

By Paul Gores
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

MILWAUKEE - When Katy Weber goes shopping at Roundy's Metro Market in Milwaukee, she doesn't bring a purse, credit card, debit card, check or cash.

All she needs to pay for her groceries is her index finger.

A sensor pad at the checkout counter scans her finger, automatically registers any discounts and then debits her bank account.

For Weber, 28, using the Pay By Touch pad is a matter of convenience.

"I don't have to dig around in my purse,'' she said.

The idea of shopping without bringing a purse or wallet might take some time to catch on, but companies using the finger-scan system say that, store by store, it is gaining acceptance.

Grocery chain Jewel-Osco is a big user of the Pay By Touch system, which is the industry leader in the touch-system payment technology.

In Jewel-Osco's four-state area, about 56,000 customers have signed up for it since it was introduced last spring, said Juanita Kocanda, Jewel-Osco's manager of public affairs.

"It's very well received,'' Kocanda said. "We get positive feedback, especially from the people who write checks, because it comes right out of your checking account and you don't have to write a check.''

Nationally, the Pay By Touch system is used at more than 2,000 retail locations, said Shannon Riordan, spokeswoman for the four-year-old San Francisco firm. She said that, combined with a check-cashing system the company sells, it has signed up 2.5 million consumers.

The finger system is more secure than using a credit or debit card or writing a check, because there are no numbers on a card or check that an identity thief could steal, Riordan said. Pay By Touch users are required to punch in a search code to start the transaction -- usually easy-to-remember digits like a telephone number -- but without the finger scan, no one else can gain access to the account.

"Overall, for merchants and shoppers alike, it greatly reduces the chances of fraud at the point of sale,'' Riordan said.

Riordan stressed that the finger image used to authenticate a transaction is not an actual full fingerprint.

"It uses 40 data points from your finger,'' she said. "That is the amount of data that gets encrypted right then and there.''

But surveys show some consumers, as much as they like the sureness of biometric identifiers, still find something Big Brotherish about letting anyone scan the print side of a finger, said Avivah Litan, a financial technology consultant with the firm Gartner Inc. in Stamford, Conn.

"Some people like the convenience, other people think it's a big privacy imposition,'' Litan said.

Riordan said there is nothing to worry about, even though she understands why it's a concern.

"If we don't respect people's privacy -- if we aren't dedicated to that -- we are going to fail as a business,'' she said.

Customers sign up for Pay By Touch at no charge at kiosks in stores where it's used. A scanner at the kiosk records the finger data needed. The sign-up process requires a driver's license, a voided check and, if desired, a preferred-shopper card for discounts.

Although retail stores such as supermarkets are the "early adopters'' of the finger-scan payment technology, other types of retailers are showing an interest, Riordan said.

"People, as time progresses, will see it in more and more places, and it will become commonplace,'' she said.