Bill Gates steps down from Microsoft's board of directors to focus on philanthropic work - advocates digitally tagging people

[leadeater]

24 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

I'm happy to believe that, except you wrote a post about how it's easier than people seem to think  

It's much easier to access the information than people think yes, but if you're outside the system systemic privacy abuse by abusing that ID is near as much impossible/impractical. It doesn't matter if a company buys up millions of the IDs because they couldn't actually do anything with that, while also be fined if found out.

 

Drivers license number is a much greater vector for abuse because many things use that when filling out forms, banks, loans, car purchases etc.

 

Heck we even have a Government run personal identification service now that is used to authenticate and prove who you are which is used across quite a few services now, https://www.realme.govt.nz/.

[leadeater]

4 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

NHI and IRD aren't digital IDs embedded into your body that can retrieve your ID easily without requiring your will or a forceful overriding of your will, even without your knowing while conscious. That's the difference that makes them not exploitable like a digital certificate microchip system could hypothetically be.

No because you can put it on your body and it would do literally nothing along the lines of what you're thinking. A number is just a number without a means to make sense of what it is, and right now there is no means to make use of that number.

 

Also it's not a high power RFID, no doorway is going to be able to scan it unless you had to rub your shoulders on the frame to walk through it, so don't place it in that location.

 

Also I'm not saying just go ahead and implement this kind of thing willy nilly, but rather that flawed argument of "anything is possible so don't even consider it".

 

2 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

And even without access to medical database of people's IDs, with standardized medical chips, 3rd-parties could begin creating their own ID databases of people based on the unique signature of people's medical chip ID.

And what if reading the chip resulted in a completely different data string that required access to the back-end system to make any sense of so scanning it alone is not enough to do anything. If it's different every time then it's a poor method of ID tracking by unauthorized parties.

[MageTank]

26 minutes ago, leadeater said:

The problem issue trying to be raised has never happened here and likely never will. Medical information has been available through IT systems since the late 80s here and we have a dedicated health information network that is used to pass information between clinics and hospitals so there is physical security across the country, the data is encrypted and access is restricted. Unauthorized access on that side of it is vastly more difficult than people seem to think, if we're talking about fear of abuse and privacy breaches if (any already existing) personal identifier was used.

I don't think this is the real concern that people have with these ID implants or whatever we are calling them. It's one thing if we are talking secured data at a stationary location, but it's a different story entirely if we are walking hard drives with important medical/insurance information that can potentially be accessed through some kind of scanner without our knowledge or consent. Granted, most of my concern stems from the fact that I have no idea how this is going to be implemented or how they actually plan on scanning peoples ID implants, but it's a concern nonetheless.

 

I get that our data is already stored at physical locations across the country and that IT personnel already have access to this information in the extremely unlikely event that they decide to throw away their livelihoods and go rogue. I am fine with knowing that a physical secured location was breached, rather than me simply walking through a public doorway and all of a sudden my information was skimmed by some high-tech thief.

 

I am far too young to feel like an old man out of touch with technology, lol.

[Dedayog]

On 3/13/2020 at 7:40 PM, DrMacintosh said:

I understand Bills character completely and have made no assumptions about him. I’ve only said that he isn’t paying his fair share of taxes. People defend billionaires like this because they get distracted by the all the PR and saving face that they do. 

Unpaid taxes do not equal your perception of fair.

 

May want to edit.

[Delicieuxz]

2 hours ago, leadeater said:

No because you can put it on your body and it would do literally nothing along the lines of what you're thinking. A number is just a number without a means to make sense of what it is, and right now there is no means to make use of that number.

But it isn't just a number - it's a unique-to-one-person, scannable number. That changes everything. If that unique number is associated with a unique person (and it is) then there is a means to track that person, even if the number isn't intended for that purpose. And if the medical database which those unique numbers associate with is acquired by other parties, then that's just all the more risk created by having an implanted digital ID.

 

Whether a medical ID is physical or digital, it's just its number or serial and doesn't reveal anything until it is paired with the information depository that holds the number's file. With a physical number, there is a layer of human interaction, typically conscious and willed, required to make use of the number, and so there can be consent. And with a physical number, a person can still distance themselves from it if wanted. But with a digital chip, the information access is an automatic response to scanning the chip and there isn't necessarily human interaction, conscious or willed, required to make use of that number. And a person can't distance themselves from it.

 

Quote

Also it's not a high power RFID, no doorway is going to be able to scan it unless you had to rub your shoulders on the frame to walk through it, so don't place it in that location.

I think that anywhere along the sides of a person's body, including their arms and hands, have that risk.

 

Low frequency RFID operates within 10 cm. And that's only addressing today's reader technology and not what technology in 10 and more years will be capable of doing. When you stick a chip in yourself, it remains the same, but the technology outside yourself will continue to progress.

 

Quote

Also I'm not saying just go ahead and implement this kind of thing willy nilly, but rather that flawed argument of "anything is possible so don't even consider it".

That isn't an argument I've presented, though. The hypothetical dangers of the concept of implanted digital IDs have emerged in the course of considering the concept.

 

Quote

And what if reading the chip resulted in a completely different data string that required access to the back-end system to make any sense of so scanning it alone is not enough to do anything. If it's different every time then it's a poor method of ID tracking by unauthorized parties.

Who maintains the back-end system and how will it and its encryption system be guaranteed to be perfectly secure forever without a single breach over the next century? If its information is leaked or is hacked just once, people's IDs will be out there permanently. That it needs to be accessible for hundreds of thousands of medical workers connecting to it remotely means it will be a big system with many working maintenance on it and with many possible avenues for exploitation - both human and technological.

 

When it comes to digital information, there is no such thing as a non-hackable system or anonymous data. And a depository of everybody's permanent IDs would be a central target.

[leadeater]

4 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Who maintains the back-end system and how will it and its encryption system be guaranteed to be perfectly secure forever without a single breach over the next century?

The same people maintaining the current system with as of current no breach of it.

 

4 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

That it needs to be accessible for hundreds of thousands of medical workers connecting to it remotely means it will be a big system with many working maintenance on it and with many possible avenues for exploitation - both human and technological.

Many really? That just sounds like an assumption based on little technical thought.

 

4 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

When it comes to digital information, there is no such thing as a non-hackable system or anonymous data. And a depository of everybody's permanent IDs would be a central target.

And the same is true of paper based systems, in fact the possible abuses with non IT systems is much worse it's just the nobody actively thinks about it today because of the big scary "technology" issues that are just more topical.

[Delicieuxz]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

The same people maintaining the current system with as of current no breach of it.

 

Many really? That just sounds like an assumption based on little technical thought.

 

And the same is true of paper based systems, in fact the possible abuses with non IT systems is much worse it's just the nobody actively thinks about it today because of the big scary "technology" issues that are just more topical.

I'm not sure which current system you're referring to. But there are a lot of heathcare systems and breaches are constantly happening.

 

https://www.healthcareitnews.com/slideshow/biggest-healthcare-breaches-2017-so-far?page=1

https://healthitsecurity.com/news/the-10-biggest-u.s.-healthcare-data-breaches-of-2018

https://healthitsecurity.com/news/the-10-biggest-healthcare-data-breaches-of-2019-so-far

 

New Zealand isn't immune to data breaches, either.

 

https://www.techradar.com/news/new-zealand-health-ngos-data-breach-could-affect-up-to-1-million-people

 

I didn't say that non-microchip systems can't be exploited, hacked, misused. But them being breached doesn't carry the potential for exploitation and loss of privacy and control like a constantly-on location tracker or medical-records access-key implanted into your skin could.

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, Delicieuxz said:

I'm not sure which current system you're referring to. But there are a lot of heathcare systems and breaches are constantly happening.

Nothing is but as of yet the Health Network has never been breached. A health care clinic or facility network having a breach is not the same thing as the Health Network. And I honestly don't give a damn about the US inability to do anything effectively and securely.

 

And FYI I personally know and have worked with the person who disclosed that breach.

 

1 hour ago, Delicieuxz said:

But them being breached doesn't carry the potential for exploitation like a constantly-on location tracker or medical-records access-key implanted into your skin could.

Yes they do carry the same risk. And again passive micro RFID won't be read in the way you think, not now and not in the future. No teach is going to magic out it's ass to read it when it's under your foot or under armpit while you're in a typical every day life situation.

 

And if it does, you'll already be dead and what was used on you is not used in that future time.

[Delicieuxz]

42 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Nothing is but as of yet the Health Network has never been breached. A health care clinic or facility network having a breach is not the same thing as the Health Network. And I honestly don't give a damn about the US inability to do anything effectively and securely.

But the topic of healthcare security doesn't entail just the New Zealand central system - which probably isn't as big a target as systems in the US. And give it some more years and New Zealand's Health Network will likely be breached, too.

 

Faith in the professionalism, integrity, and IT skills of the people currently handling the system isn't a guarantee against a security breach. And I wouldn't bank getting a permanent implant ID on the temporal status of an IT team and the track-record to-date of the system's security when everything up till now is still an insignificant amount of time compared to the lifetime people will want their ID to be private. Especially when cyber-attacks increase in number and sophistication each year.

 

Quote

Yes they do carry the same risk. And again passive RFID won't be read in the way you think, not now and not in the future. No teach is going to magic out is ass to read it when it's under your foot or under armpit while you're in a typical every day life situation.

Without a persistent on-person real-time tracking capability associated with non-digital heathcare IDs, they don't carry the same risk. Because that element, which doesn't exist with non-implant healthcare IDs, is at the centre of the risk of an implant ID.

 

The point of passive RFID systems is that they are in-fact read in the way I'm saying poses a risk when it comes to implanted personal ID. All they need to do in order to be exploitable in a way that non-implant ID isn't is to be readable and return an identifiable signal - whether that signal can be identified on its own or whether it requires access to a back-end system.

[leadeater]

51 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

The point of passive RFID systems is that they are in-fact read in the way I'm saying poses a risk when it comes to implanted personal ID.

Microchips require very close, near touching, along with exacting location. It doesn't work the way you are saying because there are many different types of RFID systems and designs. No door frame or anything like it is going to read such a microchip.

 

Having also actually used race timing RFID, the same ones used in international triathlons, I can tell you for a fact those have a hard enough time with distance and impediments between the reader and the chip and the microchips that are used in pets which require 3cm distance (8cm max if you're lucky) is not the type being proposed for humans which are smaller in size so require even closer readers.

 

You cannot just energize a large reader and then the RFID tag so easily, technology isn't going to solve that any time soon and when it does it'll be nothing like RFID of today and likely wouldn't be compatible at all.

 

If someone is unauthorized reading such a device implanted in to me frankly I would be much more concerned with my immediate personal wellbeing as I would be being restrained against my will or something similar/worse.

 

And as I said you can now with current technology, although extremely expensive, make the implant an actual logic computer device that operates like a one time key, or something else similar. Removal and replacement is also an option, if the need arises.

 

Back to my original point, it very much does sound like you won't now or ever consider such a thing as I said which you said you are not, but it totally does sound like it. I understand your concerns and I have no problem with them, but you are saying never do it ero never consider it.

 

"I cannot see how it could be done to my acceptable level so it should not be done". In a debate setting that is a bad argument.

 

51 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

But the topic of healthcare security doesn't entail just the New Zealand central system - which probably isn't as big a target as systems in the US. And give it some more years and New Zealand's Health Network will likely be breached, too.

Irrelevant, there's been enough time for it to have been. No I'm not saying it won't ever but this is yet again 'anything is possible' argument.

[Yogi_DaBear221]

On 3/14/2020 at 7:34 PM, mr moose said:

but he's a socialist.

Hi not all socialists are this blind to things. I'm very much a socialist and I don't think Bill Gates is one of the "problem" billionaires, and like stated above he is lobbying for higher taxes. I also completely support the Bill and Melinda Gates fund and everything he does. He does things to benefit mankind on top of not having an issue paying his fair share.

[Kisai]

On 3/19/2020 at 12:12 AM, leadeater said:

I've had on many occasions the access and capability to retrieve anyone's medical (digital) history in the entire country, I also had and still have access to more detailed medical notes including counseling session notes. I even have the capability to access it without being detected or audited by those systems. You just don't bloody do it, ever, for any reason.

 

People in IT have more access than people like to think about or realize, even those in the responsible areas we support. Some things are just 'unthinkable'.

 

Edit:

Even me coming out and stating this is rather taboo tbh.

Anyone who works for any major company does to be honest.

 

AT&T (Or Verizon) - you have access to everyone with a phone number in the US.

Amazon or eBay - you have access to everyone in the world who has ever used the site even once.

 

And there is no restrictions on that access, this is why outsourcing is so scary. I as a Canadian Citizen, have access to American and Foreigners taxpayer ID's in the US, even though all I might ever be doing is helping them with an issue that doesn't involve payments. It's actually rather appalling that American companies can use any part of the SSN as account verification, because AT&T let you see the entire number or even change it at will.

 

And I'm not even exaggerating. When eBay owned Paypal, there was an entirely extra level of information that eBay tracked, going back since Paypal's inception.

 

[mr moose]

5 hours ago, Yogi_DaBear221 said:

Hi not all socialists are this blind to things. I'm very much a socialist and I don't think Bill Gates is one of the "problem" billionaires, and like stated above he is lobbying for higher taxes. I also completely support the Bill and Melinda Gates fund and everything he does. He does things to benefit mankind on top of not having an issue paying his fair share.

Did you just quote me and change what I said?