The Chip
Some people ascribe an implantable chip to being the mark of the beast, and most likely it will be the physical mark. But the real mark is the attitude people have towards the world and God. Most of those who receive the mark of the beast do so willingly; essentially embracing the ways of the world, the wonders of Babylon.
While an actual "chip" may be forced on people during or after a major crisis as a means to track and identify the people, a first deployment, so to speak, of a tracking chip in this way would lead to open rebellion. Those who want to control and track people would prefer more willing slaves, particularly if the slaves don't realize they are enslaved.
We may see the "chip" come about in a more subtle way.
With the increased identity theft and the need for more secure systems, I think the initial push will be for, what I call, bio-ID, or an implanted personal security identification device.
But before that time, we will be completely accustomed to giving up our privacy and personal information in exchange for ease and convenience. This will expand to include perceived personal security and protection of our data. Part of the ease and convenience will include increased ability to stay connected, particularly as people become used to being connected and almost enter a withdrawal state when they aren't able to connect.
People have always wanted to stay connected with friends and family. The invention of the radio and phone were the first technologies that enabled communication without the individual parties being in the same location.
Computers and the internet brought about easier and quicker access to an exponential growth of data and information. Messaging and email added to the ability to stay connected.
As phones become smaller and began to take on more computing power, social media also began to take shape, allowing for even more opportunities to be connected.
Now a smartphone is far more powerful than most computers were only 5 years ago. And, the ability to be connected is in the palm of our hand.
Many people even use their phones for financial transactions, often paying for goods and services using secure near field communication at points of sale.
Technology is increasingly moving towards wearables, which are often wirelessly connected to our phones or connected independently to the internet.
The next stage is implantable technology.
With increasingly identity thefts and the search for more secure methods to protect individual data and information, usernames and passwords are not sufficient. A hack of an information system can provide the attacker with the password hashes of the users. While these hashes are not the actual passwords, hackers can use various tools to crack the hashes and discover the actual passwords.
Two-factor authentication, such as when your email service sends you a security text to confirm your login, is becoming more popular. However, this adds extra steps to the login process and for most people becomes less convenient.
Where a password is something you know, this second factor is referred to as something you have. Having only one of the two is insufficient for access.
Biometrics--like your fingerprint, facial recognition, or retina scanning--are being used and explored as alternatives to passwords. Biometrics are convenient because you don't have to remember a password. Instead of being something you know, biometrics are something you are. But there have been issues where fingerprints can be lifted, pictures used, or other methods to essentially fool the system.
A more secure method is needed. Something that combines personal, biometric information along with something you have. An implanted personal security identification device, that is mapped to your biometrics so it can't be used by somebody else, would combine the biometric and second factor authentication of something you have.
This device could make financial transactions more secure. It could make your digital identity more secure. We already live in a mostly cashless society, so the move to completely cashless won't be too difficult for most people.
Combined with GPS, such a device could quickly locate and positively identify missing children.
As the technology evolves, vital medical information could be monitored and uploaded. Diabetes, as well as a number of other medical conditions, could be more easily tracked and managed by the individual as well as their physician.
Even those without medical issues could benefit with fitness tracking capabilities.
Ease, and convenience. As the technology becomes smaller, more reliable, and less expensive it will become more attractive.
Money will become a motivator to help people adopt and accept the system.
Medical insurers may start providing premium discounts for implanted devices. As the system gains acceptance, those who are not using the devices will see premium hikes.
Financial institutions would likely provide incentives for adopters of implanted personal security identification devices. And it wouldn't be a stretch to see them later adding fees to those who don't use the devices because of the increased security risk for those not using implanted devices.
No doubt there will be other incentives offered initially (by the government and other entities) to encourage adoption of the devices. And these incentives will likely be replaced by added maintenance and/or security risk fees for those who don't use the devices.
It's a short distance to go from holding your phone to having an implanted device.
Somewhere I remember reading that really new technology--the seemingly radical, societal-changing technology--takes about a generation (roughly 20 years) to get fully accepted and integrated into society. Basically it takes the time for the youth, who are growing up with the technology, to take it and integrate it fully into the workplace and society.
although computers had been around for decades, the first personal computers started coming to market in the late 1970's and early 1980's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_computer). By the late 1990's and early 2000's computers were commonplace.
Similarly, the beginnings of what has become the internet started in the 1960's, the commercialization and general use of the internet didn't really start until the 1990's, with the internet being fully commercialized in the U.S. in 1995 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet). Twenty years later the internet is everywhere and more and more devices are getting connected.
The first recorded chip implants in humans was in 1998. The first, preliminary FDA approval for experimental use in humans was granted in 2002 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microchip_implant_(human)). VeriChip received FDA approval to market an implant in 2004 (http://www.businessinsider.com/microchip-implants-in-healthy-people-2014-7).
It seems like every few months I read or hear an article or news report about implanted chip technology. By 2022, 20 years after the first FDA approval, chips will likely be commonplace. My guess is it may not even take that long.
So, while implementation of the "chip" could be forced in a major disaster relief effort, and it would facilitate the management of those being facilitated, it would be easier for the public to willingly adopt the technology.
The downside will be if this technology is forced on a population or if it becomes required to be utilized. Like any other service, it may be that those who accept this technology will be required to accept some kind of "Terms of Service" or "Agreement." The biggest problem will be if this agreement becomes a requirement to those being forced to "adopt" the technology.
Think about this: what if a governing body were to require people to accept an agreement that requires users of the technology to be tolerant of all people, allow legal transactions with all entities, and not discriminate against anyone who has also agreed to the terms of service. Sounds good. Except, what if by making this agreement you are now required to perform a "legal transaction" which is against your religious belief?
If those who force the adoption and use of personal identification chip technology see Judeo-Christian beliefs and values as a detriment to their agenda, goals, and ambitions for their own advancement, then you can be assured such agreements will become restriction in the free exercise of such beliefs. All in the name of anti-discrimination and being politically correct.
While an actual "chip" may be forced on people during or after a major crisis as a means to track and identify the people, a first deployment, so to speak, of a tracking chip in this way would lead to open rebellion. Those who want to control and track people would prefer more willing slaves, particularly if the slaves don't realize they are enslaved.
We may see the "chip" come about in a more subtle way.
With the increased identity theft and the need for more secure systems, I think the initial push will be for, what I call, bio-ID, or an implanted personal security identification device.
But before that time, we will be completely accustomed to giving up our privacy and personal information in exchange for ease and convenience. This will expand to include perceived personal security and protection of our data. Part of the ease and convenience will include increased ability to stay connected, particularly as people become used to being connected and almost enter a withdrawal state when they aren't able to connect.
People have always wanted to stay connected with friends and family. The invention of the radio and phone were the first technologies that enabled communication without the individual parties being in the same location.
Computers and the internet brought about easier and quicker access to an exponential growth of data and information. Messaging and email added to the ability to stay connected.
As phones become smaller and began to take on more computing power, social media also began to take shape, allowing for even more opportunities to be connected.
Now a smartphone is far more powerful than most computers were only 5 years ago. And, the ability to be connected is in the palm of our hand.
Many people even use their phones for financial transactions, often paying for goods and services using secure near field communication at points of sale.
Technology is increasingly moving towards wearables, which are often wirelessly connected to our phones or connected independently to the internet.
The next stage is implantable technology.
With increasingly identity thefts and the search for more secure methods to protect individual data and information, usernames and passwords are not sufficient. A hack of an information system can provide the attacker with the password hashes of the users. While these hashes are not the actual passwords, hackers can use various tools to crack the hashes and discover the actual passwords.
Two-factor authentication, such as when your email service sends you a security text to confirm your login, is becoming more popular. However, this adds extra steps to the login process and for most people becomes less convenient.
Where a password is something you know, this second factor is referred to as something you have. Having only one of the two is insufficient for access.
Biometrics--like your fingerprint, facial recognition, or retina scanning--are being used and explored as alternatives to passwords. Biometrics are convenient because you don't have to remember a password. Instead of being something you know, biometrics are something you are. But there have been issues where fingerprints can be lifted, pictures used, or other methods to essentially fool the system.
A more secure method is needed. Something that combines personal, biometric information along with something you have. An implanted personal security identification device, that is mapped to your biometrics so it can't be used by somebody else, would combine the biometric and second factor authentication of something you have.
This device could make financial transactions more secure. It could make your digital identity more secure. We already live in a mostly cashless society, so the move to completely cashless won't be too difficult for most people.
Combined with GPS, such a device could quickly locate and positively identify missing children.
As the technology evolves, vital medical information could be monitored and uploaded. Diabetes, as well as a number of other medical conditions, could be more easily tracked and managed by the individual as well as their physician.
Even those without medical issues could benefit with fitness tracking capabilities.
Ease, and convenience. As the technology becomes smaller, more reliable, and less expensive it will become more attractive.
Money will become a motivator to help people adopt and accept the system.
Medical insurers may start providing premium discounts for implanted devices. As the system gains acceptance, those who are not using the devices will see premium hikes.
Financial institutions would likely provide incentives for adopters of implanted personal security identification devices. And it wouldn't be a stretch to see them later adding fees to those who don't use the devices because of the increased security risk for those not using implanted devices.
No doubt there will be other incentives offered initially (by the government and other entities) to encourage adoption of the devices. And these incentives will likely be replaced by added maintenance and/or security risk fees for those who don't use the devices.
It's a short distance to go from holding your phone to having an implanted device.
Somewhere I remember reading that really new technology--the seemingly radical, societal-changing technology--takes about a generation (roughly 20 years) to get fully accepted and integrated into society. Basically it takes the time for the youth, who are growing up with the technology, to take it and integrate it fully into the workplace and society.
although computers had been around for decades, the first personal computers started coming to market in the late 1970's and early 1980's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_computer). By the late 1990's and early 2000's computers were commonplace.
Similarly, the beginnings of what has become the internet started in the 1960's, the commercialization and general use of the internet didn't really start until the 1990's, with the internet being fully commercialized in the U.S. in 1995 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet). Twenty years later the internet is everywhere and more and more devices are getting connected.
The first recorded chip implants in humans was in 1998. The first, preliminary FDA approval for experimental use in humans was granted in 2002 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microchip_implant_(human)). VeriChip received FDA approval to market an implant in 2004 (http://www.businessinsider.com/microchip-implants-in-healthy-people-2014-7).
It seems like every few months I read or hear an article or news report about implanted chip technology. By 2022, 20 years after the first FDA approval, chips will likely be commonplace. My guess is it may not even take that long.
So, while implementation of the "chip" could be forced in a major disaster relief effort, and it would facilitate the management of those being facilitated, it would be easier for the public to willingly adopt the technology.
The downside will be if this technology is forced on a population or if it becomes required to be utilized. Like any other service, it may be that those who accept this technology will be required to accept some kind of "Terms of Service" or "Agreement." The biggest problem will be if this agreement becomes a requirement to those being forced to "adopt" the technology.
Think about this: what if a governing body were to require people to accept an agreement that requires users of the technology to be tolerant of all people, allow legal transactions with all entities, and not discriminate against anyone who has also agreed to the terms of service. Sounds good. Except, what if by making this agreement you are now required to perform a "legal transaction" which is against your religious belief?
If those who force the adoption and use of personal identification chip technology see Judeo-Christian beliefs and values as a detriment to their agenda, goals, and ambitions for their own advancement, then you can be assured such agreements will become restriction in the free exercise of such beliefs. All in the name of anti-discrimination and being politically correct.
Comments
Post a Comment