The type of chips that the Rockefellers and other wealthy families have worked for decades to bring about, would probably be more like an ID chip that we would put into a pet.
Eventually there will be public service advertising efforts to install ID chips in children – in much the same way as about 15 years ago they had a big push to get kids registered, fingerprinted, photos taken, and DNA evidence – all to be held by the government. Businesses had “child ID kits” on their counters and would give them away. I think it was somewhere around the time 9-year-old Nancy Shoemaker was killed. A police officer told me that realistically, if a child was abducted, DNA evidence is only likely to be useful if they find the worst has happened.
The reason the Big Bankers want chips installed, is that all financial matters could be handled through our chip. If the government felt we owed them, it would just take the money from our chip. If they became suspicious of us, they could turn off our chip and we couldn’t buy anything from the store. So it would be a power control.
Of course retailers would love it because all their transactions would be automatic and operator-error free, to a very high reliability. And they could track everything you bought, everything you returned. Every store would track who was in it at any given moment, and this would be justified under security measures. Know the customer, right? Law enforcement would probably not like it unless they themselves were exempt from chips; they’d love everybody but themselves to have them.
Big Health Care wants the chips installed so that they can be attached to all medical records. Every time you see your doctor, your doctor must report it to the national health database. After some time, after we hear enough stories about child abduction, massacres, and death in general, we will convince people that if they had a chip installed and got into trouble far away from home, the ER doctors would have all your emergency records there, and have all the emergency contact information. My guess is, if chips actually do start taking off, the medical rationale will be one of the strongest.
And certainly every Big Business has an interest in 1) having every human being identified uniquely by a code that can be read from a distance by a machine, and 2) linking everything together under that one chip.
And here’s the best part. All of these forces working together would like to see this, and ultimately all they have to do is agree upon a standard and get it FDA approved (think “Norplant” except higher tech and longer lasting) then every one of these special interests can share One Chip. Like I said, it can be just like what we currently can buy for 30 bucks for our dog or cat. A scanner gives a number, tied to a database, and everything is connected from there. So you could have hundreds or even thousands of snoopy businesses and individuals watching your every move that interests each of them, and it would on take ONE chip per person to tie them all in.
Nice, eh? These are real efforts, being led by real people.
As far as micromachines that control our brains, there is no reason they couldn’t be developed, but I’m guessing that ones like the OP describes are probably not ready for the market yet. So I’d say it’s very unlikely we get them in blood products now, but I’d also say that all bets are off for 20 years from now. It wouldn’t surprise me to see micromachines taking out cancer cells sooner than that, though, because I would think that’s a simpler task to recognize cells with cancerous DNA and more palatable to more possible funding sources for the research.
Alan
