Subject:
|
Re: Cyber Kids 2002
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 5 Sep 2002 13:28:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
231 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/09/03/uk.implant/index.html
>
> So what do you think? I see the utility of such a move, though on some
> level I'm a little uncomfortable with it (but I don't know if I'm being
> rational or simply reactive).
There are two issues that I see, that can be phrased as two questions:
Under what circumstances does a parent/guardian have the right to subject their
children to surgery (even if minor outpatient)?
Is it a good idea to participate in a practice that could theoretically be used
by governments or other agencies to track your children?
I think the answer to the second is that such an implant has a higher risk than
benefit.
The first is harder to answer. I'm positively convinced that circumcision
should not be allowed, as it causes substantially more harm than potential
benefits to my (and the American Academy of Pediatrics') calculus. But this
implant presumably has relatively little in the way of medical harm or good, so
I'm less certain.
> Apparently certain
> stores are requiring fingerprint identification before checks will be
> honored or credit accounts opened, and Mike doesn't like it.
> [snip]
> Mike feels the fingerprint policy to be an abominable invasion
> of privacy [1]. But is it? Or is it a reasonable guarantor of identity to
> be used by a retail company to ensure security for its customers? I guess
> that if it's mandatory, then Mike might have a fair point; the forcible
> disclosure of identity is indeed an invasion of privacy. But if it's
> volutary, would that be okay?
It sounds like a brilliant plan to me! And you can always choose to not pay by
check or to shop elsewhere. What's the harm? After all, if you're paying by
check, aren't you disclosing your identity anyway? The fingerprint is supposed
to just assure that you're doing so unfraudulently.
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Cyber Kids 2002
|
| (...) Yeah, that's one of the central points for me. I'm trying to find an analogy, like the removal of an ugly but non-harmful wart, or perhaps the erasure of an unsightly (and potentially stigmatizing) birthmark, but neither of these is quite (...) (22 years ago, 5-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Cyber Kids 2002
|
| (URL) what do you think? I see the utility of such a move, though on some level I'm a little uncomfortable with it (but I don't know if I'm being rational or simply reactive). On a related note, famed level-head and open-minded orator Mike Gallagher (...) (22 years ago, 3-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
