The future and Microchipping

Last year a Wisconsin company announced it was introducing microchipping into its company structure, it has been met with criticism and excitement. The tech firm wanted to start testing out the technology that we use every day but place it into humans, so no more need to carry cash or tech ID badges. The programme to be chipped was optional and not enforced upon employees who did not want to go forward with the technology being implanted into their hand, half of the other employees opted in to test out how the technology would work in their everyday lives.

As we move into an ever fast-evolving tech world, we as consumers are always looking for the next gadget that will make our lives easier. Some people are concerned that eventually, robots will run our lives and jobs, some say that the government has done little to even consider what impact this will have on the country as a whole and how people will live in the near future.

Critics of the move into microchipping employees could open a bag of worms, especially when the employer is the one in power. When we live in a culture of where the capitalist elite are in some of the most powerful positions in the world, we do have to ponder the question of would they use it to control mass population.  Moving away from potential conspiracy theories we could look closer at the beginnings of the technology, the same tech that is used in contactless cards and smart ID badges. The initial movement into a cashless system can work and has been proven that people and the economy can work in this digital world, however, could it escalate to something bigger?

“we must ensure that if we feel the technology is being exploited to reprimand”

home-banner-two-new

Many think the technology would be used to track our every movement and no privacy would soon ensue, that corporations would pay big money to buy your information and use your own spending habits to market directly to you. On a bigger scale, could the technology be used in such a way to create an even bigger divide between the poor and the super wealthy? Changing the means of how we trade with others with technology would be a simpler transition for those of great means, what would the potential future look like for those who could not afford it. Another consideration to factor, although at first it may be optional, some ask how long would it be before it became mandatory to be microchipped? If you choose to opt-out of the technology upgrade, would this mean less chance of bigger and better-paying jobs or even potentially the neighborhood you’re able to live in? Some people have said that they don’t know enough about any effects that the technology may have on their body, wondering if the technology will cause any long-term effects.

As we’re still in the ‘testing’ phases of the technology, how it will be regulated and implemented still has time to change and be reviewed. It is important to remember that technology exists to aid and make our lives better, not to be used as a tool to control and potentially manipulate what everyone can and can’t do.

For me personally, I’m all for technology improvements into our everyday lives. It will not be for everyone but it is important that we venture into new worlds, we explore what technology can do and how we can make it benefit us. I personally think, the idea of being able to pay something with the touch of a hand would be amazing, but I know we’re a few years away from being able to everything from a microchip. I say don’t panic, embrace the leap forward, don’t be afraid to question its capabilities. And of course, we must ensure that if we feel the technology is being exploited to reprimand and secure others against any acts that would jeopardize the integrity of others.

Till next time…

 

Writer & Blogger
Posts created 77

One thought on “The future and Microchipping

  1. Interesting piece.
    There are broadly two camps of thought here which are difficult to reconcile:
    – the optimistic advocates of technology (aka. demotion man-style mass microchipping) who only see the positive sides and tend not to fully consider the downsides (i.e. microchipping is somewhat permanent and cannot be easily switched off)
    – On the other side, we have the reluctant users or privacy-consious – who didn’t ask for additional intrusion for the sake of progress. They arguably have more to lose (since they are less flexible to change and have more likelihood of being adversely affected by a new system).

    Ultimately we need progress that considers both sides and protects the later where possible.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Related Posts

Begin typing your search term above and press enter to search. Press ESC to cancel.

Back To Top
%d bloggers like this: