Probability of micro-chipping for non-medical needs: 100%.

Excelent presentation, the future is created for us, today, this initiative are so important for the medicine ,( i think that), implant based in nanotech, will be the solutions, of teh future.

The "next big "i" is and always has been a genuinely big "I": Inequality. In the ever-lasting contest between "i" and "I", I will always capitalize.

It is not surprising that viewpoints differ as much as this... from the research we have been conducting over the last decade, getting an implantable for non-medical applications is a divisive issue. Nanotechnology is indeed the way of the future but with it will also come numerous levels of inequality... today we speak of a digital divide, those who have computers with Internet access, and those who do not... in the future we may well be speaking about a digital divide between various versions of iplants (e.g. iplants used for basic person ID versus iplants that are used for mobile commerce transactions verus those that even provide powerful physiological diagnostics.

I include a link here to an international conference I chaired- IEEE Symposium on Technology & Society (IEEE ISTAS10) with video presentations on microchipping people. The theme of the conference was the social implications of emerging technologies, and we were fortunate to have a number of implantees at the event and international experts on the research area at large. I think you will find these very interesting.

http://www.uow.edu.au/conferences/2010/ISTAS/presentations/index.html

Similar discussions were some years ago regarding e-government, for example. Despite the enthusiasm the world became more complicated. The problem lies with the Kranzberg Law: technology is neither good nor bad; nor is it neutral. It continues: although technology might be a prime element in many public issues, nontechnical factors take precedence in technology-policy decisions ...

Yes, this is so true especially when it comes to the study of automatic identification technologies. E.g. biometrics, or even smart cards. Fingerprint biometrics while today used more widely could have had an even greater market share if they were not synonymous to criminal records. Smart cards went through some resistance but are now proliferating world-wide. Non-technical factors may abound in the interim or short-term, but as cultural values change, it is possible that those technologies we said would 'never be adopted' in our generation, might be what the next generation is waiting for. Technology innovation evolves as far as the imagination, and at times, in socialising these technologies we as citizens, or consumers, become immune, not because we want to but because we are taken by the marketing and advertising that is forever before us by the hi-tech companies. I do not wish to underplay the role of the consumer at all- there will always be choice- so long as we live in a free society, but the push for adopting new more user-friendly computing will cycle from luggables, to wearables, to implantables as a natural trajectory.

http://works.bepress.com/kmichael/40/

Probability of micro-chipping for non-medical needs: 100%.

(#Roger) It is really of interest to me that you have made this prediction. I tend to agree after studying some of the product solutions of the big online search companies/hardware companies over last fifteen to twenty years or so. Innovation will always push us and propel us to the next high-tech advancement, whether we are ready for it or not. An opposing view came to me from a long-standing entrepreneur in the RFID industry some weeks ago- who was adamant that microchips in humans would never happen and that I should check my facts before proposing this was even a possibility. This correspondence spoke volumes to me for different reasons. Here is one interview with a key informant who believes the future will be implantables and for non-medical. He was a consultant to a small organisation that offered RFID implants as an alternative access control device to employees in mid-2000s. You might find the attached article of interest, based on this single interview, to appear in early 2013.

http://works.bepress.com/kmichael/273/

Thanks for the feedback, Katina. I had a dekko at your paper and noted your comment at the conclusion re "The potential for function creep..." - an inevitable development, I think, for most, if not all aspects of technological progress. Humanity has a propensity to seek new applications, explore possibilities, navigate new territory and, above all, control the world and all in it. I can foresee the day, for example, when a person can choose to have a wireless IT interface embedded in the head - sometime this century, I'd say.

I'll read your paper fully and I'll comment here further, if appropriate.

(#Roger): You wrote, "I can foresee the day, for example, when a person can choose to have a wireless IT interface embedded in the head - sometime this century, I'd say."

Last year we were invited to write about the "Social Implications of Technology: past, present and future" for the centennial edition of Proceedings of the IEEE. We point to this possibility in the paper with strong reference to medical bionics. You might enjoy this paper that was a collaboration between five authors with different strengths and backgrounds in engineering, software development, data mining, information systems, and ethics.

http://works.bepress.com/kmichael/255/

Katina:

After twice reading your piece I wondered who, in the 1950s, would (or could) have foreseen that the newfangled passive TV device would eventually become the platform for active, pervasive social monitoring. Truly, I wonder where we, as a species, are going: to an authoritarian hell or a life-liberating nirvana. As the arrogance of the world's Retherfords continues – as it will – I know where I’d place my bet.

Coming from a career of over forty years in computers (since 1966), I have a good appreciation of just how bug-ridden all software is; and how manipulative developers are. So, I’m also reading your article about location based services, a trap that I’ve constantly warned against with my family and friends. For example, I never use Facebook, Twitter or other such services. And I use a cell phone only rarely; otherwise, it stays off.

Oh, BTW, I think there is some confusion on page three, third paragraph, when Retherford is quoted to say: “…because it’s a mute point…”. Logically, I’d say the word ‘mute’ should be replaced with ‘moot’; or the marker [sic] accompany ‘mute’, if that is the case. The next paragraph repeats the confusion on the sixth line.

I tried the download button at the above 255 link, but nothing connected. Is there another link I can use? Thx.

(#Roger): Only a few months ago we celebrated the "clicker device" which definitely revolutionised social living spaces- everything from television, stereos, airconditioning etc.

Agreed about the bugs... especially when most corporations have a small team dedicated to 'troubleshooting' and 'bug fixes'.

Ta about the mute point... good pick up. We have time to change before it goes to print.

/255 try to press again- the file from memory is quite large as it has lots and lots of photos (try it embedded here: http://works.bepress.com/kmichael/255/)

We've run some interesting studies on location based social networking. Some of our results were recently published in IEEE T&S Magazine. Not everyone agrees with us but the findings at least speak for themselves on this occasion. See below link:

http://works.bepress.com/kmichael/270/

Edwin. Fascinating. Yes. The Google Glass project has recently indicated this route, and previously the research of MIT Labs, especially the work of Professor Steve Mann (see sousveillance research).

One thing I had planned to say during the TEDx talk I gave but forgot to is that we can imagine future one day where a camera might be embedded in the clavicles (just below shoulders)... that way no clunky pieces of hardware in front of the eye or head.

I would personally not wish to see this kind of invention ever happen but our work on uberveillance has pointed to embedded camera technology.

http://www.interaction-design.org/encyclopedia/wearable_computing.html

Thanks, Katina. The 255 link loaded okay, as did the 270. Many thanks. I'll be back. ;)

If I understand the question, then it's already been done, by Kevin Warwick.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Warwick

At a less "cutting edge research" level, then various "body modders" have implanted various things: for example this guy implanting magnets to hold his ipod...http://boingboing.net/2012/05/15/ipod-body-mod-magnetic-wrist.html

William, one of the cases I present on the TEDx talk is of Kevin receiving an implant back in 1998... I was being more provocative in my discussion point- will we go that way as a society (willingly) en masse? The body modders are an interesting study group... see example paper below... in 2003 I started to look at ancient tattooing, branding techniques, scarification, piercing, and more recently chipification practices. I found one case study of a Japanese sumo wrestler who received an implant so that he could overcome height restrictions for the 'sport' http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19940706&id=jBtVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=cD0NAAAAIBAJ&pg=5594,2539212

But there are now body modders taking advantage of missing fingers (that have become defacto usb sticks), and other situtations like eyeborg man (Rob Spence) http://eyeborg.blogspot.com.au/

I'd be keen to hear what you think.

http://works.bepress.com/kmichael/31/

Some people have been imolanted chips in their arms or forehead and that is within thelast 20 years. They were used as a type if passport and personal detail system but this had a negative spiritual effect on them and the idea of control on oeople in society is a concern, i use social networking but have to admit a chip to use as a passport bank and id is riking the freedom of what it means to be a unique person

They actually had those chips removed via amputation as the dr i dont believe was part of this chip movement. Another person was able to have the chip remived without amputation

(#Charalambos) Thank you for engaging in this conversation. Implants can be removed without amputation, dependent on which layer of the skin they have been implanted to (e.g. see the attached video below of a simple levonogestral implant). Warning the procedure you will see on this clip is not for the faint hearted. The insertion is much easier than the removal...

I have only been able to find one exception report on the web site of the US Food and Drug Administration about one particular brand of implant for which there was no removal procedure defined. Depending on the length of time an implant is embedded in the body, and its depth in the skin, yes, indeed, experts have described to me that the implant can be enveloped by tissue. This does not mean removal is impossible, it just means it requires a more invasive procedure to remove the implant.

You raise some interesting points about potential future uses of microchip implants- e.g. banking and passports and national ID. We discuss these here: http://works.bepress.com/kmichael/25/ and also why people might reject implants for these types of applications here: http://works.bepress.com/kmichael/34/

This no doubt is a divisive issue. There are obviously those who would never adopt the technology but in a more recent study in 2010, conducted by BITKOM, allegedly 23% of Germans would adopt an implant. http://www.uberveillance.com/blog/2012/7/23/survey-on-chip-implants-in-germany.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UV4dtfnX3rU&feature=related

I thought some interested in this discussion might like to see a recent DIY live surgery video at a Hackers Conference in the US. Source: Forbes. Please note the motivation for the type of implant adopted by DIYers and its uses differs substantially from those persons who take on commercial implants for possible health and medical reasons and those for convenience solutions.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/08/13/want-an-rfid-chip-implanted-into-your-hand-heres-what-the-diy-surgery-looks-like-video/