SMART Agrimatics

Technocracy IX: Nano-Science (1)

Ted: I don’t like it here. I don’t know what’s going on. We’re both stumbling around together in this unformed world whose rules and objectives are largely unknown, seemingly undecipherable or even possibly non-existent, always on the verge of being killed by forces we don’t understand!

Allegra: That sounds like my game, all right.

Ted: It sounds like a game that’s not gonna be easy to market.

Allegra: But it’s a game everybody is already playing.

Existenz


The above quote is taken from the 1999 film Existenz by Canadian director David Cronenberg who has been fascinated by the interaction between man and machine for much of his career. In the film, we are introduced to a near-future scenario in which virtual reality games interface directly with the body via “game pods” which have replaced electronic consoles. The pods are attached to “bio-ports”, which have been inserted in the players’ spines, through an umbilical cord of bio-cybernetic flesh. Gaming companies Antenna Research and Cortical Systematics, compete against each other. A resistance group made up of “realists” are fighting to prevent the “deforming” of reality by such technology.Though seemingly an enjoyable fantasy, it is fast becoming close to reality.

Cronenberg’s film touches on many issues associated with the hugely popular world of virtual reality and the move towards integrating the human body with computer circuitry, in this case, as an entertainment tool. This hyper-realistic world seems to provide a seductive alternative from a society which is failing people through a lack of values and the emotional and spiritual nourishment it sorely needs. The integration of synthetic environment modelling, biotechnology, genetic engineering, cognitive technology, neuroscience and SMART visions are all being applied to the future of military and law enforcement under the guiding hand of Pathocratic rule.

And what of nanotechnology and its place in this saw-see between the dark and light of humanity’s destiny?

One of the most exciting, potentially beneficial forms of technology which underlies much of the current practical advances in cutting-edge science is nanotechnology or the manipulation of physical, chemical and biological properties of matter at an atomic and molecular scale. Many scientists believe nanoscience on its own, potentially heralds a change on the scale of the Industrial Revolution.

The United Kingdom’s Institute of Mechanical Engineers (IME) produced a report in early 2015 titled: Nanotechnology: The Societal Impact of The Invisible which gave a useful summary of the benefits, risks and public concerns, though with a subtle bias in favour of nanotech overall. According to the IME report there is a distinction to made between the science and technology of this field.

“The field of nanoscience grew out of the technological advancements brought about by the tunnelling microscope, enabling scientists to begin to understand and characterise the nature of materials at the atomic level. Conversely, nanotechnology in its purest sense is the design and application of functional systems at the molecular level to create usable structures and devices”.

Nanomaterials are present both in Nature and in synthetic production, the latter essentially attempting to improve on what already exists in the natural world. These organic and in-organic structures include viruses, wax crystals on leaves, Spider silk, the bottom of gecko feet, Butterfly wings, cement, scales, paper, corals, colloids (milk and blood) skin, feathers, horns and hair, clays, opals, pigments and smoke.

Nanotechnology is apparently much more than the “very small” with precise nano-scale and recognised by what is called an  SI prefix for one billionth (n) or 10-9 (0.000000001). Some examples follow:

image

Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution: 27th Report, Novel Materials in the
Environment: The case of nanotechnology, 2008.

What makes nanoscience so compelling, even magical, is the capacity to buck the rules of Newtonian physics, where materials behave in accordance to quantum laws. This is due to the fact that the properties of materials change at the nanoscale, with a percentage of the atoms involved taking a highly significant role in the process of malleable change. The IME report describes it in the following way:

As the size reduces so the physical properties e.g. the melting/boiling point, conductivity fluorescence, magnetic permeability, absorption rates, strength and chemical reactivity begin to change; properties that the very same substances may not exhibit at the micro or macro scales. Newtonian physics no longer applies and the material behaves according to the laws of quantum physics. Nanomaterials are closer in size to atoms and molecules than they are to bulk materials, and due to this ‘smallness’, electromagnetic forces become more dominant than gravitational ones. Typically, a material or particle is referred to as ‘nano’ when it is 1–100nm in size. However the quantum effects generally occur around the 1–30nm range. At these scales it is necessary to use highly specialised microscopes, known as scanning tunnelling microscopes (STMs) which were developed in the early 1980s.

Which brings us to the process of building miniature structures at the micrometre scale, otherwise known as “microfabrication” which now extends into the nanosphere. This process obviously uses ultra-sophisticated, precision engineering techniques and high level design to carry out such manipulations. An example of how advanced such microfabrication has become hails from a 2014  German/Israeli team of engineers and their creation of a nanoscale ‘robot.’ According to the IME report, It: “…has has the potential to be small enough to manoeuvre inside the human body and possibly inside human cells.” They state further:

The robot has a tiny screw-shaped propeller that can move in a gel-like fluid, mimicking the environment inside a living organism. The filament that makes up the propeller is made of silica and nickel and is only 70nm in diameter; the entirepropeller is 400nm long, making it 100 times smaller than a human blood cell. It is so small,that its motion can be affected by the motion of nearby molecules (known as Brownian motion). The scientists were able to control the motion of the propellers using a relatively weak rotating magnetic field.

So this gives you some idea of the size we are talking about here. Nanotechnology is highly adaptable and takes four main  forms all of which are currently in commerical use.

The IME report lists these as:

    •  C60/Fullerenes – Fullerenes[20], named after Buckminster Fuller, the architect who pioneered the geodesic dome, are groupings of 60 carbon molecules often written as C60 and nicknamed buckyballs. Fullerenes are known for their strength and lightness; for example, when compressed to 70% of their original size, they become twice as hard as diamonds.
    • Carbon Nanotubes – Carbon nanotubes were first developed in 1991 and have an array of fascinating electronic, magnetic and mechanical properties; conducting heat and electricity far better than copper. They are at least 100 times stronger than steel, but only one sixth as dense.
    • Nanoparticles – Nanoparticles can be metallic, mineral, polymer-based or a combination of materials. The most common are titanium dioxide, zinc oxide and nanosilver. They have multiple uses: as catalysts, drug delivery mechanisms, dyes, sunscreens and filters.
    • Nanowires – Nanowires are extremely narrow threads (less than 50nm wide) and have the potential to be used in electronic devices. While they are still being developed, the hope is that they could enable further miniaturisation of electronic chips.

The latest hot topic in nanotech is molecular self assembly or self-assembled nanostructures. Using concepts of supramolecular chemistry, and molecular recognition these are brought together to induce single-molecule components to automatically arrange themselves into some useful conformation. In other words, this is the process by which molecules construct themselves into natural structures without external manipulation. Since molecules naturally bond at this level certain molecules are introduced to trigger particular outcomes. It is this automation that is the bedrock of nanotechnology. Research and Development is currently receiving millions of dollars to create self-assembly machines so that: “… in the near future, mass production self-assembly systems will be developed which would allow the mass assembly of electrical interconnections on semiconductor chips in large quantities with high speed and high precision.”

nanoflower

‘Nano Flower,’ a 3-D nanostructure grown by controlled nucleation of silicon carbide. (photomicrograph taken by Ghim Wei Ho, a Ph.D). Source: – redOrbit.com

In plain language, it means nanostructures will self-assemble and replicate under an autonomous yet regulated process, achieving more and more sophistication from each generational synthetic platform.

For now, business is booming with 670 nanotech companies in Europe and funded nanotechnology initiatives developing in countries such as Nepal, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Globally there are more than 2,000 firms dealing in the production of nano materials and/or research and development. Employment in nanotechnology increases year by year with an estimated 300,000 to 400,000 people in Europe  and over 2 million in the USA. The worldwide prediction of those employed in nanotech by the year 2020 is said to be 10 million. Public funding around the world involves large sums with:

“… total global funding reaching approx $10bn in 2011 (equivalent to c7.7bn). According to Observatory Nano[29], China surpassed the USA in 2011 for the first time, taking the top position as the biggest investor in nanotechnology research with public funding of c1.8bn. Russia and the USA have almost same level of funding (c1.6 and c1.44bn respectively) with Germany, France and the UK the biggest EU investors. The total public funding in the EU (including that from the Seventh Framework Programme) rose to c2bn in 2011, corresponding to approx 25% of the global total.”

A BCC Market Research report values the global market for nanotechnology products at $26 billion in 2014 with and estimate of about $64.2 billion by 2019. This is a “ compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 19.8% from 2014 to 2019.”

1417160533_NAN031F-0

Global Nanotech Market 2013-2019 ($ Millions) Source: www.bccresearch.com/

Despite the IME report findings revealing what the public already knew (intense distrust) and even though nanotechnology has been in the public domain for over 40 years with future profits and investments increasing annually, the  industry and its science is: “…failing to engage with society in an open and clear way and governments continue to lack impetus in committing to international regulation.” Yet, the proliferation of nano-products has been enormous during the past decade. This is just a small sample:

• Engine oil • Car wax • Catalysts to improve fuel consumption • Anti-bacterial fabrics • Tyres • Air and oil filters • Anti-scratch finishes • Air purifiers Clothing and Textiles • Anti-bacterial and anti-odour clothing • UV-resistant and protective clothing • Wrinkle and stain-resistant apparel • Flame-retardant fabrics Electronics • Displays electronics • Data memory • Anti-bacterial and antistatic coatings on keyboards, mouses, cell phones • Batteries • Organic Light-Emitting Diodes (OLED) and LEDs • DVD coatings • Computer processors and chips • MP3 players • Xboxes and PlayStations Cosmetics • Skin cleansers • Lipstick, mascara, make-up foundations • Make-up removal • Sunscreens • Skin creams and moisturisers Food and Additives • Nutritional supplements • Anti-bacterial utensils • Plastic wrap • Energy drinks • Cleaning products • Fabric softeners • Food storage containers • Cutting boards • Nano-tea, chocolate shakes, canola active oil Household • Anti-bacterial coatings in appliances • Irons, vacuums • Self-cleaning glass • Filters • Anti-bacterial furniture and mattresses • Air purifiers • Anti-bacterial, UV-resistant paints • Solar cells • Disinfectant sprays Sports Equipment • Tennis rackets and balls • Hockey sticks • Ski wax • Wet suits • Anti-fogging coatings • Golf balls and clubs • Baseball bats • Skis and snowboards • Bicycle parts Personal Care/Health • Contact lenses • Hearing aids • Cellulite treatment • Shampoos, hair gels • Insect repellents • Man-made skin • Home pregnancy tests • Body wash • Toothpaste • Deodorants • Anti-bacterial creams • Bandages • Drug delivery patches • Anti-bacterial baby pacifiers, mugs and bottles • Anti-bacterial stuffed toys • Stain-resistant plush toys

How many people are aware that they are already using and ingesting products which contain nano-materials? Very few. In the cosmetics sector would you mind if you were slathering your face with nano-materials? According to the report most people are ambivalent but not in outright opposition, even though the same polling stats showed that knowledge of nanoscience and technology was very low.

The Cancer Research industry has also apparently leapt at the chance to explore nanotech, continuing to ignore substantial alternative fields of research in diet, nutrition and other modalities which have presented consistent results in tackling cancer. The Cancer research industry has a lot of money riding behind it and only one way, reductionist science is allowed in  despite NO successes in curing the disease. What has developed is a dependent relationship to Big Pharma with a whole new range of expensive drugs for amelioration and palliative care. For example, Cancer Research UK is: “… funding multidisciplinary projects that are already bringing together collaborative teams of cancer researchers and scientists from the engineering and physical sciences. The new scheme is set to fund about ten projects each year with up to £500,000 each.”

(An extensive infographic entitled ‘How Nanotechnology Could Reengineer Us’ gives an overview of what nanotechnology could offer the human body, by “re-engineering” us).

So “progress” explores new avenues yet remains strangely one way… None more so than in the field of military and weapons companies. Indeed, by the year 2030 the UK Ministry of Defence sees nanotech playing a vital role across every aspect of society from nano-solar cells to: “… nano-robots designed for a range of purposes – including medical robots used internally in humans and micro-platforms for reconnaissance.”

If you recall the exploration into SMART Agrimatics, it will come as no surprise that nanotech is having a significant impact across the entire agricultural production cycle. Agrichemicals are a prime source of innovation as are the use of nano-sensors in combination with SMART technology. From nano-enhanced packaging to food-related products nanomaterials are slowly being adopted despite nebulous legislation and public suspicion. Though nanotech implementation in foodstuffs and animal husbandry still remains largely at the R &D stage, according to IME: “ The future application of agri-nanoproducts does however seem certain; the USA is already looking to license some products for use in the coming years, heralding a complete change in the way we grow, maintain and process food.”

There is no doubt there is great beauty, and awe-inspiring innovation in the field of nanotechnology with huge benefits for humanity in so many fields. However, this series is about the dark side of such technology and how these innovations always gravitate to the shadows since that is polarity dominating at this time.The Institute of Mechanical Engineers believe that although there is significant optimism regarding the future of nanotechnology there is still widespread suspicion that that this technology will not ultimately go where it is needed most i.e. for society and consumers. For this reason scientists in this field are not trusted. The fact that there is still no real engagement with the public about their concerns doesn’t help and the IME suggest descreasing that dislocation. Interestingly, they perceive the main reason for this as a misunderstanding on the part of the public:

“It has been suggested that the reason why some people express these views is that the established scientific community genuinely don’t consider what they do to be of any consequence to the wider population. Rather, the spotlight falls on technological advancement rather than highlighting consumer and societal needs. This is not done out of any malice or superiority on the part of the technologists; in truth, the technical community sees it purely as the everyday, the norm, and requiring little external endorsement or explanation.

That may well be but it is a subtle form of arrogance and a lack of awareness about society as a whole. More dangerously, if they have little need to inform the public and do not feel they have a duty to do so, then they fall into the hands of those forces that covet such a separation, namely corporate interests and the State. It is almost cliche now that scientists become so involved with the creativity of their work that they are often seen as geniuses on the one hand, and out-of-touch with the wider world. They are perceived as existing in a kind of intellectual bubble where accusations of outsourced ivory towers and naivete about the larger forces at work can easily stick. It is in this sense that there is most certainly technological advancement for its own sake predicated upon this community “normality,” and therefore a way in for institutionalized hubris. This is especially true in lieu of the massive potential changes we are talking about here.

Engineers in the global defence industry have no problem rationalising their satisfaction and subsequent salary that they receive from this line of “creative work”. They are doing what they love. One individual designs the a console and  another the software for Apache helicopters in Iraq which have notched tens of thousands of civilian deaths. Is there a responsibility there? Or do they fall back on: “If I didn’t do it, someone else would.” The same applies to the dark side of nanotechnology. Official Culture makes it much easier for us not to care and to compartmentalise our conscience, even our emotional life, away from deeper connections to our fellow man and woman.

The historical perspective of technology as an automatic saviour as well as a traditional source of State control lends itself to both a philosophical and practical critique since that is exactly the reality we are facing. The progression is not one of technological emancipation for societies where it counts, it is one of State warfare and corporatism. That is where the greatest innovations in Research and Development generally end up, with the by-products effecting the social and material ecology as a mirror of what is denied. Scientists in this context, can only be effective if the overall system in which they live is designed to foster a natural cooperation of expert and layman which leans overwhelmingly toward a socio-economic framework that is inclusive and just. Clearly, this is very far from the case. Quite apart from endemic corruption in science in general, nano-scientists, and the “technical community” are no exception when they are wholly governed by the military-corporate complex and inside Official Culture, whether they are able to see that or not. Thus it matters little whether they have good intentions, rather what the real world dictates from the outside in.

Meanwhile, the US National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) has referred:

“… to the possibility of information dominance through nano-electronics; virtual reality systems for training; automation and robotics to offset reductions in manpower, reduce risks to troops and improve vehicle performance; higher performance platforms with diminished failure rates and lower costs; improvements in chemical/biological/nuclear sensing and casualty care; improvements in systems for non-proliferation monitoring; and nano-/micromechanical devices for control of nuclear weapons.” [1]

Across the Three Establishment Model (3EM) the idea of enhancing human performance through the convergence of nanotechnology biology, information, cognitive science and warfare is highly seductive because it adds a technological ontology to their plans for society not least for their desire for a synthetic immortality. The promise of nano-implant devices, slowing down or reversing ageing, direct brain–machine interfaces and ‘artificial people’ has been discussed at various conferences and seminars across America since the early 2000’s. This may have something to do with the fact that “… the USA is spending far more [on nanotech] than any other country, and maybe more than the rest of the world combined.” [2]Since future science is part of the armoury of the power elite’s ideology for a World State, governments in Europe, Asia and the United States have invested almost $5 billion dollars between them, contributing to the projected annual market of around one trillion US dollars. [3]

 


Notes

[1] ‘Military Uses of Nanotechnology – European Commission’ ec.europa.eu/research/conferences/2004/ntw/pdf/soa_en.pdf
[2] Ibid. (“Figures on military NT R&D funding in other countries are difficult to obtain. The conjecture is supported by the following: the USA spends about two-thirds of the global military R&D expenditure at large (BICC, 2002); in the field of MST, according to a cautious estimate the US military R&D spending was more than ten times that of Western Europe (Altmann, 2001: 46); conference and internet presentations show an verwhelming preponderance of US work in military NT.”)
[3] ‘Apply nanotech to up industrial, agri output,’ The Daily Star (Bangladesh), 17 April 2012. | Health Risks Of Nanotechnology: How Nanoparticles Can Cause Lung Damage, And How The Damage Can Be Blocked Science Daily, June 11, 2009.

Technocracy III: Tagged (and Bagged?)

“The lessons learned from the adoption of other technologies suggest that radio frequency identification will be more important than anyone currently imagines.”

– Mark Roberti, founder and editor of RFID Journal


RFIDChip

© infrakshun

As American infrastructure crumbles under the weight of trillions of dollars of debt accumulated from largely illegal and spurious wars abroad, automation is biting further into the human labour market. Parallel advances in data-collection, surveillance and monitoring continue to build a “soft” police state, all of which must be paid for. New ways of fleecing the populace must be found which means we will be seeing more examples of SMART applications roll-out across a broad range of societal domains.

Hot on the heels of issuing digital licence plates in California, a little black box has made an appearance that will fit neatly by the dashboard of your car. An October 2013 Los Angeles Times report: ‘A black box in your car? Some see a source of tax revenue’ Evan Halper tell us: “The devices, which track every mile a motorist drives and transmit that information to bureaucrats, are at the center of a controversial attempt in Washington and state planning offices to overhaul the outdated system for funding America’s major roads.” The idea is to extract more money out of the hapless US citizen by allowing the government to keep track of the miles they drive in order to draw up yet another tax bill.

No doubt when this is integrated into “the internet of things” then every little iota of information about where you go and what you spend your money and who you decide to see will be factored in to the bill with increases, decreases and penalties and pluses accordingly. This initiative has its blessing from libertarians and lobbying from environmental groups. The former has a SMART techtopia informing its idealism while the latter sees Agenda 21 and sustainable development as the medium by which their own complimentary ecotopia can manifest. Despite protestations from the American Civil Liberties Union, both camps are blind to the undercurrents of Pathocracy in this context.

Keen to do its part for the SMART revolution the European Union has proposed a scheme which would see cars fitted with camera systems that ‘read’ the limits displayed on road signs and automatically apply the brakes. Supposedly in a bid to cut the number of deaths in car accidents the scheme labelled ‘Intelligent Speed Adaptation’ would use GPS satellites to transmit data to automatically limit the driver’s speed along with verbal computer commands to slow down. Or, according to The Telegraph’s September 2013 report: ‘EU plans to fit all cars with speed limiters,’ drivers can be given “… a warning of the speed limit, or their speed could be controlled automatically under the new measures.” [1]

RFID-TagsVariety of RFID retail tags

microchip1

The merging of SMART society and surveillance already has a formidable momentum in America. These examples are the tip of an emerging philosophy of data collection and surveillance which is making inroads into every facet of our once relatively free existence. For instance, just in case you were in any doubt that vaccinations are always a gift from God, registry systems have been set up to track your vaccination status so that you can continue to do as you’re told. Or perhaps you’ve come across the biometrics programs currently be tinkered with in US schools which will “… track students’ eye movements, monitor their conversations or even measure their smiles.” Turning the classroom into a tech-lab paradise of attentive drones is easy – and profitable. In the same month, online journal The Future Is Now ran an article entitled: ‘Biometrics Help Teachers Track Students’ Every Move.’ Sheila Dharmarajan writes: “When the student is looking up at the teacher, the teacher score goes up. If she looks down at the computer, the computer score goes up. So we’re tracking facial expressions. If she makes a smile, it might be indicative that is enthusiastic about the topic.” [2]

Ah, the simple world of binary perception …

But it isn’t only in the US. While the UK’s ID scheme has been temporarily jettisoned, other countries are pushing ahead. Journalist Katitza Rodriguez, writing for the Electronic Frontier Foundation on January 10, 2012 highlighted Argentina’s resurrected and mandatory National Registry of Persons (RENAPER) which had lain dormant from the era of military dictatorship. Facial recognition and finger-printing are part of a security-surveillance system which is about to be integrated into the Federal System of Biometric Identification (SIBIOS) used by existing police and military networks. The registration of new-born babies’ biometric information has taken place since 2012 with projections that the SIBOS database will reach over 40 million within the next two years.

In January 2012, all 1.2 billion residents of India were the lucky beneficiaries of a nationwide program overseeing the allocation of a Unique Identification Number (UID). Each number will be fixed to the biometric data of the recipient utilizing using three different modes of information detection: fingerprints, iris scans, and face recognition. The implementation of RFID (radio-frequency identification) is the next stage for India’s flourishing biometric industry.

RFID stands for “Radio Frequency Identification”. With the advent of Wi-Fi and SMART applications the platform for RFID is expanding to include SMART labels for consumer products, assest tracking, secuirity and data retrieval for business. Then we have the more invasive tagging  with computer chips implanted into physical objects, animals, livestock and human beings. The Electronic Product Code that lies within the chip can be “read” when the device emits a radio signal. The chips contain electronically stored information which can be read up to several meters away. Active tags are self-powered and have a long range, particularly useful for surveillance. Passive tags are without battery source and use a local power source, the range being variable.

Some Christians have long been frothing at the mouth at the prospect of micro-chipping and what they consider to be the proverbial “Mark of the Beast” from The Book of Revelations, without which: “no man might buy or sell save he that had the Mark.” To be fair, it does sound remarkably similar. The Association for Automatic Identification and Mobility (AIM) sees biometric identification in true technocratic form where federal, state, local governments, military and commercial applications should join together and embrace the SMART culture without a care in the world. According to AIM, the RFID-chipped “SMART cards” and the biometric revolution “are set to pervade nearly all aspects of the economy and our daily lives.”  [3]The selling pitch goes like this: The tagging of products from razor blades to underwear represents enormous benefits to consumers, protecting us against fraud and theft as well as providing cost reduction and convenience. What could be simpler? And because it is so simple and so convenient given the fast-paced nature of our modern society, doesn’t it make sense to get yourself tagged too? Efficiency, efficiency and more efficiency …

As a precursor to this we have contactless technology being pushed by companies such as Google, with the majority of mobile network companies getting in on the act because data – your data – is king. Disney’s electronic “MagicBand” illustrates why. In the summer of 2013, the Disney corporation announced the use of an electronic wristband for all visitors to its theme parks. First introduced at Disney World in Florida it can be used at rides, hotel doors, stores and allow Disney staff to greet you using your first name. Who needs a wallet when everything is done for you? The downside to this of course, is a marketing coup d’état where Disney will be able to track what you purchased, which stores you visited, which rides you enjoyed and when, at which hotel you stayed and a vast collection of data to provide valuable insights into social psychology of visitors.

So, what’s a little data between friends and theme parks? Quite a lot actually.

RFID_Wristband_braceletmickeyRFID Tracking bracelets for amusement parks, hospitals and children’s playgrounds. It’s all good clean fun kids!

If you really want to take technology to the heights of efficiency in order to go about your business without a care in the world then your very heart might offer the ultimate hub for hands-free, contactless connection to the New Synthetic World. Canadian biometric company Bionym introduced us to the unnerving offer that: ”Your pulse could be your new Password.” Indeed, every number and code that you currently use to live your life could be distant memory if people such as Bionym chief executive officer Karl Martin has his way. “Pulse passwords” could be the new ultra-convenience. [4]

The heart has unique characteristics relating to size, position and physiology so those clever bods at Bionym have developed a wristband which recognises the pattern of an individual pulse. The transmission of information allows the user to carry out all the usual transactions and internet-based activities which require a password. And it also pleases those worried about security as heartbeats cannot be replicated. Furthermore, as every heartbeat is unique, should the wristband become lost or stolen, it would not function for another user. And on the market in 2014 at $100 many will see the benefits of such an appendage.

Tattoos used to be a tribal marking of religious or sacred significance. In Western culture gangs, dockers and truckers were some of the groups who took to marking themselves to tell their peers who they were and what they’d been through. Now, tattoos are big business and a fashion statement for the young. As luck would have it, electronic tattoos are now appearing from telecommunications companies like Motorola who are working on a version that contains a computer chip and an antenna. Just to give us an idea what to expect in the new future to complement these tattoos there is also: “A pill that dissolves and turns the entire body into a transmitter …” If they can be used to replace all those dozens of pesky passwords then there is money to be made and an interaction with the internet of things (IOT).

We will not need to identify ourselves because we will be integrated into the system.

As discussed previously, Mike Orcutt’s March 2013 article for MIT Technology Review explored John Roger’s work as a materials scientist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He is one of those experimenting with “epidermal electronics” where applications can be printed directly onto the skin. Rogers tells us that these new devices will be very useful to the medical industry and explains: “You can use a rubber stamp to just deliver the ultrathin mesh electronics directly to the surface of the skin.” And by using “spray-on bandage” products a thin protective layer acts to “… bond the system to the skin in a ‘very robust way.’”

Smart-skin-1Back in November 2003, The Privacy Rights Clearinghouse – a non-profit, grant-supported advocacy and consultancy organisation for consumer awareness – had already produced the “Position Statement on the Use of RFID on Consumer Products.” In the study, they concluded the following:

  • Hidden placement of tags. RFID tags can be embedded into/onto objects and documents without the knowledge of the individual who obtains those items. As radio waves travel easily and silently through fabric, plastic, and other materials, it is possible to read RFID tags sewn into clothing or affixed to objects contained in purses, shopping bags, suitcases, and more.
  • Unique identifiers for all objects worldwide. The Electronic Product Code potentially enables every object on earth to have its own unique ID. The use of unique ID numbers could lead to the creation of a global item registration system in which every physical object is identified and linked to its purchaser or owner at the point of sale or transfer.
  • Massive data aggregation. RFID deployment requires the creation of massive databases containing unique tag data. These records could be linked with personal identifying data, especially as computer memory and processing capacities expand.
  • Hidden readers. Tags can be read from a distance, not restricted to line of sight, by readers that can be incorporated invisibly into nearly any environment where human beings or items congregate. RFID readers have already been experimentally embedded into floor tiles, woven into carpeting and floor mats, hidden in doorways, and seamlessly incorporated into retail shelving and counters, making it virtually impossible for a consumer to know when or if he or she was being “scanned.”
  • Individual tracking and profiling. If personal identity were linked with unique RFID tag numbers, individuals could be profiled and tracked without their knowledge or consent. For example, a tag embedded in a shoe could serve as a de facto identifier for the person wearing it. Even if item-level information remains generic, identifying items people wear or carry could associate them with, for example, particular events like political rallies. [5]

Not that these warnings have made a whole lot of difference to the momentum of such technology.

American and European governments’ expenditure of billions of taxpayer’s money on creating these new systems “for our protection” is unjustified for a multitude of reasons. One of these shows how particularly ridiculous the whole scenario really is. If someone wishes to read the biometric information from our passport, driving licence or ID card they need only to purchase a reader device and scan the information without the individual ever knowing. Of course, the government and their spooks have been extracting information in a similar fashion from so called “secure” systems of information for decades. As outsourcing of the state to private companies is becomes the norm, it is hardly likely that governments could stem the tide of information theft should they even want to.

In February 2007, the electronics corporation Hitachi proudly revealed the development and successful testing of the world’s smallest and thinnest class of “non-contact RFID Powder IC (integrated circuit) Chip.” It measures just 0.05 x 0.05 millimetres, which is about the size of a pin-head or less. We read on their website in a Research & Development report that their aim is: “… to embed the chip in thin paper, a practice that is already in general use,” informing us that: “These technologies are expected to be seen in a wider range of applications.” [6]

In 2015 this became a reality. The chips have a 128-bit ROM for storing a unique 38 digit number and can indeed be worked into any product at all. Since these chips are “already in use” it begs the question: what other applications are they thinking about? The military surveillance uses are well ahead of the consumer game. As one writer on the chips mused: “… suppose you participated in some sort of protest or other organized activity. If police agencies sprinkled these tags around, every individual could be tracked and later identified at leisure, with powerful enough tag scanners.” [7]

This echoes trans-national corporation IBM and their business relationship with Nazi Germany’s Third Reich in the 1930s and their subsequent collaboration during World War II. Investigative journalist and author Edwin Black explained how IBM’s technology helped facilitate Nazi genocide against Jews and other undesirables through the creation and tabulation of punch cards based upon national census data. Aside from administrative and logistical support, IBM machines were used in concentration camps. Many prisoners had their details passed through the Labour Assignment Office and assigned a characteristic five-digit IBM Hollerith machine number, 44673. This five-digit number in the punch card system was designed to track prisoners in the camps, most notably the slave labour camp at Auschwitz. The number was the precursor to the numerical tattoo stamped upon the arm of an individual and deemed more cost-effective and efficient.

ibmachineIBM Hollerith Card Processing Machine used by the Nazis circa 1940s

There is no doubt that the targeted identification of Jews and other racial groupings for: “… asset confiscation, ghettoisation, deportation, and ultimately extermination” took place in a way that is logistically and insanely ambitious. The Nazis were able to kill as many as they did with the help of IBM’s pioneering computer work which required: “… generations of communal, church, and governmental records all across Germany—and later throughout Europe—[to be cross-indexed] a task so monumental, it called for a computer. But in 1933, no computer existed.” [8] That’s where IBM came in. And its legacy for number crunching computation has remained, the profits of its participation in the logistical side of the holocaust having kept it afloat for all these years.

So, what has IBM been up to recently?

Harking back to their darker history, the corporation has finished patenting their “Identification and Tracking of Persons Using RFID-Tagged Items in Store Environments.” Security and Privacy analyst Katherine Albrecht, founder of the consumer pressure group CASPIAN (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering) writes about RFID’s potential for surveillance: “… where networked RFID readers called ‘person tracking units’ would be incorporated virtually everywhere people go – in “shopping malls, airports, train stations, bus stations, elevators, trains, airplanes, restrooms, sports arenas, libraries, theaters, museums, to closely monitor people’s movements.”

You can already see the acclimatisation taking place with i-phone apps scanning capabilities in billboard ads in bus shelters and shopping malls. When RFID tag scanners are located in the required locations, they scan the RIFID tags on a person. Albrecht continues: “As that person moves around the store, different RFID tag scanners located throughout the store can pick up radio signals from the RFID tags carried on that person and the movement of that person is tracked based on these detections … The person tracking unit may keep records of different locations where the person has visited, as well as the visitation times.” What is more, if personal data does not register on the tag, no problem, IBM tells us: “the personal information will be obtained when the person uses his or her credit card, bank card, shopper card or the like.” [9] Which means a person’s unique RFID number and his or her identity will merge into the overall techno-identity of our SMART society.

Although slower than the technocrats would like, the implantation of RFID’s in the global population is making progress. Alongside marketing tattoos a much vaunted fashion statement, another method of gradualism was to implant pets and farmyard animals as part of an agribusiness efficiency and as a prelude to human implantation.

In January 2007 Business Week reported on the Federal mandated National Animal Identification System (NAIS) and their desire to digitally tag “… 40 million farm animals to enable regulators to track and respond quickly to disease, bioterrorism, and other calamities.” The report rightly highlights the fears of the more informed which it summarises thusly: “You test it on the animals first, demonstrating the viability of the radio frequency identification devices (RFIDs) to monitor each and every animal’s movements and health history from birth to death, and then move on to people.”  The report mentions the ambitions of one Scott Silverman who runs a: “… company that sells the rice-size people chips, which are the only ones with Food & Drug Administration (FDA) approval, for implantation in an individual’s right biceps. They carry an identity marker that would be linked to medical records. His goal is to create ‘the first RFID company for people.’” [10] More from Mr. Silverman presently.

cow1© infrakshun

Things have progressed since 2007 and we can now see implementation of Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and RFID chips in a fusion of agribusiness and SMART technology called by French technocrats as “SMART Agrimatics”. A paper hot of the press at the time of writing is about as innovative as you are going to get on the subject of agribusiness and technocracy. The culmination of a pilot project research, it involves the application and use of RFID tags for “ruminants” (cows, sheep and goats to you and me) the studies of which were conducted between 2005 and 2010. This includes discussions on the relevant use of RFID; use of RFID for feeding automates on farm; use of RFID for performances control; use of RFID for animal trade; use of RFID for slaughter chain and supervision for RFID devices.

The paper reads like a machine mind designing for another machine mind, except there are – inconveniently it seems – sentient beings involved. For the farmer scratching his head as to whether he is a human being raising animals or an engineer maintaining “automated consumption units” and keen to make the leap to SMART-Agrimatics, then obviously this dossier would be invaluable for setting his mind straight – one way or another.

With “ear-tag and detection cell” and “fixed readers integrated in the environment” agri-business and GM technology are well placed to maximize their efficiency ratios. Once all cattle have been tagged logged and every aspect of their cellular structure analysed then the collection and transfer of said data can be uploaded to the national database “… the weight linked to the official animal identification number from RFID reading.” [11] Driven by economic incentives and inventory control, larger farms all over Europe and the US are signing on to RFID.

Now, how would that play out for humans?

If we were learn from automated factory farming and now SMART-Agrimatics, the key term here, once again, is efficiency.

How does one maximize the efficiency in automated methods of keeping an awakening population asleep to a minority of psychopaths?  The technocratic, sensual and pharmaceutical amusements of Huxley’s Brave New World should give you some idea. The following picture from the above report might easily apply to the “sheep” in the human population who believe in the authoritarian structures they have grown up with. Wolves come in many disguises.

clip_image002.gif“The Future Sheeple?”

Over in the UK, after a series of well reported dangerous dog attacks new legislation has gone ahead that forces dog owners to pay between £20 – £30 to have a RFID chip injected under the skin of their pooch while still a puppy. As one animal welfare spokesman mentioned: “It’s not so much the dogs that should be targeted, but the owners who train them to be vicious.” (A metaphor for psychopaths and their societies perhaps?) Implantation of RFIDs has predominantly taken place within security firms, the military and various dance clubs in European countries whose clientele find it convenient to speed their entry. These are the voluntary lab-rats.

The Verichip Corporation and their various subsidiaries has been one of the leaders in RFID technology with their flagship product the Verichip ™ manufactured by Digital Angel. PositiveID, a developer of medical technologies for diabetes management, clinical diagnostics and bio-threat detection is the company that uses its patented VeriPay system where the chip can be used like a credit card to authorise financial transactions. It is currently being used by the Baja Beach Club in Spain to the delight of many happy party goers.

PositiveID-logo

The Verichip was initially foreseen as a device for retrieving medical records, having received FDA approval for medical use in 2004. But the vision was never designed to stop there. The size of a grain of rice it is easily implanted just under the skin in the arm or hand so that the device can monitor human biometric functions and transmit the data with GPS technology. Thousands of Mexicans have since been implanted, from law enforcement workers to ordinary citizens. The latter are doing so in increasing numbers due to a 317 per cent rise in kidnappings, 20 per cent of which has involved corrupt police officers. Many US companies are dubious that the chips actually work in combination with GPS devices but payments of up $2000 are being handed over nonetheless. One slight wrinkle in the chip means that confirmation of identity can only be confirmed when the body has been found. [12]

Currently in talks with the Pentagon to implant Verichip into all 1.4 million US soldiers, PositiveID has also been delighted to receive bulk orders from the Israeli military not wishing to be left out of technocratic party. Marc Poulshock, PositiveID’s Vice President of Business Development, said: “We believe there are many important applications for the VeriChip and our associated intellectual property including next-generation identification and bio-sensing capabilities. Our partner is looking to help healthcare organizations, militaries including the IDF, and governments with their disaster preparedness and emergency response needs.” [13]

VeriCorp insists that the Verichip is very difficult to steal despite two hackers showing just how easy it really was to steal a person’s identity via the RFID. Annalee Newitz and Jonathan Westhues gave a special demonstration at the HOPE Number Six conference in New York City in July 2008. Newitz had the VeriChip RFID implanted in her right arm. Westhues then proceeded to clone the chip by reading Newitz’s arm with an RFID reader, scanning it with a homemade antenna connected to his laptop which recorded the signal from the chip. Finally, he used the same RFID reader to obtain the signal from his laptop, which then gave Newitz’s “unique” ID. Verichip had no comment to make other than they had been too busy to look at their evidence.

That hasn’t prevented the idea that new-borns should be protected from nefarious activities of the public. Ronald Kane, Vice President of CUBIC Corp., a major manufacturer of implantable chips, while discussing the profit margins on RFID tags enthusiastically stated: “If we had our way, we’d implant a chip behind everyone’s ear in the maternity ward.” [14]

According to RFID News Student ID cards equipped with RFID chips are becoming more common sight on schools and college campuses. Education officials are “… adopting RFID technology to track everything from student attendance to valuable assets.” [15]It is part of a wide-ranging rollout of SMART technology including Iris recognition software and cameras which monitor the emotional states of students, both of which have caused considerable controversy, not least at the idea of turning schools into virtual prisons.

A similar efficiency-ratio mentality is being employed in business training software offered by online technology company Mindflash. FocusAssist is a new feature designed for i-Pad which tracks the user’s eye movements via the tablet’s on-board camera. When you’ve looked away for several seconds the course is paused. This apparently forces you to pay attention so that you can finish the assignment. One wonders how long it will be before computers are teaching children and adopting a similar attention mechanism.

The contradictions and double-speak that are on display from the Verichip advocates is quite a show. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave a 2002 ruling that that: “VeriChip is not a regulated device with regard to its security, financial, personal identification/safety applications … VeriChip’s healthcare information applications are subject to regulation by the FDA in the United States.’ As author and journalist Uri Dowbenko mentions: “It’s OK if the VeriChip tracks your credit report history, but not OK if it’s used to inform doctors you’re diabetic? This will undoubtedly be used as an argument to justify the VeriChip as a so-called ‘medical device’ in the future.” [16]

verichipmicrochip / verichip ™

The stages which the RFID tags have followed have moved through: pets = cattle = criminals = military = business workers towards the longer more drawn out process of finally chipping the mass population. Biometric passports, national ID cards and then gracefully having your palm over the supermarket scanner will make things so easy! So easy in fact, that perception management will tell you the next logical step in this New World of SMART design is to be “SMART” yourself and integrate your body into the system, and then you will be “free.” Notwithstanding the potency of such an illusion, there is another problem. Verichip and other companies love to tell us about the medical and community benefits of tagging which include the monitoring of heart troubles, children safety, pet protection and the like, what of the health issues related to RFID tags?

In 2007 the Verichip Corporation and other related companies were dealt a severe blow to their credibility when Katherine Albrecht’s CASPIAN consumer pressure group released a 48-page paper entitled “Microchip-Induced Tumors in Laboratory Rodents and Dogs: A Review of the Literature 1990–2006”. Based on a dense review of academic research on the subject, the causal link between implanted radio-frequency (RFID) microchip transponders and cancer in laboratory rodents and dogs could not be clearer. Dr. Robert Benezra, head of the Cancer Biology Genetics Program at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Centre in New York, said: “There’s no way in the world, having read this information, that I would have one of those chips implanted in my skin, or in one of my family members.” Given the preliminary animal data it looks to me that there is definitely cause for concern.” [17]

CEO and Chairman of Verichip Corporation Scott R. Silverman played his part in a disinformation campaign launched by RFID companies in response to the findings. Silverman is quoted in a Time article as saying that in the “… second study, conducted in France in 2006, two years after VeriChip’s FDA application was approved, found that while 4 per cent of the 1,260 mice in the study developed tumors, none of them were malignant.” [18]The truth is a little different. The tumours were indeed malignant sarcomas and most of the animals in question died prematurely as a result of the microchip-associated tumours. Destron Fearing, makers of the HomeAgain pet implant came in a close second when they ignored a finding of fibrosarcoma – a highly lethal cancer – as “benign” in a recent report. Katherine Albrecht stated: “Either VeriChip and the makers of HomeAgain actually don’t understand the difference between a benign fibroma and a malignant fibrosarcoma, or they’re deliberately lying to the public. Either way, it’s clear they can’t be trusted. We hope our new report will set the record straight.” [19]

Despite this, Silverman was correct in that overall, the incidences of cancer in dogs after over 10 million injections is relatively small, which means that this scare is not enough to put off either the medical establishment, security companies and the potential benefits to consumers in a variety of social situations.

russo-nick-rockefellerAaron Russo (left) and Nicholas Rockefeller

“The goal is to get everyone in this world chipped with this RFID chip and have all money and information be on these chips. And if anyone wants to protest what we do or violate what we want, we just turn off their chip.”

From Russo’s film: America: Freedom to Fascism


The above quote is lifted from the late Hollywood producer and film-maker Aaron Russo’s now classic America: Freedom to Fascism (2006) in which he details a conversation he had with also now deceased California Attorney Nicholas Rockefeller. Russo, who was frequently around the elite and their antics and was rather bemused by their beliefs asked Rockefeller:  “… what’s the point of all this,” …“you have all the money in the world you need, you have all the power you need, what’s the point, what’s the end goal?” The answer was the above quote. Does it sound too hackneyed and outrageous? Watch the film to discover more of Russo’s discoveries. Made almost ten years ago, one realises what a warning this film truly was.

This brings us back to the National Security State; the various World State advocates that would like to see the global population “culled” and the war on terror tool that has allowed a technocratic Police State infrastructure to rise up virtually unopposed. When SMART, surveillance society arrives on the back of a few more mini-911-type scenarios, there may come a stage where, if you want to eat, you must acquire a chip. It’s a logical step that once mass acceptance of RFID tagging has gradually taken place anyone that is deemed a “terrorist”, “subversive” or merely suspiciously expressing a “radical” opinion on Facebook can be easily tracked and controlled. (See Police State Amerika I: Facebook Thought Police). The next step from targeting dissidents is the expansion of powers to include a wide range of groups or organisations that come under the vague and nebulous definitions of terrorism. Everything that doesn’t fit into that SMART design will be well … switched off.

Technocracy is essential to the smooth running of the Elite-collectivist model and as we have seen so far in this series, the younger generations are the primary targets for social engineering. With a sizable marketing drive underway headed by the Verichip slogan: “Get chipped,” RFID tags are being marketed as chic and trendy, cool and desirable. If the recent surge in tattoos is anything to go by, the microchip might be the next fashion statement for those too young (or programmed) to have awareness of the implications.

Despite loud mutterings of discontent in the US and the European Union the advances in SMART tech will not be going away. Ideologically driven technology and enormous amounts of money to be made will mean that regulations are unlikely to be enforced. The health hazards of mobile phone use and GMOs are well known but we still use them because society itself is being redesigned to make life unlivable without them. It seems we are no longer human beings but living bar-codes programmed to proffer feedback loops of data in a vast auto-matrix of supply and demand. It should come as no surprise that corporations and their governments are seeking ways to extract more profits from the New Technological Order that is rising up from the shopping mall.

See also: They’re Spending Billions to Chip Our Brains


Notes

[1] ‘EU plans to fit all cars with speed limiters’ By Claire Carter, The Telegraph, Sep 2013.
[2] ‘Biometrics Help Teachers Track Students’ Every Move’ By Sheila Dharmarajan, The Future Is Now,September 17, 2013.
[3] aimglobal.org
[4] http://www.privacyrights.org/
[5] ‘Seen At 11: Getting Personal – Your Pulse Could Be Your New Password’ Pin Numbers, Credit Cards, And Passwords Could Soon Be A Thing Of The Past, CBS News, September 16, 2013.
[6]‘Operation of World’s Smallest Class Noncontact RFID Powder IC Chip Successfully Tested’ hitachi.com 2008/2009 Research & Development paper: http://www.hitachi.com/rev/archive/2008/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2008/07/24/r2008_technology_rd.pdf
[7] ‘RFID ‘Powder’ – World’s Smallest RFID Tag’ by Bill Christensen, technovelgy.com February 14, 2007.
[8] IBM and the Holocaust: The Strategic Alliance between Nazi Germany and America’s Most Powerful Corporation. By Edwin Black, Second paperback edition. Washington, DC: Dialog Press, 2009; (introduction).
[9] ‘How RFID Tags Could Be Used to Track Unsuspecting People’ by Katherine Albrecht, Scientific American, August 21, 2008.
[10] Animal Tags for People? by David E. Gumpert, Business Week, January 11, 2007.
[11] ‘Conclusions from the French pilot projects for the use of RFID for ruminants’ by the Institut de l’élevage-France Louise Marguin, Marion Dang. June 14, 2012. | http://www.smartagrimatics.eu/Portals/66/Smartpercent20AgriMaticspercent205_3_RFID_Paris_2012-MD.pdf
[12] ‘Thousands of Mexicans Implanting Tracking Devices- But experts say they are not likely to work’By Evann Gastaldo, newser.com, Aug 22, 2011.
[13] ‘positiveID Corporation Receives VeriChip Order for Use With Israeli Military’ MarketWatch, October 11, 2011.
[12] ‘The IBM 2020 Neural Implant’ The Phoenix Project, Dr. Al Overholt, quoting from The California Sun, by Herb Dorsey, Feb. 1997.
[14] ‘Schools add RFID tagging to student IDs’ RFID News / CR80 News June 18 2012.
[15] ‘VeriChip: RFID Microchip Implants for Humans’ by Uri Dowbenko, conspiracyplanet.com
[16] ‘Microchip-Induced Tumors in Laboratory Rodents and Dogs: A Review of the Literature 1990–2006’ by Katherine Albrecht, Ed.D. November 19, 2007.
[17] ‘Are Microchip Tags Safe?’ By Siobhan Morrissey Time Magazine, http://www.time.com, Oct. 18, 2007.
[18] ‘CASPIAN Releases Microchip Cancer Report’ antichips.com November 19 2007.
[19] op.cit Albrecht