"What do these 2 items have in common," you may ask. Think 1984 by George Orwell. If you haven't read that book yet, you should. Animal Farm is another good one from George Orwell. I read both of these many years ago and don't remember the details but I do remember the "big idea."
"2020 Vision" invited us to "time-travel forward 10 years and look back at a decade of astonishing change." OK, I'm with them so far. Talk about robot butlers, microbes that can help digest food and extract calories more efficiently so we all can lose weight effortlessly, making downtown more suburbia-like, a body parts store (kind of), and other interesting (or not) stuff. Among all these items was a little jewel that made me really really think - about 1984.
"Your Home is Your Helper": This section of the article talks about the house of the future being able to know and respond to your desires with, for instance, TVs that determine your favorite programs and remind you to watch. We pretty much have that today in the form of DVRs. And, I like those. The article also talked about the possibilities of "Technological Watchdogs" that could keep an eye on the ill or elderly actually being able to sense a change in gait or a fall through special carpeting, for instance. The article goes on to talk about the possibility of these "Technological Watchdogs" being able to see how often you use your appliances and (I don't lie) monitor how many times you use your bathroom.
Think back to the discovery of nuclear energy for a minute. When we use nuclear energy to do peaceful, helpful things, it is excellent. But, when we use it to build destructive things like bombs, those who directly experience its effects don't think it's so excellent. So, it would be with these "Technological Watchdogs."
If these "Technological Watchdogs" can be "helpful" monitors, they can also be the means for government to keep an eye on and ultimately "control" the people - think 1984.
The "no-fly" list article confirmed what I already thought about the full body scanners now installed or being installed at many airports. This article is advocating that anyone flying over the Thanksgiving holiday opt out of having the new "full-body, nude-image scanners." The article describes how some of the images are being used (for example, in one country the screeners amuse themselves by looking at the images of nude women). If I understand correctly, if you don't want to be full-body scanned, you can opt for a pat down. But, from what this article says, it sounds like that's not a very good alternative since the pat downs are now, in many cases, more like gropings. In either event, one would likely feel violated. In addition, it seems you are subjected to a dose of radiation if you opt for the full-body scan.
It seems there may also be 4th Amendment issues as well. From the article:
In a WND column, Faith2Action chief Janet Porter warned the video strip-searches are a banana peel on a slick slope.
"Voyeuristic equipment has been deployed at airports around the nation that more than violates your privacy – it violates the Constitution as well as child pornography and obscenity laws," she warned. "While the Fourth Amendment doesn't specifically mention 'electronic' strip searches, here's what it does say:
Is full-body scanning good or bad? Is it really for our safety or is it just one more case of the government taking more and more control? I don't have an answer to those questions. You can read the article here if you choose.
These two items coming together as they did to my house led me to think about another issue that is of concern: Government-Mandated Electronic Health Records. My doctor puts his patient records on a computer and I get a diskette with all the test reports, diagnoses, etc. on it in case I need them when I'm on a trip or whatever. But, the federal government doesn't have access to them. With the new Government-Mandated Electronic Health Records, the federal government will have access to our health information. Is that a good thing? I don't know but I don't think so. I think only my doctor(s) and I should have access to my medical information.
Even if we might think the government has a good reason to have access to our medical records, I get really suspicious when they say you have to report certain things but not others. I get even more suspicious when the things they want to see vs. the things they don't need to see don't make any sense to me. From the article "HHS: Government-Mandated Electronic Health Records Need 'NOT' Include Cancer Diagnoses--As Opposed to Obesity Ratings" by Matt Cover:
Hmmm . . . So, the government doesn't care if you have cancer or HIV/AIDS or an abortion but they do care if you are overweight? Sounds like more government control coming our way. Doesn't it? You can read the article in full here.
I think you know where I stand on these things now! Where do you stand?
Oh, on a happy note: from the 2020 Vision article, Jim Osborn, executive director of the Quality of Life Technology Center at Carnegie Mellon University said they "found out recently that people prefer robots that apologize when they make a mistake."
Blessings,
Mary
Even if we might think the government has a good reason to have access to our medical records, I get really suspicious when they say you have to report certain things but not others. I get even more suspicious when the things they want to see vs. the things they don't need to see don't make any sense to me. From the article "HHS: Government-Mandated Electronic Health Records Need 'NOT' Include Cancer Diagnoses--As Opposed to Obesity Ratings" by Matt Cover:
HHS's EHR regulations say that every EHR system must, “Calculate body mass index. Automatically calculate and display body mass index (BMI) based on a patient’s height and weight.”
A cancer diagnosis is not the only significant health event that may be omitted from a person's EHR. HHS also says it is not mandating that health-care providers include an abortion or a diagnosis of HIV/AIDS on a person's EHR. Hmmm . . . So, the government doesn't care if you have cancer or HIV/AIDS or an abortion but they do care if you are overweight? Sounds like more government control coming our way. Doesn't it? You can read the article in full here.
I think you know where I stand on these things now! Where do you stand?
Oh, on a happy note: from the 2020 Vision article, Jim Osborn, executive director of the Quality of Life Technology Center at Carnegie Mellon University said they "found out recently that people prefer robots that apologize when they make a mistake."
Blessings,
Mary
No comments:
Post a Comment