I’m interested in a chip/ phone app combination where the phone checks that the implanted chip is close by and allows for geotracking. This would ensure the person is actually with their phone. It could also sound an alert if the person forgets their phone or if the phone is taken from them. Surely this is technically possible but I have not found any product yet.
It is not possible. Read range on implants is a couple centimeters at best.
Smart watches already alert when you wander too far away from your phone. Get a smart watch.
5 Likes
Well maybe if you implanted a module in a spot on your arm where you can place a sports band and then place your phone in the sports band over the implant.
Then you wrote the app in such a way it would go active, couple, read, verify then deactivate the reader.
Then put that in a timer.
(Minus the forgot my phone feature)
1 Like
Actually, you could alert if the job can’t find the chip (or incorrect chip). Then the phone could just play an alarm sound at full volume. The only thing I can think of that being useful would be if it fell out of the sports band. But I’m hoping that feeling it fall would be more noticeable. Additionally, usually people run with music and their headphones would glitch and pop and eventually disconnect when you go out of range.
While it is technically possible, it isn’t really practical for lost devices.
However, the chip verification could be practical. Say you have N subjects that have N modules and you have N phones and want to ensure that the correct phone is attached to the correct subject.
E.g. dedicated racing with chip verification or something like that? That way the app can verify it is really you doing the run. Like I can imagine a Strava verification system via implanted module id etc .. but that implies we have a global module registry and it becomes our SSN at that point. We haven’t made it that far into the future yet lol
1 Like
Thank you. The main purpose is to ensure the person I’m geo tracking is indeed with the phone.
why does this sound so ominous? is “the person you’re tracking” aware you are tracking them or are you tracking people without their knowledge or against their will? what’s the situation here?
also, you can never be sure since GPS coordinates can be spoofed on phones using software on the phone, or with external radio gear.
7 Likes
I find it hard to conceive you could implant a chip in someone without their knowledge. And it would be difficult to force someone to keep a phone near them if you are not in the vicinity.
So yes, the person is well aware.
Woman implanted against her will with a “tracker” device
https://www.marketplace.org/story/2016/03/02/health-care-takes-fight-against-trafficking
Health care takes on the fight against trafficking.pdf (1.8 MB)
To clarify, it’s not a tracking device
The chip found in the woman in the story above is not a “tracking” device.. it is an RFID device, an identification device, which has no ability to “track” anyone. The general public’s ignorance about what such technologies are actually capable of, and what they are not capable of, was the actual weapon used against this woman. She was injected with a common pet ID implant and told she could now be tracked. The inability for the common public to understand that subdermal geolocating devices are “not a thing”, and why, turns this ignorance into the weapon itself.
4 Likes
Sounds ominous indeed.
Even if aware of it, I find it ominous whenever my software that I’m using on my device insists upon ensuring that I’m playing by its rules. I don’t know your specific use case, but here’s my general reaction to that kind of thing:
If it’s a game, sure, maybe. Games are an interesting set of limitations. Especially if it’s multiplayer. (Though I still won’t install DRM, and I still enjoy mods and consensual exploits on the side.)
If it’s not a game, I would be hesitant to use anything that forcibly limits me. Utilities should add functionality, not remove it. If there’s some good reason that this software is most useful to me if I only activate the app’s function when the device is actually on me, then I will only activate the app’s function when the device is actually on me. If this rule is not useful to me, then I question why the software ought to be on my device at all.
Again, don’t know the use case, but those are my thoughts in general. Also, depending on the type of implant, they could just clone the card to a chip that moves with the device and not the person.
1 Like
The use case is a bit of a non-issue since there doesn’t seem to be any technical solution.
But if you must know, it’s a situation of consensual kink Dom/sub play.
1 Like
Why not go the “traditional” route and get an ankle monitor or custom build a “chastity collar” with gps?
1 Like
Subcutaneous gets more into the head space.
Maybe you could make an ankle monitor like device that is a powered reader, set a scan interval so it checks every minute that there is a chip, and sends an alarm if it doesnt read? Then youd have an implanted chip under it.
Now that im thinking about it, that would be amazing in a collar, and it could sound an alarm if the collar is removed. But there are definitely easier and cheaper ways to do that as well.
4 Likes
There was literally a company that made exactly that but straight up lied and said the chip was a “gps tracker”. Instantly out of business of course. I they were marketing it for animals but clearly the gps, battery, and cellular gprs modem were all in the collar. Companies that simply skipped the chip part obviously won. Smaller batteries, less finicky, and we’ll, not straight up lies as a marketing strategy.
3 Likes
I mean… I’ve never understood that kind of thing either. When I wanna sub, I sub because I wanna, but having a device that forces me makes it no longer consensual. Consensual slavery is only consensual so long as it ends the moment consent is withdrawn. Whatever floats your goat, I guess. But I would be worried about it falling into the hands of non-consensual slavers.