It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ObamaCare Subjects Nearly Every Phone and Computer to Government Control

page: 4
29
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 10:43 AM
link   
THIS IS SOO OLD NEWS...
Everyone's calls have been traced since 911....in one place....one system.....I know personal that have been there......they only track with a certain code alert that is measured...so any one of you that think what you talk about on the phone is being recorded...not to worry, your conversation is not being coded....I see nothing wrong with it, it's to help weed out the real threats....




posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by URFRIENDMO
THIS IS SOO OLD NEWS...
Everyone's calls have been traced since 911....in one place....one system.....I know personal that have been there......they only track with a certain code alert that is measured...so any one of you that think what you talk about on the phone is being recorded...not to worry, your conversation is not being coded....I see nothing wrong with it, it's to help weed out the real threats....


Huh?

Did you read any of the posts or article?



posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Like Pelosi said... "we have to pass it to see what's in it" Our only hope is that individual state legislatures and Governors grow a pair and nullify this entire nightmare. Romney won't do it.



posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
this is pathetic.



posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


beezzer,
Thanks for posting this information.
I feel there is an immense amount of control going on, and also coming upon us. Cracking down on us, spying and lettig us know about it.
I do feel trying to press right medical information instead of online crap, is alright. But do not feel thats the problem here.
I feel the problem here is lack of privacy and no shortness of power.
Thanks for the share!



posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Nawww, LE is in it for the hate, not the information gained. Of course he does all his homework and knows everything. That's why he can sit in judgement.


I did enough homework to see your entire OP is made up. What else do I need? No one is taking over my phone or my computer as you have posted. None of that is going to happen. Nothing you posted demonstrates that is going to happen. Yet you claim it is.

What more homework do I need to know?
You are the one posting a lie and then thanking other people for educating you on it.

Tell me what exactly am I supposed to be so worried about from this news? Seeing as how I use 0 medical apps. What do I have to worry about? Any of what the OP says? Any of it? I am all ears

edit on 13-3-2012 by LErickson because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2012 @ 11:10 PM
link   
I think the motive for this might actually be to further control the internet. So far we have successfully held back the mammoth flood of government censorship over the internet, but now this administration is trying to cut out the source of it all, our computers. If the government can take down our ability to use our personal machines as we desire then the internet itself is as good as dealt with.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Th issue, that so many are over-looking is the ever increasing encroachment of government into any and every aspect of our lives. Through th media we use, to health issues, to government creating an environment that would necesitate more government involvement.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 
You want to make a case for reulation? Bully for you. Go for it.

But to put into a healthcare package, to hide it in a healthcare package, is disingenuous at best, and damned sneaky and crooked at worst.

Government regulation, government oversight over all means of wireless communications.

Lets hear your case for it!



OK...here you go...ready. Here's the case on why "regulation" is not, in and of itself, inherently "bad".

A TRULY free market is one in which there is ZERO interference from any governmental, political, regulatory, or legal body.

....which sounds great until you realize that there are no property laws anymore. Any thug with a gun can murder your whole family and steal your personal property without fear of societal recourse, so long as they incorporate their gang and the theft is a profit center for them.

So...now that we have that out of the way, perhaps we can move forward.

"Regulation" of business is necessary. It's in the Constitution and every civilization on Earth has "regulated" their economies. Even in primitive tribal societies there is some sort of tribal tradition which dictates who gets the best cuts of meat and whatnot.

Therefore...why don't we just focus on how to "regulate" responsibly, efficiently, and in a manner that does not infringe upon The Bill of Rights instead of just assuming that "all regulation is bad".
edit on 14-3-2012 by milominderbinder because: minor grammatical error



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
Th issue, that so many are over-looking is the ever increasing encroachment of government into any and every aspect of our lives. Through th media we use, to health issues, to government creating an environment that would necesitate more government involvement.


So...how about we add an Amendment to the Constitution which guarantees a citizens Right to Privacy (of data, being spied on, surveillance, storing of biometric data and/or genetic material, tracking of movements, and implanting of chips) instead of whining about it and allowing the manufacturer of your pacemaker to just go ahead and use whatever sort of crazy math they want to?

The fact is that there is a perfectly adequate framework already in place to address the preservation of quantum leaps in technology while still maintaining the intent of the Bill of Rights. Hell...maybe we should also look to specify that "Freedom of the Press" includes ALL forms of information dissemination and that "Freedom of Travel" means by any and all conventional modes of travel without getting a rectal exam from the TSA. Sorry guys...but I just don't think "you could walk" is really a justifiable reason.

However...we get so caught up in the ideology, rhetoric, dogma, and absolutism of all that we while we are bickering amongst ourselves we have allowed even the original Bill of Rights to be subverted by the NDAA and the Patriot Act before it.

...then we totally lose our minds about a non-regulatory memo which essentially tells software developers that it's a best practice to not have their heads up their asses and to use the same guidelines on already-regulated equipment for new software controls on portable computing devices.

Again...this thing is about the ONLY logical, rational, and fair thing the Obama Administration has done to date.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by thov420
reply to post by beezzer
 


It doesn't demand anything.

It says in the guidance itself its only recommendations and suggestions at this point.


Okay. *whew* it just suggests government oversight over every wireless/wired device that is associated with medical applications!

I suppose that when the government "suggests" that they gain oversight and full regulatory powers it wouldn't grow the government in any way, nor would it increase their powers over tools that we all use every day.

Might I "suggest" to the government that they stick to wars, building roads, and delivering the mail. I can do without their "suggestions", their oversight, their regulations, their closed fist around my throat!


The Constitution specifically states that the Federal Government has sole authority over the systems of weights and measures. Given that all medical apps are excluded save for those which rely on computational algorithms to measure things such as (but not limited to) dosages, lab values, EEG's, ECG's, and various types of diagnostic scans it would seem that the government is ACTUALLY doing what it is supposed to do....perhaps for the first time this year.

Ironically...the Government doesn't deliver your mail. The United States Post Office is a private corporation much like the Federal Reserve.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by beezzer
 



Why not let the free market regulate it?




And how do you propose we do that...just wait and watch where people are dying the most and then don't go to hospitals that are using that software???

The free market is concerned with profit...not safety...and healthcare isn't an industry we can just wait and let the "free market" decide which software/medical devices aren't killing people so we can make our decision.



Have a bad device, a bad product? Well guess what?! The market will let that product die because people won't buy it. (Because it is a bad product)


And how do we measure a "bad" medical device???

Exactly...we just keep a body count.


If this is new regulation that the Obma plan is trying to implement, then it would stand to reason that there isn't current government regulation.
Hence the title of the propoal

Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff - Mobile Medical Applications

www.fda.gov...

So where are the stacks of bodies? Where are the long lines of dead and dying bodies as evidence for this "proposal"?

There is none. Yet just for an imaginary "crisis" we now are looking at a new department, a new extension of the government. More oversight, more regulation, more rules, more paperwork (to justify governmnt involvement).
edit on 12-3-2012 by beezzer because: (no reason given)


Wow. You really do not understand programming, mathematics, chip architecture, or numerical control devices.

Seriously...take a time out here. You don't understand the document you read nor the field to which it applies.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by sageofmonticello
reply to post by Ghost375
 





Know how many idiots would think they have good b.p. when they don't because of a faulty app?


I respect your opinion though I disagree with it strongly. I just wanted to quote your text and raise a point. I feel like what you said above is the typical government thought pattern.

They think we are too stupid to realize a $2 piece of software on a smart phone can't replace a visit to the doctors office. I feel it is unrealistic to believe that. Though for the sake of argument, lets believe that is actually true and people are truly too dumb to know any better.

In that case what would be more dangerous?

Having it known that anything health related that is not coming out of your doctors mouth could be unsafe, incorrect or inaccurate so you better do your own research and take responsibility for your own health and risk taking.

or

Assuming that everything health related that is not coming out of your doctors mouth is assumed safe, correct and accurate because it has been FDA reviewed so there is no need to do your own research or take any responsibility for your own health.

I realize it may not be that black and white but before you come to your conclusion, please take note of the amount of drugs that are approved and then later unapproved by the FDA and the amount of people who die each year by simply taking prescription drugs as instructed or using a health device as intended.

It is clear the FDA is fallible yet it is perceived that once something gains FDA approval that it is now safe for use. So what is safer? Assuming everything could be dangerous so you better be informed or assuming nothing approved by the FDA is dangerous so there is no reason to worry?

Just my thoughts, the questions are rhetorical unless you would like to discuss it further. Just some food for thought I guess.


edit on 12-3-2012 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)


Actually...in many cases a FREE app can replace a visit to the doctors office. Depending, of course, on the ailment at hand.

Besides...know any diabetics that go to the doctor a couple of times each day to check their blood sugar? What about people on pacemakers...do they tie a doctor around their waist and take them everywhere?

In fairness, what makes even more sense that FDA approval would be FDA approval ALONG WITH open publication of the algorithms, mathematical formulas, chip architectures, source code, etc so that theoretically speaking individuals could check these things out for themselves.

The argument against this is usually that less than 2 or 3 % of the country would even be able to comprehend the material...much less bother to ever look it up. However...I am a proponent of the Openness of Large Systems and the Privacy of Small, so irrespective of the additional costs I would prefer to have such things made public and freely available for download on the internet.

Those would be tax dollars well spent for a change.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 





Besides...know any diabetics that go to the doctor a couple of times each day to check their blood sugar? What about people on pacemakers...do they tie a doctor around their waist and take them everywhere?


Thanks for your response, I agree with most of what you said but am a little confused how you can jump from phone software to a pacemaker or a blood sugar monitor.

I think you sort of missed what I was saying. I was not trying to make the point that people have to go see a doctor for every health instance only that people would not confuse a piece of software on a phone for replacing a doctors visit as they are two very different things.

The whole point of my post was that FDA approval makes people feel like something is safe when in many cases it may not be. I am not and was not advocating that home technology can't replace some things that are traditionally done by a doctor.

I have yet to see a smartphone app that takes a sample of blood and checks the level of sugar or a smartphone app that attaches to your heart and monitors and helps control your heartbeat.

You are talking about specialized equipment, one that is recommended by a doctor for diabetes patients and one that requires surgery to install onto your heart.

I am talking about a program you download onto a piece of equipment not meant to do health related tasks. I don't think anyone will be confusing their smart phone for a pacemaker or a blood glucose monitor anytime soon.

edit on 14-3-2012 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by sageofmonticello
reply to post by milominderbinder
 





Besides...know any diabetics that go to the doctor a couple of times each day to check their blood sugar? What about people on pacemakers...do they tie a doctor around their waist and take them everywhere?


Thanks for your response, I agree with most of what you said but am a little confused how you can jump from phone software to a pacemaker or a blood sugar monitor.

I think you sort of missed what I was saying. I was not trying to make the point that people have to go see a doctor for every health instance only that people would not confuse a piece of software on a phone for replacing a doctors visit as they are two very different things.

The whole point of my post was that FDA approval makes people feel like something is safe when in many cases it may not be. I am not and was not advocating that home technology can't replace some things that are traditionally done by a doctor.

I have yet to see a smartphone app that takes a sample of blood and checks the level of sugar or a smartphone app that attaches to your heart and monitors and helps control your heartbeat.

You are talking about specialized equipment, one that is recommended by a doctor for diabetes patients and one that requires surgery to install onto your heart.

I am talking about a program you download onto a piece of equipment not meant to do health related tasks. I don't think anyone will be confusing their smart phone for a pacemaker or a blood glucose monitor anytime soon.

edit on 14-3-2012 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)


You are dead wrong. It's well underway.

Here is an iOS blood glucose meter. www.ibgstar.us...
Here is an iOS blood Pressure cuff. www.withings.com...
iOS ECG readings. alivecor.com...
iOS Oximeter. www.phoneoximeter.org...
iOS ultrasound machine www.mobisante.com...

...and THOUSANDS more on the way. The old iPad 2 had the same computational power as a Cray II supercomputer did in 1996. The future of medical care is the future of mobile processing and sensors.

Read the copy of the draft. Those are specifically the examples of apps covered under it. Only those which take measurements/readings, control other medical devices, perform diagnostic calculations, and have diagnostic scans reviewed on them. It excludes the common "consumer" types of medical apps such as those for keeping track of health records, billing, basic health & wellness tracking, textbooks, etc.

All this does is extend the current regulatory practices on medical devices to the mobile operating system world. Even if the draft turns into regulation or law, it will only make sure that the algorithms used to measure your blood pressure are the same on phone as they would be on hospital equipment. An error is source code could give you a WILDLY different reading simply from Sh$#@ty coding.

Likewise your Doc can use any computer monitor in the world to check his email. However, monitors which are used to view diagnostic scans like MRI's must fit into certain standards to ensure that Doctor A sees the same thing as Doctor B. Look at the big wall of TV's at Best Buy sometime...there is a huge difference in sharpness, brightness, color saturation, and aspect ratio. No problem for watching reality shows on...but let's hope one Dr.'s red colored tumor isn't showing up as light purple on the surgeons, huh?

Likewise...if the radiologist uses a 16:10 aspect ratio and the surgeon I ultimately choose at a different hospital is using a 16:9...I sure as hell hope the image was encoded as aspect-ratio neutral anamorphic or it's going to take him two or three tries to get that incision in the right spot.

Algorithms drive all of this. If everybody just does whatever they hell they want you will have to find a doctor who uses identical equipment from start to finish for a second opinion. It would be chaos.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 
As much as you espouse government control, government regulation, government intervention into medical apps, I just can't.

I can honestly imagine that there is an office somewhere in DC where a bunch of pols sit around and think up ways to raise taxes, grow government, and increase their power and influence.

You'd fit in quite well.

I'd be a pain in the butt.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by milominderbinder
 
As much as you espouse government control, government regulation, government intervention into medical apps, I just can't.

I can honestly imagine that there is an office somewhere in DC where a bunch of pols sit around and think up ways to raise taxes, grow government, and increase their power and influence.

You'd fit in quite well.

I'd be a pain in the butt.



You misunderstand. I'm TERRIFIED of the big brother police-state that we are turning into. However, if we are to truly be free, we must take the time to understand the issues. There is a very, very, good and positive way that this could be implemented...and a very dark one.

However, just standing against "government control" without any deeper thought or understanding is the same as surrendering all control. REMEMBER: WE...YOU AND I, are SUPPOSED to BE "THE GOVERNMENT"!!

This certainly hasn't been true in many, many years...but by pushing "government" out of things you also push YOURSELF out of things. The correct answer isn't to just close our eyes and hope that corporations be fair and responsible, because our government is not...THE ANSWER IS TO FIX THE GOVERNMENT so that they do not destroy everything they touch.

As this is proposed now...it's the programming equivalent of basic traffic laws. Imagine if everyone with a Ford car drove on the right hand side of the road and everyone with a Chevy drove on the left just because the owners manual told them so and Nissans didn't have any instructions at all. It would be a damn disaster.

There ARE certain fundamental things which a society must agree upon in order to function. Imagine if every electronics supplier used a different format for an electrical cord? NOTHING WOULD WORK!!! Governmental regulation brought you the 110 and 220 outlet.

Again...the trick is in making sure that this governing body is not only EFFICIENT...but also BENEVOLENT AND FAIR.

For that to happen....we need to overhaul our system of government.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


Nope, I am not dead wrong. Honestly, we are just simply having two different conversations. I feel like, I am talking about the number one then you are replying to me that you can prove Z is the best letter in the alphabet?

Your reply simply shows me that you are completely misunderstanding what I am talking about. Or rather, what I am trying to communicate.

I have already told you that



I am not and was not advocating that home technology can't replace some things that are traditionally done by a doctor.


Your reply to that is (paraphrasing here) Look, see home technology can replace some things that are traditionally done by a doctor!

I think the problem we are having is semantic. You are reading meanings into my words that I haven't intended. My guess is that we simply have a problem communicating. I am not sure how I am being unclear and I am even less clear about how to progress the conversation further without this continuing.


edit on 14-3-2012 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by sageofmonticello
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


Nope, I am not dead wrong. Honestly, we are just simply having two different conversations. I feel like, I am talking about the number one then you are replying to me that you can prove Z is the best letter in the alphabet?

Your reply simply shows me that you are completely misunderstanding what I am talking about. Or rather, what I am trying to communicate.

I have already told you that



I am not and was not advocating that home technology can't replace some things that are traditionally done by a doctor.


Your reply to that is (paraphrasing here) Look, see home technology can replace some things that are traditionally done by a doctor!

I think the problem we are having is semantic. You are reading meanings into my words that I haven't intended. My guess is that we simply have a problem communicating. I am not sure how I am being unclear and I am even less clear about how to progress the conversation further without this continuing.


edit on 14-3-2012 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)


Sorry...I only meant you were "dead wrong" about the blood sugar testing and the role mobile apps controlling other medical devices, etc. Those things are already here and will be increasing exponentially. Moore's Law is truly mind boggling....but here we are.

If you wear glasses, does your eye doctor have you look into one of those machines that has a picture of a house or something which goes into and out of focus? They've been out for about 10 years or so. What it's doing is essentially measuring your pupil's and it is "smart" enough to know when the picture you are looking at is crisp and clear based upon the movements of your eyes. From these measurements it generates a pretty good baseline prescription. From that point your eye doctor then only has to "fine tune" the prescription with you in the chair.

Realistically speaking...this is something that can EASILY be done with a smartphone app today if a set of goggles were developed which essentially had the "viewfinder" part of that device embedded into it. The REAL challenge of the computational power and whatnot has been there for at least 2 years already. Factor in one or two generations of improved optical sensors to take measurements of your eyeball as it focuses and you have essentially rendered the traditional optometrist appointment almost wholly unnecessary.

In short order it will become about a 5 minute appointment. The Doc will pretty much only have to look into your eyes to make sure there isn't any sign of disease or degeneration, ask you if you have any concerns (sorta like a pharmacist does), and you are on your way.

So...if this is most assuredly going to be the near future (remember...technology ACCELERATES. The amount of change from 1990-2000 was had FAR less impact than the change from 2000-2010, and so on) shouldn't we make sure that all apps for making eyeglass prescriptions are regulated in the same way that the gigantic swinging arm of lenses in the Optometrists office is right now? If for no other reason than to provide consistent results over time?

Again...there COULD be a very dark side to this if managed poorly. But if not managed at all...it will devolve into chaos.

Thus with ALL things regulatory in nature we come to the question of "How can the government address the needs of the people in the face of rapid technological development responsibly, fairly, and with benevolence?"

This is really the central question of our age. We have to come up with a new paradigm that allows us to do these things with a minimal risk of abuse.

My point is that regulation is in and of itself not inherently "bad"...even if the manner in which we implement and execute regulation usually is.



posted on Jun, 10 2012 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Its not just soda bans. I just took a family member to the ER yesterday for pain in left kidney. The first thing they did was do a suicide assessment. Because he is single, over 50 and a man he was listed as moderate suicide risk. Obama-care is also going to be used to take away peoples ability to buy guns. The link below is to the paper I grabbed on our way out of hospital as we told them to go do something not nice to their self. We had to drive 50 miles to a hospital with a little more common sense.This administration is the most evil in history! Obama-care will be used as a big stick against US Citizens.


i484.photobucket.com...


I had trouble posting image but I did manage a link. I can understand asking the suicidal question at the hospital but to use gender, age, and marital status to try and pad the score stinks to high heaven. This could be used to add lots of gun owners to the ban list. According to this paper if your are single, over 50, male,and drink or smoke you are at greater than average risk of committing suicide.Just for being a male over 50 and single they gave my family member a score of 5. Imagine if the other items were added in say more than a couple traumas or losses, some depression (be honest if you are human you have been depressed at some time),drinking mild or moderate,it would easily shoot you up above the 12 point mark. At the bottom of the paper it says "SCORES OVER 12" "PLACE PATIENT ON SUICIDE PRECAUTIONS". In case your wondering, that's probably when they put you in a room that's locked and make arrangements for your transfer to mental health facility. And all of this just cause you go to hospital for a kidney stone.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join