AND another thing…

It struck me tonight that biometric surveillance has the possibility of becoming incredibly stringent (well… even more so) with the increasing enrolment into biobanks. That is, without wanting to be just straight-out conspiracy-alarmist, how long do you think it will be before these kinds of innovations (to ‘counter criminals’ and enforce the national borders I discussed in the last post etc) come to rely on the biobanks’ information? And as such, it seems likely to me that the whole ‘social contract’ spectre that was raised in relation to Iceland’s biobank (when compulsory enrolment was a possibility but rejected) will become solid and be given form. We already see hints in that direction with the national identity card. Though the way that that conversation has taken place in Australia (in which the plan seems to be to not make it compulsory, but make access to services like Medicare (and thus some free healthcare) dependent upon it) could suggest that wealth would play into this issue as well.

Sigh… sorry… sleep!