Why did the UFP never came up with subdermal locator beacons

[Mike DiCenso]

The Federation Starfleet does have and does use that. It's more commonly refered to as the subcutaneous transponder. and have had the technology since at least the middle 2260's.
-Mike

[Mr. Oragahn]

And those, who have such devices implanted can always be sure, that the potential to monitor them 24/7 is never abused because ... ?

Because the US government is not interested in monitoring their private lives not to mention that the things only transmit a locator beacon not eavesdrop or anything like that. By your logic we should not even use the internet or even computers as they can too be easily monitored by anyone technically savvy enough. Heck your cellphone can be traced to your actual location nowadays and even be used to eavesdrop without you even knowing it.

Is a calculated risk that out weights the cons of not having one in a dangerous universe filled with hostile aliens trying to kill/capture you...

Ever heard of the RFID chip? That's a chip that has already been promoted to civilians, and is a system which has also been already implanted into certain products you may have bought, but unbeknown to you.
In our case, it is a subcutaneous beacon with some more functions.
In case you wonder, it is not SF. Sometimes, the fiction is so huge that people think it can only remain fiction... never mind that fiction has often preceded reality in uncanny ways.

Privacy.

That's the word. You need to consider the issues here when we're talking about civilians.

Something strapped or concealed in the clothes for the scope of the mission is more than enough.
Eventually, if it's strictly restricted to the military, fine.

But the UFP is not just about the military. So please make yourself clearer.

[PunkMaister]

The Federation Starfleet does have and does use that. It's more commonly refered to as the subcutaneous transponder. and have had the technology since at least the middle 2260's.
-Mike

I knew they had to exist thanks Mike!

Something strapped or concealed in the clothes for the scope of the mission is more than enough.
Eventually, if it's strictly restricted to the military, fine.

But the UFP is not just about the military. So please make yourself clearer.

Fair enough I should have said Starfleet instead...

[Who is like God arbour]

And would that not contradict your claim, that "the US government is not interested in monitoring their private lives" and that therefore there is no reason to fear, that "the potential to monitor them 24/7 is abused"?

No it does not this people work for the government, the military in the first place ...

And that's why they have no rights to information privacy and informational self-determination, even when they are in no threat to be kidnapped or are off duty or retired?

... The implants are not designed nor used for eavesdropping but to locate a missing crew member quickly ...

And that would allow to monitor their whereabouts 24/7, even if they are not missed.

... if the need arises such as that person being kidnapped or in peril.

As was said already, the sensors are already able to do that, so that the additional advantage of such devices, permanently implanted, may be very limited and can't justify the disadvantage for information privacy and informational self-determination.

[Praeothmin]

Well, Mike provided proof that they do exist, but also proof that they are not implanted 24/7 and can be removed, so this shows that Starfleet also values privacy and self-determination...

And I agree that something like this sewn into the clothing would work just as well, as we don't always see prisoners being stripped like Picard when he was interrogated by the Cardassians...

And also, in a world where just about any electronic device can be scanned and jammed, what advantage would that really give.
As soon as a Starfleet member gets scanned, the implant could be either removed or simply rendered inert, or jammed...

[PunkMaister]

Well, Mike provided proof that they do exist, but also proof that they are not implanted 24/7 and can be removed, so this shows that Starfleet also values privacy and self-determination...

And I agree that something like this sewn into the clothing would work just as well, as we don't always see prisoners being stripped like Picard when he was interrogated by the Cardassians...

And also, in a world where just about any electronic device can be scanned and jammed, what advantage would that really give.
As soon as a Starfleet member gets scanned, the implant could be either removed or simply rendered inert, or jammed...

Before everyone jumps on the so called "Self determination" bandwagon can anyone provide any shred of proof that as now just about everyone seems to be claiming that SGC personnel is being monitored by the IOA/US Government 24/7. Anyway the OP of this thread was to ask had not the UFP or more preciely Starfleet come up with subdermal transponders and it has been confirmed that the equipment does exist.

[Who is like God arbour]

Before everyone jumps on the so called "Self determination" bandwagon can anyone provide any shred of proof that as now just about everyone seems to be claiming that SGC personnel is being monitored by the IOA/US Government 24/7...

Irrelevant. Nobody is claiming, that SGC personnel is actually monitored 24/7. But your objection shows, that you still haven't read the links, I have provided. You still don't understand the spirit of information privacy and informational self-determination.

The fact is, that they can do it and that the monitored person wouldn't even notice it, if or when they are doing it. That means, that if you have such a device implanted, you can never be sure, that it isn't done and you have no way to prevent it, if and when it is done. And that is already a violation of information privacy and informational self-determination.

Anyway the OP of this thread was to ask had not the UFP or more preciely Starfleet come up with subdermal transponders and it has been confirmed that the equipment does exist.

You have asked in the OP, why the UFoP has never adopted subdermal implants as a a standard issue. Not something, that is only implanted, when it is needed in a certain mission, but something, that remains always implanted for the off-chance, that someone is abducted. I have answered to that question.

I have known from the TNG episode »Who Watches The Watchers«, that they have not only subdermal locator beacons, but even subcutaneous communicators, with which not only the whereabouts can be monitored, but a communication with the carrier and even the eavesdropping of conversations of the carrier with others is possible.

But such device is removed, when the mission is finished because the UFoP seems to value information privacy and informational self-determination.

[PunkMaister]

According to SG-1/SG: Atlantis IIRC the implants need to be activated with a singnal and only then do they start transmitting their beacon signal so that takes care of the alleged 24/7 monitoring.

[Who is like God arbour]

1. That was not the premise of your OP.
2. Can you provide evidence, that it is indeed as you say?
3. It would change nothing, if the carrier of such device doesn't notice the activation and/or can not prevent it.

[PunkMaister]

1. That was not the premise of your OP.
2. Can you provide evidence, that it is indeed as you say?
3. It would change nothing, if the carrier of such device doesn't notice the activation and/or can not prevent it.

First of all it's funny you allege that is not the thread's OP since what is it's tittle? Why did the UFP never came up with subdermal locator beacons?
Oh wait it does ask why they never came up with the tech and alas they did after all. You, you are the one that have tried to turn this into something else it never was.

In the episode where Vala was kidnapped a signal was sent from the Daedalus to activate her beacon but by then it had been removed but thankfully not deactivated in time, still she lost her memory as she was connected to a machine that the Goa'uld use to extract memories. When it comes to the comm badges in ST they do not know if the thing is actively monitoring them or not. As to what happens when SGC personnel retire my guess is that they render the thing inert or remove it as there would be no need for such a thing for someone who is no longer going on dangerous offworld recon missions and such...

[Who is like God arbour]

First of all it's funny you allege that is not the thread's OP since what is it's tittle? Why did the UFP never came up with subdermal locator beacons?
Oh wait it does ask why they never came up with the tech and alas they did after all. You, you are the one that have tried to turn this into something else it never was.

In the episode where Vala was kidnapped a signal was sent from the Daedalus to activate her beacon but by then it had been removed but thankfully not deactivated in time, still she lost her memory as she was connected to a machine that the Goa'uld use to extract memories. When it comes to the comm badges in ST they do not know if the thing is actively monitoring them or not. As to what happens when SGC personnel retire my guess is that they render the thing inert or remove it as there would be no need for such a thing for someone who is no longer going on dangerous offworld recon missions and such...

That's the title of this thread, not your OP.

That's your OP:

• • I'm rather surprised that the UFP apparently never came up with the idea of placing such beacons in their personnel instead relying on comm badges that could easily get lost or simply taken away if captured. A subdermal implant would not be so easily found in fact unless whoever captures them has intel on the subject they would have no idea is even there for example in Stargate they are a standard issue and the only instance in which one was removed was when Athena captured Vala and had knowledge of them her host being a former member of the Trust.
    
    So any idea as to why the UFP never adopted such a thing?

You are describing the subdermal implants of Stargate. As you are describing it, they are »standard issue« and are not to be removed.

You haven't known, that they are inactive, as long as they are not receiving an activation signal until it was explained to you here. And that information is still unconfirmed. Or have you watched the episode in the meantime and can confirm, that Emperor Tippy has remembered correctly?

Anyway, you question was, why the UFoP never adopted such a thing - a thing, that is »standard issue« and is not to be removed.

And the UFoP has the technology, as was shown. Their technology is even far advanced. With their subcutaneous communicators it is possible not only to monitor the whereabouts, but also to communicate with the carrier and even eavesdrop conversations of the carrier with others. But they don't use it the way, the subdermal implants in Stargate are used. Their subcutaneous communicators are only implanted, if and when a specific mission require it and are removed after it.

And, as I have already said, it would not make a difference, if such device is not always active, if the carrier of such device doesn't notice the activation and/or can not prevent it. It is still a a violation of information privacy and informational self-determination.

The carrier of a comm badges can decide any time to remove it and let it behind. But that is not possible with subcutaneous communicators. If you are the carrier of such a device, you dependent on the good will of others to not abuse the possibility to monitor your whereabouts 24/7. And, if you don't even notice the activation of such device, you can't even check, if they are respecting your privacy or not.

But, as you have shown again, all that is probably irrelevant to you because you still don't even understand the concept of information privacy and informational self-determination. You probably would have no problem with a camera in your bedroom, to which only the government has access, if they promise you, that they will only look, if they have reason to believe, that you are in danger or a threat to others, even if you can't find out, if they are really only looking in such situations or if they are always watching your mating rituals.

[PunkMaister]

You haven't known, that they are inactive, as long as they are not receiving an activation signal until it was explained to you here. And that information is still unconfirmed. Or have you watched the episode in the meantime and can confirm, that Emperor Tippy has remembered correctly?

Tippy's tip's good no pun intended but they did have to acvtivate that damn beacon from the Daedalus itself. They probably never expectecd to have a member kidnapped right on freaking Earth in the first place.

But, as you have shown again, all that is probably irrelevant to you because you still don't even understand the concept of information privacy and informational self-determination. You probably would have no problem with a camera in your bedroom, to which only the government has access, if they promise you, that they will only look, if they have reason to believe, that you are in danger or a threat to others, even if you can't find out, if they are really only looking in such situations or if they are always watching your mating rituals.

A camera is something far more intrusive than a beacon that might be activated remotely or not and I'm not in the military but if I were and I had to opt risk being kidnapped and tortured by some crazed Mullahs in some God forsaken region of the MidEast/Muslim world or give the rest of the US armed forces to be able to locate me I'd choose the latter in a heartbeat yes...

[Who is like God arbour]

You haven't known, that they are inactive, as long as they are not receiving an activation signal until it was explained to you here. And that information is still unconfirmed. Or have you watched the episode in the meantime and can confirm, that Emperor Tippy has remembered correctly?

Tippy's tip's good no pun intended but they did have to acvtivate that damn beacon from the Daedalus itself. They probably never expectecd to have a member kidnapped right on freaking Earth in the first place.

Does that mean, that you have verified, that Emperor Tippy has remembered correctly? Because I don't even know this episode and are not able to verify that claim. If you say, that you have verified it or that you can now remember from your first time seeing it, it's ok. But if I see that episode and notice, that it is wrong, you have gambled away your credibility.

But, as you have shown again, all that is probably irrelevant to you because you still don't even understand the concept of information privacy and informational self-determination. You probably would have no problem with a camera in your bedroom, to which only the government has access, if they promise you, that they will only look, if they have reason to believe, that you are in danger or a threat to others, even if you can't find out, if they are really only looking in such situations or if they are always watching your mating rituals.

A camera is something far more intrusive than a beacon that might be activated remotely or not and I'm not in the military but if I were and I had to opt risk being kidnapped and tortured by some crazed Mullahs in some God forsaken region of the MidEast/Muslim world or give the rest of the US armed forces to be able to locate me I'd choose the latter in a heartbeat yes...

Why, if the camera is officially only there for the off-chance, that you are in danger or a threat to others and the government does promise you, that they will only look, if they have reason to believe it, wouldn't it be better, if the camera is there. If you believe your government, you have to think, that the camera is almost always deactivated. Insofar, it can't be more intrusive. How can a deactivated camera be intrusive?



And your MidEast/Muslim world example ist inappropriate because in such a region, there would be indeed a good chance, that you are abducted if you would be in a war zone as a member of the US military.

But we are speaking of Star Trek. How big is the chance, that Starfleet personnel gets abducted and that ship sensors wouldn't be able to find the abducted personnel? Certainly not big enough to warrant a permanently implanted subdermal locator beacon or subcutaneous communicator.

And your own reservation shows, that you would want such a device only in such situations and not always. Would you want such a device, if you are a member of the US military, but garrisoned in the US or another western nation where the likelihood, that you get abducted, it very small?

[PunkMaister]

Does that mean, that you have verified, that Emperor Tippy has remembered correctly? Because I don't even know this episode and are not able to verify that claim. If you say, that you have verified it or that you can now remember from your first time seeing it, it's ok. But if I see that episode and notice, that it is wrong, you have gambled away your credibility.

Well I know for a fact that Jackson and Vala went to a restaurant where Vala ended up kidnapped and obviously no one was monitoring their wheraabouts. And it was the Daedaulus or one of the few Earth cruisers that finally managed to track the device before it was deactivated by Athena.

Why, if the camera is officially only there for the off-chance, that you are in danger or a threat to others and the government does promise you, that they will only look, if they have reason to believe it, wouldn't it be better, if the camera is there. If you believe your government, you have to think, that the camera is almost always deactivated. Insofar, it can't be more intrusive. How can a deactivated camera be intrusive?

Because a camera let's you watch a trasnponder just gives off a location and that's it.

And your MidEast/Muslim world example ist inappropriate because in such a region, there would be indeed a good chance, that you are abducted if you would be in a war zone as a member of the US military.

It is because in the case of SGC personnel they are constantly in danger whjen going into offworld missions thru the Stargate. So the comparison is sound

But we are speaking of Star Trek. How big is the chance, that Starfleet personnel gets abducted and that ship sensors wouldn't be able to find the abducted personnel? Certainly not big enough to warrant a permanently implanted subdermal locator beacon or subcutaneous communicator.

Agreed in the case of Starfleet it would not be something they would require all the time which is why they do use them but on a temporary basis.

And your own reservation shows, that you would want such a device only in such situations and not always. Would you want such a device, if you are a member of the US military, but garrisoned in the US or another western nation where the likelihood, that you get abducted, it very small?

Except your analogy does not work for SGC personnel who are always at high risk when going offworld thru the Stargate.

If you haven't noticed only such personnel are given this transponders, not the whole US armed forces.

[Who is like God arbour]

Does that mean, that you have verified, that Emperor Tippy has remembered correctly? Because I don't even know this episode and are not able to verify that claim. If you say, that you have verified it or that you can now remember from your first time seeing it, it's ok. But if I see that episode and notice, that it is wrong, you have gambled away your credibility.

Well I know for a fact that Jackson and Vala went to a restaurant where Vala ended up kidnapped and obviously no one was monitoring their wheraabouts. And it was the Daedaulus or one of the few Earth cruisers that finally managed to track the device before it was deactivated by Athena.

That does not mean, that the device is deactivated the whole time and was only activated when the Earth Cruiser has sent an activation signal.

Why, if the camera is officially only there for the off-chance, that you are in danger or a threat to others and the government does promise you, that they will only look, if they have reason to believe it, wouldn't it be better, if the camera is there. If you believe your government, you have to think, that the camera is almost always deactivated. Insofar, it can't be more intrusive. How can a deactivated camera be intrusive?

Because a camera let's you watch a trasnponder just gives off a location and that's it.

But only if the camera is activated. Your government has promised to you, that it will only activate the camera, if it believes, that you are in danger or a threat to others. And because that will probably never happen, you can assume, that the camera will never be activated.

And, for the off-chance, that it will happen, is it not better, if the government can activate the camera, if you get in danger or will become a threat to others? Where is the problem? You know, it will never happen. Why should you get in danger or become a a threat to others in your bedroom?

Insofar, according to your logic, you can totally ignore the camera.

And your MidEast/Muslim world example ist inappropriate because in such a region, there would be indeed a good chance, that you are abducted if you would be in a war zone as a member of the US military.

It is because in the case of SGC personnel they are constantly in danger whjen going into offworld missions thru the Stargate. So the comparison is sound

Yes, but we were not debating the situation of SGC personnel, but of Starfleet personnel. Remember your question in your OP: »So any idea as to why the UFP never adopted such a thing?«

But we are speaking of Star Trek. How big is the chance, that Starfleet personnel gets abducted and that ship sensors wouldn't be able to find the abducted personnel? Certainly not big enough to warrant a permanently implanted subdermal locator beacon or subcutaneous communicator.

Agreed in the case of Starfleet it would not be something they would require all the time which is why they do use them but on a temporary basis.

That's just the point. You have described devices, that are »standard issue« and are not to be removed.

And your own reservation shows, that you would want such a device only in such situations and not always. Would you want such a device, if you are a member of the US military, but garrisoned in the US or another western nation where the likelihood, that you get abducted, it very small?

Except your analogy does not work for SGC personnel who are always at high risk when going offworld thru the Stargate.

If you haven't noticed only such personnel are given this transponders, not the whole US armed forces.

Yes, but we were not debating the situation of SGC personnel, but of Starfleet personnel. Remember your question in your OP: »So any idea as to why the UFP never adopted such a thing?«

My answer was privacy and that such devices do interfere with information privacy and informational self-determination and in a universe, where sensors are already able to monitor individual persons from great distances, the additional advantage of such devices, permanently implanted, may be very limited and can't justify the disadvantage for information privacy and informational self-determination?

I have never said, that such device, permanently implanted, can't be useful in certain situations and that then its advantages can justify the disadvantage for information privacy and informational self-determination.

But not in Star Trek - as far as we have seen it. For special branches of Starfleet (e.g. Undercover Agents from Starfleet Intelligence), which we have not seen on-screen, it may be different. But why should e.g. a botanist, a psychologist or an engineer aboard of a Starfleet ship or even on an UFoP planet have such a device implanted?

And that applies also for Stargate and each other armed forces. Such a device is only useful and can maybe justify the disadvantage for information privacy and informational self-determination when the likelihood of an abduction is accordingly high. But such a device is to be removed, if the probably is accordingly low and even more, if the person retires. I think, that the SG teams of SGC or the away teams of Atlantis could have such a device. But I don't think, that everyone in the SGC or on Atlantis, even those, who are not supposed to ever leave it, should have one.