[danieltillett]

Couldn't the same thing be done by a wristband with just a shortened weblink. The advantage is you could update the website and the link could be engraved on the wristband.

[arethuza]

I'd have thought a wristband would be too easy to damage/remove - especially if they become indicators of people in that kind of situation. Similarly I think things like tattoos or embedded chips are spectacularly bad ideas - for all manner of reasons.

Maybe retina scans or something like that?

[danieltillett]

You could make the wristband hard to accidentally remove, but if it is made out of a decent metal and engraved then it would not be hard to ensure that it survived.

Something like this needs to be voluntary - we really don’t want to be forcing vulnerable people to start wearing something they don’t want to.

[austinjp]

My thoughts exactly. Also, less to go wrong with engraved metal vs USB bracelet.

[reacweb]

tatoo a url ;-)

[danieltillett]

Well not to Godwin the thread I think that might be taking things a bit too far.

[viewer5]

You're Godwinning it pretty hard. Do you have a more lucid and less Godwinny argument than "well, Hitler!" ?

[DanBC]

The government tattooing people who have an illness that increases paranoia seems sub-optimal.

You'd definitely have people cutting the tattoos off.

[junto]

Surely a tatooed QR code would be the modern day equivalent!