×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

RFID Production to Increase 25 fold by 2010

samzenpus posted more than 8 years ago | from the tag-you're-always-it dept.

Privacy 179

Luke PiWalker writes "The number of RFID tags produced worldwide is expected to increase more than 25 fold between 2005 and 2010, reaching 33 billion, according to market research company In-Stat. Total production of RFID tags in 2005 reached more than 1.3 billion, according to a recent report. RFID production will vary widely by industry segment for several years -- for example, RFID has been used in automotive keys since 1991, with 150 million units now in use, a quantity that greatly exceeded other segments until recently, according to In-Stat. "By far the biggest RFID segment in coming years will be supply chain management," said Allen Nogee, In-Stat analyst, in a statement. "This segment will account for the largest number of tags/labels from 2005 through 2010." RFID has obvious privacy flaws, why is the world pointed in the direction of RFID?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

179 comments

FRIST PSOT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507187)

I made those typos on purpose.

Thank God... (5, Funny)

BHennessy (639799) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507188)

that I got in early and made my duct-tape / tinfoil wallet already.

Re:Thank God... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507288)

Take your religion somewhere else pal.

Re:Thank God... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507789)

Okay, maybe I'm stupid, or insufficiently paranoid, so someone correct me if I'm wrong.

The way I understand it, RFID basically amounts to a radio-frequency barcode, that can be read from a distance of a few feet. It really sounds more convenient than Orwellian to me, yet the tinfoil hat brigade comes rushing in every time a /. story mentions it. What am I missing? What's so evil about it?

RFID and the Average Person (4, Interesting)

kjh1 (65671) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507209)

I can't help thinking that the average person is still pretty clueless about RFID tags and will still be even when there are 25x as many! Will understanding of RFID tags be similar to that of browser cookies? Will the security implications be blown out of proportion in a similar way? Don't get me wrong, I'm all about computer security, but cookies hardly scare me, and so far, RFID tags don't scare me too much. The counter solution should be pretty simple - get an RFID scanner so you know if there are any 'hidden' ones about.

Re:RFID and the Average Person (4, Funny)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507268)

But dude! People will be able to tell that you just shopped at The Gap by JUST BEING NEAR YOUR BAG. And if people know that, just WHERE will all your geek-cred go?

Right out the window, that's where.

And don't even get me started on all the poor unskilled walmart cashiers that will lose their jobs because a shopping cart will be able to be read accurately and automatically. They might actually have to learn to do something useful with their lives, and damn it, this is America, and they shouldn't have to do that!

Re:RFID and the Average Person (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507421)

An RFID scanner won't always tell you if there are tags. A smart tag could wait for a particular key in the scan signal before responding at all. I don't know if anyone makes one that does that, but I don't see any reason why not.

Re:RFID and the Average Person (2, Insightful)

ls -la (937805) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507462)

Get your RFID scanners before the government decides you shouldn't know where they are or what data they contain unless you're a multinational corporation. You know the way Bush has been handling national security they'll be illegal before long (like as soon as RFID appears in passports, beginning of 2007 IIRC). Especially if scanners/readers get popular.

Re:RFID and the Average Person (5, Informative)

_ph1ux_ (216706) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507598)

I have one of the most highly polished Tin-Foil-Hats around, but I am not terribly worried about RFID, not the commercially advertised incarnations anyway.

I work as the IT manager for the largest RFID company in the world. We are *the* supplier of RFID tags and devices to the DoD. With the tags and devices available from my company and others; Matrics, Alien etc.. you needent worry. These tags are too expensive, or also too big and too weak to be of concern to people. (Expensive being the primary gating item to ubiquity)

However - i would remind people that a cell phone is far more an unknown and exploitable device than the current commercially advertised and known RFID tags.

RFID is a phenomenon that has been known about for a long time. (as are cell phones which were first proofed in the 40s) and falls into two categories; Active or Passive. Active tags have a battery which powers the antennae - passive tags merely respond to RF waves that pass through them and "reply" with a unique signature.

Passive tags hold very little data, usually just an ID - or serial number (around 1K-ish - historically). Active tags have memory (256/512K ish) and can hold real data, such as the manifest of a shipping container.

The data still needs to be read and dealt with in a meaningful way. Passive IDs need to be correlated to a backend DB which equates the ID with some meaningful data, such as a record of what that ID actually represents.

Active tags are a bit more flexible in that they can provide info which does not necessarily require access to a backed DB in order to understand what the tag is identifying, or what that container holds.

My company only produces Active tags. These tags are large, expensive and meant for tracking THINGS. Containers specifically - or large cost items, such as a vehicle(parts). Our tags are used on shipping containers and trucks, and pose no threat to personal privacy, unless you dont want people (yourself) to know what you placed inside some container which is being shipped from one port to the next.

Active tags, backed by batteries, arent just capable of greater range, they are capable of TELLING the reader system about events that occur. For example - we have some tags which have sensors on them. Light, temp. humidity, shock etc. These sensors can be set to alert if they go off or above threshold. This is important when you are concerned about the viability/integrity of the property the tag is "watching". Some medications spoil if exposed to certain temperatures for extended periods of time. The sensor tag can monitor temp then alert if it gets too high for too long. Some munitions automatically ARM themselves if they receive a certain amount of shock. so the tags would warn if a munition is armed, important to know if your going to be moving a box of explosives via crane or forklift.

Active tags cost between 60 and 85 dollars per tag. Are roughly 4" long and 1" high and 1.5" wide. Active tags run at 433 megahertz and 123 kilohertz (the two frequencies are used for two different functions: reading data from the tag (433) or sending commands to the tag (123)).

There are some new active tags which are smaller, and run on 802.11 (wifi) frequencies, but there are a great number of challenges in that freq. range.

Passive tags are a losing proposition for most companies as the manufacturing cost is greater than what the tag can be sold for. Before tags can be ubiquitous in products - they need to be throw-away cheap. some person I dont know said that the magic number for passive tags was .05 (a nickel) - but one thing that hasnt been talked about with regards to the mass use of RFID is the backend databases and logic application required to actually do anything with the data read from tags. This obviously implies the reader infrastructure as well.

There is a lot of supporting infrastructure required to do anything of interest with RFID - its not just that you deploy a bunch of tags and all of a sudden you can track people.

You need to know what location each reader is at, you need to be able to tell tags where or who they are. What if people move tags around and put them on things that are not the original item tagged? Then you have false data.

There are a lot of articles written about RFID from people who no nothing about it. I was even sent a glossy about a training event costing nearly 2K for a class regarding the mandated use of RFID in the bio/Pharma industry that was being taught by some no-name. i did some research on the guy (google) and was able to determine that the guy knew *nothing* about RFID. His website was amaturish at best and had an article he had written on RFID which was pure misinformation based on extremely shallow understanding of the technology and its implications.

The "killer app" is for RFID its a term called "RTLS" - real time location services. NOBODY has figured this out effectively yet (meaning slot level visability within a meter in a 3d space)...

If you can figure out how to locate a tag within a few feet in XYZ, then youve got soemthing. Until then, all you have is a "smart" barcode and a bunch of fud. ...

MOD PARENT UP PLEASE! (1)

Da VinMan (7669) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507818)

Awesome post ..Thank you! Wish I had mod points for you.

I do think your tin foil hat loses some luster though given your informed and rational stance on RFID technology/privacy. You're making WAY too much sense to be in the foil 'hood anymore. :)

Re:RFID and the Average Person (2, Interesting)

core plexus (599119) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507918)

Excellent and informative post. "These tags are too expensive, or also too big and too weak to be of concern to people."

Today, perhaps. But tomorrow? :"An unusual pool of scientific talent at the U.S. Department of Energy's Argonne National Laboratory, combined with new nanofabrication and nanocharacterization instruments, is helping to open a new frontier in electronics, to be made up of very small and very fast devices [suvalleynews.com] ." and ""When the first computer hard disk was introduced 50 years ago, it required a rather large size to store each bit of digital information. On today's computer disks, the corresponding size is about one-50-millionth of that needed in the original disks. We are now moving well into the nanoscale range, and nanomagnetism is one of the real drivers of the nanotechnology field.""

Will it take 50 years to make RFID tags ubiquitous? Probably not.

Nearly oxymoronic there (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507220)

By far the biggest RFID segment in coming years will be supply chain management," said Allen Nogee, In-Stat analyst, in a statement. "This segment will account for the largest number of tags/labels from 2005 through 2010." RFID has obvious privacy flaws, why is the world pointed in the direction of RFID?"


The first half of this quote concerns pallets in a warehouse, something with no conceivable privacy implications of any kind. The second half of this quite asks how anyone could approve of this given its "obvious privacy flaws".

Uhhhhhhh... right.

So let's say I buy a pair of shoes with an RFID tag in them and I don't like this. Never mind I haven't heard of a single shoe manufacturer proposing to do this, let's just say it happens. All I should have to do is run the shoes through the microwave and the RFID tag should fry, right?

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

BHennessy (639799) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507247)

"All I should have to do is run the shoes through the microwave and the RFID tag should fry, right?" Finding a microwave big enough could be a problem, but I'd suggest that you run really really fast.

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507295)

My feet aren't that big...

I'd suggest that you run really really fast.

Because I'm microwaving metal, I assume? It isn't much metal though. This isn't like aluminum foil quantities or something, it's just a little bit. Would it really be that dangerous?

Hmm... looks like somebody's actually run this experiment already... that's not enough to damage the microwave, but it probably wouldn't be good for the shoes. [prisonplanet.com]

Well, surely there's some simple way to fry an RFID without actually exploding the chip. Aren't RFID's basically run by a single capacitor powered by the radio waves that represent the "identify yourself" signal? It seems like you ought to be able to build something with just radio shack parts that would put out a "identify yourself" signal strong enough to overload the capacitor and kill the RFID chip. Right? That wouldn't require "causes cancer" levels of radiation or anything would it?

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

rts008 (812749) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507555)

WOOOSHH!! Overhead it goes! Laugh, it was kinda funny...as in joke.

hints: "run", "shoes", "microwave", "fry"

It's okay, we'll wait.

P.S. yes, the microwave would "fry" the chip, but may also damage the shoes- don't know about the second part- too many variables involved (where in shoe was chip, materials of shoe, construction of shoe, etc.)

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (2, Insightful)

penguin_strut (751980) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507265)

Ugh. Remind me never to eat anything out of your microwave. MIT's already shown us some of the clandestine cell-phone tracking options available. With all the cameras, phones, retinal scanners, ID cards and genetic fingerprinting available in the coming years, why would they need RFID tags? Hell, windows are a privacy risk. Just don't go outside, speak loudly, or use anything made later than Atari and you should be fine.

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

zjbs14 (549864) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507266)

Not really necessary since any tags used for supply chain purposes are going to be on the box, not in the product. And it's pretty unlikely that they'd be on the box you'd take home. They would probably be on the pallet or carton that gets shipped to the store.

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

Velox_SwiftFox (57902) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507601)

Well, given the number of tags proposed by some, they're going to end up in the ecology sooner or later, like Teflon or freon. Given a decade or two, they'll probably be accumulating in polar bear body fat, and innocent infants and the like will be exposed to them from sources like their mothers' milk.

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

jibjibjib (889679) | more than 8 years ago | (#14508059)

Do you have *any* idea what your talking about? RFID tags aren't like some chemical or something. They're just electronic barcodes. I never heard anyone complain about the ecological impact of barcodes.

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (0)

FredThompson (183335) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507267)

Yup, this is a bunch of FUD, poorly constructed FUD at that.

It's real simple. Chinese labor is about $70/week.

That's about all you need to know. RFID allows automation, fewer people, tighter control and fewer processing steps.

The options are automation, including lots of remote sensing/identifying technologies like RFID or total economic collapse.

I, for one, don't care to be a dirt farmer. RFID is about the same "privacy concern" as a phone book.

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

Travoltus (110240) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507387)

"The options are automation, including lots of remote sensing/identifying technologies like RFID or total economic collapse."

I call BS on that. Let's see proof. How does lack of automation mean total economic collapse?

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

AK__64 (740022) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507332)

Excellent point. Unless the feds require RFID in the Nat'l ID due out next year, and states/banks start issuing more licenses or bank cards with embedded RFID tags, RFID is simply not going to be that great of a privacy issue. I'd like to see sales of RFID scanners restricted to retailers/what have you that actually *need* them, and perhaps a different RFID standard or format for secure gov't applications that can't be read by the RFID scanners at my local bookstore. This would add a layer of security beyond encryption and the practically geeks-only tin-foil solution... But in the end the sheer number of RFID tags being made is not cause for fear and trepidation.

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

jacksonj04 (800021) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507780)

Also, with national IDs, remember that the tag is likely to return no more data than a serial number. You then need access to the database to look up anything about the carrier.

That means the best you could do is work out that the same person is doing xyz, but not who it is. And if it's encrypted (SecurID make very slim cards which contain technology quite capable of this), there's even less risk because it won't return a sensible number, or even any number at all.

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

abdulwahid (214915) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507354)

The first half of this quote concerns pallets in a warehouse, something with no conceivable privacy implications of any kind. The second half of this quite asks how anyone could approve of this given its "obvious privacy flaws".

Uhhhhhhh... right.

I agree with your point. The biggest use of RFID for supply chain management is not going to have any privacy concerns for the general population. The company I am working for are using planning to use it to track the 1 million sacks of produce we manufacturer each year. We have something like 25 distribution points around the country and it would be very useful to be able to track every single sack and know exactly where it came from and which factury batch just by a using a scanner. At the moment it is very hard to track every single sack and its whole history. This will not affect consumers though as they are not buying our product by the sack load.

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (2, Funny)

jmv (93421) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507424)

So let's say I buy a pair of shoes with an RFID tag in them and I don't like this. Never mind I haven't heard of a single shoe manufacturer proposing to do this, let's just say it happens. All I should have to do is run the shoes through the microwave and the RFID tag should fry, right?

I just bought a pair of skis that have RFID tags in them. What do you suggest I do?

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1, Insightful)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507499)

I would say I suggest you do your research ahead of time if you don't want RFID tags in your skis. See, it's simple: if you don't buy the skis with RFID tags in them then you don't have to worry about RFID tags in your skis. Obviously if enough people don't buy skis with RFID tags in them then the companies that produce said skis will go bankrupt. Freedom in action.
And if you cannot be bothered to do your research ahead of time, don't expect me to care when you whine about the RFID tags in your skis.

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

Fanro (130986) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507717)

And if you cannot be bothered to do your research ahead of time, don't expect me to care when you whine about the RFID tags in your skis.

But will you care when there are NO skis without rfid tags available for sale anywhere because too few people knew about the problem or bothered to research ahead of time?

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507862)

First you assume this is a "problem". Did you ever stop to think that maybe some people would like their skis to have RFIDs? If so, should your desire trump theirs? If all skis have RFIDs, then you should start your own ski manufacturing company that doesn't put RFIDs in the skis. If you aren't successful well then tough. The market has spoken. No constitution on earth(even in Switzerland!) states that you have a right to skis. You either take what the market produces, produce your own, or don't use the product. Simple as that.

I know a lot of people on this site don't like to face up to this, but freedom cuts both ways. People seem to think they should be able to do whatever they want, but go crying when someone else reserves that same right for themselves.

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

Fanro (130986) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507946)

The market has spoken.
O mighty market, thy word be the law! Deliver us from our suffering!

No constitution on earth(even in Switzerland!) states that you have a right to skis.

On the other hand, several constituions, including mine, state that your right to privacy is in many occasions stronger than the right of "the market" to do whatever it pleases.
Of course rfid is such a new developement that laws and judgement dealing with it are scarce.

You either take what the market produces, produce your own, or don't use the product. Simple as that.

Or you limit the almighty power of "the market" through rules, preferably in a democratic way.
If you are a big corporation, you can also try lobbying, cartels, monopoluistic pracises and and and...

You seem to believe in the free market as some sort of noble goal, but do you really think that we have a working one, or any chance of getting it?

People seem to think they should be able to do whatever they want, but go crying when someone else reserves that same right for themselves.

Thats total nonsense. what gave you that idea?
There are a lot of things that I don't think I should be able to do. Just for starters I don't believe I should be able to murder anyone, and I likewise will go crying "murder" when someone else does that.

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

Mathinker (909784) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507650)

No problem!

Build and use the cool RFID Zapper [events.ccc.de] .

I have a feeling that their server might not be up to a Slashdotting, so use www.mirrordot.org if possible...

Re:Nearly oxymoronic there (1)

pHatidic (163975) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507652)

Funny, because the sweaters at J Crew have RFID tags in them. The books at Borders have RFID tags in them. The CDs at Tower have RFID tags in them.

Privacy fatigue (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507229)

"RFID has obvious privacy flaws, why is the world pointed in the direction of RFID?"

Yeah, because that crate of 300 rubber chickens from Shanghai really needs "privacy" as it makes its way from Dock 42 in Seattle to some anonymous Wal-Mart stockroom in Piedmont, Arizona.

The annoying thing is that when they come for me, there will be plenty of people left to speak up for me, but nobody will be listening. Quit crying "wolf" over every meme that exits the blogosphere, fer Pete's sake.

Re:Privacy fatigue (1)

Concerned Onlooker (473481) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507440)

Yeah, because that crate of 300 rubber chickens from Shanghai really needs "privacy" as it makes its way from Dock 42 in Seattle to some anonymous Wal-Mart stockroom in Piedmont, Arizona

But you'll probably be a lot more interested in privacy when that rubber chicken makes its way from the Wal-Mart stockroom to your bedroom.

Re:Privacy fatigue (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507504)

At that point, privacy is the least of my issues.

Re:Privacy fatigue (1)

gbobeck (926553) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507689)

But you'll probably be a lot more interested in privacy when that rubber chicken makes its way from the Wal-Mart stockroom to your bedroom.


That is assuming that (spr)Wall-Mart has their suppilers RFID tag every rubber chicken to be sold rather than every case/box/unit.

Also I remember reading somewhere (read:I could be wrong about this) the following:

(1) All RFID tags feature a built in kill function which permanently disables the tags. This is part of the RFID spec.

(2) Passive RFID tags aren't readable from great distances. Someone would have to install an RFID reader in your bedroom to know if you are using your rubber chicken in bed (assuming that the tag was not killed). Also, RFID tags are difficult, if not impossible to read through materials which block radio waves.

Active RFID tags (i.e. the ones used in the tollway systems) can be read from a greater distance, but their cost, size, and the fact you have to power them somehow will keep them out of your rubber chicken for quite some time. They also have distance limitations.

(3) People will find out about what you do with rubber chickens after you either are sent to the hospital after abusing your rubber chicken and having to call the paramedics or members of PETRA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Rubber Animals) beat you into a pulp for abusing an "innocent" rubber animal in that manner.

Walmart wants to know WHO is buying WHAT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507845)

"RFID: a pathway to your soul?

Retail consultant Kevin Coupe of MorningNewsBeat tells us the average American household spends $1,500 a week on necessities -- along with a whole lot of useless junk. (My paraphrase.) When you combine all those households, American Demographics reports that Americans spend more each week than the entire annual gross domestic product of Finland. That's a lot of spending.

Kevin Coupe thinks it's great, since "this level of spending has helped to keep the U.S. economy relatively healthy" (though he acknowledges that much of the spending is done on credit cards, contributing to our crushing debt load). He also praises the skyrocketing growth of the U.S. population as "another healthy sign." (Hey! Yeah! Let's make more consumers! Then Americans can consume every last thing on the planet!) But the real jaw-dropper is this advice he gives to marketers about the bloated spenders. In addition to capturing their money, Coupe suggests going straight for their souls.

He writes:

        These are our customers. Understanding them is the first step in serving them. And that means understanding them in fundamental ways... It means going beyond demographics.... Demographics is the study of what makes people the same. Psychographics is the study of what makes them different, and ultimately, we believe, is a better tool for figuring out a pathway into consumers' souls.

Our souls? We'll charitably assume he didn't really mean that. But RFID coupled with our personal data would be the ultimate marketing tool. Coupe explains:

        We've become a culture that is able to generate enormous data on almost every customer we have....It is time for the knowledge-based retailer to serve the knowledge-based society. Some technologies, such as RFID, will make this easier...(Think of the powerful, knowledge-based marketing engine that Wal-Mart will have once its RFID efforts really get traction, and it owns banks and can issue credit cards/smart cards to its customers.)

Yes, indeed. I think of the "powerful, knowledge-based marketing engine" now gaining traction every day. But do we really want Wal-Mart owning banks and tracking people around the store with spychipped credit cards? And more importantly, do we really want them having an RFID pathway into our souls?"

From http://www.spychips.com/blog/index.html [spychips.com]

Re:Privacy fatigue (1)

DrMrLordX (559371) | more than 8 years ago | (#14508120)

I want to start collecting some RFID tags and implant them in my skin so that when the gub'ment starts running scans on people, I'll show up on the scanner as a pallet of 300 rubber chickens, a cow in heat, an Xbox 360, some dog named Muffin that's been missing for 2 years(and counting), and any number of other inane things.

Because.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507234)

... the world sucks?

Obvious Privacy Flaws (4, Insightful)

jasonditz (597385) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507255)

Warrantless wiretapping, anti-anonymity laws, calls for heavier regulation of pre-pay cell phone purchases, video cameras on street corners, "free speech zones" where they ask you to show ID.

RFID is going in the same direction as the rest of the world, which is away from individual privacy vis-a-vis the state and vis-a-vis the large, "trustworthy" corporation

Re:Obvious Privacy Flaws (1)

fabs64 (657132) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507566)

oh ffs, RFID is a serial number or a barcode that can be read without line of sight.
The sky is not falling.

No. No, it's not. (1)

Grendel Drago (41496) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507731)

RFIDs are not barcodes. They contain enough data to uniquely identify not only every item on the shelf, but every instance of that item. This is the difference between a 12-digit UPC and a 512-byte passive RFID.

If a sale is made, and you pay with an identifying method, such as a credit or debit card, or even a supermarket affinity card, that particular item is now linked to your identity. This is why the increased data capacity of RFIDs is meaningful.

And, of course, this means that if a major metropolitan area decides to put RFID readers in its lamp posts, it can track the movements of its citizens--not all, but enough of them--by the RFIDs in their pants as they walk by.

But you think this is no more dangerous than a barcode?

Re:No. No, it's not. (1)

fabs64 (657132) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507841)

And a model no. + serial no. DOESN'T uniquely identify an instance of an item somehow?
Bought a laptop lately? Check the serial no. on the back, it will almost certainly be unique to that laptop.
There is no real feasible way to do the orwellian thing with RFID in consumer products without some ridiculously huge database and infrastructure as well as cooperation between millions of seperate stores, govt, competing producers etc etc.

The same FUD was spread when barcode readers and credit cards came into play.
When the government starts trying to implant an RFID chip in my neck and IS installing readers in every lampost I'll be one of the first to freak out and make a big fuss, but untill then I'm gunna go ahead and be content with accepting RFID for what it is; another useful technology making life easier and the world more efficient.

Where the difference lies. (2, Insightful)

Grendel Drago (41496) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507989)

And a model no. + serial no. DOESN'T uniquely identify an instance of an item somehow? Bought a laptop lately? Check the serial no. on the back, it will almost certainly be unique to that laptop.

But that's not the same sort of problem. My laptop's serial number is not encoded in any discernible way in my system's software (I wiped the bundled software when I got it); if I walk down the street, my movements cannot be tracked by it. When the laptop is turned off and sitting in its briefcase, it is nontrivial to read its serial number.

There is no real feasible way to do the orwellian thing with RFID in consumer products without some ridiculously huge database and infrastructure as well as cooperation between millions of seperate stores, govt, competing producers etc etc.

My point is that the ridiculously huge database you hand-wave away already exists. Consider a receipt from my local Wal-Mart. It has a unique number on it, so that they can, if I return something, pull up the record of the transaction. This transaction, if I used a credit or debit card, has my name on it. Currently, serial numbers are not on this transaction record, because it would be difficult to put them on it; they're not on the barcodes. However, moving to RFIDs would make it trivial to do so. Thus, we have a link between the consumer and the purchased item.

If you recall, the TIA program was to fuse government and commercial databases. The idea isn't so far-fetched.

The same FUD was spread when barcode readers and credit cards came into play.
When the government starts trying to implant an RFID chip in my neck and IS installing readers in every lampost I'll be one of the first to freak out and make a big fuss, but untill then I'm gunna go ahead and be content with accepting RFID for what it is; another useful technology making life easier and the world more efficient.


I'd say it'd be a bit late at that point.

Re:No. No, it's not. (2, Informative)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 8 years ago | (#14508100)

There is no real feasible way to do the orwellian thing with RFID in consumer products without some ridiculously huge database and infrastructure as well as cooperation between millions of seperate stores, govt, competing producers etc etc.

I belive that IPv6 address space contains enough unique IPs to have something like a million per square metre of the earth's surface. IPv6 is going to be implemented.

It's simply a question of scaling. Consider the RFID tag to be like a unique IP. Can you locate that ID amid distruibuted databases? Potentially yes.

Marketers want this. The lust for it. If you tag it, they will find a way to grok it.

Re:Obvious Privacy Flaws (1)

msormune (808119) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507607)

No, YOU are going to the direction most people seem to be going. You are afraid and wary. That maybe what your government wants you to feel like.

Terrorists seem to have already beaten you.

Car Keys (2, Interesting)

borisborf (906678) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507263)

It will be interesting to see if this drives down the cost of RFID keys for cars (as mentioned in the article). Right now, Chrysler wants a couple hundred bucks for a copy of the key to each of my cars. I cant just head to Walmart and get myself a fifty cent copy.

Re:Car Keys (1)

abdulwahid (214915) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507331)

There are two types of RFID: active and passive. Active meaning they have their own power supply to enable them to transmit. Passive is where there is no power supply but the chip is powered by the small amount of power generated by actually being scanned. The small tags that are put in labels and for palets are passive. These are the ones that will be made in the millions and are very cheap.

Car keys use active RFID so will not be affected much by the mass production.

Re:Car Keys (1)

karmatic (776420) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507588)

Alright, I'm a [casual] locksmith, so I really shouldn't tell you this, but oh well...

If you have two original keys, do the following:

Grab yourself a $12 or so transponder key from eBay [ebay.com] .

Get someone to cut the key. Your local home depot can possibly do this - your local locksmith almost certainly can. I don't know about Wal-Mart.

Put the first original key in the ignition, turn to on.
Wait 5 seconds, turn off.
Very quickly insert the second original key, and turn on.
Wait 10 seconds for the SKIS indicator light to flash, and a tone to be emitted.
Within 60 seconds, throw in the new key, and turn it on.
About 10 seconds later, a tone will sound, and the SKIS indicator stops flashing, goes solid for 3 seconds, then turns off. This means the new key is programmed.

Congratulations, you have a $12 new key rather than a couple of hundred dollars. There is a 50 cent copy solution, but it involves some serious work removing the transponder system. It's easier to just program a new key yourself.

For what it's worth, some of the owners manuals describe the above process.

Most innovated use of rfid (3, Interesting)

truckaxle (883149) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507270)

No bull shit check out these guys putting rfid in cows [magiix.net] . Looks like they check the cows health and if she is in heat!

Re:Most innovated use of rfid (3, Interesting)

BHennessy (639799) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507340)

This could be how future governments view us.

Re:Most innovated use of rfid (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507519)

...future?

Re:Most innovated use of rfid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507395)

I had never heard of 'Hardware Disease' before reading this link. Thank you, /.!

Re:Most innovated use of rfid (0)

rts008 (812749) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507585)

Magnets help! Just swallow it and it collects the hardware before it penetrates intestinal or stomach wall. (Tip of the day: If you have hardware desease and have swallowed the magnet, be VERY wary of laxatives! *ouch!*) disclaimer: Yes, IAACVT (I Am A Certified Veterinary Technician)

In other news... (2, Funny)

javaDragon (187973) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507287)

RFID Zapper [events.ccc.de] production set to increase 1000 folds during the same period.

And that's just because most beople can't afford A real EMP shock generator [amazing1.com]

Re:In other news... (1)

Rezun8er (938867) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507369)

Let's hope that the Gorgio Armani suits in his 2010 line come complete with internally stitched Farady cages. The bubble wrap body suit phase didn't quite catch on, but giant metal cages? That's gonna be a hit!

Google House (4, Funny)

xiphoris (839465) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507289)

Perhaps once it becomes standard that pretty much everything is tagged with RFID, maybe I'll be able to use Google House to find that sock I lost a year ago! I know it's here somewhere...

Re:Google House - I'd buy one! (1)

kburkhardt (664593) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507661)

Laugh now, but if everything you buy has an RFID in it, why wouldn't you want a Google House type search?

Load Google House into your house's HAL9000, plug your floor plan into it, put sensors in appropriate spots, and bingo!

Where are my keys? Ah, I see they are on the wall hook, not on the table. Where's the remote? X marks the spot. Did junior take my playboy and hide it under his bed *again*? Atta boy - guess I'll just buy another copy. :)

Re:Google House - I'd buy one! (1)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 8 years ago | (#14508106)

It wouldn't work. By then, Orwell would be spinning around so fast that the EM field from his gravesite would jam all radio frequency bands.

Non-RFID companies popping up? (3, Interesting)

farmhick (465391) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507297)

I wonder if there will be specialty companies that guarantee their products are RFID free. Their shipping containers may use them, since they are the next step for inventory control. But what of smaller companies that would make or sell clothing with no imbedded RFIDs, which are of course all of our concerns?

Just like there is 'hemp' clothing that seems to be bought as a stand against "The Man", does anyone see 'RDID-free' as a growing market? And if so, how long until they are bought out by the large corporations, and tags start going in?

Alternatives? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507310)

To bring a newbie up to speed, the front page post states that "RFID has obvious privacy flaws, why is the world pointed in the direction of RFID?"

From what I understand, the only real privacy protection from RFID's is that the corporations self-police themselves.. which is unlikely. I'm curious if other alternative solutions out there to RFID that can provide a similar service?

r.e.a.c.t.i.o.n.a.r.y. that is how we spell.... (5, Insightful)

riprjak (158717) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507316)

Oh dear; what an alarmist post.

Yes, granted, RFID does have some privacy implications when applied in P.O.S. applications, hospitals and such like.

However, AFAIK, by far and above the largest use is in automotive security, logistics and workflow handling. Boxes dont care if people know whats in them, but it sure as shit makes the warehouse easier to manage if your robot/forklift knows what is in those boxes and automagically tracks stock in and out. Even walmart would still use RFID even if they weren't allowed to use it on stock in shop, because the would still use it for shipment and bulk stock management.

Most of the increased use of RFID will still remain back office, in factories, warehouses and other transit points. Put your tinfoil hats away.

*IF* the article discussed governments planning to RFID tag humans behind the left ear, then, perhaps, we would have a major issue.

However, the small number of privacy impacting cases aside, RFID is an incredibly flexible technology. In factory workflow planning, it allows us to remove human error from data logging. The workstation AUTOMATICALLY presents you with the correct fittings for component G because it knows you are assembling component G and not component W. Barcodes dont even come close.

The inventory management system knows what stock levels you have in the Finished Goods Inventory (FGI) because it has scanned the RFID bearing kanban's as the goods were loaded into the FGI racks.

Even if EVERY SINGLE application which impacted privacy was disallowed and canned; RFID use would still exponentially increase as people replace laser based barcode systems with RFID because it is more reliable (in a maintenance sense), easier and ultimately cheaper. Furthermore, it allows for far more efficient automated handling systems to be designed because you no longer have the limitation that every box needs to be in a direct line of sight for the scanner.

So, perhaps, just perhaps, the increased use of RFID *MIGHT* be in aid of improving the efficiency of the manufacturing and logistics industry and *NOT* to track where you take your pr0n. Considering how much whining about offshoring goes on here, you would think productivity technologies might get a better hearing.

Ah well. Just my Engineers $0.02 AUD
err!
jak.

Re:r.e.a.c.t.i.o.n.a.r.y. that is how we spell.... (2, Interesting)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507449)

Oh dear; what an alarmist post.

That's the whole idea. Look at the submitter's linked web page.

Reaction not to FUD, but to an existing threat (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507811)

Taken from http://www.spychips.com/blog/index.html [spychips.com] :

There are two glass encapsulated RFID tags pictured above. One is intended for human flesh, the other for the scruff of your pet's neck. Which is which?

Answer: The chip pictured at the top is VeriChip's VeriMed chip that former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson would like to see implanted in all Americans. Directly below the human chip is the animal chip marketed by Schering-Plough under the "Home Again" brand name.

There's no visible difference between the chips. They look the same, and they're both manufactured by subsidiaries of VeriChip's parent company Applied Digital Solutions. The whitish substance on the end of the chips is an anti-migration coating called "biobond" that encourages tissue growth so the chip doesn't move around inside of the animial--human, feline, or canine.

There is a technical difference between the chips that you wouldn't see with the naked eye. The pet chip contains a 9-digit number while the human chip contains a 16-digit number. I asked VeriChip spokesman John Procter why the human version contained 16-digits. His reply: "flexibility." He said the company wanted to ensure there would be enough unique numbers available for all the people it envisions chipping. Yikes!

Note: The VeriChip corporation tries to ease consumer fears by referring to the chip as being "about the size of a grain of rice." The rice in the photo above is long-grain rice--the longest grain I could find in my pantry. As you can see, the VeriChip is much larger.

News just in (5, Funny)

Belseth (835595) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507317)

A Walmart was struck with an EMP weapon by terrorist. All RFID tags were wiped out causing chaos. No longer able to track customers purchases the marketing department has applied for disaster relief funds. The White House responded and FEMA was on the scene within the hour to help in the replacement of the lost tags. The President stated that allowing the customers to go untracked was a major victory for the terrorist and the situation must be resolved as quickly as possible. Haliburton is expected to deliver the new tags before the store opens tomorrow. The 50 billion dollar RFID tag replacement program was considered a bargin given the potential loss to the Walmart marketing department.

Re:News just in (2, Funny)

msormune (808119) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507590)

Yes, because in US the most terrifying situation is not when a lot of people lose lives, but when a lot of people are stoppped from buying useless crap.

RFID in the supply chain (4, Informative)

zjbs14 (549864) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507333)

For those who want to understand more about the real-world use of RFID, and not just spout alarmist paranoia, here's a link to EPCglobal [epcglobalinc.org] , the standards group that defines RFID tag and data interchange for supply chain applications.

I can't wait for them (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507339)

I'm a regular poster here, who - ironically enough - is going AC for this post to preserve my privacy.

"...why is the world pointed in the direction of RFID?"

Because it is a labor-saving device.
I own a bookstore. It is the largest independant bookstore in a 3+ million city in the US. Shelving books and keeping track of them is one of my biggest expenses in terms of labor. And it is boring labor. The employees gnerally find it the most unpleasant part of the job aside from cleaning the toilets.

I can't wait to be able to do inventory by just walking along the isle with a scanner. It will save me many thousands of dollars every year. And the employees will be happier.

I don't want to intrude on your privacy. I'd be quite happy if RFIDs work only in my store and not in your home. But I'm going to use them because they make my life easier and they will save my money.

Re:I can't wait for them (3, Insightful)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507537)

Here here. It's posts like yours that make me hold out hope that not everyone on Slashdot is a reactionary 14 year old.

Hats off to you sir, and I hope your eventual RFID roll-out occurs. I would be more then happy to purchase a book from your store =)

Re:I can't wait for them (2, Interesting)

smithberry (714364) | more than 8 years ago | (#14508133)

Yep I agree. I work in a library and hunting for missing books is the worst part of the job (we have a cleaning staff for the toilets :-) ). If every book was RFID tagged, the (already compterised) library catalog wouldn't just say "on the shelves" it could say (for sure) which shelf. And if a book was missing, we'd know before we spent an hour hunting through every shelf.

So I see RFID a bit like a car. Lots of folk die in car accidents, but for society as a whole the benefits seem to out weigh the problems. (although I doubt RFID will directly kill quite so many.)

fold? am I the only geek on /.? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507379)

25 fold and 25 times are not the same thing! how could this not be noticed? has slashdot gone that downhill? for the moronic: fold comes from the idea of folding, for example, a piece of paper, you fold it once you have 2, twice you have 4, 3 times you have 8 sections...fold is exponential...duh

Re:fold? am I the only geek on /.? (1)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507475)

25 fold and 25 times are not the same thing! how could this not be noticed? has slashdot gone that downhill? for the moronic: fold comes from the idea of folding, ..fold is exponential.

Bollocks.

Oxford Dictionary:
-fold /fld/ suff. [OE -fald, -feald = OFris., OS -fald (Du. -voud), (O)HG -falt, ON -faldr, Goth -falps, cogn. w. FOLD v.1 and w. Gk -paltos, -plasios, also w. plo- in haplos, and prob. w. L (sim)plex.] Forming adjs. and advs. from cardinal numerals and adjs. meaning 'many' w. the senses 'multiplied by', 'in an amount multiplied by', 'having so many parts', as in threefold, manifold, etc., and parallel ns. used with a w. the sense 'a specified number or amount of times' (cf. FOLD n.3).

Re:fold? am I the only geek on /.? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507476)

You aren't the only geek. I too get testy when someone on CNBC talks about how a stock's earnings are up 5 fold... when they really mean 5 times.

So for all of you concerned about RFID (4, Interesting)

joeflies (529536) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507386)

Did you find that the RFID chip in your car keys is a violation of your privacy? Did you take measures to remove it?

Do you decline to use your badge to open the building door at work?

Is it only a violation of privacy when it's used in supply chain management?

Which RFID company to invest in... (4, Insightful)

Douglas Simmons (628988) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507404)

Flash memory is to SanDisk as RFID technology is to ______?

Re:Which RFID company to invest in... (3, Informative)

zjbs14 (549864) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507434)

Alien Technologies http://www.alientechnology.com/ [alientechnology.com]
Impinj http://www.impinj.com/ [impinj.com]
Intermec http://www.intermec.com/ [intermec.com]

The really scary thing (1, Insightful)

chadamir (665725) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507423)

I dont know if you guys have heard of this, but they've invented a device that allows a person to see through walls. Pretty soon everyone's going to have one, and it will be the end of privacy. Can you imagine what it's going to be like when anyone can look in your house whenever they want? It let's you see through walls...They're calling it a "window"

Re:The really scary thing (1)

narcc (412956) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507723)

I hear you can selectivly deactivate these "windows" with the optional blind(tm) and curtain(tm) add-on modules. Though I think the option to disable should come pre-installed. How's the casual home user supposed to know about, let alone install, these extra features?

Only Korean Generals need to RFID their troops (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507427)

Only N^GSouth Korean Generals need to RFID-tag their troops [slashdot.org] .

They didn't have this problem in Soviet Russia. In Soviet Russia, troops tagged you.

Why? (3, Insightful)

mr_zorg (259994) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507432)

RFID has obvious privacy flaws, why is the world pointed in the direction of RFID?

Because they handily solve so many pressing problems? Don't blame the technology for its misuse, that's the fault of people. Stores can deactivate RFID tags just as they remove the current crop of anti-theft devices. If they don't, don't shop there!

Re:Why? (2, Interesting)

cogg (864885) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507955)

Stores can deactivate RFID tags just as they remove the current crop of anti-theft devices. If they don't, don't shop there!
The chances are they will. Why pay for two technologies, when you can pay for one. Retailers could use the RFID tag for inventory management and for as anti-theft. If it is used for anti-theft, then it will likely be disabled at the sales counter.
So if you don't want active RFID tags , don't steal!

EETimes: Global news ... (1)

J. Random Luser (824671) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507452)

33 billion RFID tags huh? TFA indicates the vast majority of these will be used in warehouse tracking and similar tasks in a few technologically aware industries. 33 billion ~= 6 tags for every man woman and child on this planet, 80% of whom will never come within 10^6 times scanning distance of one in their entire life. This is Global News? In a week when James Lovelock is warning us that Gaia is ready to cough up those industries that make and use RFID tags, along with the 4 billion innocent non-users...

Walmart's the word (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507721)

RFID has obvious privacy flaws, why is the world pointed in the direction of RFID?

Because Walmart (the other evil empire) is demanding it, and what Walmart wants Walmart gets...

There needs to be legislation to prevent abuse. (1)

Antony-Kyre (807195) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507768)

There are advantages to RFID microchips. It can make it easier for stores to scan items at checkout and do inventory. It could help you find lost items easier (using a reader and walking around with it). However, there needs to be legislation to prevent privacy abuse. Maybe make it illegal for stores to retain the data once the item is scanned out of their store.

RFID brings MANY Privacy Considerations (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14507776)

From http://www.spychips.com/ [spychips.com] - just one of many examples:

Q: Is it true there are plans to put RFID chips in Euro banknotes?
A: Hitachi has been working with the European Central Bank on the idea of putting RFID chips into Euro banknotes. This would eliminate the anonymity of cash by making it trackable. In essence, it would "register" your cash to you when you get it from the teller or take it out of the ATM. Euro banknotes could be RFID tagged as early as 2005. See: "Euro Notes May be Radio Tagged" at http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t295-s2135074,00. html [zdnet.co.uk] for details.

anonymous Cash exchange places (1)

spineboy (22918) | more than 8 years ago | (#14508063)

But when you ask someone else for change, it screws up the whole system. Probably stores won't keep track of what bills they hand you either.

Supply chain management (1)

scdeimos (632778) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507937)

By far the biggest RFID segment in coming years will be supply chain management," said Allen Nogee, In-Stat analyst, in a statement.
Of course what he failed to mention was that within the supply chain management strata there's one segment that can't use RFID - the manufacturers and distributors of RFID. How could you put your own tag on a pallet/box of RFID tags and still use yours to track them? :)

Privacy is important? (1)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507957)

RFID has obvious privacy flaws, why is the world pointed in the direction of RFID?

Since when have companies ever gave a flip about maintianing the average person's privacy? The fact you have to opt-out of policies that share information most consumers would obviously rather keep private is proof enough.

This isn't good (2, Insightful)

fonos (847221) | more than 8 years ago | (#14507959)

As a person who is forced to carry around an ID with RFID implemented into it, I can say this sucks. I go to an international school in Beijing, and to get any food at all, you need what they call a "smart card" which is basically just an ID card with your picture on it but it has RFID implemented into it. School policy is you can't pay straight-up cash for food which is really annoying seeing that everything you purchase via your smart card is logged. My parents can just go to the web interface and look at what I've been eating or whatever.

Now this isn't RFID's fault, the same thing could be possible with using magnetic stripes, but it's policy and the logging of things that's the privacy invasion. RFID just makes things easier for those wanting to get your log your information and stuff. All I have to say is, get the duct tape RFID blocking wallets now! ^_^

Re:This isn't good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14508076)

uk are RFIDing numberplates soon , but of course it's for your own good...

The problem is telling them apart .. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14508005)

If many items will contain RFIDs it will pose a design challenge: how to isolate 'yours' from the rest? I can already see the problem in London Underground: the Oyster card (stored value travel card) is RFID based, but if you have another RFID card in the same holder (like my ID badge) it fails until you take the two apart.

In this case it's easy to separate the two, but what if you don't even know you've been 'wired' with RFIDs in other articles? On the bright side, it at least means that you can use a London Underground scanner to check (it will tell you if it scans a code by stating that that code 'is not registered' ;-).

Now expand that to world + dog having RFIDs all over - you will be required to scann all the tags you find, and then match that whole collection against your 'own' list. Enter next problem: the volume of tags you need to match, and what you should do with a mismatch. Say you use it for access control: does the wrong tag mean someone's trying to break the system?

At leats privacy isn't that much of an issue as long as they truly randomise the numbering.

Given what I've seen of late of privacy violations (usually in the name of "fighting terrorism") I don't hold out much hope there either, so overall it really looks like the next Bad Idea heading your way. Combine that with DRM and you'll see we have a nice time coming for technology risk management. It might be worth retraining as a lawyer - they'll be laughing all the way to the bank on this (and, IMHO, rightly so, it's not like most technical people haven't been flagging these problems for years).

Readers are where its at (1)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 8 years ago | (#14508101)

RFID tags maybe the privacy issue but whats really going to matter are readers. Do we have any idea where and how readers will be installed? How fast is RFID reader technology developing? In the coming years readers are going to become much cheaper and have longer ranges and processing power. Worse (or better) these things will start to be networked, I can imagine by 2010 most mobile phones will have built RFID support, security cameras will probably have them fitted too, many building entrances and exits, computers, laptops, and some of these things will have pretty decent ranges or will be able to interact with other readers to get better signals.

This technology is too useful for people to ignore, for example you could have an RFID fire safety system that monitors which tags (just random things such as clothes) enter a building and which tags leave, if there's a fire there will be an instant count of who's in the building and even where, privacy issues will just be put aside because this is about saving lives.

In London this week the police used the travel log of a murdered lawyer to trace his stolen RFID ticket on the tube, this will be completely normal in 5 years, again privacy issues will be put aside because this is about solving murders and rapes.

You're not going to have a choice in RFID, everyone else will ignore the privacy issues forcing you to comply, any job you get will want you to carry an RFID card, if you want to travel you'll need an RFID ticket, if you use money it will have RFID in it, unless you pry it out of everything you buy you're pretty much certain to have at least one RFID tag on your person at all times within the next 5 years.

Privacy issues? (1)

Bazzalisk (869812) | more than 8 years ago | (#14508122)

Oh no, short-ranged RFID recievers could be used to follow people around! like ... you know ... cameras, and car license plates, and the friggin' human eyeball. There are plenty of very real "civil rights" issues to take up, so why do the civil liberties groups waste so much of their time and effort crowing about some imagined concept of "privacy"?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...