Slashdot Mirror
Labelling RFID Products
John3 writes "Following Wal-Mart's recent announcement that they plan to push RFID in their stores, CASPIAN (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering) has posted proposed legislation that would require a product to be labeled if it contained an RFID tag. Beyond the label requirement, the proposed legislation also sets up some strict restrictions on the use of RFID data. Even though RFID is not in widespread use, it's probably best to start working on these types of protections before the products are on the shelves."
Katherine Albrecht of CASPIAN also has another very informative site on RFID. It's pretty scary stuff. Also, check out her appearance last week on Rense. Link to streaming MP3.
Does that mean the RFID needs to be IDed with an RFID in case someone takes off with the RFID???
...maybe I don't get it, but how are RFID tags a violation of your privacy. They have an effective range of a few feet. They are the next logical evolution up from barcodes. Are we that paranoid and afraid of technology? Somebody please enlighten me...
I lost my concept of community when my community lost all concept of me.
These RF tags are perfect for tagging clothes, as the blurb pointed out. But an even more sinister use than tagging clothes is tagging the people who wear the clothes. And I'm especially referring to a certain kind of person:
Slavery is alive and well in this country, and I'm not referring merely to rhetorical or political slavery, but actual slavery. Women from foreign countries, particularly southeast-Asian countries are flown to America and promised low-paying but normal jobs performing menial labor or housecleaning services, but when they arrive, they discover to their horror that the real purpose is to prostitute themselves for the financial benefit of their masters. These women (and even children) are trapped, since they don't speak English, don't have the money to fly home, and don't have the physical or mental stamina to escape their tormentors after so much abuse.
How is this relevant to RF tags? Think of how much easier it would be to kidnap people from airports if all you needed to do was wander around with a small device, picking up the signals from the tags embedded in clothing given to the erstwhile immigrants back in their home countries. No longer would there have to be complicated networks of international communication -- they'd just have to agree on a certain range of serial numbers (of which there are trillions, as the article points out), hand out "free" clothes to people boarding the plane at departure, and sit back while agents at the US airports haul in the "goods".
This never would've been possible if we'd stuck to normal barcodes -- it's simply impossible to read barcodes surreptitiously. And since criminals are always the first to adopt new technologies for these devious purposes, it's only a matter of time before it comes to an airport near you, Thirteenth Amendment be damned.
me when I lined my trechcoat with copper screening in highschool!!! Whose laughing now suckers!
People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them
some should patent "labeling of the RFID enabled clothing"
Consensus is good, but informed dictatorship is better
If there is no rugulation on this technology pretty soon we can see RFID tags that point you out in a mall, and tell the mall owners what shops you've gone to and what you've bought or looked at. So this is logical that these people are trying to limit the technology in its early stages.
Useless sig.
We're terrified of barcodes.
Where have you been, man?
--
the strongest word is still the word "free"
that these RFID tags would be susceptible to a low power EM pulse. A little high school level physics ought to be enough to keep them from being a problem if they bother you that much.
has posted proposed legislation that would require a product to be labeled if it contained an RFID tag
Use RFID tags under the labels to facilitate the tracking of RFID warning labels.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
it right...
Privacy? You don't have any privacy. Get over it!
RFID Right to Know Act of 2003
Proposed legislation to mandate labeling of RFID-enabled products and consumer privacy protections
AN ACT
To require that commodities containing radio frequency identification tags bear labels stating that fact, to protect consumer privacy, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the 'RFID Right to Know Act of 2003'.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE FAIR PACKAGING AND LABELING PROGRAM.
15 U.S.C. 1453 is amended--
(1) by inserting the following under subsection (a) paragraph (6):
'(7) A consumer commodity or package that contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag shall bear a label as provided in paragraph (9) of this subsection.
'(8) For purposes of paragraph (7) of this subsection the term "radio frequency identification" or "RFID" means technologies that use radio waves to automatically identify individual items; and the term "tag" means a microchip that is attached to an antenna and is able to transmit identification information.
'(9) A label required by paragraph (7) of this subsection shall:
'(A) state, at a minimum, that the consumer commodity or package contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag, and that the tag can transmit unique identification information to an independent reader both before and after purchase; and
'(B) be in a conspicuous type-size and location and in print that contrasts with the background against which it appears.'.
SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, TACO AND COSMETIC ACT RELATING TO MISBRANDING.
21 U.S.C. 321 is amended--
(1) by inserting the following under subsection (mm):
'(nn)
(1) The term "radio frequency identification" or "RFID" means technologies that use radio waves to automatically identify individual items.
'(2) The term "tag" means a microchip that is attached to an antenna and can transmit identification information.'.
21 U.S.C. 343 is amended--
(1) by inserting the following under subsection (v):
'(w) Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Tags
'If the food or package contains an RFID tag, unless it bears a label
'(1) stating, at a minimum, that the consumer commodity or package contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag, and that the tag can transmit unique identification information to an independent reader both before and after purchase; and
'(2) in a conspicuous type-size and prominent location and in print that contrasts with the background against which it appears.'.
21 U.S.C. 352 is amended--
(1) by inserting the following under subsection (t):
'(u) Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Tags
'If the drug or device or package contains an RFID tag unless it bears a label
'(1) stating, at a minimum, that the consumer commodity or package contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag, and that the tag can transmit unique identification information to an independent reader both before and after purchase; and
'(2) in a conspicuous type-size and prominent location and in print that contrasts with the background against which it appears.'.
21 U.S.C. 362 is amended--
(1) by inserting the following under subsection (f):
'(g) Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Tags
'If the cosmetic or package contains an RFID tag unless it bears a label
'(1) stating, at a minimum, that the consumer commodity or package contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag, and that the tag can transmit unique identification information to an ind
And totally clueless? Yeah, it's really easy to kidnap people out of an airport, one of the highest security zones in the fucking country. You seem to have dropped your tinfoil hat there son, better get it back on before they microwave your brain and induce any more hallucinations.
Their proposal seems to be quite well-prepared, albeit a little too general. However, I would really like to see another section under "Privacy", which would require the users of RFIDs to include them in a way that would make them easy to remove. People should have a choice whether to drive with the tags all the way home or remove them on the spot.
Is there like an XML-type spec or schema for RFID tags? If lots of things are gonna have 'em, then there's a lot of room for problems occurring when items get moved out of their 'native' areas.
From the website, the summary of the RFID Act (summary is pretty long though):
RFID Right to Know Act of 2003
Proposed legislation to mandate labeling of RFID-enabled products and consumer privacy protections
SUMMARY OF THE BILL
AN ACT
To require that commodities containing radio frequency identification tags bear labels stating that fact, to protect consumer privacy, and for other purposes.
SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This section shortens the title of the bill to "RFID Right to Know Act of 2003."
SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE FAIR PACKAGING AND LABELING PROGRAM.
This section amends the Fair Packaging and Labeling Program by inserting language under subsection (a) of paragraph (6). This section requires that a consumer commodity or package that contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag shall bear a label as provided in the paragraph below.
It also defines the term "radio frequency identification" or "RFID" to mean technologies that use radio waves to automatically identify individual items. It defines the term "tag" to mean a microchip that is attached to an antenna and is able to transmit identification information.
Finally it describes that the label should state, at a minimum, that the consumer commodity or package contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag, and that the tag can transmit unique identification information to an independent reader both before and after purchase; and be in a conspicuous type-size and location and in print that contrasts with the background against which it appears.
SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT RELATING TO MISBRANDING.
This section amends the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act by inserting language under the sections relating to misbranding of commodities. It says that a food, cosmetic, drug or device is misbranded if the product or package contains an RFID tag, unless it bears a label stating, at a minimum, that the consumer commodity or package contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag, and that the tag can transmit unique identification information to an independent reader both before and after purchase. It also prescribes that the label must be in a conspicuous type-size and prominent location and in print that contrasts with the background against which it appears.
SEC. 4. AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL ALCOHOL ADMINISTRATION ACT.
This section states that a person shall not manufacture, import, or bottle for sale or distribution in the United States any alcoholic beverage unless its container bears a label. That label must state at a minimum, that container contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag, and that the tag can transmit unique identification information to an independent reader both before and after purchase. The label must also be in a conspicuous type-size and prominent location and in print that contrasts with the background against which it appears.
SEC. 5. AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 15, CHAPTER 36--CIGARETTE LABELING AND ADVERTISING.
This section states that a person shall not manufacture, import, or package for sale or distribution in the United States any cigarettes unless its container bears a label. That label must state at a minimum, that container contains or bears a radio frequency identification tag, and that the tag can transmit unique identification information to an independent reader both before and after purchase. The label must also be in a conspicuous type-size and prominent location and in print that contrasts with the background against which it appears.
SEC. 6. AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 15, CH. 94--PRIVACY.
This section goes directly to protecting the privacy of consumers. First it directs that a business shall not combine or link an individual's nonpublic personal information with RFID tag identification information, beyond what is required to manage inventory. Second, a business shall not, directly or through an affiliate, disclose to a nonaffili
The privacy folks worry mostly about RFID tags in cash.
A person shall not manufacture, import, or package for sale or distribution in the United States any cigarettes unless its package bears a label:
Seriously, is there still room to put warnings like this on cigarette packaging? With the cancer warnings and cartoon camels (not anymore :)), how much room is left?
Sex - Find It
I understand that people are concerned but I believe it is a little early to be looking at legislation. As for Wal-Mart, right now they are only mandating RFID at the pallet level. This is to speed shipping and receiving and have no privacy implications. The case and unit level is still a ways off till the costs come down a lot. Let's not assume the worse yet.
But earlier and later in the FAQ, they mention tags placed into the soles of shoes. Since this is done during the manufacturing process and would require slicing open the sole to find/destroy the tag (if you even knew where specifically it was), it doesn't seem there is an effective tag killer in this instance (and any other where the tags are deeply embedded).
So, anybody else know of an effective tag killer that doesn't involve destroying the item and/or setting it on fire?
Americans don't get it. Neither do 95% of Slashdotters for that matter.
/. patent whining.
/. You should be somewhere you can actually make a difference like your congressman's website or www.whitehouse.gov.
I just love to come on and watch the daily whining about the continuing loss of personal liberties in America. That and the daily
If you don't like it, don't cry about it here, write your congressman. Nobody but the other fools here care about your rants.
I am fortunate because I have a forum to bitch about my pet peeve which is SlashDot. That's why I post here. This is the best place to whine about
Take your fingernail or a key and score the plastic wrap on the front cover where it meets the spine.
Remove the outer wrap.
Remove the front cover by prying the 'hinges' from spine.
Twist the cover so that the anti-theft stickers peel off.
Put the cover back on.
Enjoy!
Tom Cruise.
At least one person realizes this wasn't offtopic. That's the usual response.
If stores want to use them for inventory, why not have them in everything -- but -- once the item is purchased, it is disabled like the security tags (for instance, they swipe it over a pad of some kind.)
This would negate the privacy concerns and let them reap the benefits of using RFID inventory.
It was Sun Microsystems' Scott McNealey.
Remember. RFID isn't perfect. It's operation usually falls under Part 15 of the FCC rules, which is the whole "may not emit interference" and "must accept interference, even if it causes undesirable operation". RFID also uses 900MHz, 2.4GHz, 5GHz, and other public use frequencies, some of which are even also HAM bands. Amateur Radio isn't governed by part 15, so if a ham operator decides to operate on the frequency that RFID transceivers use, and if the HAM radio operator is operating legitimately, it's the RFID tranceiver's owner's problem, not the HAM's. Specific jamming is prohibited by the rules that amateur radio operators follow, but consumer use, nonlincensed devices are secondary users where both licensed and unlicensed spectrum overlap.
so, what happens when someone is checking out, and the computer fails to record all of the RFID tags because of interference, but the person has legitimately purchased something? When they go to return it, the computer could possibly say that it wasn't purchased, and then the individual is left with more headaches.
I think that the FCC should require that business-use devices like this be licensed, and each one individually identified in a publicly searchable database. I also believe that reissues of identification should be prohibited. This would work quite strongly to curtail use of RFID for tracking mechanisms.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Actually, all we need is a RFID killer. I wonder if putting that new shirt in a microwave might overload and kill it...
That statement was pure tin-foil hat dude. Do you even know what you're talking about?
explain this. These tags are 'attached' are they not. Is this not like the the ad labels etc I junk after a purchase ???
From the hype I am starting to get the impression that somehow the clothing material is impregnated with some uniquely identifable device which will id me whereever I go, which I am pretty sure is not the case.
This aside, modern forensics are pretty much advanced to the point where pretty accurate is available from the fabric alone so the fuss is over what ????
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
This is tooo funny. All these people paranoid about RFID. OK, two categories of folks to worry about with RFID, PITA marketing and the MIB. Whatever about the marketing, just use a seperate unlisted phone# and a po box and you eliminate huge amounts of unsolicted phone calls/junk mail.
OK, now on to Big Bros. MIB knows that corps want RFID to save bucks (and maybe marketing, see above). Cool, MIB can maybe utilize it too (hey Joe bought a sixpack, how interesting, glad we have all these scanners everywhere). Best thing is, while everyone hoots and hollers about RFID, they fail to notice those "security" cams that can see your face + see what you bought + see the license plate of your car, all of which can be done TODAY, IF anyone really gave a crap that you bought some weiners and diet coke. We won't even talk about the instance when you use your CC. OK, so if Osama buys some slacks from Banana Republic using cash, we'll be able to tell if he tries to hop a Greyhound to Walla Walla because his RFID will set off the scanner. Assuming he's stupid enough to not be aware of the fact that RFID's are EVERYWHERE now, what are the odds that he can either disable, or better yet, make copies and distribute them EVERYWHERE, totally making the system worthless?
Like others have said, privacy, forget it. All us cell phone toting, internet using, CC charging, electricity using folks aint got no privacy at all. If RFID makes Walmart more efficient so it can hire more people, drop more prices, fatten their wallets, I say more power to'em. We techno elitest getting all scared and up in arms about tech, we have to take the good with the bad, once you open the box, you can't filter what escapes.
Just collect several hundred RFID tags for all different and varying kinds of products and sew them into your clothing to deliberately confuse the hell out of the scanners.
What an insanely obvious troll.
How could anyone with mod privs be dense enough to give it an "interesting"? Arg!
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
In the example of clothing why would it be harder to remove these tags?
Even if they are embedded, a few seconds in the microwave should effectively kill any circuits in the units.
EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
no, but tha government could put detecors on the corners, and if a crime happens nearby, immediatly begin to survale you. you don't think thats bad? how about, bring up all the black people in the area, and bring them in for questioning? or, find out who was protestng, and bring them all in for 'disturbing the peace'? or, get me a list of everybody who participateed in the million man march, and label them as seditious?
The reason we in the US have has so many years with minimal issues liokje these is because of protections we have had and guidlines various agencies have had to adhere to. We hae not enjoyed the freedom we have had throught the kindness of the government..except the first one.
Again, its not about the pruchase item, its about tracking a SPECIFIC single item, anywhere it goes.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Were still laughing and I bet you still aren't getting any.
Using a MOVIE as an example of what will happen? WHERE THE HELL IS MY FLYING CAR! Every movie in the 50s said I would have one by now!!!!!
(Not to mention about a billion other things that didn't happen.)
I have no problem with RFID tags, as long as they are disabled when you purchase the product (like the tags that are used by many bookstores which are disabled after passing the book over that little pad). Until you actually hand the money over the cashier, it's not your property, it's the store's, and they have the right to keep track of it as they see fit (but not the continue keeping track of it after it's no longer their property).
"People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
Now that's what I'm interested in. I want to be able to grab the numbers, and then change them. I want to be able to walk into a store and instead of "How did you like those pants?" I want it to say "How did you like those extra-large elephant sized condoms you bought last week?" :)
There are just so many possibilities to hack these things and have tons of fun with retail stores if they use them for anything useful. Maybe I should start my own organization: The Anti-Datamine (TAD). And we'll go around trying to screw with all the data mining techniques out there.
Buy something that has RFID with a credit card, and your NAME can be associated with that number. If you wear the item when purchasing another RFID item, your NAME can be associated with that item, even if you pay in cash. As time goes on, you will accumulate enough RFID items to allow yourself to be identified everywhere you go.
Your acceptance of the technology seems to be as much of an intellectual deficiency as it is a moral deficiancy. You simply cannot wrap your little head around how powerful this technology is. And you foolishly place the fate of your identity within the hands of marketing people, who have proven time and time again, that they're completely morally bankrupt. Reptiles.
The more information someone has about you, the more power they have over you. It's not a matter of others believing in conspiracies, it's a matter of you being spineless and ignorant. How dare you insult people who have the guts and forsight to take on issues as important as this. Fuck you!
what happens when you walk in without a tagged garment, when they expect people to have there garments tagged?
Are you labeled as an 'undesirable'?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The RFID tags in each and every one of our Cheetos are for quality assurance purposes only. The rumors about their barbed surfaces being intended to lodge in the colon are completely unfounded.
my tinfoil hat back on!
the world isnt a safe place for us anymore, they will know we bought our pants from a store and that we wear them and like those kinds of pants. we are doomed. i can only hope they dont find out what kind of beer i like and alert me to its precense, such events can lead only to drunken catastrophe!
if anything these new founded improvements will just cost alot of money to implement but it will be easier to do inventory with 1000s of unique bar codes. im sure it will be.
i just hope i am not followed home by someone with an rfid scanner who wants my pants! "THEY SIZE IS RIGHT TOO"
anyways i cant think of anything else so if you liked this then reply and tell me how great of a person i am and i will reward you with a wink
Can I use the staff microwave for a second? Thanks.
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
While the potential invasion of privacy is fairly scary, the likelyhood of these things turning into massive invasion is small. With active RFID systems, the power output will be tiny if they're going to have a shelf life of more than a few hours, which means range will be short. VERY short. While I can get a fair range with low power on the VHF bands, these things are TINY, with corespondingly tiny antennas and tiny power outputs. With a zillion of them transmitting at once, they will have a useful range of a few meters, not a few miles.
The passive tags are even worse, since they require an "activation" signal from another source - taking the radio energy from another transmitter and using it to power their own reponse. A range of 40 feet is probably optimistic. After all, the more of these things within range of the reader, the more will respond to the activating pulse and send their "I'm ID number nnnnnn!" reply. The more that respond, the smarter the reader needs to be to isolate the signals and ID's it's interested in.
The more intelligence you build into the chip ("Only respond to queries in 'this' range") the more expensive they become. The larger the antenna, the more expensive they become. The more frequencies you build them for, the more expensive they become. Etc. At less than a penny a pop, the chips are almost certainly as dumb as a stump, which makes them less invasive.
Blocking these things should be relatively easy. While I haven't intestigated what frequencies they operate in, it should be relatively trivial to shield them, jam them, spoof them, or otherwise inconvenience the reader.
I don't like them, but they don't frighten me.
Never attribute to malice what can as easily be the result of incompetence...
This will be the best thing for grocery self-checkout.
Have you ever been in line behind Joe "I have no idea where the UPC is" Blow and watch him try to get the scanner to recognize his can of Dinty-Moore stew? It's torture watching him wave the thing 3 feet away from the scanner or swing it back and forth in front of it at 100 mph.
With this he can drop his carton full of Lean Pockets on the counter, pay, and be gone!
Oliver's army is here to stay Oliver's army are on their way And I would rather be anywhere else But here today
Here on the South Sandwich Islands" we've been using this technology for some time, the results have been remarkable, shop lifting has been totally eliminated, none of our department stores ever run out of stock, and the only drawback seems to be a small localised outbreak of testicular cancer. But most people seem to agree that its benefits far outweigh its drawbacks.
Wal-Mart doesn't exactly higher the "brightest bulbs in the chandelier" if you know what I mean.
The good thing is that if RFID tags become omnipresent then so will RFID tag readers. As such an RFID tag reader should be small, simple to use, portable, and dirt cheap.
In fact the RFID Journal has a story about just such a reader being developed.
I guess I'll be buying one as soon as they come to market.
The big concern is in RFID tags in clothing and especially shoes.
Once you (or say your household) is linked to a purchase of a clothing item RFID, what's to stop them from tracking every time you enter a store, or a fellow business partner's store? I'm sure shoe manufactures could make a mint reselling the info.
Yeah, any given store may know what I buy there, but they don't know what I buy elsewhere, and especially what I pay for with cash (say a 2600 magazine at Barnes & Noble). But if you track my shoes, or know all the pants/shorts/shirts I own, you can track every purchase I make, even with cash so long as I still have the item on me (say in a mall and I'm shopping for a few items and popping in a number of stores).
Heh, you could track "friends" of someone by tracking shirts or 'ehm, boxers and such as well.
how are RFID tags a violation of your privacy
How about shoe manufacturers putting them into the soles of your shoes? These things can be as small as a grain of sand. Then everywhere you go, those ID'ed shoes can be "read" by floormats, and of course, tied to the customer record of the person who bought them.
I don't mind that they're tracked up to the point where I purchase them. But I want to be able to "fry" the chip as I walk out of the store. And I want automatic (and substantial) tort (damage) remedies for those who use them against me without my consent. Laws can be created to put that into effect.
BTW these things can be put in food. That gives a whole new meaning to "you are what you eat"!
Cheers
Giving you the benefit of the doubt:
It's about tracking things and the people that own them after purchase. RFID tags in tires could track everywhere you drive. RFID in clothes or shoes can track where you go.
Maybe you don't care because you don't do anything important to participate in the democratic process, but for anyone even involved with it to the basic level of civil duty, there will always be groups that don't agree with you that wield some power, and who are willing to use any means necessary to discredit or get you thrown in jail.
Everyone does some things that are illegal, because we have way too many laws that are very broadly written. I'm willing to bet you have committed several felonies in the past. We don't have enough resources to put everyone in jail, but we do have enough resources for a group in power to jail those with dissenting viewpoints.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Hey Surak, I tried commenting in your journal, but it wouldn't let me due to the friend or fof rule. I like your journal, let me comment :-). --dagg
However, business from WalMart on down will unite to fight any restriction or product labeling requirements.
Remember, there are people who want a Minority Report style future. There are others who simply see it as a way to make money... there are people who see "You wear adult diapers? We have Depends on sale" as simply an opportunity to make money.
It is the job of your Congressperson to make sure that his consituents are served. His constituents are the people who send him checks and only those people.
And if your RFID tag gets missed at checkout, it'll be your word against the store's that it's their fault. Enjoy your stay in jail.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Anyone have any ideas on where I can get a scanner, or how much they are, or if there are standards for them?
Screw privacy i'm worried about having to have 10 different scanners to keep track of my fridge inventory!
Assuming that Ms. Albrecht's server can stand the strain, we really *need* to click that link and visit the page. A massive hit count (especially one that lasts beyond the original slashdotting) will be just one more weapon she can add to her arsenal when she presents her message to decision makers in government and in business.
I have a huge amount of respect for the CASPIAN folks -- I wish I could throw away my Kroger card, but I'm in an area where the only alternative would be to pick up an Albertson's card. Let's give 'em all the hits they can get.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
>> Wal-Mart doesn't exactly higher the "brightest bulbs in the chandelier" if you know what I mean...
"higher"???
Yeah, we know what you mean.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
You know, this is actually a good idea to combat the problem before it begins.
Think about it, if nothing is done to restrict the use of RFID information, corporations/government will become happy with their presence. If you try to take these RFID data that is collected away from them, they will use their money to lobby against it.
Why do we have to use our social security numbers for everything these days? They were only invented for tax purposes, but because this is a juicy bit of information corperations want, they have lobbied, and won, the rights to ask for this info for say, signing up for your cell phone.
Moral is, if you don't get $100 you will not miss it as much as you will when someone takes it back after giving it to you. The same thing will happen with RFID tags and the information databases that will be associated with them.
Once companies have this data and ways to track it, they will NEVER want to give it back. And little guys usually have trouble fighting the big guys with even bigger wallets.
Those are tiny little radios - find out the frequency they use, rig up $10 worth of Radio Shack parts, hook it up to a 9v battery, and go for a walk in the offending store.
If you feed them an order of magnitude more energy than they're designed to take in exactly the band they're using
Yes, you can know the operating frequency without a fancy spectrum analyzer - the data sheets on those things are pretty much public knowledge
I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
I buy a shirt at Wal-Mart and wear it a week later to my friendly supermarket. Since the RFID tags broadcast, the supermarket counter realizes that the person at the counter has RFID #123456789. Once I swipe my debit card, they can combine my name, debit card, and an RFID. Each time my debit card is swiped at the store, a new RFID may be logged along with it. The next time that I pay with cash, the device at the counter may still be able to track what I buy because it knows that RFID 123456789 is John Doe and he just bought some . Broadcasting IDs is a VERY bad thing because it allows passive devices to pick it up. I don't want to be able for my local store to be able to identify me based on the shirt I'm wearing.
If you mod me down, I shall become less powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Stick your new clothes in your microwave! Not only will they be rendered untraceable, but they'll be nice and warm, almost dryer fresh!
If the outside is short on room, you could put all the warnings and restrictions on the inside of the packaging.
Doesn't Microsoft do this with their EULA?
" Cool, MIB can maybe utilize it too (hey Joe bought a sixpack, how interesting, glad we have all these scanners everywhere)."
How about, hey this empty can on the side of the road was bought by Joe. Send him a ticket for littering, and put a tag in his file that he probably drinks and drives.
"Best thing is, while everyone hoots and hollers about RFID, they fail to notice those "security" cams that can see your face + see what you bought + see the license plate of your car, all of which can be done TODAY"
Yes, but not automatically. They ned to go through tapes.
"We won't even talk about the instance when you use your CC"
You can only track a CC if a purchase is made. Since RFID broadcasrt a signal when they are hit with a signal, you can be tracked at every stop light. This outs you in a position to prove your innocents should something happen 'near by'. Have to prove your innocent is far worsee then defending your inocents. Look at historic england and what happens when someone has to prove there innocents. hell, go back to the Salem witch trials.
"Assuming he's stupid enough to not be aware of the fact that RFID's are EVERYWHERE now, what are the odds that he can either disable, or better yet, make copies and distribute them EVERYWHERE, totally making the system worthless?"
exactly why these would only end up being used against innocent people.
"we have to take the good with the bad,once you open the box, you can't filter what escapes."
no true. there is no reason this technology can't be used in the way manufactures want and not lead to privacy concerns., There is no reason why we shouldn't loko out for are selves to ensure that the scenerios I have posted don't come true.
ow about rfid tags the "self destruct" when you walk out the store? Or the ability to easily remove it from clothing, like applying them with a stcker so they could be easily removed.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Leave it to anything like this to bring the "conspiracy theory my privacy is being violated the man is watching me" comments.
/. with an email address? Did you pay for your internet connection using your credit card to post using your /. account?
I hate to break it to you guys, but guess what? You're already being watched! Do you have a credit card? A bank account? Do you have an account on
Your purchases can already be tracked. My cell phone bill can track me too, and let's not get started on the possibility of using a cell phone in operation to place someone within the certain range of a cell site, let alone GPS enabled cell phones.
YOU ARE NOT ANONYMOUS. Somebody knows.
If someone, say the police, wanted to track you down, they could. That isn't anything new at all. For cryin' out loud, what do you people really expect in a world of technology?
And for that matter... privacy means "freedom from unauthorized intrusion." What happens when that intrustion is authorized? Say you buy a knife with an RFID tag and go stabbing people with it. My knife has an RFID tag, but I'm not killing anyone with it, so I don't care. The guy with the tagged knife will probably care, because then he might get caught. The RIFD tags in my shoes could track Mr. Knifer, and me too, but nobody really cares where I'm going.
Every technology can be used and abused, like the knife. I can make dinner with it or kill you with it. It's a matter of controlling its authorized use. Even then, no matter what anyone does, someone will find a way to abuse it. The only solution to that, dear readers, is to disavow civilization and live in caves.
this is my sig
First, there is perhaps .01% of the population who even know what these RFID devices are, never mind the alleged societal dangers that lurk within them. Very few politicians are going to fight very hard to pass a piece of legislation that has so little public spotlight. Most politicians, especially the powerful ones who can sway votes, are media whores. No one is going to get on a network Sunday morning political program talking about RFID tags.
Second, the political winds are blowing gale force in the anti-regulation direction. Any piece of legislation that isn't privatizing workers or loosening government oversight is pretty much dead in the water without some kind of immediate crisis (like the recent corporate scandals). The best that could be hoped for is that congressional folks would say, "let's see what the free market does with these devices first and then regulate them if need be."
Third, Wal-Mart & Co., if there was a miraculous surge in support for this legislation, would easily lobby to defeat the bill or get it placed into committee for further study which would effectively kill the bill. A grassroots campaign would be too disorganized, too broke, and too unsophisticated to ever hope to win such a battle.
I'm not recommending whoever is sponsoring this bill to give up. I'm a firm believer that even losing battles are important to fight because they do raise awareness and keep alive the chance for change sometime in the future.
<a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>
I'll just stick everything I buy in the microwave for a few seconds :)
Is there consumer-available equipment to read and write these things? Aside from the privacy concerns, it would KICK ASS if my shoe could log me into my server...
Anyways, I'll be lining everything I wear with copper and drag a grounding pole behind me everwhere I go. I'll also carry an ion-ray gun to disable any of those little bastards I come across...
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
CASPIAN also has some pretty far out claims when it comes to rfid technology. Among my favorites is this page which claims These tiny tags, predicted by some to cost less than 1 cent each by 2004, are "somewhere between the size of a grain of sand and a speck of dust." They are to be built directly into food, clothes, drugs, or auto-parts during the manufacturing process. Directly into food!?!? Seriously folks, I work for a major food manufacturer and we would never dream of putting these things directly into food.
Although labs might be able to produce microscopic tags, the ones we currently use in the industry are around 1 inch square (ever open a new book to find a funny sticker with metal in it?). The tags are also relatively extremely expensive. The two vendors I talked to within the last two weeks both quoted me a price of around $0.50 per tag for an order of 50 million tags, nowhere near the price we'd require for a realistic rollout.
In short, yes the tags will come and there will be some potential for abuse. And yes, it should be illegal for a stalker (or merchant) to sit in a mall and see what you're walking around with. But the hype is is way overblown.
--I really don't want to write this but I sorta have to. Please don't take this personal, I just need to rant on this stuff and in general, it's not addressed to you just it fits as a reply here, k? It's IMPORTANT. This is WAY more important than any video game, music track, latest CPU chip, latest cellphone-any of that stuff. That stuff is FUN, it's not IMPORTANT.
OK, generic rant time
Range on these tiny chips started out a few millimeters. Then quickly got to a few inches, then a few feet, and some are much farther than that now. They started out not holding much data, now they can hold a lot. They started out saying microchips would never be small enough to implant, now it's common in pets and some special forces and some prisoners have them. This is a geek board, let's get real on tech advances. "They" , they being these high powered international goons and orgs and whatnot- started out saying your social security number was not an ID, and that it would only be used to track your social security info. They started out with no licenses, then paper licenses (I had one, no picture on it either), then picture licenses, now licenses that have your biometrics, retina scan, finger print and who knows what, DNA patterns, no idea what they got planned.. They started out with "only" a few firearms restrictions,(I remember much less crime, far fewer restrictive laws, funny how that worked out) then they added more and more and more, then they took more and more classes away and now you need a permit to get a permit to think about getting a permit, and a lot of places they just tell ya to go pound sand. Same with something as simple as owning your own property and building a regula small home, now it's a mnightmare of inspectors and bribed off councilmen and restrictions and who knows, and NO, it's just not all that much safer, it's roughly the same amount of fires and "houses collapsing", in fact, new homes are mostly built a lot crappier than they used to be in most aspects. They started out with individual repsonsibility and only elected sheriffs that everyone local knew and you could go talk to them, and if you didn't like them, you could vote the bum out and with the vote you could LOOK into the ballot box and see yes/no if it was stuffed or not.. Now they have mostly non elected helmeted black ski masked anonymous darth vader clones kicking in peoples doors and throwing in "humane grenades",no matter what ya get popped for it's gona cost you your house almost to even think about fighting it in court, juries have been castrated to nothinghood, and when you go vote some machine announces who won with absolutely zero way to check and see if you are being lied to. They started out with real money made of precious metals that couldn't be dorked with, now they have funny money *they* can re valuate up or down without asking you at the issuance of some commands on a screen.
On and on. This is one of those deals you either get it or ya don't get it. It's just one more step towards full bore dictatorial police state. I'm older than most here so I'll just say it out loud, because my frame of reference is long enough to SEE the changes and the directions, and there's NO WAY to avoid what it is, it's obvious as all get out.
YO, the government is taking over ya young guys! No %^&^&**( %%^^t!! Wake UP! It's a freeking police state heading your way, it's half way here now! It ain't NOTHING like it used to be not that long ago and it's clear as day what they are doing!! They will MAKE YOU get chipped, even if they have to run a scam "terrorist" attack or six, eventually-and soon-or you'll be a criminal if you aren't chipped or "tagged". They WILL BE telling you where to work. The laws are written and on the books, you can READ the dang things, they PLAN on using them laws, they don't write that crap for giggles. You WON'T have any say in it. This government is right at the point it kills people, it's building more "camps" now, I mean, please pick up on what "camps" means. They WILL BE tracking y
I think the major problem here we're all missing because of the huge uproar over privacy, are the tons and tons of potential lost jobs to this technology.
There are entire segments of the lower class and college students that populate the ranks of cashiers and warehouse workers, and the list goes on.
Im a firm believer in laissez faire, and this could lead to a day when not everyone *HAS* to be employed full time busting ass and instead can concentrate on school, or whatever... but i believe the much more likely outcome would be social dissent caused by people with too much time on their hands.
a ton of possibilities, a ton of problems. it will be interesting watching the powers that be play this one out.
I believe that there should be some regulation here, but the Walmart 2005 date shouldn't concern ANYONE about privacy issues.
The reason? Wal-mart is pushing for RFID on the PALLET level. They are not pushing for all of their products to be individually identified (yet).
For tracking of product coming in and our of their warehouses, this is a great idea. Rerouting product that someone accidentally put into the wrong truck is costly. Also this means they could drive around and find a pallet they are looking for in moments, even if it is still in a trailer.
The majority of the RFID tags in use are the read only type that repsond with an identification number. This number is useless without a database to cross reference the number to some item, person, whatever. If anything should be feared it is the database not the tag. There are many other methods of tracking besides RFID, i.e. finger prints, retinal scans, your face! Any of these distinct features can also be cross referenced to a database. So attacking some simple technology like RFID tags is pretty stupid. Instead there should be concerns, attacks, legislation, etc. against the data that goes into a database and how it is used. burnin
I love lobbies like these. I'm going to lobby to get products clearly labeled that have a barcode stuck to them. I think that's important, you know. You just can't forgot about the thousands of people a day who purchase things not understand the purpose of a barcode.
Ok, so I'm confused. Why is this important? Why does it matter if a retailer has a little RFID tag instead of a big, ugly looking barcode? Transactions still take place as usual, don't they? I give the merchant money, they give me product. Does it really matter what the means is by which they determine how much money I give them in exchange for their product?
It seems like such a non-issue to me. Someone please tell me what the big deal is.
-BrentBut think what you could do if all your clothing had RFID tags. You could have a sensor that queries what is currently in your closet, what is in the drawers, what is in the hamper. No searching for things, no wondering.
/. about this, and rfid tags seems like a simple way to do it.
Extend this out to food items, if you had rfid tags in the packaging of all your food items, your refridgerator and pantry could make the grocery list itself. I've seen many conversations on
Journey
If you didn't know it: All car tires contains RFID devices on the request from certain law enforcement agencies.
But maybe cars are not considered "wide spread".
Just install one of those bad boys in your car. Not only takes out the rfid's on the way home from the store, but also most of the cars around you, traffic lights and especially the cell phones. Just make sure your car was built pre-electronics age.
I hoped you're enjoying your Odor Eaters Extra Odor Control shoe inserts.
Can we interest you in another pair of Dr Scholl's Lift Inserts for Short Men With Inferiority Complexes?
Isn't it about time you bought some new underwear? Those Hanes Her Ways you're wearing are 2 years old.
Just because it works, doesn't mean it isn't broken.
Last time I checked, tin was not aluminium.
In truth, RFID doesn't seem all that alarming to me. I work for a company that's about to enter this market, and the technical aspects of it seem pretty harmless. For one thing, the detectors aren't positional; you can't tell where the tag is, only what data it contains. This is most useful in a warehouse, where you want to know how much of which pallet you've got.
Secondly, the tags are VERY short-range. We're talking inches here, especially for the small tags linked above. You can boost range with a higher-power transmitter, but if you want to extend farther than a couple of feet, you'll probably fry somebody's brain. I'm not sure how this could be used for surveillance.
Hamster
Should I be scared of RFID tags? This is a big game of "What if"
What if Johnson and Johnson puts RFID tags in my vitamins, and I poop them out. Should I be worried that RFID tag scanning trucks will be scanning my local sewage treatment plant?
What if they just built little sewer traversing robots that just sat at my connection to the sewage system analyzing my waste water in order to do data mining to see what nutrients would be better marketed in my area.
What if Law Enforcement took over that technology and had a sewer traversing robot that could scan RFID tags and analyze what drugs I take?
OMG what if aliens are taking over mars?
Wal-Mart will use the technology to eliminate all their check-out people. You just walk up to a thing and scan your credit card and it figures out the crap you got. Every corporation's dream is to have 1 employee and still be able to rake in ungodly amounts of cash.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I'm shocked. Not that this legislation is being put forth (which is a good idea btw), but rather I'm surprised that a group called Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering exists to begin with. The fact that a bunch of paranoid conspiracy theorists have meetings and offices baffles me.
It's not stupid. It's advanced.
The possibility of these things being put into pieces of currency (as described here) is probably even more worrisome than them being put into consumer products. No more anonymity in cash transactions. (By the way, would they interference with wireless devices, cordless phones, etc? I don't want to have to change into an old shirt to use the phone!)
This post is dedicated to all of those
I'm as concerned about privacy as the next /.er, but count me in on the "what's the big deal?" side. These tags are meant for inventory control up to the point of retail sale. They'll most likely be attached to the packaging which gets thrown away, not the product itself. If you walked through a mall in clothes full of active RFID tags, you'd be setting off all kinds of inventory scanners, cash register scanners, shoplifting sensors, etc. Assuming they didn't zap the tags at the cash register when you paid, there would be some small privacy leak between the time you bought the stuff and threw away the packaging at home if someone wanted to stalk you at short range with an RFID scanner to see what you bought. Someone could also theoretically dumpster dive through your garbage without getting their hands dirty if they wanted to find out your shopping habits.
Just put your jeans in the microwave for a few seconds and forget about it...
As I understand it, RFIDs identify specific units. Barcodes identified a product.
Barcodes are easily visible, and will be removed or not left in a visible position when a consumer wears a purhcased item. RFIDs are invisible, and could easily be read without the consumer being aware of it.
Even without access to a central database on who bought what shirt, RFIDs could be used to automatically correlate data: "Customer entering in pink blouse has been in store 7 times over the past three weeks,"
I would not go so far as to accuse its backers of attempting to sneak a "citizen tracking" technology past us. The intended uses of the technology are valid and make sense. However I believe they are showing a callous disregard to the potential unintended consequences on their customer's privacy.
Of course if you actualy bought anything they could then correlate it with your credit card.
The goals of tracking inventory can easily be met with an RFID device that automatically deactivates at a certain date and can be told to deactivate.
And as soon as I can buy a scanner I'm getting one!!! No more lost keys, lost wallet, lost camera. Only problem - what if I loose the scanner...?
Old pickup line: "I love that red dress."
New pickup line: "I love that purple Victoria Secrets Wonderbra, 32C, with front hooks you're wearing... etc...."
There already are thousands of microwave antennas all over each and every country, They're called Cell phone towers, and it would take very little work on the part of an electrical engineer to alter the regular transmissions to the frequency needed to activate these things.
Ahhh... Silly comments (such as these) intrigue me.
If Wal-Mart didn't "hire" the "brightest bulbs", then they sure know how to motivate "dim bulbs" to elevate the company to $200+ billion a year.
And is there any significance if the poster uses as super huge or ultra little as their humourous qualifier.
Or better still if they use hemoroid creme as their example purchase.
This is how RFID tags are a violation of your privacy.
I don't understand, there's all this talk about tracking people wherever they go with these RFID devices...what's stopping me from taking the device off and tossing it out?
I think it was (formerly?) SUN's software architect, Bill Joy. Ellison is fine with this technology so long as an Oracle Database is used to store all the data, if they try to use DB2 he is bitterly opposed to any RFID tagery.
Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
Easy solution - trade your grocery card to someone else with one, and trade to someone else next month.
I think Kathy Albrecht may be exaggerating a mite when she claims that the RFID tags will "burst into flames" when microwaved.
First off, you're dealing with a silicon chip. The melting point of silicon is, according to this site, over 2,500 degrees Fahrenheit. Its boiling point is even higher, at over 5,000 degrees F.
Another thing to remember is that any RFID device is going to have conductive paths in it. It is, in essence, a small integrated circuit chip. Considering that the thickness of conductive paths in a typical IC can be measured in micrometers, it seems to me that said paths would vaporize under microwave-oven level bombardment, thus rendering the chip useless, with only a few seconds (at the most!) of exposure to the high-power field.
Yet ANOTHER thing to think about. Microwave ovens work by heating water molecules trapped in food. How many water molecules do you think are trapped in a silicon chip?
I can see one possibility here, and I certainly intend to E-mail Ms. Albrecht about this. Under strong microwave fields, such as are found in a typical oven, it may be that the chip gets hot enough, with more than a few seconds exposure, to cause melting or scorching of the surrounding material.
Why might it do this? Because, once the microwave energy vaporizes the normal conductive paths, one or more of those paths may melt together on the chip and form a big diode, capable of passing lots of current. This could result in the chip generating lots of heat.
However, as for the chip itself, I don't think there's a consumer microwave oven on the planet that puts out enough power to make it "burst into flames." Not with a 2,500+ degree melting point!
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
Probably would have been better with Tom Hanks though. :-)
"We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
I can see this going down in walmart's stock room:
1. Take individual products out of main container.
2. Replace products with bricks and RFID tags.
3. Place main container in inventory.
4. PROFIT!
Seriously, if they are going to do inventory without actually opening boxes and COUNTING individual pieces then they are going to have alot of shrink and no one will know about it until the main carton is cracked open to stock the shelves.
-ted
Throw Them In The Microwave!
Slashdot is my Mercer Box.
I'd have to, in order to protect my media from accidental microwaving.
Doesn't copyright law allow for a personal backup, so long as the two copies are not used at once?
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
You have to be kidding. It's probably the most profitable business of all. Okay, maybe not the chinese potato bags that pass as clothing in Kmart shops in the US, but all the stuff that teenagers want to wear is highly profitable. A lot more than high-tech gizmos.
To give you an example, when I was a student my roomate had his own clothing company. Among other things they were making jackets for famous french design companies like Chanel. Chanel would give them the design and the fabric, they would put it together and sell it back to Chanel for about 20~40$ and Chanel would add their tagname and sell it for, hold on to the railing, 1000~2000$. I'm not making this up. Rich bitches and stupid teenagers will buy anything at any price as long as it's in fashion and better than what their neighbor/friends are wearing.
It's not because we are geeks without clue about this stuff that it doesn't exist. And RFID tags fit right in to sell them more of that stuff. They'll love it.
Non-Linux Penguins ?
Why is it that people always inherently love assuming the worst about technology? I was in the annual meeting for the australian packaging group, and i know their main concern was to get RFID implemented to prevent situations of poisonings and extortion - ie, once an item is sold, the RFID is set as sold. Alarm bells can start to ring if this already purchased item is returned to the shelf - automatically.
How do these things with a passive range of a few feet compare to say a mobile phone's tracking ability. ah well.
You're all missing the real aim of this - to wipe out shoplifting. If there's a RFID tag placed inside a product's packaging during manufacture, It'll make it nigh on impossible for shoplifters to remove. At the moment taking of an anti-theft tag takes 2 seconds and an exacto knife. If they could bury a chip smaller than a grain of rice inside every product, shoplifters would be stopped overnight.
Tom Hanks dumped Nicole Kidman? Yeah, but he's not as lame as Tommy Lee Jones! What an idiot, dropping Pamela Lee like that! Like that old fart could get another young one as cute as li'l Pamela... Don't these hollywood guys have eyes?
Why not just take a black pen marker with you when you go shopping, mark out the RFID!
A fascinating development took place recently. On March 2, 1999, patent 5,878,155 was issued to Houston inventor Thomas W. Heeter described as a "Method for verifying human identity during electronic sale transactions". Heeter's patent "abstract" reads: "A method is presented for facilitating sales transactions by electronic media. A bar code or a design is tattooed on an individual. Before the sales transaction can be consummated, the tattoo is scanned with a scanner. Characteristics about the scanned tattoo are compared to characteristics about other tattoos stored on a computer database in order to verify the identity of the buyer. Once verified, the seller may be authorized to debit the buyer's electronic bank account in order to consummate the transaction. The seller's electronic bank account may be similarly updated." Heeter's invention is aimed toward the booming world of Internet E-commerce. In the very near future, many products will be purchased E-commerce via the Internet. WorldNet Daily writes, ". . . Internet e-commerce figures spiraling upward, and the European market expected to surpass the U.S. online community in a couple of years, potential sales online have been projected to reach nearly $1 trillion by 2003." (WorldNet Daily, September 30, 1999)
This space available.
If these things are so small what's to stop them from using them in actual food items? It would work in the same manner taggants work in explosives in the US. I donâ(TM)t like the sound of these things but, It might be useful if you had food allergies and went in for allergic medical care. Hell they could probably track you last meal(s) to find out if you had something you werenâ(TM)t supposed to.
And what about passing these things out in your waste (assuming they survive the digestive system)? Seems like they could be picked up, much like how seeds are passed through animals and deposited miles away from the parent plant. Then whoâ(TM)s to say they actually "belong" to you and just not along for the ride somehow.
Or what about recycled products? Would they also contain a chip that would be passed on to the next item, so that it may read: âoeI am a Pepsi bottleâ and âoeI am (now) a milk container?â
Seems like after a while there would be too much noise from unrelated chips.
~phyman
I agree.
I live in Sweden, and lately I have noticed that RFID tags have quietly been introduced in some stores.
The uses I've seen so far has been pretty responsible. The RFID-tag is usually stickered on like a price tag and easily removed and discarded (I always tear it up).
The only problem I've encountered so far was when someone in a book store had slipped a RFID-tag between the pages of a computer book I bought.
For some reason it proceeded to set of the alarm in a different store when I continued my shopping.
I haven't seen any outhright abuses of the tags tough, at least not yet.
"First lesson," Jon said. "Stick them with the pointy end."
I see what you're getting at, the whole RFID-tag is basically a antenna, but I doubt it would be practical to knock them out with a EM-pulse.
As I understand it they are actually designed to convert EM pulses to power since they have no internal power source, so far so well, but if you look at a RFID-tag you'll see that at least the visible conductors are really fat.
From this we can conclude that they would be hard to burninate with an EMP.
My (pretty uneuducated) guess is that they are much tougher than other electronics due to them not being very miniaturized.
In short, you would probably knock out every integrated circuit in a wide radius before you managed to toast the RFID-tag.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
"First lesson," Jon said. "Stick them with the pointy end."
Assuming he's stupid enough to not be aware of the fact that RFID's are EVERYWHERE now, what are the odds that he can either disable, or better yet, make copies and distribute them EVERYWHERE, totally making the system worthless?
Obviously you'll need tags as you would stick out like a sore thumb w/o any. You won't "make copies" of your own tags, you'll copy other peoples tags. That should be quite easy as everyone you walk by will eagerly transmit you their info. In the future I think there will be 'RFID' theft and police will profile you based on your tags.
Deuteronomy 13:06-9
[nt]
"First lesson," Jon said. "Stick them with the pointy end."
. go ahead, insult all you want, everything I have stated is true, it's verifiable, the information is out there to find, and usuallyeasily. I wouldn't say it if it wasn't all *true*, I'd be doing or saying something else. They lie, they kill people. Nam was based on a huge government lie, the "gulf of tonkin attack". Maybe you need drugs to be able to read, or maybe you think millions killed and sickened are just a joke, but I don't. I have too many friends in the service who got told the massive corporate/government lie that agent orange was "harmless". Those asshats lie. They lie constantly, just constantly. They lied about gulf war one, remember the "babies in the incubator" story? Turns out to be a PR fabrication to garner political support. They also lie about the casualty count, they claim around 300, but they leave out around 40 THOUSAND guys dead from gulf war syndrome. They lied for years about that, said it was "all in their heads". Yep, and all through their bodies too, poisoned "vaccinations", exposure to blown up chemical weapons (why saddam doesn't have many they have found, they all got destroyed under orders from schwarzkopf when they were found, they just don't publicize it much because they were almost all US manufactured and shipped over there), and those guys thereand down wind did it with NO PROTECTION, then add in exposure to DU munitions. Liars, saying none of that is harmful. Warren commission report with lee harvey oswald being the lone perp? Absurd. They lie. "Sneak attack" on Peral Harbor? turns out they lied, they knew it was happening, even the residents at pearl knew it was going to happen and the FBI went around and confiscated newspapers with the notices, then lied all through the war and for decades after about it. These are BIG lies, on very important subjects.
Besides that, try again, you're an AC, so who knows your motivation other than shooting the messenger. The internet is enabling the people to find out things faster and better than before, and this scares the liars, the blood profiteers, and their little drone employees who value a cheap paycheck over what is right. You might be able to fake out people younger and not with as much historical background, but don't try to fake out people old enough to have seen lie after lie exposed. They are chronic and serial liars on most important subjects historically, so we have to consider they are still lying about what's going on now. And I'll state again, they plan on forced human microschipping at some point, and this getting people to accept chips everywhere and fingerprinting and whatnot is part of the mass conditioining that is required. It's obvious as all get out.
Challenge, find one thing I have stated that is not the truth, go ahead, knock yourself out. Want some more? They lied constantly about the TWA 800 attack, government spokes liars, up and down and sideways, yet earlier this year a little fast moving story crossed the wires that they were forced to admit by lawsuits they were lying-but by then, the mass damage was done. How many examples do you need? How about the attack on the Liberty intel ship? they lied for years about that one, even ordered the poor survivors to lie or face military brig time. How about the "no live POWs" after nam? That turned out to be a lie, same as they abandoned live POWs after ww2(stalin kept all the US prisoners he found in german camps) and the korean war (both china and russia kept a lot of US prisoners), and lied about it. In the 50s and 60s they got caught at medical experimentation and mass exposure with chems, biologicals and radiologicals,some from mass spraying with airplanes over huge areas, again, they denied it. Finally in the 70s they admitted they had been lying. They are lying now about the spraying going on.
No, friend, perhaps you need to stop using drugs and wake up, or perhaps question the people you are working for and maybe stop just following any order given to you. This is brave new world on steroids coming, all this advanced tech will be used to co
In response to the scary thought of stores being able to track items they sell, Ive started a public interest group of my own.
Citizens Raging Against Proper Standards To Allow Identifying Numbers.
We are having our first meeting this weekend in my basement, because frankly i dont trust YOUR basement, it may have RFID scanners in the walls, celing, and floor, as common as they are and as much as everyone will want to put them in their homes.
A few years ago I bought some shoes at a (national chain) and shortly thereafter, found myself setting off store alarms all over the area. One security person at one store, noticing that I hadn't purchased anything, noticed my shoes and asked if I'd purchased them at (national chain). That was my first clue to what was going on.
It got bad enough that at some points I would alter my footwear based on if I was planning to visit a store.
Once I'd set off an alarm walking out of a (another national chain) when the manager(?) ran up to me. As I turned, I noticed him looking down and he turned away. Probably noticed the shoes.
1) How many people were falsely accused before this issue was known?
2) What if I wasn't a reasonably respectable-looking white guy? How differently would I have been treated?
When I purchased a new pair of those shoes recently, I mentioned to the cashier that they need to make sure their anti-theft device was deactivated. The cashier responded that they'd heard a lot about that.
These kinds of incidents will probably be much more common with RFIDs.