Slashdot Mirror
Wal-Mart Cancels RFID Trial
EABird writes "CNet is reporting that Wal-mart has announced that they have canceled the RFID trial they were planning. Unfortunately, it looks like they are canceling it to focus on the use of the same technology in the warehouses and distribution centers instead, and waiting for the cost to come down before using the RFIDs in the stores."
Why is it "Unfortunate" that they're using a new tool for their warehousing? It sounds like you want them to abandon RFIDs altogether. Why the fear? Hell, they would never need to TELL you they're using them. How would you know? At least they're talking about it, eh?
"In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, 'Make us your slaves, but feed us.'" -Dostoevsky
What exactly is "unfortunate" about this? If it doesn't make it into a consumer product at the point of sale, what FSCKING harm is it doing? (as far as it goes, even if it DOES make it into a consumer product at the point of sale, if 1) they disclose that it's there and optionally 2) they make it removeable (part of packaging, on a removable tag, etc) I fail to see how this is a problem. If they disclose and don't make it removeable, I don't have to buy that product, do I?
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
I don't have a problem with them using RFID for their internal inventory tracking. Sure, we'll be facing this same argument all over again when the price does drop enough to deploy in stores, but it can wait until then.
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
What's wrong with this?
I can't say that I don't give a fuck. I've just run out of fuck to give.
Didn't they start censoring their video games and pulling magazines because customers complained? How is that not listening?
No, but they might listen to a few million fundamentalist Christians concerned about the mark of the beast.
Geeks don't have a monopoly on privacy concerns. Perhaps if you'd not decided that the rest of society was "trash" and paid some attention, you'd know this...
Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
Complain and fret all you want but that's the way it is. The benefits are too great for retailers to ignore:
- easy to inventory...no more midnight teams counting stock and taping notes to the shelves
- no more scanning trouble (dirty scan window or munged barcode)
- meta information can help keep stock fresh...embed an expiration date and have the product tell you when it's expired
- reduce loss from fraudulent returns - stores could tell if a product was purchased at that chain.
Those are just a few simple examples of the usefulness of tags. I do have some questions though...
- What's the range of scanners? What if I buy a candy bar in one store, stick it in my pocket, then go to another store. Will the scanner pick up what's in my pocket?
- People seem to be worried about being tracked. What will washing do to the tags?
I'm not sure why this is a "rights" issue. Is there a right to privacy written somewhere?
Look at grocery store membership cards. They've been out for almost a decade now. Privacy pundits decried that the stores would know WAY TOO MUCH sensitive information by correlating users to their groceries.
I think I've received two mailings in the last four years that said: "Mr. Miller! Here are some wonderful coupons that are tailored to your unique shopping needs!"
Both times the results were laughable. Not a single coupon was for somethind I used, or wanted to use, or might have been persuaded to use, based on the data they've 'gathered'.
For the tinfoil hats out there, if my experience in Government is any indication, Big Brother doesn't have the resources or money or true knowledge to abuse this information the way you think they will.
When was the last time cookies were used to betray your privacy? They were a big hot nasty item in the near recient past too.
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
They pulled a couple of 'men's magazines', Maxim and Stuff because a few people complained.
They sell (unmarked) censored versions of music because the company find them morally wrong.
Consequently, I can't buy music there, since everything I buy has a 'parent advisory' on it.
"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
Honest question. How is this any different (from a privacy perspective) from serial numbers on bills? I don't know about Euros, but US dollars have them, and nobody seems to think they're that much of a threat to privacy. When you spend a particular bill at a store, how can anyone down the line know that you once had it, or that you were the one that spent it there?
In other RFID news today, Wired is reporting that the EU may implant RFID tags into the Euro, basically eliminating the anonymous cash transaction.
To stop counterfeit bills, not to stop anonymous cash transactions. You honestly think someone is going to setup a database and link all of the bills against your CITIZEN.USER_PK1 unique ID number just to make sure you can't be anonymous?
Sometimes I just get utterly confused as to what you people expect. Why do you guys even leave the house? I got a news flash for you -- you still don't have anonymous cash transactions because people still see you! Yeah, you better go saw your face off as it's a way of identifying you.
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
There's been a lot of talk here about RFIDs lately. Mostly (justifiably) negative talk. However, this is okay, for now, right? Does anyone here have a problem with the use of RFIDs in the warehouses (assuming they don't trickle down to the consumers)?
I do see the privacy problems with RFIDs, but I'm not really worried about it... yet. I don't care if they use RFIDs in their warehouses/stores, as long as any items I buy do not have an active RFID when I leave (not that I shop at, or have ever even seen, a Walmart). RFIDs do have legitimate (anti-theft) uses. They have a use for inventory tracking/control. They could be used in corporate offices to keep track of various items (laptops/desktops [maybe], other electronics, books, etc).
RFIDs also have other uses, outside the traditional business realm, such as in ecology and field biology. They can be used (theoretically) in some tasks in meteorology.
Yes, they have "immoral" uses, but so does P2P software. It should still be legal to manufacture and use RFIDs, just like it should be legal to write and use P2P code. Don't sound like a paranoid kook, be rational about all of this. Write to your local representative what's bad about RFIDs, and what sort of legislation would help curb the privacy invasion that will inevitably come along with widespread use. Better yet, try getting an appointment with any of your local representatives to discuss it in person (not too likely, but it can happen). Now is the time to get this taken care of, because it will soon be too late. Once something gets in motion, it's much much harder to legislate it out (again, this is similar to P2P).
Note: I didn't read the article.
Down with Saudi Arabia!!!
To be completely honest, they've been doing a good job of tracking us anyway over the past decade. Of course, this is a bad thing, so it's nice to know that we won't have an electronic bulls' eye stuck on our package of Sam's Peanut Butter Cups for the time being.
Still, keep in mind that everything we buy with that special discount card from your local grocery store is linked to your name, address, telephone number, date of birth, annual salary, previous purchases, purchase trends, purchase times, and favorite cashiers. I would mind heavily if they didn't pay me for mine - of course, that's because I work at Meijer for mine, and I now have an associates' degree, so the tracking can be more easily rectified by finding a new job and leaving the 10% discount behind.
I would recommend finding tinfoil bags for your groceries soon, however.
Nicholas Eckert
vidstudent
Putting RFID in the individual packages doesn't really affect their distribution model too much, since they're scanning everything with bar codes in the checkout line anyway.
"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." -- G. K. Chesterton
Having worked in a big box wal-mart like store for several years, I can say that had I been unscrupulous and wanted to take something, I could have.... and I wouldn't have had to leave via the main entrance. Employee's can very easily slip out the back.... now, if these chips were tracking everyone inside of the store, I can see massive privacy problems with that.
It's the slippery slope, but I can picture some guy in a dark room watching little blips move around on a screen ala Enemy of the State. How long before this technology is required and we all have chips under our skin to track us in the name of national security?
Wired is reporting that the EU may implant RFID tags into the Euro, basically eliminating the anonymous cash transaction.
How exactly does that "eliminate the anonymous cash transaction?" Newsflash: CURRENCY ALREADY HAS SERIAL NUMBERS ON IT. The fact that the bill has a number is useless unless they know the details of every transaction in which it was ever exchanged. If you lend me $20 and I spend it at Subway and get $10 back in change... how on earth would they ever track any of that? How would the Sub-lady know that it was me who bought that sub?
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
Personally, I was a little disappointed when I read it and found out that they weren't cancelling it due to consumer backlash. That would be the ultimate victory.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
I think the writer meant that it was unfortunate for the RFID industry that Walmart is backing down from the more ambitious plan; it's not exactly great PR any time a client downgrades their plans. Walmart was supposedly the main power behind UPC barcodes and hence their every move is watched...and if they're backing down and going for a less-ambitious implementation, it might be interpreted as a sort of warning flag to the business world that maybe RFID isn't quite ready for primetime.
It's not a terribly surprising move, and is pretty intelligent, honestly; this is sort of the retail equivalent of the "staging" concept in IT. Walmart's forging new ground, so they're taking it one step at a time. Warehousing operations are more centralized, there's fewer units of equipment than for a POS system change, and so on. It's also a little easier to keep it transparent to end users.
Please help metamoderate.
(Disclaimer: I am affiliated with the MIT Auto-ID Center.)
All these privacy concerns people bring up, about people tracking you down are really overrrated.
Why?
The stores (walmart and others) have the same concerns. They preferably just want their own scanners to recognize their own products. Why? If an average joe can create a reader that identifies the actual product, what's to stop their competitor from parking a van outside their store with a powerful reader? The last thing a store wants to do is let anyone else knows their inventory levels. They're practically on the same boat.
and why won't they have the incentive to kill the tags when you leave the store? If you're talking about Walmart, people that buy clothes from walmart most likely will go BACK to walmart at some point in the future wearing those clothes. The last thing they need is a line of 100 house-wifes lining up at the customer service center wondering why they were accused of stealing.
(just in case someone catches my userid, yes, I'm not in the service now, now I'm in sales.)
I've been selling manufacturing equipment for boxes for about 6 years.
RFID tags have many, many uses in warehousing. The idea that an RFID will somehow automatically lead to an invasion of privacy is silly.
Sometimes RFID tags are used so the forklift operator knows what's on a pallet they're moving. The traditional way is to hang a piece of paper from the load. However, paper can and does fall off, get ripped, etc.
RFID can also be used on physical portals to measure traffic. A huge amount of savings can be made in a warehouse by knowing where the physical bottlenecks are. The most cost-effective and reliable way to do this is a system of non-invasive sensing and automatic data collection. Ever been in warehousing operations? There's a LOT going on and it's easy to lose stuff. I've had trouble finding a shipment at a customs depot that was only garage-sized. Everything is a different size, shape, and appearance.
Will the FUD never stop?
Ever buy something like a power tool, CD, or memory strip from a retailer? There's an inventory control strip in there, right? Duh.
Beyond that, do some investigation to the problems of bar codes. Betcha didn't know there's a very limited number of options there which are basically exhausted. Ever consider the sensing difference between barcodes and RFID? Hmm...maybe you could know what something is and what's INSIDE without having to physically touch the box.
Yes, I know there are barcode readers that work at a distance. They don't work THROUGH other boxes. How do you know what's inside a mixed pallet of boxes which is sealed with plastic wrap? How better to detect a discrepancy between shipping documents and the actual items than by non-invasively knowing AND COUNTING what's inside such a mixed pallet?
RFID and other non-invasive knowledge technologies don't automatically mean you are being spied on. It's far more likely a way to increase efficiency and lower costs. We DO live in a price-competitive society, don't we?
As far as the reply about tracking what you buy. Uh...ever hear of credit cards and so-called discount cards at retailers?
Wouldn't a better idea be to use RFIDs to track the politically inconvenient? Implant them under the skin, on the forearm perhaps. It's a little less conspicuous then tattoing numbers on them.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Use a unique identifier RFID on piece of clothes-X to broadcast that number when exiting and entering the store...
It would be TRIVIAL to attach that Unique ID Number to the Credit Card Number or Bank Account Number of the person that bought the article of clothing. Cross reference that with all the other RFID tags on that same person and a VERY logical deduction could be made that the person in the store is you, the one that bought all that stuff...
Then, you nonchalantly walk about picking up this and picking up that and before you know it*, as you walk through the stores ads for all the items you "know and love" will start appearing on the screens that are right in front of you beamed cheerfully at you by the Wal-Mart TV Network... In time, those same ads could be calling out your name to entice you further...
The technology to do all of that exists today. The only thing keeping it from happening is that everyone is afraid to give it a go... Once one company does it and nobody complains... Another will do it, then another and another until it is everywhere. There wouldn't be any stopping it because there aren't any laws against it today and if you think that the average citizen will be able to lobby Congress against such a thing when nearly EVERY corporation benefits from such technology...
Well, you are living in a dreamworld.
(* The Before you Know it, is a flash-forward ten or so years...)
If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
This is complete and utter BS. I'll bet a lot of money that the poster has never been to Europe, probably never left the state or city he lives in, and maybe has never even left his house!
The US is in general a lot less free and less liberal than most other western countries (think drug laws, does 'Total Information Awareness' ring a bell, how about laws against gays, its 2003!!!). This is type of thinking is the result of constant brainwashing by the US media that the US is the 'land of the free', where in actuality it lost that title a long time ago. You should get out more.
'Men never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for religious convictions.' B. Pascal
There was an article in Network World (somewhat cheesy industry magazine) last week that talked about Walmart and Home Depot losing over 3% of thier revenue do to inventory procurement and tracking errors. The RFID tags played a role in reducing those costs. Basically, the suppliers would not get paid until the products left the store with a paying consumer. I seriously doubt that Walmart is giving up on the idea, they are probably waiting for the suppliers to catch up. When giants like Walmart and Home Depot say jump, the supply chain doesn't have to ask how high because they know it needs to be higher then last time.
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
Imagine, for instance, walking down the sidewalk and having a high-tech robber stop you because he recognized big euro denominations in your pocket.
So, all of you anti-RFID people, who are opposing this cool technology because of its potential for misuse, please answer me this:
The RIAA, MPAA and others are opposed to P2P technology due to its potential for misuse. So how is your anti-RFID stance any different? From what I understand, there are plenty of very legitimate uses for RFID technology.
it's not a worthwile thing to do until ALL places are required to scan the pets and the national database is free for use.
It's still worthwhile - perhaps not as effective or bulletproof as people may thing, but still worthwhile.
Why? Simply put, it's a chicken and egg scenario.
Until many/most pets have it, shelters won't buy the scanners/subs as they feel they're a useless extra expense.
Until most shelters have scanners, skeptics feel it's a waste of money to chip their pets, and don't.
You can help break that cycle, and spur adoption of the chipping, by being the early adopter and chipping your pets, making the purchase of the scanners more reasonable for your local shelters.
You honestly think someone is going to setup a database and link all of the bills against your CITIZEN.USER_PK1 unique ID number just to make sure you can't be anonymous?
Fuck yes I do! Ever hear of the Total Information Awareness project? The government and industry is investing a great deal of time and money for the implicit purpose of tracking people. Face recognition at the superbowl, traffic cameras, gait recognition software, black boxes in cars, GPS units in cars for taxation. And the documents from the RFID industries own website talk about meetings thay've had with Tom ridge.
RFID is a technology designed EXPLICITLY for tracking things. Do you believe they would go through all the trouble of putting them in the money supply without actually using them for their intended purpose?
Any "successful" use of RFID technology (even in the warehouse venue) will lead to an increasing likelyhood of their inclusion at the store level. Since there are a large number of legitimate privacy issues (even acknowledged by the organization behind RFIDs) that have not remotely addressed yet, further usage of RFIDs is in general a negative.
You can't possibly be serious. You're saying that placing RFIDs on pallets and warehouse-size boxes should be fought on the basis of privacy concerns? RFID tech is not inherently evil, and privacy concerns should be raised only for uses where there are actually privacy concerns.
I'm not for RFID tags in my sneakers either, but let's at least try to make arguments that make sense.
The best thing to do is put tags on your animal. It's amazing how many people dont have tags on their cat,dog,pig,monkey,mountian lion, grizzley bear.
A very simple, low tech way of letting people know WHO the pet belongs to and WHERE to call..
and it doesn't rely on some database that you have to pay to access.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.