Slashdot Mirror
RFID Hell
Matrix2110 writes "Finally, somebody has stepped up with an article that descibes the potental abuse of RFID. Imagine being flagged for social tendencies.
Gattaca is not so far off as we think. it is simply a pass of a wand for your embedded tag rather than a drop of blood."
Its really about the UK employing technology to track pedophiles that has been used for some time in the US. Granted the parallels to RFID are there, but the bigger issue is whether one can be tagged after being convicted and serving a sentence. The laws in the US have flip-flopped on this one several times, generally the only time this sort of monitoring holds up is when it is a part of the original conviction of the criminal. Therefore, there are some precedents for electronic monitoring, the real question is whether they will apply once the private sector faces legal challenges regarding the use of RFID to track innocent people.
Children in the backseats don't cause accidents. Accidents in the back seats cause children.
ToTal Democratic Patriotic Protection Act
They started with the paedophile and it was OK because those are law breaker.
Then they went on murder condemned and It was also OK.
Then they went on tagging all former felon. Ok those were bad people anyway.
Then they tagged people with bad social past and juvenil arrest since those were the one with the highiest chance to re-iterate a crime.
. Then they tagged immigrant and it was also OK, because those bastard are not like us.
Then they tagged people belonging to certain religion "because they might be potential terrorist".
When they came to tag me I was the only one left in the neighbourhood without a tag...
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Indeed, the article is *not* about RFID. More importantly, the device described is intended for tracking paedophiles. No Orwellian conspiracy here, although there are some civil rights issues to be considered in addition to whether or not the tech meets its intended goals.
Not nearly as bad as it first sounded. Yes, it is a first step and can be a proof of consept, but so long as it is restricted to people on probation as stated, then it's not so bad. With probation you are not free, you are simply watched outside of jail. Perhaps a slipery slope but it also provides protection for the person as well. Cops picking people up and 'leaning on them' is more tipical in movies then in real life, but it does happen. This would give the person the proof they need to show it realy did happen. If it works as clamed then it should only be a few years till it's used with all people on probation and could help both sides quite a bit.
Question reality.
Now available for personal use.
The technology described in the article seems similar to this product which allows GPS units to send their location to other receivers.
This particular application has excellent application with Search And Rescue. It would also be a good idea for keeping track of your family members during trips.
Of course the Brits have an invoulentary system of location reporting, foisted upon convicted padeophiles, probably as a conditinon of parole.
Would you give up a portion of your privacy and freedom in exchange for less time in prision?
Now, if this is a mandatory sentence, it just seems like the physical prision is being exchanged for a technological one.
Which is safer, more humane, and capable of bringing the miscreant back into "normal" society sooner?
I guess England will let us know in a few years when they have the results of the pilot program ready.
True that this article has nothing to do with RFID, but just FYI there are many active RFID tags as well. The larger one which are used for highway tolls in some countries for example. Passive tags usually don't have this large range.
What if this continues? As a teenager, you make the bad decision to shoplift and they plant an RFID on you. Now you are "stuck" with that label. Aren't you just a criminal too, who abused their rights. Worse was the nature of your crime.
Plus what is a pedophile in your opinion. Not all people violate someone elses rights. Who make the decision to tag them, who makes the decision to untag them? Can someone every reform? What if it was a 19yo having consentual sex with a 15yo? Now they are stuck with that reputation for the rest of their lives?
D.O.U.O.S.V.A.V.V.M.
The device in this article, as many have already said, is not an RFID. But let's take that one step further; a lot have also responded to state, simply, how RFID tags could be abused in the same way that this device could be abused. And they're right.
The Slashdot post that links to the article refers to the dystopic world portrayed in Gattaca, and states how instead of identification based upon DNA testing we could be tagged and scanned at every point via RFID tags. Also another technology, but a similar abuse.
In the Holocaust, a low-tech version of the RFID tag was put in place, as we all know. Concentration camp inmates were tattooed with unique serial numbers. It required visual authentication rather than just close proximity, but nonetheless could be used to easily track and identify people, as was its purpose.
Herein lies my whole point. RFID tags are like many technologies; they can be abused or used properly. Unique numbers tattooed onto an arm are a half-step away from SSNs that are needed in modern society where the familiarity of small-town life is no longer a sufficient ID. DNA testing to separate the haves from the have-nots based upon their probable health is a mere decision away from the same DNA testing that helps us diagnose and track many hereditary ailments, with the goal of one day curing them. And RFID tags promise tremendous improvements in industrial applications. Whether they are used to tag inventory or people is not in any way based on the technology; it's a matter of policy. Like the other two technologies described in this post, it is not inherently dangerous and will not be harmful unless we use it to do harm.
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
Pedophiles *aren't* in control of their actions. Think repeat offender drunk drivers - they just *can't* control their behavior. Chronic drunk drivers are frequently subjected to a monitoring device in their vehicle.
The pedophile is much, much worse than a drunk driver. The drunk driver stands some small chance of injuring or killing someone when they drive, but the pedophile who reoffends *always* hurts someone and *frequently* plants the seed that leads to another generation of the same behavior.
Consider this; for society such control means a long term (generations long) decrease in such problems, instead of paying to jail or otherwise institutionalize a dangerous person for whom there is likely NO CURE, they are again a tax paying member of society.
The offender is motivated as well; instead of slowly rotting in prison he is again able to work, live somewhere much more pleasant than cell block C, and the 'control' of radiolocation makes reoffending very, very difficult - most offenders in moments of lucidity welcome anything that will restrain them from further misbehavior.
I've trained police officers in computer forensics and its mostly used in child porn/child enticement cases. I've done RF surverys inside my state's maximum security prison. The father of my son's best friend is a felony probation officer and I cringe every time I hear another story of a third time loser destroying another child's life. I'm not sure whether the horror of the crime is perfectly matched by the horror of the state's warehouse for those unable to be left free, but consequences don't seem to be a deterrent in this area.
I think all parties benefit from a system that makes tax payers with supervision in the place where unrestrained predators and expensively restrained inmates used to be. Good for Great Britain and may it happen here RSN.
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
>Finally, somebody has stepped up with an article
>that descibes the potental abuse of RFID.
Finally?!!!
Use the search feature -- it at the top of every page -- and search for RIFD. Now what percentage of the articles DON'T discuss the potental abuse of RFID?