Bar Coding The World Away

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by Hemos on Monday July 12, 2004 @03:34AM from the it's-the-mark-of-the-beast dept.

778790 writes "The Bar Code, long used for inventory classification and sometimes feared as a tool of social engineering, has been regulated in the name of globalization, and the globe has defeated the United States. Bar Codes in America will now have more digits, to match the global bar code standard: the European Article Numbering Code."

9 of 470 comments (clear)

More digits... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-07-12 03:35 · Score: 5, Funny

...to include the "evil bit"?
Damn by The-Bus · 2004-07-12 03:36 · Score: 5, Funny

Now I have to go update the tattoo on the back of my neck...

--
Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.
1. Re:Damn by Chainsaw · 2004-07-12 04:23 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Are you a) a racing driver, b) in the military or c) into extreme sports?
  d) stalked by a psycotic ex-girlfriend?
  
  --
  War is one of the most horrible things a human can be exposed to. And one of the worlds largest industries.
Bwahaha by Anonymous Coward · 2004-07-12 03:36 · Score: 4, Funny

And next: the metric system. Eat this, oversea refugees... ;-)
Woah... by perly-king-69 · 2004-07-12 03:36 · Score: 5, Funny

For a minute there I thought it said that Americans were going to fall in line with a European designed system.
Is this an April fool dupe or something? ;-)

--
--
This sig is inoffensive.
end of the bar by Doc+Ruby · 2004-07-12 03:43 · Score: 4, Funny

The US codes have 12 digits; the EU codes, to account for 12 countries and about 25% greater population, have 13. Now the unified system has 13, with 225% the population, globalism, and 30 years of using up codes. Seems like barcode system upgrades are a perpetual growth industry.

--
--
make install -not war
Re:Metric? by Lehk228 · 2004-07-12 04:17 · Score: 4, Funny

the US uses metric, Litres for soda, and kilo's for weed

--
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
Internationalism? Multinationalism? What? by Zany+Paraclete · 2004-07-12 04:19 · Score: 4, Funny

We all know that "global" means "European"; I'm fine with that. And the "international community" means the EU. No problem. Now that Europeans have repented of their colonialist/paternalis past, they're once again qualified to decide what's best for the rest of the world.
What's difficult is keeping track of which "international" things are evil and which are good.
"Multinational" is bad, right? Because it's got something to do with corporations, which are bad. Unless they're European. A "multinational" corporation is an American corporation which operates in more than one country, and it's bad, even if it practices "internationalization", in spite of the fact that "internationalization" is good (right?). But what about "multinational ism "? Is that one good or bad? I can't tell.
International standards are good, of course, provided that they're European, because then they're "multilateral" (which is good, I think, because "multilateral" means "involving any set of one or more nations which includes France"). If standards are not European, they're "unilateral", which is bad. "Unilateral" means "not including France" (or else "not excluding the US"), and it's very, very bad.
"Globalism" is good, because it includes France. "Globalization" is bad because, even though it includes France (except for Jose Bove), it doesn't exclude the US. "Globalism" is good because it excludes the US by definition: Anything which includes US is no longer "global". Instead, it's "hegemonic", which is very, very bad.
Did I miss any?

--

I've never yet met anybody who'll admit to posting on Slashdot. So who are all these people?!
No the Mark of the Beast! by Saturninus · 2004-07-12 04:36 · Score: 4, Funny

I don't appreciate the United State conforming to put the mark of the beast on everything. Heathens! I guess they want us all to get sent straight to hell. I'll be living in my bomb shelter until God tells me its okay to come back out again.