Bar Coding The World Away

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."

Comments

More digits...

[Anonymous Coward]

...to include the "evil bit"?

Re:More digits...

[cayenne8]

"...we already have Social Security Numbers that follow us eveywhere"

Well, that doesn't HAVE to be true...unless a transaction that is taking place involves SS taxable income,etc, you do NOT have to give your SS#, and I pretty much do not.

Sure it is inconvenient, but, it can be done. When I wanted a cell phone, or ordered new cable service...I refused to give my SS#. In the case of the cell phone, they were just using it to run a credit check...and I want as few of those run as possible as that it can affect your credit rating, but, I digress. I had to give them something like a $200 deposit, and got signed up. I think I got the deposit sent back to me less than a year later.

I had a hassle at a company I worked for once...I refused to let the company's insurance have my SS...I told them to generate a new ID for me...after a little bitching...they gave me one. Thankfully, it is getting alittle easier to avoid giving the SS these days...due to people understanding identity theft being a problem (I've had mine stolen 3 times).

Not to mention the fact, it is a horrible number for a unique identifier from a database viewpoint. It cannot be counted on to be unique....the numbers are recycled...you cannot count on everyone HAVING one...and you cannot count on them being exactly 9 digits...many foreign national guests of the military are given special 'SS' numbers...that have extra digits to identify them as special...etc.

So, just because someone asks for it, you don't have to give it......and you should not!

Re:More digits...

[Rei]

You know, there are many long-continued misunderstandings of the bible and within the bible itself, and the whole "666" thing is one of them (the former category). It's not three sixes. It's chi-xi-digamma. The greek counting system used their alphabet. Instead of having a set of only 10 numbers total and having the ordering determine significant digits such as we do, they assigned 10 numbers for the 1s digit, another 10 for the 10s digit, another 10 for the 100s, etc. And, instead of having separate characters as we do, they used their alphabet (in addition to some discontinued alphabetic characters, such as the digamma). So, the mark of the beast isn't three identical sixes; it is both a specific number (six hundred sixty and six) and a name (chi-xi-digamma).

Other common misunderstandings: "Lucifer" (Lux+Ferre = Light Bringer) is not Satan; the phrase is "a ROPE through the eye of a needle" (camelis != camel!!!); there is linguistic confusion over whether Mary was a virgin (neanis vs. parthenos, alma vs. bethusaleh, etc; there's also some evidence that parthenos did not carry its modern connotation); etc

Why not be smarter?

[Pig Hogger]

Why not take the time to implement a flexible sytem which may allow to encore an arbitrary number of characters?

This would last forever and be able to migrate through other technologies, such as RFID.

Re:Why not be smarter?

[mopslik]

Why not take the time to implement a flexible sytem which may allow to encore an arbitrary number of characters?

I imagine it has to do with simplifying the amount of work done by barcode readers. Similar to IPv6. Bigger, longer... but still fixed-length.

That last bit makes me feel dirty.

Re:Why not be smarter?

[LostCluster]

Barcodes themselves can be as long as the user wants them to be. We're just talking about a change in the addressing scheme that is the UPC code to have another digit. Anybody who assumed UPCs were no bigger than 12 characters now has a Y2K-ish overflow issue.

Re:Why not be smarter?

[MarkedMan]

Arbitrary length barcode standards do exist (EAN-128 for example), but they are complex beasts and great care must be taken to ensure both the creater and reader get everything exactly right. The UPC or EAN-13 have the advantage of being simple. There may be multiple barcodes on a box, but only one of them would be in the UPC/EAN-13 symbology. I suppose you could create a new symbology just for that, but every reader in existence would be obsolete.

In the end, that's what it boils down too: anything that would allow varying length would make way too much software and hardware obsolete. The cost/benefit would be astronimically bad.

Damn

[The-Bus]

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

Re:Damn

[Chainsaw]

Are you a) a racing driver, b) in the military or c) into extreme sports?

d) stalked by a psycotic ex-girlfriend?

Re:Damn

[MajorDick]

Motorcycle racing, actually Ive never hurt myself in a race , only in dorking around in practice and nearly all have been due to mechanical failure. In addition to my mentioned head injuries, I've broken my elbow, wrist, 10 ribs (at various times of course) my jaw, my right foot (twice) a couple of fingers and toes and had my knees so tore up I'm 33 and looking at knee replacments (actually I should say looking forward to then the damm things wont hurt anymore)

But its all been worth it, I've had a blast Ive been racing since I was 9 , first Junior MX, Then by 14 Flat Track, then I got into Road Racing and I'm still doing it, although in the last 2 years I've raced Vintage, probably will till I croak, Ive actually thought SERIOUSLY about doing the Isle of Man TT, but I havent had a sponsor (other than contingency sponsors) since I was 18

Bwahaha

[Anonymous Coward]

And next: the metric system. Eat this, oversea refugees... ;-)

Get me a rewrite...

[LostCluster]

12-digit bar codes aren't quite going to be retired, but US and Canadian retailers will be expected to be able to tolerate 13-digit codes as of January 2005. This sounds a lot like the Y2K situation... anybody whose database and/or software assumed it was a 12-digit field is now going to have to account for an extra digit and that's going to mean patches and code rewrites all around.

It's good news for the geeks... more work for us to do.

Re:Get me a rewrite...

[furball]

Wal-Mart has been running with 13-digit codes for almost forever now. Amazon does likewise.

To the best of my knowledge, I don't know anyone that works with strictly 12-digit codes on any mass level. Perhaps it's just the mom&pop shops with their possibly custom software that runs with 12-digits only.

Re:Get me a rewrite...

[MarkedMan]

Just a nit, but one that happens to affect me greatly. The reality is that the people printing and/or applying the barcodes are the packaging operations. They typically understand very little. For some odd reason, the UPC standard prints the check digit in the interpretation (the human readable part of the barcode). Why is this an issue? Because one of the common mistakes operators make is to enter the entire code, including the check digit. So there are twelve digits when we were expecting eleven. Did they fat finger an extra character or enter the check digit?

We've tried a few different ways over the years to insure the right number of characters, including forcing eleven by cropping, forcing eleven by not allowing entry (no good if the table is a linked one and the entry is outside of our software) or allowing 11 or 12 and checking the checksum if there are twelve. All this matters because the equipment used to print the barcode typcially generates the check digit on its own, and the different manufacturers handle excess digits in several different ways.

The new standard now says we have three choices: 11,12 or 13. What do we do now? I'm not expecting an answer, because in the end we have to balance all the considerations and make Hobson's choice.

I'm not even going to go into the major US corporation whose database consists of 10,11 or 12 digit UPC codes, because in the beginning, that first digit was always the same, so why waste space on it?

Just goes to show you that when volume and/or speed increases, everything gets complicated (except rock).

Re:Get me a rewrite...

[letxa2000]

12-digit UPC-A codes are automatically EAN-13 codes. When EAN-13 was deployed, they essentially pulled a Microsoft... they "embraced and extended" UPC-A. All UPC-A codes can be scanned by EAN-13 scanners because the EAN-13 is an extension of UPC-A. However, not all UPC-A scanners can automatically understand the extended EAN-13 barcodes.

This has meant that UPC-A barcodes can be scanned worldwide but EAN-13 barcodes produced in other countries could not be scanned in the U.S. because U.S. POS systems didn't understand the "extended" version (EAN-13). This meant that manufacturers outside the U.S. had to have an EAN-13 barcode for the "rest of the world" and a UPC-A barcode for the U.S.--U.S. manufacturers only needed a UPC-A barcode because it works worldwide.

The only thing that is changing here is a requirement that U.S. retailers use POS systems that are able to read an EAN-13 barcode and that their database support it (i.e. the code field must support 13 digits rather than just 12). This is so that a barcode produced in other parts of the world can be scanned in the U.S.

Thus it's not that UPC-A is being "retired"--it's just that U.S. retailers will be expected to be able to handle foreign barcodes.

Woah...

[perly-king-69]

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? ;-)

Re:Woah...

[the eric conspiracy]

Well, while decimal has it's advantages because it is aligned with base ten which is the most commonly used numbering system, units of measure using other bases like 12 and 60 have advantages as well in that they have more factors. 60, for example has factors of 2,3,4,5,6,10,15,20 and 30.

For example, if an hour was 10 minutes, a quarter hour would be a fractional number of minutes. Not so in the base 60 system. Likewise, the foot, being 12 inches can be divided into more parts than a decimal foot could be.

We might want to consider getting rid of decimal numbering and going to duodecimal, and then adopting a self consistent set of units in the new numbering system as a superiour alternative to that crazy scheme developed by the cheese eating, wine drinking, unbathed, Godless French.

let me hit you with some knowledge

[spoonyfork]

In June of 1974, the first U.P.C. scanner was installed at a Marsh's supermarket in Troy, Ohio. The first product to have a bar code was Wrigley's Gum.

When a domain runs out of numbers...

[LostCluster]

Also on our radar screens should be the fact that the US PSTN numbering scheme keeps getting more lines and is coming closer to the point that the (xxx)-yyy-zzzz numbering format is about to hit the wall. The rule that declared the center digit of an area code had to be 0 or 1 fell years ago. If an extra digit ever gets added anywhere, a lot of PBX systems are going to not like the new numbers.

IPv4 is also in trouble in this area, and IPv6 is waiting in the wings to take over. However, NAT seems to be good enough in stretching out single IP addresses to multiple computers so I don't know if we'll ever be forced to convert over.

Re:When a domain runs out of numbers...

[bigpat]

"IPv4 is also in trouble in this area, and IPv6 is waiting in the wings to take over. However, NAT seems to be good enough in stretching out single IP addresses to multiple computers so I don't know if we'll ever be forced to convert over."

Although I agree essentially with what you say, I think far too many people don't realize that "good enough" will be at the cost of future economic and internet growth. There are many potentially very profitable communications, collaborative and gaming applications that are currently being restrained by IP address scarcity.

Globally addressable numeric addresses enable end to end communication. What we lose when using NAT is simplicity. Simplicity is what would enable more communications applications to become practicle. As it is now, when using NAT, either the application software or user needs to do extra work either setting up a static route or discovering a route through a NAT. It should be clear that this unnecessary complexity imposed by the artificial scarcity of IP addresses limits the broader practicality of direct (most efficient) end-to-end video, voice and data communications over IP.

Sure, there are some companies that profit from the scarcity of IPv4 addresses, but this is akin to the rise in gas prices, which raises oil company profits, but at the expense of a far greater number of people and companies that would have otherwise benefited from the increase of commerce that results when energy and transportation costs go down.

Comunication cost and ease of communication are fundamental economic drivers. When communication is easier and cheaper, the economy as a whole will be better. Replacing IPv4 with IPv6 means communication would be both easier and cheaper(as long as the rollout costs don't get out of hand).

end of the bar

[Doc Ruby]

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.

It's about time

[1u3hr]

You may notice that most books sold in the USA have two barcodes, an EAN-13 one (for the rest of the world) and a UPC one. It's a drag having to support those troglodyte US companies that insist on having their UPC. Books published overseas often have to pay to have a UPC code stickered to them.

Next up, metres and kilogrammes (you can spell them American if you really want).

Inevitable

[metamatic]

Other inevitable and overdue US switchovers:

1. GSM mobile phones.
2. Metric. (*)
3. Standard international dialing. (00 + country)

And one I won't be holding my breath for:

4. A universal healthcare system.

(*) Laugh all you like, global corporations are gonna use metric for everything, not stupid US-only units. Eventually this will trickle down to everyday life. It may take decades, but...

What happens to old bar codes?

[midifarm]

Let's say product X is assigned a barcode. Product X is discontinued. What happens to the assigned bar code?

BTW who assigns barcode numbers and do they reap huge financial rewards from performing such a task?

Peace

Re:Metric?

[Lehk228]

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

Internationalism? Multinationalism? What?

[Zany Paraclete]

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?

No the Mark of the Beast!

[Saturninus]

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.

Gov't anti-metric

[bill_mcgonigle]

Metric is actively discouraged by the government. It's done under the guise of promoting it, and it's quite subtle.

For example, there'a sign on I-87 in NY which reads:

Montreal 300 miles (482.8 km)

There is no sign 50 miles later that says:

Montreal 400 km (248.5 miles)

so, you see, Imperial is easy, Metric is hard.