Slashdot Mirror


7.5 Micron Thick RFID Tag

YesSir writes "The EETimes is reporting that Hitachi has a breakthrough in RFID technology that they are planning to show at this years ISSCC (International Solid-State Circuits Conference). The new RFID chip is their newest mu-chip that, measuring in at 7.5 microns, is ten or more times thinner than a sheet of paper and comes complete with 128-bit identifying goodness."

149 comments

  1. RFID Scares me.. by guildsolutions · · Score: 2, Funny

    Pretty soon we will be carrying our tin foil encrusted wallets and clothing interlaced with foil to foil the detection system of the aliens watching us.

    I wonder if government will advocate tracking of people using RFID, or advocate banning the tracking of people via RFID?

    1. Re:RFID Scares me.. by OctoberSky · · Score: 1
      I wonder if government will advocate tracking of people using RFID, or advocate banning the tracking of people via RFID?

      They probably won't take a stand either way for the time being, it's best for them to keep thier options open, although not necessarily good for us.

      The way I see it, in the future they will start implanting these into Drivers Liscenses, and since you are (I think) required to have ID with you this can be thier loophole into always having an eye on you, but not actually sticking you with a needle full of nano technology.

    2. Re:RFID Scares me.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They will advocate the tracking of advocates of banning tracking via RFID.

    3. Re:RFID Scares me.. by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      You will be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, and numbered.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    4. Re:RFID Scares me.. by rasqual · · Score: 1

      You forgot folded, spindled, and mutilated.

    5. Re:RFID Scares me.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... is using aluminum foil considered a violation of the DMCA?

    6. Re:RFID Scares me.. by deviantphil · · Score: 1

      The way I see it, in the future they will start implanting these into Drivers Liscenses, and since you are (I think) required to have ID with you this can be thier loophole into always having an eye on you, but not actually sticking you with a needle full of nano technology.

      They don't need to stick you with a needle now. There are guns from what I understand that can inject you with a tag at a distance. The sensation felt is that equivalent to a mosquito bite. Most people would pass it off as a hair being tugged by something...scary.

    7. Re:RFID Scares me.. by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Funny
      I wonder if government will advocate tracking of people using RFID, or advocate banning the tracking of people via RFID?
      Can't I just leave me cell phone on all the time?
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    8. Re:RFID Scares me.. by neuroticia · · Score: 1

      Meh. Why not just stick it into the innoculations that we get as kids? :p Tagged from birth.

    9. Re:RFID Scares me.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shush! Don't give them any ideas they might not have thought of already!

    10. Re:RFID Scares me.. by Fnord666 · · Score: 1
      I wonder if government will advocate tracking of people using RFID, or advocate banning the tracking of people via RFID?

      Yes.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    11. Re:RFID Scares me.. by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Either the bullet is actually the RFID tag, in which case I'm not sure of the aero dynamic properties of hte RFID tag, but something that small wouldn't really travel well in straight lines, and would be too light to maintain the necessary speed. If it was larger, and could carry the necessary momentum necessary to get to you from a distance, then i would surely feel a lot more painful than a mosquito bite, or you'd notice the dart sticking out of your neck.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    12. Re:RFID Scares me.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      rfid is EXTREMELY short range

    13. Re:RFID Scares me.. by deviantphil · · Score: 1

      Either the bullet is actually the RFID tag, in which case I'm not sure of the aero dynamic properties of hte RFID tag, but something that small wouldn't really travel well in straight lines, and would be too light to maintain the necessary speed. If it was larger, and could carry the necessary momentum necessary to get to you from a distance, then i would surely feel a lot more painful than a mosquito bite, or you'd notice the dart sticking out of your neck.

      Bruce S. covered the conceept of RFID Injection from a Distance. It may still be science fiction...

    14. Re:RFID Scares me.. by deathy_epl+ccs · · Score: 1

      I don't remember "folded, spindled and multilated" being in the intro to "The Prisoner."

    15. Re:RFID Scares me.. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "The way I see it, in the future they will start implanting these into Drivers Liscenses, and since you are (I think) required to have ID with you.."

      I think that you are required in most states to have your drivers license with you if YOU are operating a vehicle on public roads.

      However, at least for now, you are NOT required to carry any form of ID on you all the time for any reason.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    16. Re:RFID Scares me.. by AndyKron · · Score: 1

      Dude, the foil will be incrusted with RFID chips! Yikes!

    17. Re:RFID Scares me.. by Monte · · Score: 1

      Why not just stick it into the innoculations that we get as kids?

      Because the RFID tag interferes with the efficacy of the chemical they put in those innoculations that gives 1 in 3 people cancer later in life.

      Those doctors aren't gonna let anything as trivial as national security mess with the Big C Gravy Train.

      [Note for the humor impaired: I'm kidding, of course. There's no conspiracy to innoculate little kids with cancer fnord.]

    18. Re:RFID Scares me.. by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Not so much forgot than left open for others to interject, hopefully to be modded Funny.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    19. Re:RFID Scares me.. by neuroticia · · Score: 1

      Unless you're in NYC and you want to be able to get home without being detained. If you have the unhappy luck of wandering through a protest, the chance of being asked for ID is high. If you have to go into a building of any sort, the chance of your being asked for ID is high. And I've seen random moments where police officers have asked for ID from people in the subways/train stations. While I'm not sure what happens if you don't procure your ID, I do know that I prefer to have it with me. Even though I'm a distinctly non-middle eastern female who is not likely to be detained for anything.

    20. Re:RFID Scares me.. by GeekyMike · · Score: 1

      Actually, at this time Americans are not required to carry identification unless operating a motor vehicle or in limited other situations (I believe hunting is one of these). We do, however have to truthfully identify ourselves to law enforcement. I am sure that the day of national ID is looming, but it is not upon us yet. After all, if you are not a criminal, you should have nothing to hide, right?

      --
      Beware the fury of a patient man
      - John Dryden
  2. small enough? by joe+155 · · Score: 2, Funny

    are they not already small enough; I have one in my card and its the same size as any other credit card. I alwyas like to see people pushing the realms of what is possible but haven't we already reached a situation when its already "small enough"... not to mention the fact that now they are so small I'll not know where to put the tinfoil... dam it, the tinfoil could even have RFID in it :O...

    --
    *''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
    1. Re:small enough? by Amouth · · Score: 1

      that is why you forge your own... this will usher in a new era of /.'ers && the rest will be in some jail... survival of the fittest.

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    2. Re:small enough? by aunticrist · · Score: 2, Funny

      Now what was that again about a mark in the palm or the forehead and not being able to buy anything or travel anywhere, etc? Yeah. RFID. Mark o' da beast is here! woot! Now, about those horsemen...

  3. Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    So instead of just being on our food packages. It'll be in our food.

    Yummy.

    1. Re:Great... by JediTrainer · · Score: 2, Funny

      LOL. Take this the next logical step. Your health insurance company parks outside your house and sets up a Pringles Can RFID scanner to see what's coming down the sewer.

      Your premiums just went up because you ate too many pork rinds.

      --

      You can accomplish anything you set your mind to. The impossible just takes a little longer.
    2. Re:Great... by Fnord666 · · Score: 1
      So instead of just being on our food packages. It'll be in our food.

      I can just hear the conversation now:
      "Sir, we are tracking the suspect but he appears to be using the sewers to move about the city. We suspect he is planning to escape by boat since he is heading towards the sea."

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    3. Re:Great... by Firehed · · Score: 1
      Meh, you consume eat more silicon than what's in this thing just by drinking out of a glass. The question, of course, becomes whether or not the signal (when activated) is strong enough to pass through stomach acid and several layers of fat and skin.

      That or they end up with a lot of Fat Bastard-esque toilet-tracking. Which is definately the best way we can track down... umm... useless crap.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    4. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just float 'em over a Superbowl game, and everyone will breathe them in.

  4. New system in the works by oc-beta · · Score: 1

    It is literally a paper tracking system.

  5. OMG! This is thin enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...to RFID tag tinfoil hats, and you would never even know it except for the black helicopters following you.

  6. The smaller they are, the harder they fall by Jordan+Catalano · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Shouldn't a smaller chip mean that even less radiative power is needed to overload and inactivate the tag? So... good news?

  7. RFID signatures in art by Soloact · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This seems to me that artists could embed an RFID chip in their art, such as under paint, or even in a tatoo, to identify their work. Such a thin tag could be under the label layer in a CD/DVD/etc to identify the origin, to identify whether the work is original and/or authorized. But, of course, someone will eventually find a way around this as they did with CSS and other encryption.

    1. Re:RFID signatures in art by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 1

      Yeah once you break the encryption you just swipe a blank RFID and put the same code on it. RFID is nice, but it's just as open for attack as UPC codes.

  8. just one word by iplayfast · · Score: 2, Funny

    PAPERCUTS!

  9. Possibilities by JustinKSU · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wonder if McDonalds will start tracking where we go after we scarf down a Big McRFID.

    1. Re:Possibilities by The-Bus · · Score: 1

      The results will all be the same: The nearest toilette.

      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    2. Re:Possibilities by Xophmeister · · Score: 1
      toilette

      What's that? Some kind of "facilities in miniature", for when it's not-so-urgent ;)

      Before anyone starts, I know it's an accepted spelling. I've just had a very boring day!

      --

      Christopher Harrison

  10. another easily circumvented solution by Travoltus · · Score: 1

    How will they prevent someone from stealing and counterfeiting the RFID reader and using that to find and destroy RFID's inside the paper (or worse yet, duplicate its data)?

    Is there a way to run a current through a piece of paper to destroy the RFID?

    --
    --- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
    1. Re:another easily circumvented solution by mpapet · · Score: 1

      find and destroy RFID's inside the paper
      I believe it's a pretty simple. I will leave it up to fellow /.'ers to fill it in.

      or worse yet, duplicate its data
      This is much harder to do. Normally the tags are pretty dumb, they have a hard-coded serial number and that's about it. My understanding is changing it after manufacture is not feasible. Is it possible? Probably. I think there are easier weaknesses to attack though. Social engineering comes to mind.

      If they do a little more than just store a number, then it will only be a matter of time before those security methods are defeated.

      --
      http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
    2. Re:another easily circumvented solution by $ASANY · · Score: 1
      or worse yet, duplicate its data
      This is much harder to do. Normally the tags are pretty dumb, they have a hard-coded serial number and that's about it. My understanding is changing it after manufacture is not feasible. Is it possible? Probably. I think there are easier weaknesses to attack though. Social engineering comes to mind.
      Devices that can encode Matrics 0+ and Gen 2 tags (which are rewritable) run about $8000. Sure you can duplicate a tag. Problem is getting Gen 2 RFID tags in small quantities is tough. Minimum order for Symbol Squiggle tags is 7,500 at $0.39 a unit for us right now. So you invest about $11,000 so you can counterfeit an RFID tag -- for what???

      It's more useful to counterfit UPC barcodes on retail products -- tape over a barcode on an expensive item with the barcode of a less expensive product, and likely the checkout person will not notice. You can do that with an inkjet printer and a shareware 3of9 barcode font today. Don't see a lot of that happening these days. So if that's not a big fraud issue right now, what makes anyone think RFID will be a huge fraud problem in the future with an enormously higher barrier to entry?

    3. Re:another easily circumvented solution by Babbster · · Score: 1

      So if that's not a big fraud issue right now, what makes anyone think RFID will be a huge fraud problem in the future with an enormously higher barrier to entry?

      Because geeks love thinking of ways to take advantage of systems, even if they would never do it themselves. Add "sticking it to the man" and the paranoia which comes built right into all RFID issues (and tags) and everybody on /. will try to think of a way to screw with the system.

    4. Re:another easily circumvented solution by $ASANY · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Easy. Carry a battery-powered baby monitor that uses the 900MHz band in your pocket. Those things are wonderfully capable of farking up any and all passive RFID tag reads. Just about anything that uses the 900MHz band will do. The reflective signal of a passive tag is extremely weak, and any powered emissions source at close proximity will mask an RFID tag's signal. Chances are that since there's no error correction in Gen 1 and Gen 2 tag constructs, the signals from any baby monitor will cause numerous phantom reads as well.

      Look at the biggest challenges in passive RFID today, and it'll show you exactly where the vulnerabilities are. Proxomity to metal, proximity to liquids, proximity to other tags, false reads frequency, sensitivity to interference and tag failure rates provide all sorts of opportunities for general mayhem. It don't take much.

  11. All fine and dandy but... by JFlex · · Score: 0

    ... how much will these new tags cost to produce? I can think of a million different ways to implement them into our every day lives, but if it's an expensive technology, we may not see it in use for a while.

  12. Which leads me to ask... by AltGrendel · · Score: 1

    ...how on earth do you disable/kill these things?
    Static electricity? What?!?

    --
    The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination

    - Douglas Adams

    1. Re:Which leads me to ask... by Sporkinum · · Score: 1

      [i] ...how on earth do you disable/kill these things?
      Static electricity? What?!?[/i]

      Exactly! My hope is that with the smaller size, they would be easier to fry with an overload of incoming RF.

      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    2. Re:Which leads me to ask... by jcochran · · Score: 1

      You disable/kill the things by carrying a jammer. Something about having something that claims that all 2^128 possible ID chips are *right here, right now* tends to mask the few that are actually here.

  13. Math illiteracy by MyNymWasTaken · · Score: 3, Funny

    ten or more times thinner

    That little bit of ineptitude is nowhere in the article; so the blame passes to the submitter.

    "10 times thinner / (less in any form or fashion)" is exactly like saying "300% less". It is an ridiculous statement made by a math illiterate. It is, by definition, impossible for anything to lose more than 100% of it's value.

    People see the statement "3 times larger" and, because they can barely add 2+2 without an electronic calculator, they think "3 times smaller" is a valid statement.

    [/rant]

    1. Re:Math illiteracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Almost as ridiculous as saying "an" when you mean "a"; then again, who am I to point out others' faults?
      Then again, who are you?

    2. Re:Math illiteracy by marco.antonio.costa · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but I don't understand what's wrong with saying something is 10 times thinner than a sheet of paper.

      In math-think I'd write 1x = (1/10)y where x = sheet of chip and y = sheet of paper.

      right????

      --
      Send your spendthrift head of state this
    3. Re:Math illiteracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no... it doesn't have LESS of something, it has MORE of something - thinness. Ten times as much thinness. It's not saying that it's ten times less chip. That would be different.

    4. Re:Math illiteracy by DinZy · · Score: 1

      What something means mathematically is entirely different from what something means literally. Besides if you just interpret "times smaller" to mean 1/ then it makes perfect sense to both parties.

    5. Re:Math illiteracy by Asprin · · Score: 1


      Yeah, yeah, I know, but what I find so offensive is that the illererati use such hamfistedly awkward and nonsensical language to describe relationships for which simple language already exists, and THEY CHOSE NOT TO LEARN.

      Here, watch me say it correctly:

      (Ahem)

      "The new RFID tag is one-tenth the thickness of a sheet of paper."

      There, now wasn't that simple? Ya know, way back in school when we told you(*) fractions and algebra were important things for you to understand, we weren't kidding.


      [(*) Generalized, figurative "you", not "you" the commentor to whom I am replying.]

      --
      "Lawyers are for sucks."
      - Doug McKenzie
    6. Re:Math illiteracy by ronocdh · · Score: 1

      It is, by definition, impossible for anything to lose more than 100% of it's value.

      That little bit of ineptitude is nowhere in the article; so the blame passes to the poster.

      It is an ridiculous [sic] statement made by an English illiterate. It is impossible for something to lose more than 100% of it is value, because that just doesn't make sense.

      If you're going to be a dick, watch your ass.

    7. Re:Math illiteracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone communicated an idea effectively to you, there's no reason to take umbrage at the way in which they did it. Language is functional. If it served its function, if you understood what the other person meant, admonishments directed at form rather than content are a pompous timewasting exercise.

    8. Re:Math illiteracy by mattcoz · · Score: 0

      The correct statement would be "one-tenth as thick", or if you really want to use "thin" then I guess you could say "ninety-percent thinner".

      On a related note, one of my biggest pet peeves is people who misuse "as many" and "more". Say if you have ten apples and your friend has one apple, the correct statement is "ten times as many apples", not "ten times more apples". The latter statement is correct only if you have eleven apples.

    9. Re:Math illiteracy by windowpain · · Score: 1

      Why do you call someone who corrects poor writing a "dick"? If Person A wrote crappy code and Person B called him on it would you also call Person B a dick?

      Why does making a simple typo mean that someone correcting an egregious error in writing should "watch [his] ass." If only people who write perfectly can offer corrections, then nobody will be qualifed to offer corrections. Or would you prefer that nobody ever corrects anyone else's writing so that we can all just wallow in our mistakes and never improve?

      --
      Insert witty sig here.
    10. Re:Math illiteracy by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      me too !

    11. Re:Math illiteracy by Eightyford · · Score: 1

      Your original post had more than a touch of arrogance in it. You were called on it.

    12. Re:Math illiteracy by windowpain · · Score: 1

      RTFP. It wasn't my post.

      --
      Insert witty sig here.
    13. Re:Math illiteracy by windowpain · · Score: 1

      The reason you don't understand what's wrong with saying something is ten times thinner is that you believe that you can apply the rules of math to formulate proper English. Natural languages are not nearly as amenable to logical analysis as is the realm of math.

      --
      Insert witty sig here.
    14. Re:Math illiteracy by Eightyford · · Score: 1

      My bad. I read the fucking post, but mistakes happen.

    15. Re:Math illiteracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahhh... Sweet irony - being forced to admit that mistakes happen while gloating over a simple typo.

      Your post had more than a touch of arrogance in it. You were called on it.

    16. Re:Math illiteracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, you dick.

  14. Re:Maybe paper, probably not by mpapet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There might be some problems with putting it in paper:

    1. Module has to stay in the paper. This is harder than it sounds.
    2. Antenna (for contactless) has to be much thinner and more flexible than paper. Many transit systems using microcontrollers embedded inside tickets might already have this, but the paper is pretty thick.
    3. Antenna has to stay in the paper.
    4. Paper tracking can be done already with UV inks. I'm not sure which would be cheaper though.

    Does anyone know what kind of microcontroller is used on the transit system tickets?

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
  15. Oh no by daddyrief · · Score: 0

    This is the worst thing ever.

    --
    "Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies." -Thomas Jefferson
  16. Oh good... by TheNoxx · · Score: 1

    The virtual panopticon has begun construction.

    --
    Ex nihilo nihil fit.
  17. EXCELLENT!!! by lkcl · · Score: 1

    ahh, smaller - so it takes _less_ than 3 seconds to fry these chips in a microwave oven.

    it's always nice when a company lets you know how much easier it is to destroy privacy-invading technology.

  18. Medical use by cr0m0 · · Score: 1

    I fear the moment we use this kind of chips inside our own body. At this moment there are several studies in development to apply the RFID chips in Medicine.

    1. Re:Medical use by 500IE · · Score: 1

      Maybe they should put them in the instruments... They could find out how many items they left inside after stitching you back up.

      --
      i thought i had lead poisoning until i stopped browsing at -1
  19. Editing Comment re: 'n' times thinner by Stupid+Mentat · · Score: 0, Redundant

    It is impossible to be "ten or more times thinner" than something else. Now the width of the new RFID can be "one-tenth that of a sheet of paper," but grammatically speaking, something can only be 'n' times larger/longer/heavier etc.

  20. This technology is taking off very slow by blueZ3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I remember seeing an ad a few years back about how you would be able to push your loaded cart through the check-out and all the groceries would be scanned and totaled and you could just pay and go without the need unload the cart and wait for the checker to scan and reload everything. The closest I've seen is the "self checkouts" at the grocery stores (anyone else have these?) where you scan and bag the items yourself. (I'm still wondering how they would handle items that are sold by weight)

    Like any technology this could have its uses (as the above example) and I really think a lot of the concerns are exaggerated (I have a hard time getting my RFID badge to trigger the door locks here, even when it's practically touching the reader). The tinfoil hat crowd and their "the black helicopters will read these as they fly over your house" don't make a lot of sense to me. But maybe the joy of the thing is in conspiracy, not the logic? My read on this is that in order to generate enough power to be read at any great distance (like from outside your house) you'd have to paint the tags with enough radio to fry the occupants.

    Anyway, so far it's all talk and nothing much else of practical value. Maybe the packaging of the next Duke Nukem will have RFID? :o)

    --
    Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
    1. Re:This technology is taking off very slow by adam.skinner · · Score: 1

      In DNF, RFID is actually a wearable vapor.

    2. Re:This technology is taking off very slow by balsy2001 · · Score: 1

      One way to sell things by weight is just have the RFID in a lable that was printed off like when you get meat with a bar code on it. This would require a veggtable attendant in the super market though.

      --
      GENERATION 27: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    3. Re:This technology is taking off very slow by melandy · · Score: 1
      I'm still wondering how they would handle items that are sold by weight
      At the self checkouts in my neck of the woods, you put the item on the scanner/scale to measure the weight, then use the touch screen to navigate to the item that it is. You could also print a barcode label at the self-serve barcode printer in the produce dept.

      Not sure how closely they watch to make sure you're paying for the right item, though.
    4. Re:This technology is taking off very slow by asuffield · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Like any technology this could have its uses (as the above example) and I really think a lot of the concerns are exaggerated (I have a hard time getting my RFID badge to trigger the door locks here, even when it's practically touching the reader). The tinfoil hat crowd and their "the black helicopters will read these as they fly over your house" don't make a lot of sense to me.

      To repeat a point that Schneier made recently (can't find the link, sorry), there's three ranges involved here and you're making the common mistake of confusing two or more of them.

      There's the expected operating range - that's the distance at which the device is intended to function. In order to keep costs down, and to prevent false triggers (which are regarded as worse than false misses), door opening systems, checkout scanners, and similar devices are designed with an intended operating distance of a few inches. At that range it should always work, when the hardware is not defective.

      Then there's the maximum operating range - that's how far you can manage to pick up the signal with the same equipment on a good day, if you wave it about a bit and tilt it to get a better angle and clear any metal objects out of the immediate area, etcetera. That's usually a few feet on the same devices.

      Then there's the maximum operating range for a person with special equipment. No longer using that cheap $20 RFID reader in the door sensor or checkout. Now we're using an expensive, high-gain antenna with an expensive amplifier, and a specialised computer device on the back end doing noise compensation and stuff. That's usually on a scale of somewhere between dozens of yards and miles (depending on exactly what variation of RFID you are dealing with), reading the same tags that we were reading the first times. The cost of this equipment is measured in hundreds or thousands of dollars. Too much to be installed in a door sensor, but there's absolutely no reason why you couldn't own one if you wanted to, and scan all the RFID tags on your street. Anybody who can afford a helicopter can certainly have one of those.

      You are observing some combination of the first two distances and wondering why people are worried about the third one. Saying that the government wants to do this might be a conspiracy theory, but saying that it can be done is not - hobbyists do this kind of thing all the time. Bluetooth has the same issue (normal operating range is a few feet, maximum is some number of miles). Most wireless devices do, to some extent.

      The difference between these ranges is just economics at work. You can buy better equipment if you want, but the companies who install hundreds of fixed devices buy the cheapest equipment they can get away with using.

    5. Re:This technology is taking off very slow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just to add to this there is the recent (last weeks ish) of the passport from "I think sweden" with biometric data which was read from 10 meters away

    6. Re:This technology is taking off very slow by leachlife4 · · Score: 1

      at the albertsons around where i live, there are little scanners you can carry around, which you use to scan your items as tou put them in your cart

      when oyu walk in you scan your "albertsons preffered card" (dont worry they dont charge you for any of this) and a machine unlocks a scanner gun from its holder. the scanners are nice; they have screens which display an itemised list with individual prices, and a running subtotal. after you get your scanner there is a holster type thing on the handles of the cart which the gun fits into. as you are shopping you casually scan your items and throw them into bags. this also works for produce that need to be weighed (each variety of produce has its own 4-5 digit which you enter into a scale which prints out a barcode and sticker for you to scan. after completeing you shopping you scan a special barcode on a big sign that says finish shopping. you leave your gun. you go up to any self checkout and scal your albertsons card, it fetches your items from the gun, you pay, and ur outta there

    7. Re:This technology is taking off very slow by un1xl0ser · · Score: 1

      One problem (that you mentioned) is the products by weight. This is how I buy a lot of my food. With meat packing, that would be solved by programming the rfid for in the packaging when they are packed. Depending on where you are, this still is a manual process done by real people. Fruit and veggies are normally picked out by the consumer, so there is a problem there.

      Besides that, there is the issue that products that you have paid for may still have active RFID tags in them. Imagine having a pack of gum in your pocket while paying that shows up every time. This could be limited by having the range done properly.

      The self checkout things work great ... or do they. If you have a coupon, or don't know the PLU for something, or any number of complications come up, it can take much longer than just waiting in line. I always pay with a credit/debit card, but I still have to sign. If the attendant is busy with another customer, I have to wait.

      I think that we have quite a while before we just walk out of the store without actively interacting with any machines.

      --
      v4sw6PU$hw6ln6pr4F$ck 4/6$ma3+6u7LNS$w2m4l7U$i2e4+7en6a2X h
    8. Re:This technology is taking off very slow by HaggiZ · · Score: 1

      I recently saw a documentary showing the application of the technology in a German supermarket much like we'd been promised a few years back. You could email your shopping list through ahead of time (or select the products from the website as required) and they were added to your account. On arrival at the supermarket you swipe your customer card to dispatch a trolley with attached LCD screen, and the trolley provides a list of the items to purchase and their location within the store as required. You scan items on entry into the trolley and the total is automatically calculated and the product checked off your list. Weighted items (vegetables) you bagged yourself and printed out a barcode from one of the weighstations in the produce section as you bagged. Scan that on the trolley and those items are checked off and added to the total. All in all, it looked like a very cool system. You simply presented your screen at the checkout, paid and left (returning the trolley when you're finished loading your car obviously).

      And there was plenty of value add there too. If you wanted to be quick, the trolley can show you the shortest route around the store. If you were stuck for ideas on a wine to accompany your dish your could prompt for suggestion and be directed to a complementing Merlot in aisle 3.

    9. Re:This technology is taking off very slow by Glen+Ponda · · Score: 1
      The closest I've seen is the "self checkouts" at the grocery stores (anyone else have these?) where you scan and bag the items yourself. (I'm still wondering how they would handle items that are sold by weight)

      Re. the weight thing - there's a scales built in (e.g., Tesco). There's also some primitive weight sensor on the conveyor belt, presumably to eliminate cheating. A typical scenario at my local Tesco:
      • Scan item and place on belt
      • Belt moves so item reaches end to the bagging area
      • You forget to wait for the belt to stop before scanning the next item and it skooches it to the bag area before it registers its weight
      • Till refuses to scan your next item beacuse it thinks you didn't place the item on the belt
      • You walk to the end of the belt, get the last item and put it back on the start of the belt
      • Repeat above, depending on how much of a hurry you're in
      All in all, quite annoying when you're in a rush and the damn thing keeps making you walk to the end of the belt and back.
  21. How do you show something you can't see? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...they are planning to show at this years ISSCC... ...measuring in at 7.5 microns...

    How do you show something you can't see? :-)

    Stephen

  22. I see an Orwellian opportunity here. by mmell · · Score: 0
    1) Tag population with RFID chips (in food? clothing?)

    2) Entice them to identify themselves just once

    3) Tie the appropriate RFID to the personal ID, continue updating as RFID's enter/leave the individual

    4) Track individual movements and activities

    5) ???

    6) PROFIT!!! (or RULE THE WORLD!!! ?)

    1. Re:I see an Orwellian opportunity here. by steven94585 · · Score: 1

      I don't see how anyone could use something like this to really controil people. Tracking where 300 million American are would be a huge waste of resoures (computers, readers, and physical people to install and maintain). I could see that used to track know criminals (sex offenders and the like), but if you've done nothing wrong, you should have nothing to worry about, unless you "accedentally" get marked as a pedophile or something.

    2. Re:I see an Orwellian opportunity here. by msbsod · · Score: 1

      > 3) Tie the appropriate RFID to the personal ID, continue updating as RFID's enter/leave the individual

      Each new US passport has an RFID chip. Orwell described 1984 - this is 2006.

  23. Price! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I understand the excitement over this latest breakthrough from an engineering perspective, but from a business perspective, "feh."

    In the business world, the adoption of RFID has little to do with how small they make it. The real barrier is one of price. If an RFID tag weighed 12 pounds and was shaped like a brick, put a pack of 10,000 of them cost a hundred bucks, you better believe the heavy industries would push to adopt immediately. Not every industry requires a paper-thin chip.

    1. Re:Price! by symbolic · · Score: 1

      What you say is true, except that often these things start out as a "solution without a problem". The real issue is that problems are then invented to accommodate the new technology.

  24. RFID Cereal by Glog · · Score: 1

    So instead of just being on our food packages. It'll be in our food.
    Yummy.


    Ah yes, in future episodes of Austin Powers they'll just feed Fat Bastard a bowl of RFID Cereal (TM) instead of making poor Beyonce stick the tag up his big fat hairy ass.

    1. Re:RFID Cereal by D4MO · · Score: 1

      or was it Heather Graham?

      --

      Rocket science is easy. Neurosurgery, now *that's* difficult.
  25. That's great news! by catdevnull · · Score: 3, Funny

    I was worried that the older ones would be visible under my forehead.

    --

    I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
    1. Re:That's great news! by jobcello · · Score: 1

      It's a popular belief among Christians that the RFID chip might be the fulfillment of a prophecy in Revelation 13 about the Mark of the Beast--a mark which, according to the prophecy, is received on the right hand or forehead and is required in order to buy or sell anything. Same passage as the infamous 666:

      Revelation 13:16-18 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

    2. Re:That's great news! by catdevnull · · Score: 1

      that's exactly to what I was referring, chief.

      --

      I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
    3. Re:That's great news! by jobcello · · Score: 1

      ...of course you were, and very humourously at that.

      It may not be a majority, but I do know that some people might not know the juicy details related to your concern over having a bulky chip under your forehead.

  26. Future archaeology by rasqual · · Score: 1

    Good grief. Imagine archaeology as an entrepreneurial field for the first time, somewhere in the time of Duck Dodgers. Innovative mavericks will be levitating across midwestern sewerage fields in their byte-mining combines, parsing the surface for data which, in the aggregate, when cross-referenced with live historical transaction records will yeild a corpus of information having arbitrage value on the global information market.

    Everything about everyone will be inferrable by triangulation, but only by a system whose storage and processing powers are capable of indexing not only every web page and library document, but every real-time product/service that's purchased/delivered to everyone.

    Thinking of ingestion -- what happens when RFID meets nano-genotyping and a swallowed chip will be capable of providing a hash via RF of your gene sequence as a primary key -- in real time?

  27. Tracking my trackers.. by modi123 · · Score: 2, Funny
    Oh greatest news of all! With this RFID tag being so small I now have a solution for tracking all my RFID tags.. I tried to adhere two RFID tags together, but that was way too bulky. Now I can have wafer thin tags on my bulkier, older tags, and I finally know where any of my RFID tags are at any point of the day! Oh joys of joy!

    Additionally, as I am thinking about this new miracle invention, I also have a way of tagging all my M&Ms and Skittles.. yeah! I will soon find out who has been eating my Skittles in my apartment.. *angry fist shaking*

  28. TOO MANY RFID CARDS!!!! by Palal · · Score: 1

    I have too many RFID cards in my wallet already and they don't work when you tag the wallet on the reader. I have to take the appropriate card out to use it! This is just going to get worse!

    --
    -Palal
    1. Re:TOO MANY RFID CARDS!!!! by rasqual · · Score: 1

      The conspiratorialists will point out that it's just the kind of dissatisfaction that comes from experiencing such hassles, combined with taking the base technology for granted, that will have people welcoming innovations that solve it but are even more scary -- like the use of a primary key for all systems (SSN is the current bogeyman for such conspiratorialists). I can testify that for my part, I'm definitely vulnerable to the "this new technology sucks, and here's why," then welcoming the solution that works by being far more obtrusive. Gotta watch it -- conspiracy theorists among us or no.

  29. Philosophy illiteracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    When you come right down to it, who are any of us, really?

  30. Re:Maybe paper, probably not by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Funny
    Does anyone know what kind of microcontroller is used on the transit system tickets?
    Usually the microcontroller is an abrasive female, but occassionaly it's a worn down guy.
    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  31. Slips easily under skin of forehead, no ugly bump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why be satisfied with the Number of the Beast?

    Now you can have your own _individual_ number!

  32. Flexible? by redelm · · Score: 1
    If it's that thin, it'd better be flexible (capable of operating when flexed). Otherwise, if it's made of silicon, it'll just break unless attached to a solid surface. A credit card may not be stiff enough unless it's small sized (~2mm sq).

  33. apps by Darth+Cider · · Score: 1

    The RFID topic is usually met with alarmism about privacy, but some applications of cheap RFID ought to be cool. Game pieces that interact with game boards. Keyboards with no circuitry except to read RFID embedded keys. Better snail mail. Any technology can be abused. You're here, now go delete your cookies.

  34. Five Medical Futures by handy_vandal · · Score: 2, Informative

    I fear the moment we use this kind of chips inside our own body. At this moment there are several studies in development to apply the RFID chips in Medicine.

    Scenario #1: RFID nano-medicine saves my life. GOOD THING.

    Scenario #2: RFID nano-medicine tracks my location, rogue Pinkerton agents hunt and kill me. BAD THING.

    Scenario #3: RFID nano-medicine extends my life. GOOD THING (but see also TOO EXPENSIVE).

    Scenario #4: RFID nano-medicine used to collect statistical bio-data from millions of people, including me. NOT SURE.

    Scenario #5: RFID nano-medicine makes me immortal. NOT SURE ....

    -kgj

    --
    -kgj
    1. Re:Five Medical Futures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scenario #6: RFID nano-medecine contains potassium benzoate.

  35. Could care less about size... by doormat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What I really want out of RFID tags is the ability to scan 1000s per minute. I've got a large room, a library of documents. If I RFID tag each one, I want to be able to run a wand past all the documents and inventory all 100,000 documents in 15 minutes. Right now, the people I've talked to say its not possible. That is what I am waiting for.

    --
    The Doormat

    If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
    1. Re:Could care less about size... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm waiting for the day when people learn the difference between the statements "could care less" and "couldn't care less."

      You never specified how you could care less or why we should care about you being able to care less. Now if you couldn't care less your post would have made some sense...

    2. Re:Could care less about size... by mshultz · · Score: 1

      For most major marathons these days, the timing system depends on each participant wearing a small RFID tag on their shoelaces. At the start line, every runner passes over a mat to calculate their starting delay (from when the gun was fired).

      I'm not sure how much different this example is from what you're talking about (since the reader in this case can be much larger than a hand-held wand), but at marathon start lines, there seems to be no problem keeping track of what is probably on the order of a thousand runners per minute.

    3. Re:Could care less about size... by Federico2 · · Score: 1

      If I RFID tag each one, I want to be able to run a wand past all the documents and inventory all 100,000 documents in 15 minutes.


      100,001 including you. In SSSRFID Russia books count you.
    4. Re:Could care less about size... by Splab · · Score: 1

      The problem there is somewhat limited in the sence that only one rfid occupice a certain amount of space.

      The rumor around here (DIKU - Computer science at the university of Copenhagen, Denmark (think cartoons?)) is that you can only have a very limited amount of rfids in the same place, when alot of them respond to an impulse you get all sorts of feedback (noise). Haven't really looked into it yet, but I am thinking of doing a project on RFIDS this semester.

    5. Re:Could care less about size... by doormat · · Score: 1

      Exactly the problem I have - these aren't on books (mostly) they're on individual engineering plan documents, put up on racks side by side. We fit about 50 plans in one inch, in our Multifile rack system. Thats the density I need to scan RFID's with. Right now we're looking at barcoding, but thats almost as labor intensive and just identifying the documents by number.

      --
      The Doormat

      If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
    6. Re:Could care less about size... by $ASANY · · Score: 1
      The scan rate likely isn't the problem -- I've seen scan rates in the several hundreds per second without trouble. In this application it's likely the proximity of the tags to each other that's the hurdle. If the tags have the necessary separation from each other, this could be done fairly easily.

      PM greg_dot_letiecq_yat_wfinet_dot_com.

    7. Re:Could care less about size... by lawpoop · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I wish for the day when people learn the meaning of SARCASM.

      Actually, I could care less about that day.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    8. Re:Could care less about size... by sootman · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      And I could care less about pedantic assholes who refuse to accept the fact that language--especially slang and expressions--can and does change. "Could care less" == "couldn't care less" and has since the '60s.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    9. Re:Could care less about size... by doormat · · Score: 1

      Yup. We've got 50 tags per inch, if not more. Thats the problem. Too dense.

      --
      The Doormat

      If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
    10. Re:Could care less about size... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What I really want out of RFID tags is the ability to scan 1000s per minute. I've got a large room, a library of documents. If I RFID tag each one, I want to be able to run a wand past all the documents and inventory all 100,000 documents in 15 minutes. Right now, the people I've talked to say its not possible. That is what I am waiting for.


      s/library of documents/street full of people/
      s/all the documents/all the products they are carrying/

      This sounds far more 'dual-use' that any aluminium tube....
  36. More Thinner? by pupdog311 · · Score: 0

    Shouldn't that be just 'thinner', or is the Grammer Nazi my mother beat into me coming out?

    1. Re:More Thinner? by windowpain · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This weird locution is becoming increasingly common. I wish I knew where it came from.

      I'm fully expecting to see a box of something on the supermarket shelf that's half the size of the regular box with bold lettering on its front declaring "NOW! TWICE AS SMALL!"

      --
      Insert witty sig here.
    2. Re:More Thinner? by smoker2 · · Score: 1
      I'm fully expecting to see a box of something on the supermarket shelf that's half the size of the regular box with bold lettering on its front declaring "NOW! TWICE AS SMALL!"
      Except that these days, it would probably say "Two times as small !"
  37. Makes no sense by Pedrito · · Score: 2, Informative

    I see stuff like this all the time and it makes no sense to me:

    measuring in at 7.5 microns, is ten or more times thinner

    Okay, I assume this means that paper is roughly 75 microns thick. But to say something is 10 times thinner means that it's 10 x 75 microns thinner. In other words, somehow, 7.5 microns = 75 microns - 750 microns.

  38. 128-bits is enough for everyone by MobyDisk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How do they assign RFID numbers? 128-bits is probably plenty if they are given out efficiently. Or are they giving them out like IPv4 blocks and we are going to run out eventually?

    1. Re:128-bits is enough for everyone by $ASANY · · Score: 1
      There are numerous constructs for the data stored on RFID chips. One of the most popular is to give a gajillion dollars to EPCglobal in order to obtain an EPC Manager Code, which you can then concatenate with a locally-assigned sequence in order to have a globally unique value.


      Most of the other constructs work pretty much the same way with:

      [construct identification]

      [entity identifier]

      [sometimes:locally assigned product code] [always:locally assigned serial number]


      So for the most part, unless you are a part of the entity that established the last two values, or pay another gajillion dollars to get access to an EPCglobal network which will let you query within that enterprise, or you have some special relationship with that entity and they decide to share data with you, you stand precious little chance of figuring out what the heck that 128 bit value actually represents.

  39. Innumeracy by RealProgrammer · · Score: 1

    >ten times thinner

    Another way to look at it is that the scale is missing. To say that something is "ten times thinner" you have to know what unit of thinness is being used. Same with "ten times quicker" or "ten times slower", as you say. It's backwards construction.

    Marketers love to use this mangling, because it sounds better to the untrained ear than "one tenth as [thick, far, fast]". More is always better, so ten times something is better than one tenth of something.

    People respond with some form of the "rose is a rose" argument. This is not a simple case of naming, but once someone adopts the view that it's idiomatic it's hard to get them to think about it further.

    --
    sigs, as if you care.
  40. Top SECRET FACT:Most modern cars tracking ALREADY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They have been grain-of rice sized for years, mainly for all car tire embedding.

    TOP SECRET FACT:Most modern cars have tracking transponders ALREADY! While you drive on highways. Wires in the road and 14 feet above work fine.

    Spy transmission chips embedded in tires that can be read REMOTELY while driving.

    A secret initiative exists to track all funnel-points on interstates and US borders for car tire ID transponders (RFID chips embedded in the tire).

    Yup. My brother works on them (since 2001).

    The us gov T.R.E.A.D. act (which passed) made it illegal to sell new passenger cars lacking untamperable RFID in the tires allowing efficient scanning of moving cars.

    Your tires have a passive coil with 64 to 128 bit serial number emitter in them! (AIAG B-11 ADC v3.0) . A particular frequency energizes it enough so that a receiver can read its little ROM. A ROM which in essence is your GUID for your TIRE. Multiple tires do not confuse the readers. Its almost identical to all "FastPass" "SpeedPass" technologies you see on gasoline keychain dongles and commuter windshield sticker-chips. The US gov has secretly started using these chips to track people.

    Its kind of like FBI "Taggants" in fertilizer and "Taggants" in Gasoline and Bullets, and Blackpowder. But these car tire transponder Ids are meant to actively track and trace movement of your car.

    Taggant chemical research papers :
    http://www.wws.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/byteserv.prl/ ~ota/disk3/1980/8017/801705.PDF
    (remove spaces in url from slashcode if needed)

    I am not making this up. Melt down a high end Firestone, or Bridgestone tire and go through the bits near the rim (sometimes at base of tread) and you will locate the transmitter (similar to 'grain of rice' pet ids and Mobile SpeedPass, but not as high tech as the tollbooth based units). Sokymat LOGI 160, and Sokymat LOGI 120 transponder buttons are just SOME of the transponders found in modern high end car tires. The AIAG B-11 Tire tracking standard is now implemented for all 3rd party transponder manufactures [covered below].

    It is for QA and to prevent fraud and "car theft", but the US Customs service uses it in Canada to detect people who swap license plates on cars when doing a transport of contraband on a mule vehicle that normally has not logged enough hours across the border. The customs service and FBI do not yet talk about this, and are starting using it soon.

    Photos of tracking chips before molded deep into tires! :
    http://www.sokymat.com/index.php?id=94

    PLEASE LOOK AT THAT LINK : Its the same shocking tire material I have been trying to tell people about since the spring of 2001 on slashdot.

    a controversial dead older link was at http://www.sokymat.com/sp/applications/tireid.html

    (slashdot ruins links, so you will have to remove the ASCII space it inserts usually into any of my urls to get to the shocking info and photos on the embedded LOGI 160 chips that the us Gov scans when you cross Mexican and Canadian borders.)

    You never heard of it either because nobody moderates on slashdot anymore and this is probably +0 still. It has also never appeared in print before and is (or was) very secret.

    Californias Fastpass is being upgraded to scan ALL responding car tires in future years upcoming. I-75 may get them next in rural funnel points in Ohio.

    The photo of the secret high speed overpass prototype WAS at :
    http://www.tadiran-telematics.com/products6.html ...but the shocking link finally died in July 2004 and the new location 2005 does not have a photo of a RFID bridge underpass RFID database collector. But this 20005 link below does discuss their toll booth

  41. Tin-foil by warlock71 · · Score: 1

    Make sure you check your tin-foil hats even closer now!!

  42. It's republican math by Chemisor · · Score: 1

    So you are saying that "we'll make the budget deficit 2 times smaller", really means newBudgetDeficit = oldBudgetDeficit * 2?

    1. Re:It's republican math by Pedrito · · Score: 1

      No, 2 times smaller would be newBudgetDeficit = oldBudgetDeficit - (oldBudgetDeficit * 2). Or in other words, newBudgetDeficit = -oldBudgetDeficit.

  43. EMF Shielding Clothing by airship · · Score: 1

    Time to suit up in the EMF shielding clothing sold here.
    I especially like the cap woven with silver threads. :)

    --
    Serving your airship needs since 1995.
  44. Eek. by RandomPrecision · · Score: 1

    I already feel uncomfortable when someone pats me on the back - I'm the type to immediately try to find the sticky note. But I can find stickies - not sure that I'd find a 7.5 micron tag.

    1. Re:Eek. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When nerds start kicking you, you'll know you've got a "kick me" RFID on you.

  45. So for arguments sake... by eheldreth · · Score: 1

    Lets say the tinfoil hat crowd is right and the government is out to track you, here is how it could go down. Every piece of clothing sold has an ultra thin RFID chip imbeded in the hem. You purchase said clothing with a credit card now said clothing is linked to your name. Now all thats needed is to install scanners at stratigic locations and wham they know who and where you are(untill you give all your clothes to goodwill that is).

    --
    The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
    1. Re:So for arguments sake... by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      As soon as this technology becomes pervasive I plan to zap all just-purchased clothing in the microwave for 10 seconds. I'm hoping thats enough to kill an RFID chip.

    2. Re:So for arguments sake... by $ASANY · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Every piece of clothing sold has an ultra thin RFID chip imbeded in the hem. You purchase said clothing with a credit card now said clothing is linked to your name. Now all thats needed is to install scanners at stratigic locations and wham they know who and where you are.

      Phooey.

      And just how and where does this "linking" happen? Do you think the cash register is going to have an embedded EPC Class 1 Generation 2 RFID tag writer which will for convenience's sake rewrite the tag to include a credit card number? Or would Wal-Mart decide it makes good business sense to host petrabytes of pretty useless data linking credit cards and EPCglobal RFID tag values?

      All of these scenarios have a box in the middle of their systems architecture that reads "A miracle occurrs here" where data integration supposedly happens. Until someone figures out a way to perform such miracles, this dog won't hunt.

    3. Re:So for arguments sake... by iphayd · · Score: 1

      Umm, all you need to do is replace "A Miracle occurs here" with "The government mandates it to fight the war on Terror/Drugs/Pedophiles/Tribbles" and you now have a possible way that the "Linking" can occur.

      Now, you say that the government won't do this? We're now being surveilled by the Executive branch, with the Legislative branch not _really_ doing anything about it, despite the fact that there are supposed to be part of our "checks and balances" system.

      The other thing is that if the American goverment won't do it, some other government will. Once the technology is available for one country, it will be made available in others in the private sector. Imagine a world where an advertiser can target _you_. You spend %50 of your income on alcolhol and cigarettes? I'd imagine that you would get a lot more beer and cigarette ads. Of course, they are no longer targeting the "Kids" so they can say whatever they want to you, rather than the BS of "visit our website to help quit."

      Now, the information is gathered, all the government has to do is ask for it. Most likely, their friends the CEOs will be happy to give it in exchange for a tax break.

  46. National ID and RFID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are already advocating it.
    The National ID sports RFID.
    You could be detected when you walk near a hidden scanner.

    Who is to say, this information isn't going to end up in the hands of Alberto Gonzalez and the rest of Administration.

    We already know how did that go with the search engine data.

    Some related notes:
    http://www.unrealid.com/
    http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,121077,R SS,RSS,00.asp

  47. 7.5 microns thick... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....so when's the 7 micron ID tags comin' out?

  48. Re:Price! [and many links] by Lord+Satri · · Score: 1

    The real barrier is one of price.

    Well, yes and no, last october:
    MobileMag have a small article about a 100% organic matter RFID chip developed in Korea, costing only 0.5 cents. From the article: The new RFID Tag chip is able to function on the 30 kHz frequency by only using 100% organic compounds and an inkjet printer. By cutting down the price considerably it will allow for thee mass production through the printing process. The chip can also be printed on any paper, plastic and wood standard.

    Of interest, Slashdot already discussed RFID production increases before.

    Yes, RFID can be scary, especially in a bank or in passports. Imagine, even Sun cares for RFID.

    Anyone interested in RFID could also start with the excellent wikipedia.org entry.

    And if RFID and geospatial tech seriously interest you, see my sig ;-)

  49. They'll do both! by wheresjbob · · Score: 2, Interesting
    "I wonder if government will advocate tracking of people using RFID, or advocate banning the tracking of people via RFID?"

    They'll likely do both! Track people using RFID while banning others from doing the same.

  50. ... but you still need an antenna by helix_r · · Score: 3, Insightful


    Yes, of course, its not surprising that the RFID chip itself can be incredibly small. What most commentators are missing is that YOU STILL NEED AN ANTENNA to access the thing.

    A "long-range" (> few inches) RFID tag needs a relatively large area antenna, like the size of a business card.

    A "near-field" tag can have an antenna that is a few millimeters wide, but then your reader has to be very close-- almost touching.

    1. Re:... but you still need an antenna by typicallyterrific · · Score: 1

      More than enough for most uses.
      The future has no barcodes (or keys)!

  51. Another mission for the... by mriya3 · · Score: 1

    ... RFID-Zapper! http://events.ccc.de/congress/2005/wiki/RFID-Zappe r(EN) ( also linked in RMS's Personal Page )

  52. Not tin foil, Mobile Cloak. by ACMENEWSLLC · · Score: 1

    The tin foil hat doesn't work well.

    What you really need is an outfit and shopping bag made of this material;

    http://www.mobilecloak.com/

    That will stop the RFID's.

    Of course, these will certainly be illegal once Walmart goes to RFID cash registers, for obvious reasons.

  53. Paper MONEY by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

    This thing is destined for the Euro note, and probably the US Dollar as well.

    What with the GPS tracking that is planned to be mandatory for all road vehicles in Europe, Galileo (for it's ability to work in urban zones, which GPS is not so hot at), and RFID pickups tracking notes seamlessly, European governments will have unprecedented intelligence on the movements of their citizens.

  54. Some anti-orwellian blabber by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 1

    Betty: Hmm? Tiger, tiger, tiger.
    Betty: Hmm ! Bird. Birdie. Birdie, birdie. Hmm.
    Betty: I am a great magician.
    Betty: Your clothes are red !
    Betty: Your clothes are black.


    After that quote from Kung Pow, I think everyone sees the potential the combination of RFID hand implants and OLED clothes has!

  55. Oh, yes . . . I see . . . by mmell · · Score: 1
    "If you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear."

    ***/me hiding in basement, fearing sound of jack-boots***

  56. There can be only one... by Harodotus · · Score: 1
    Scenario #5: RFID nano-medicine makes me immortal. NOT SURE ...

    We'll I'll be sure to immediately start taking up sword-fighting just in case an endless stream of similarly RFID nano-medicine users come to take my head.

    You can never be sure when the Quickening is going to happen and one needs to be ready to take the Prize, just in case

    --
    Its not users who are broken, it's systems not taking account their likely behaviour and fixing it technically.
  57. Mmmm..Edible? by c0d3r · · Score: 1

    Want fries with that?

  58. So Thin by triso · · Score: 1

    This new tag is so thin that I guess that we will all be wearing the "patch" in a few years.

  59. Re:Top SECRET FACT:Most modern cars tracking ALREA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The photo of the secret high speed overpass prototype WAS at :
    http://www.tadiran-telematics.com/products6.html ...but the shocking link finally died in July 2004 and the new location 2005 does not have a photo of a RFID bridge underpass RFID database collector.

    pssst, they haven't yet wiped the archive at http://web.archive.org/web/20010502162058/http://w ww.tadiran-telematics.com/products6.html

  60. Ya'know, there were so many links in there that I couldn't confirm that I really wouldn't know if the guy was telling the truth or not... but I just thought that it was worth pointing out that the entire post was written in the same writing style as those one page websites that are trying to sell you things. "I've been trying to tell people forever, but noone would listen, until NOW. Buy my ebook and I'll teach you how to be a millionaire within minutes. This priceless information is worth a bajillion dollars or more, but if you buy it within the next twelve seconds , you can have it for free."

    --
    http://www.christiannerds.com/, TRUTH and Technology