HP's Memory Spot Chip

Iddo Genuth writes, "HP Labs recently revealed a prototype of the Memory Spot Chip, a tiny wireless chip capable of storing and transmitting data. When it hits the market in about 2-3 years, the new chip will enable a variety of applications ranging from digital wristbands that store patient medical information to sound bytes on paper or printed pictures that can be accessed using a reader-equipped device. The article has an interview with Howard Taub of HP Labs and some photos of the prototype chip." The chip can only be read at a distance of 1 mm, so it avoids many of the privacy concerns of RFID. It has about 1000 times the storage capacity and 100-1000 times the data transfer rate of RFID.

Comments

No thanks

[LiquidCoooled]

I can only see 1 metre without my glasses,
But shockingly if I get a device to FOCUS the light I can see much further.

Do they make tiny pringles cans?

How's this really better?

[jhfry]

The advantage of RFID is that it could be read from a distance... so that you could walk out of a store with a cart full of items and not need to scan each one individually. This removes this ability.

The security concern with RFID is that it could be read from a distance... so a marketing company could scan a cart full of items and not need to scan each one individually. this removes this ability.

OK so now it doesn't benifit you or the store at all... but it protects your security better! But the way I see it is it's no better than the current, cheap alternative of barcodes.

I think where TFA is off is in it's comparing this technology and it's applications to RFID. These technologies are certainly not targetting the same markets or applications. I wouldn't mind the new chip in my credit card (unlike RFID), but don't raise the price of my canned fruit by embedding one in the label.

This new technology is best suited in situations where large volumes of data need to be attached to an object and securely (relative, physical only) read very quickly and with minimal effort. Medical applications come to mind as well as banking, credit card processing, and identification (DL, VISA, Passport).

Re:If so close, then why even wireless?

[profplump]

Because a wired reader would:
      1. Require the reader to be properly oriented, not merely within range, so that the 2+ contacts required are aligned
      2. Render the chip unreadable when it's dirty
      3. Render the chip unreadable when it's wet
      4. Prevent the chip from be layered inside paper/plastic/fabric -- it would have to be exposed, which complicates manufacturing

Re:If so close, then why even wireless?

[arielCo]

1. With wired links you need contact pads, which spell trouble (dirt on the pads, dirt coming inside the package, tiny wires, etc).
2. You have to align the contacts for reading/writing. Even if this RF chip actually has to come within 1 mm from the antenna, the latter can have as large a surface as you want it to be.

iButton is a simple, rugged contact-based solution, but it's far from being cheap/small enough to put on every spare widget you sell.

Animals

[Do You Smell That]

These types of devices could be incredibly helpful inside live animals (including humans). Imagine a farmer being able to touch a machine to a computer laying just beneath the skin of livestock. He could use this to collect info from internal probes and other data gathering tools... sugar, water, and fat levels, hormone levels, known pathogens, etc... all could be checked every time the cow wandered in to get milk (as happens automatically in many big farms).

Inside people, temporary chips could be used to do similar jobs for patients in hosiptals; assisting data reporting for patients with diabetes, heart irregularity, etc.

How about deterministic distance?

[Spinlock_1977]

Instead of relying on the sensitivity of today's receivers to come up with "it can only be read from a distance of 1mm", why not implement very simple technology (radio signal ping-pong) to determine the distance of the radio partner? Encryption keys could be passed to ensure a single partner, and possibly moot the entire Pringles Can argument. Or perhaps I'm daft to think any solution could be so simple.