Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Streamlining and Testing RFID Technology

Posted by Soulskill on from the all-the-better-to-see-you-with dept.

Multiple readers have written to let us know that an experiment at the upcoming Hackers on Planet Earth (HOPE) conference will use RFID to track the movements of at least 1,500 registrants for the duration of the conference. Those movements will be transmitted onto screens which "show in real-time where people go, with whom they associate, for how long and how often." The system will also be used for games which involve manipulation of the available data. Meanwhile, researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology have developed a method for testing large quantities of RFID tags, which may serve to greatly speed distribution.

69 comments

  1. How appropriate... by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Funny

    privacy, rfid, security, technology (tagging beta)

    For once "tagging beta" is appropriate. B-)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:How appropriate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's ironic, because the article is about testing new methods of using rfid(a technology for identifying or 'tagging' objects). He's using a phrase in something other than its literal intention or typical usage.

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

    There goes my plan of hanging out at the bar while my video presentation is running at the booth.

    1. Re:dammit by plover · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There goes my plan of hanging out at the bar while my video presentation is running at the booth.

      Hardly. I bet HOPE is going to be a circus of people hiding RFID tags on each other, unsuspecting passers-by, luggage carts, equipment crates, laptops, and probably in capsules hidden in hamburger buns in the buffet. I expect very few tags to remain on their originally intended targets.

      --
      John
    2. Re:dammit by MadnessASAP · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You mean like a worst case scenario RFID environment? Might be interesting to see if anybody comes up with a system to extract usable info from this.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
    3. Re:dammit by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      [nerd alert]

      Years ago at a roleplaying convention I participated in a Babylon 5 game where someone tried to plant a bug on Odo's back without him noticing.

      Odo subsumed the bug and caused it to work it's way down to his hand so he could then inspect it.

      Not particularly enlightening I know - but it was the image I had in my mind when I read the above comment.

      [/nerd alert]

      We now return you to your normal programming.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    4. Re:dammit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Babylon 5? Odo? Huh? What?

      (I mean, I realize Deep Space 5 was ripping off your Lord God and Master, JMS, but still man...)

    5. Re:dammit by LexIcon759 · · Score: 1

      What was Odo doing on B5? Was Garibaldi jealous?

    6. Re:dammit by Ihmhi · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, they could put the tags in a tamper-proof portion of the con badge - behind a sticker or something that shows clearly when it has been removed. I doubt a lot of people would forfeit their convention fee by destroying their badge.

      --
      Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
    7. Re:dammit by Macthorpe · · Score: 1

      Please turn in your geek/nerd cards immediately.

      In order to have your cards returned to you, you must watch the entirity of Lexx from start to finish without stopping or having your eyes bleed.

      --
      "It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
    8. Re:dammit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      There goes my plan of hanging out at the bar while my video presentation is running at the booth.


      Hardly. I bet HOPE is going to be a circus of people hiding RFID tags on each other, unsuspecting passers-by, luggage carts, equipment crates, laptops, and probably in capsules hidden in hamburger buns in the buffet. I expect very few tags to remain on their originally intended targets.

      I'll be there selling RFID Blocking wallets and passport cases =)
    9. Re:dammit by houghi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And that might be the real test. See how much 'bad' information you get. Calculate the falso positives and false negatives. The best place to do this is at HOPE. That way you will know what the worst numbers will be.

      The general public will e much more docile and thus much better tracable.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    10. Re:dammit by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      Apparently my nubness know no bounds

      Odo was in the DS9 game - Keira uniform in a box somewhere in storage with the latex nose. The Bab5 game was the following year.

      Thinking before typing FTW

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  3. That's EASY... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Interesting

    At random intervals, pick a stranger and offer to swap tags. You could even devise rules for doing this in groups...

    Games could be invented involving your favorite randomizers (dice, coins, chicken bones, shots of whisky) to spice up the action. Sounds like fun to me.

    1. Re:That's EASY... by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not if they are implanted.

      And are programmed to explode if removed.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:That's EASY... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ,,,,or if your tag is recorded at the location and time of the murder of the person who decided the RFID tags were a good idea.

    3. Re:That's EASY... by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      You're not one of these freaks who think that technology should be suppressed because some people come up with not very nice ways to use it are you?

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    4. Re:That's EASY... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, anything can be used for evil purposes, technological or not. I am a strong believer though in people having the right to privacy, free from being tracked, video montitored etc which is nothing more then spying. Tagging people like this is yet another loss of liberty which should be met with refusal to comply imo and I am pretty sure the founding fathers would agree. I would not work for anyone who required it nor attend any conference where such abuses were a requirement of attending. I refuse to do business with any store that requires a customer card for discounts and avoid credit cards. As for the government requiring it, I would have to agree with Patrick Henry.

      As for what I originally said, it wouldn't be the first time someone was framed nor the first time someone lost a case over misunderstanding of how a particular technology works. Lots of people are getting released now by DNA technology that were convicted on technology related to hair samples, blood testing, etc. Eventually we may end up seeing convictions made possible by DNA testing overturned as the technology advances or new technology discovered. It also may happen just because proof comes out that the tests were manipulated to get an easy conviction or the person was just plain framed by placing their DNA at the crime scene/in/on the person harmed. Murder mystery writers will no doubt include such scenarios in future writing at least, as well as stuff like GPS, if they don't already.

      What I said before fit into the conversation line. I am not a technophobe but I do believe in proper handling of things and the denial of someone's rights without them earning it is just not tolerable. Call me a privacy nut if you wish, but I had rather be called than become a victim for the lack of it.

    5. Re:That's EASY... by LexIcon759 · · Score: 1

      Especially when they come back and see what we've done with the place.

    6. Re:That's EASY... by Yogiz · · Score: 1

      I understood that the experiment was not meant to make people like RDIF tags. It seems they just want to make people think about the technology and make their own conclusions. If the attenders see how much information can be gathered about their activities by them just carrying a small tag along during the conference, they might think twice before agreeing to let the government make carrying such a tag a legal requirement in a not-so-distant future.

  4. HOPEfuly, they'd be all geeks... by yorugua · · Score: 1

    ...or else the "Those movements will be transmitted onto screens which show in real-time where people go, with whom they associate, for how long and how often" would take the meeting to whole new levels.

  5. Billing? by arthurpaliden · · Score: 3, Funny

    Will the results of the number and dureation of these 'meetings' be automatically applied to the persons credit card?

    --
    Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
  6. Re:HOPE ? by zapakh · · Score: 0, Troll

    Not until /. hosts a get-together in meatspace.

  7. Re:HOPE ? by RuBLed · · Score: 1

    That would be great, now the three of us can finally meet each other...

  8. Re:HOPE ? by urcreepyneighbor · · Score: 1

    Could there be a larger assembly of geekwads, dorkwads, and basement-dwellers on the planet? Not sure if you're trolling or are genuinely interested in finding something larger? ;\

    Defcon would be larger.
    --
    "The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
  9. Cool by duckInferno · · Score: 5, Funny

    but will it show everybody's hunger, bladder, entertainment and relationship status bars as well?

    --
    Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, watch it -- I'm huge!
    1. Re:Cool by RuBLed · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, in the next expansion pack.

  10. RFID diary of a Hacker On Planet Earth: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    • Subject X walks past boothbabes
    • X goes to restroom
    • 3 minutes later, X leaves restroom
    • X goes to bar
    • 2 hours later, X leaves bar
    • X goes to rooftop
    • X leaves rooftop
    • CARRIER LOST
    • Subject Y walks past boothbabes...
  11. Disconcerting by lawpoop · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's nothing that bugs me more with nascent technology than RFID. I don't mind it in products -- it would be great to inventory a warehouse, or, say a refrigerator, in minutes. Theoretically, I wouldn't mind RFIDs in identification cards, if it weren't so darned close to the skin. What really concerns me is RFID implants.

    It reminds me of the tattooing of numbers on Jews during the holocaust, for the Third Reich to track them and 'dispose' of them. I'm not a Christian, but the whole "mark of the beast" stuff raises my hackles. It just seems way too open to abuse for any totalitarian-minded politician. At first it's just for medical records, then it's for routine identification stops... finally, there's some computer screen somewhere in a mountain showing the movement of every American citizen.

    I don't know, I just have a very visceral reaction against the idea of an RFID implant. I have a phobia of needs; that might have something to do with it. If it really came down to the point where you had to have an RFID implant to participate in society, I don't know what I would do. I really don't. I might just drop out at that point, try to live in a cabin somewhere.

    What do other geeks think? Am I being paranoid?

    --
    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
    -- Pablo Picasso
    1. Re:Disconcerting by duckInferno · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Definitely not. The ease of control that implanted RFID tags would give to those in power, is equal to the ease of control that product RFID tags give to you.

      In a perfect society, sure, they'd help find criminals and missing persons. Otherwise, the consequences of misuse (by those with authority as well as those without), however minimal the risk, is simply too much.

      --
      Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, watch it -- I'm huge!
    2. Re:Disconcerting by plover · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Are you opposed in every case, or just "forced" implantation? I can think of several scenarios:
      • Required to enter secure room at work - (I believe this is in use in some places today)
      • Optional to enter secure room at work, with the alternative being a time-consuming strong password, a card swipe and a retinal scan
      • Optional as part of criminal home monitoring - either remain in jail or stay at home with an implant kept near the bedside monitor, instead of an ankle bracelet
      • Required to hold a particular job, such as prison guard
      • Voluntary temporary implant to hold credit information while you're partying on nude beaches (I heard some bars in Ibiza have done this, but I don't get out much!)
      • U.S. Army soldier, as an optional replacement for the Common Access Card - they get filled with vaccinations and all kinds of other stuff today, and are essentially treated as paid property of Uncle Sam.
      • As a voluntary part of a lifesaving medical treatment -- perhaps the tag is swallowed and followed through your GI tract, or perhaps it's implanted and used to monitor a medical condition?
      • As a required part of a lifesaving medical treatment, where your only access to obtain treatment is to consent to implanted RFID?
      I'm just wondering what your tolerance is. A similar question is: do you carry a cell phone? They're more trackable than an RFID chip. RFID is still limited to less than about 100 meters under perfect conditions. Or do you have to carry an RFID access card for work? Again, not a big difference in "trackability".

      As far as health, RFID is a low power technology, and active chips emit only a minute fraction of that power. The only real exposure you get is from RFID readers, not RFID chips. And you can't really avoid the readers unless you don't walk through the doors at stores with anti-shoplifting antennas.

      Anyway, I think the Xtian Right would rise up before they'd accept mandatory implants, so you'd probably have some strong allies there.

      --
      John
    3. Re:Disconcerting by tele_player · · Score: 1

      Paranoid? I don't think so. Implanted RFID would, at best, solve some non-problems, and inevitably, be misused. Kind of like computer voting machines. To me, the bad outweighs the good.

    4. Re:Disconcerting by erlehmann · · Score: 1

      As a required part of a lifesaving medical treatment, where your only access to obtain treatment is to consent to implanted RFID?

      Wouldn't that amount to, ahem, Extortion ?
    5. Re:Disconcerting by erlehmann · · Score: 1

      The ease of control that implanted RFID tags would give to those in power, is equal to the ease of control that product RFID tags give to you.

      Exactly. This technology makes it easy to treate people like objects, to instrumentalize them at the most efficient way possible. In some societies, people at least pretend to value human dignity - exactly that is what is at stake here.

      Not because the technology is "evil" - it's ambevalent like every dual-use technology (starting with knifes). But with every new thing, that is introduced to society, you have to ask yourself what the worst abuse could be - if that's acceptable, go, if not, fix it. Since you can't stop technology itself, it should be up to the lawmakers to introduce sufficient safeguards against abuse. But then, seeing so many democracies failing on privacy issues, I don't expect much.

    6. Re:Disconcerting by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "What do other geeks think? Am I being paranoid?"

      Yes, but unfortunately you're not being paranoid enough.

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    7. Re:Disconcerting by zappepcs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree, and the only place that I've EVER seen where RFID technology on people is appropriate is aboard a Federation starship or space station. Outside of a military situation... well, NATCH! Not worth the effort.

      Think of this in what I like to call the 'failure mode analysis':

      Your company (100-250 people) uses RFID tags. A fire breaks out. All but 7 people's RFID are accounted for. The FD goes in to the burning building to get them ... 2 firemen die. All 7 were in the parking lot watching at the time.

      It's absolutely no good for tracking terrorists.. they won't wear them and you won't have sensors to pick up the individuals that don't have RFID tags. This applies to any building currently in existence.

      You decide to tag everyone in a town of 3700 people for an experiment. After an estimated 430 million dollar installation of equipment, the sum total of what you know will be that people get paid on thursday and go to the bar. Walmart is busy on the weekends, and the guy you found cheating is suing you for illegal disclosure of personal information.

      Now, say you have a valid use for this, such as security in your data center, or so you think. Only people who have embedded chips can access the data center. There is a car crash, one tech dies, two are in hospital. Now your backup system is down over the weekend, and you can't even buy access to the data center. Yes, that might be a stretch, but I did say 'failure mode analysis'.

      Now, if you want to tag your milking cows to keep track of them, make sure they are getting milked, vaccinated, etc. That is useful. If you want to make sure that all the deliveries to your distribution center reach their intended end user space.. that also is good.

      Tagging people has a *VERY* limited use, no matter how cool it might seem. I'm always willing to be proved wrong though.

      At the conference, it might be cool to have anonymous RFID tracking to see what kind of data it would provide, but linking it to an individual would be wrong. If you want to see how the traffic flows through the booths, it would work but then so would cameras and video analysis software... hmmm I'm willing to bet that the video analysis would be much easier to implement, less intrusive, and much more reliable as there would be no swapping of tags, no RF interference issues, no expensive system to install for tracking etc.

      So, somebody tell me what I've gotten wrong here?

      --
      Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
    8. Re:Disconcerting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In a perfect society, sure, they'd help find criminals and missing persons

      Pft. In a perfect society there are no criminals.

    9. Re:Disconcerting by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      "In a perfect society, sure, they'd help find criminals and missing persons."

      In a perfect society there would be no criminals or missing persons.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    10. Re:Disconcerting by unPlugged-2.0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wow,

      I can't believe it but I actually agree with someone here. As someone who knows and develops RFID software the probability of fiscally feasible implants is such an afterthought its not even funny.

      Most of implant cases in RFID have been for FUN. Thats right most of them have done it because it's cool or they can start a trend. You know what the same can be said for tattoos, piercings and dying your teeth black (not that I have anything against that)

      Its simply not a good implementation of technology. Most implantable RFID is very very low power meaning 3 - 6 inches at best. Can you imagine the amount of readers needed to track your every move like Micheal Jackson in Billie Jean.

      You want to be paranoid then be paranoid about gps enabled cell phones. Those are far better at doing the job.

      --
      Software Defined RFID - The Rifidi Emulator
    11. Re:Disconcerting by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      Are you opposed in every case, or just "forced" implantation? I can think of several scenarios... You see, the thing is, I'm not really opposed to it at all. What I'm opposed to is its misuse by government. If it were totally and completely voluntary, great. I wouldn't have a problem. The problem is, I see the 'several scenarios' growing to a point where it's mandatory to have a chip from birth, or else you are an 'untouchable'. Sort of like a social security number -- who even knows what its original scope and purpose was? But nowadays, you need one for practically any serious financial transaction. You need one in order to live within the system in the US.

      So sure, I don't have a problem with X professional choosing to have an implant for their job. But I don't think it will end there. I think that would be the 'first step' towards a more pervasive and mandatory use of RFID implants.

      Basically, just think of a scenario where the government could use it to locate and round up some despised ethnic group, say, or 'dissappear' political dissidents in a single night. That's what I'm opposed to. An identification system where it is out of the control of the person being identified. Well, that and the real-time tracking.

      • As a voluntary part of a lifesaving medical treatment -- perhaps the tag is swallowed and followed through your GI tract, or perhaps it's implanted and used to monitor a medical condition?
      I understand the use of RFID implants in the case where you need to identify a person confidently, such as a prison guard, soldier, or employee in a secure room. However, what's the point of RFID in this scenario? If you swallow the tag, that's fine -- you'll pass it in a few days. But how would an RFID chip monitor a medical condition? Aren't you talking about an electronic a medical device, like a pacemaker, rather than a remote identifier? I have no problem with pacemakers. Again, it's the problem of identification being out of control of those being identified.

      • As a required part of a lifesaving medical treatment, where your only access to obtain treatment is to consent to implanted RFID?
      Why would you need an RFID chip for surgery? Why not a regular hospital bracelet? If you need definite identification, you can even get a temporary tattoo from a tattoo gun. If it's done lightly, it comes off in about 30 days.

      I'm just wondering what your tolerance is. A similar question is: do you carry a cell phone? They're more trackable than an RFID chip. I can drop a cell phone any time I want. I don't have to dig it out of my skin. ( Who knows, they might even put these RFID chips in your brain! How would you get it out on your own accord then? ) I can drop a wallet, ID card, anything. Those things aren't mandatory. If RFID chips were mandatory, and removing one from your system was illegal, I would have a serious problem with that.

      But again, it's all about the creep. Mandatory implants (hopefully) won't be around in my lifetime. But if several generations grow up with implants being state of course for certain situations, nobody will really have a problem with mandatory implants for everyone.

      Also, as far as health, I wouldn't worry about cancer; I would worry more about its ability to modulate your nervous system -- either central *or* peripheral. What if there were an RFID implant that was implanted in your brain that induced a general 'haziness' of thought, or slight depression, in response to a certain signal? There's been a lot of experiments showing that electromagnetic waves and electronic implants can control experience and behavior.

      For me, RFID rolls up a lot of nasty in a little implant. Identification out of control of the person ( think Auschwitz tattoo ), real-time remote tracking, and possible nervous system modulation. Bad, bad mojo.
      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    12. Re:Disconcerting by Awptimus+Prime · · Score: 4, Insightful

      U.S. Army soldier, as an optional replacement for the Common Access Card - they get filled with vaccinations and all kinds of other stuff today, and are essentially treated as paid property of Uncle Sam. Putting them on military personnel? Not a chance, it would put your guys at an enormous tactical disadvantage when $50 worth of common electronic components could "light them up" from 100m.

      There's probably a few more reasons the government would not be interested in implanting such things in citizens. Cost of operations having to figure out how to install, maintain and monitor everyone. Considering no totalitarian group is doing this now, I think people in current democracies are pretty safe from this.

      As mentioned many times in the thread, there's already many other methods of tracking that's already usable by the government when they are interested in you. Hell, we can't even get a few miles of "electronic fence" to work at the border, I really don't see people handing over money for a project of this scale in my lifetime.

      For the guy who mentions "all but 7 RFID cards are accounted for" in a burning building and firemen go dying, I highly doubt firemen would go running into a burning building because someone might be in there over employee swipe badges. They tend to go on "Hey, Suzie was on the 2nd floor! I think she's still inside! We can't find her!" instead of waiting for the NT admin to run into said burning building, log into a Win2k machine that's off the network and audit who has come and gone from the building since the fire started.

    13. Re:Disconcerting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've heard that some people are working on instrumented RFID tags. These could be used in medical situations where you would like to avoid batteries.

    14. Re:Disconcerting by Mjec · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You want to be paranoid then be paranoid about gps enabled cell phones. Those are far better at doing the job. Hell, it doesn't even have to be GPS enabled. Whenever your phone is on and in range it's communicating with a cell tower. Telcos keep this information - at least here in Australia. Hell, the tower in question shows up on my itemised bill. Add that to the number of towers in your average urban area, use a bit of basic mathematics and if the government wants to it sure as hell knows where you are every second of the day.
      --
      "But everyone should know everything." -markab
    15. Re:Disconcerting by Erie+Ed · · Score: 0

      U.S. Army soldier, as an optional replacement for the Common Access Card - they get filled with vaccinations and all kinds of other stuff today, and are essentially treated as paid property of Uncle Sam.

      Incase you didn't already know our CAC cards are property of the US Government (it even says it right on the ID). Also our CAC cards are dual purpose first of which is being able to log on to the network with a pin, second is that its used as a Geneva Conventions ID card. Anyhow the government already owns us :(
    16. Re:Disconcerting by DrLang21 · · Score: 1

      Why would you need an RFID chip for surgery? Why not a regular hospital bracelet? If you need definite identification, you can even get a temporary tattoo from a tattoo gun. If it's done lightly, it comes off in about 30 days. Not that I don't entirely agree with most of your points, there's a liability issue with patient identification. Hospitals spend a LOT of money trying to minimize human error when it comes to getting the right treatment to the right patient. The consequences of error can be severe for both the patient's health (long and short term) and the bottom line of a hospital's finances (due to malpractice litigation). As such, I am completely understanding if a hosptital wanted to demand that you had an RFID tag on your person when recieving care. With that said, implantation doesn't make much sense because it would increase the risk of infection. A much more likely senario is a RFID tagged ID bracelet. This would be safer, cheaper, much more efficient, and the compared failure rate would be negligible.
      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    17. Re:Disconcerting by plover · · Score: 1
      Oh, sorry, I meant to imply that Uncle Sam owns YOU, not just your CAC. :-)

      But the previous poster has a great point: an RFID-tag-seeking RPG would make the desire for implanted chips go way, way down.

      --
      John
    18. Re:Disconcerting by TheMonkeyhouse · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It is possible to read a passive implanted RFID tag from 100-200' under the right conditions with some new technology i have been looking at.

      locating can be done by phased arrays placed appropriately - GPS is overkill and totally uneccessary.

      time to start being paranoid...

    19. Re:Disconcerting by neuromanc3r · · Score: 2, Interesting

      • Required to enter secure room at work - (I believe this is in use in some places today)
      • Optional to enter secure room at work, with the alternative being a time-consuming strong password, a card swipe and a retinal scan
      • Optional as part of criminal home monitoring - either remain in jail or stay at home with an implant kept near the bedside monitor, instead of an ankle bracelet
      Bad ideas. Cloning RFID chips is a no-brainer. And entering secure rooms? Seriously, use a fscking key...
    20. Re:Disconcerting by apt-get+moo · · Score: 1

      What I find even more disturbing about RFID implants is their presumed connection with causing cancer.

      --
      ...."Have you mooed today?"...
    21. Re:Disconcerting by plover · · Score: 1
      While they seem like adding fuel to the fire, the technology concerns you raise just aren't that big.

      RFID chips have no power source of their own, and are electrically inert until they're powered up by receiving energy from an external transmitter. Unless you have an actively transmitting RFID reader next to you, your tag won't be able to "modulate your nervous system" or do anything else to you.

      Using them for remote tracking would be hard, as the "ordinary range" is two meters or less, and the "extraordinary range" is still under 100 meters.

      However, there is a tracking aspect separate from Big Brother, and that's one I personally don't like. A store could read your tag as you walk in, monitor your shopping behavior, and market to you personally as you walk around. (The scene from Minority Report where the billboard identifies Anderton's new eyes and says "Welcome back, Mr. Yakamoto" comes to mind.) While the government might not have real-time access to your location, any place you choose to go could.

      As far as the Auschwitz tattoo analogy, well, I can't argue how you would feel about being tagged. I might personally like it for the convenience factor ( I'm thinking of the "pay for your drinks with a wave of your hand" and the "can't forget my access badge" scenarios. ) But yeah, it would not be for everyone.

      --
      John
    22. Re:Disconcerting by DrLang21 · · Score: 1

      Keys are going out of style due to the ease of copying keys and picking locks.

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    23. Re:Disconcerting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah...it would be a lot worse if the same tracking technology could be applied to ...say ....cell phones.....oh wait.....

    24. Re:Disconcerting by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      RFID chips have no power source of their own, and are electrically inert until they're powered up by receiving energy from an external transmitter. Unless you have an actively transmitting RFID reader next to you, your tag won't be able to "modulate your nervous system" or do anything else to you. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the external transmitter that activates an RFID chip simply a radio broadcaster? In that case, couldn't a radio or cell phone tower be repurposed, relatively easily, to 'activate' the RFID chips of an entire town?

      Or if you were some law enforcement agency or some governmental authority, couldn't you easily disable anybody with the proper RFID chip nested into their nervous system with the right kind of 'radio gun'? Just walk into a room, press a button, and the target is is suddenly in such a fog that they can't walk.
      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
  12. Re:HOPE ? by sigipickl · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And they will all go stand next to the hottest marketing chic/umbrella girl/eye candy they can find so they can go home pull up the project web page and say they '...associated with this totally hot babe'. Really though, how can they tell with RFID who someone is associating with vs. standing next to?

    --
    Never trust anyone who takes pride in being called a 'geek'....
  13. Reminds me of TraceEncounters by srijon · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.traceencounters.org/

    ArsElectronica 2004 project to track 900 people at a conference.

  14. Hmmm... hackers, rfid, tracking... by rusty0101 · · Score: 1

    Wondering how long it will be before there are 1500 tags showing up all with the same ID that point to a record for someone in the database that didn't register...

    --
    You never know...
    1. Re:Hmmm... hackers, rfid, tracking... by LexIcon759 · · Score: 1

      And all the screens go black and have this green text raining down, and the one guy with all the IDs says in a really sinister voice "Mr. Anderson..." Wait, I saw this movie already.

  15. Bringing Web 2.0 into meatspace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like HOPE is trying to make a real life version of Flickr...

  16. not exactly 1500 people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is actually only available to those who pre-registered and only a first handful of people that show up to the conference that didn't pre-register. This is due to the cost and the time to build these items.

  17. Sputnik by zeromorph · · Score: 1

    Isn't that quite the same as the CCC has done for years now on their conference with Sputnik?

    --
    "Hannibal's plans never work right. They just work." Amy/A-Team
  18. Track the Planet by TheMonkeyhouse · · Score: 2, Informative

    i work almost exclusively in RFID tracking & technology and have been doing this stuff for years.

    In the east they let you monitor employees during the day in the factories/facilites so they wear RFID tags and you can watch them just like the material that moves around the buildings.

    know where the breakrooms and bathrooms are? then watch for the tags disappearing out that door and send them a page/text if they are not back withing 5 minutes! the unions would have a field day in the west!

    it does work though - only the slackers have a problem with it and only if you have bad managemement would it be abused. so, yeah, you couldn't use it in the US.

  19. Where have I heard this one before... by OrangeTrafficCone · · Score: 1

    A method of tracking individuals wherever they may be within a building, viewable on a display... hmm, sounds like the Marauder's Map to me.

  20. And so the slaves forge their own chains. . . by Iowan41 · · Score: 1

    Why would anyone willingly work on such a project???

  21. NOT 100M!!! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    A couple of comments have been made in this thread about RFID tags being identifiable at "up to 100 meters".

    While theoretically possible, from a simple physics standpoint it would take a very large device on the detector end (maybe it could fit in a pickup truck), and it would take a similarly large tag (bigger than implantable size), in order for the tag to be able to receive and re-transmit enough energy to be detected at that range.

    Even RFI keycards today, which are an old and proven technology, have a fine coil of many turns, about 1.5" in diameter, in order to be read by a detector about half the size of a breadbox from no further than away than about 8". If you want greater range, you have to increase the size of the antennas (coils) on the detector, or on the RFI tag, or both! And for 100M, it would definitely be both.

    As another example, the existing square "paper" stick-on RFI tags on products (as opposed to the magnetic-strip type tags) are also larger than 1" on a side, yet it takes two large coils at the door, person-tall, 2 feet wide, and no more than about 3 feet away from you, to reliably detect them.

    Keep in mind, too, that the very act of implanting a tag under the skin decreases the range of the device.

    This is scary enough technology, but let's not get carried away. You can turn off the GPS on a cell phone (or just turn off the phone). And as a practical matter, nobody is going to be reading any RFI tags in your possession from 100M away, for many years if ever.

  22. Anyone frightened yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know this is a small scale test of the control grid. They'll be putting these RFIDs in you and your kids next...to watching in real-time where you go, with whom you associate, for how long and how often. You have been warned.