I was a fan of the strategic commander myself, it was great for playing Alice once I got everything mapped the way I wanted it. I've still got it, I just haven't had a real compelling reason to plug it back in lately. (Although I should see if I can hot-key a bunch of Starcraft things to it,....)
You're forgetting that is a radio transmitter. It's going to be difficult for an inventory control system to tell how many widgets are on the floor, because all of them will be yelling the same id at the reciever at the same time. Also, these suckers are built to be kind of a pain to deactivate, so how does it know that THIS widget's been purchased?
No, you're wrong. The ENTIRE orginal point of this was for inventory tracking of items on an individual level. To use it like a barcode is currently used is stupid since RFID's are more expensive. There has to be an added benefit, in order to justify the cost of upgrading to it.
And there are ALREADY systems in place that can do exactly the kind of tracking you're talking about. Have you ever been to Gameworks? You get a card that has a unique ID. This card plugs in to every reader in the center, and those readers talk to a central database that tells them how much money is left, and recieves instructions to debit a certain amount. Do you have any idea how many of these cards Gameworks goes through in a week? And they're ALL unique. Hell, you could apply the same concept with credit and debit cards. The only difference is is you're tracking inventory instead of money, and you're using radio frequency instead of a mag-strip. Everything else is the same.
And don't kid yourself. Stores ALREADY have inventory tracking systems in place, that tell them how much of what item should still be in the store, based on how many of xx UPC has been listed as sold. RFID makes the process more precise, through easier tracking, and unique identification. Another added benefit if they place scanners throughout the store, is they can locate items that have "moved", and direct customers to the location of the item they want, or more easily put it back on the correct shelf.
BTW, they're much closer to the 5 cent mark than the 30-50 cent mark. Wal-Mart wouldn't even consider the use of these if they weren't dirt-cheap already.
YOU'RE missing the point. The point is to develop an inventory-control system that is more effective at stopping shoplifters. If you can cut the tags off, people will still attempt to shoplift items. Embedding the tags makes this a lot more difficult.
Yes, that was the general idea. I think RFID's can be a fantastic idea, especially if they set up a reliable way to quickly and easily identify you. You could in theory set up an account with a store, then just walk in, grab what you want, and walk out, and the store would automatically debit you. Of course, then they have a list of what you bought, cross-referenced with other information. What they are allowed to do with that information is what we should be concerned about.
Why not simply port the UPC system from bar codes to radio?
Because the entire stated point of the RFID tags is for inventory control and as a shoplifting deterrent. No unique ID's destroys both of those benefits, and just makes this a more expensive version of something else that already works fine. The privacy risks can be mitigated if people are proactive and get legislation passed that will prevent abuses of the information from taking place.
"Meant for" and "used for" are not necessarily the same thing. As another poster stated, SS numbers were not originally intended to be your ID number, they were intended specifically for government benefits.
And the numbers are unique. Unique means that there isn't another article that has the same ID. This means that they DON'T have to be destroyed at point of sale, as the scanners will check to see if the item you're trying to carry in or out is in the database, and if so, if it has been listed as sold or not. Something you buy at another store won't be listed as inventory.
The other problem is that the RFID's can be sewn in to clothing, or become part of the packaging, (like a cereal box), which means it's very difficult to dispose of.
I'll repeat my above comment, watch "Minority Report" if you want an idea as to why this RFID thing could be a bad idea.
Re:Better stop them before they arrive...
on
Labelling RFID Products
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
RF stands for radio frequency. ID stands for identification. In this case, a UNIQUE ID.
So, you're carrying a radio transmitter around, that sends this ID to whatever happens to be listening. If you don't understand where this can be a bad idea, watch "Minority Report", and mentally replace all of the eyeball scanners with radio recievers.
That SOUNDS good, until you add in the motherboard and bios. Apple's bios is a proprietary design, and you can install an Apple OS without it. They did this way back when to eliminate competition in the marketplace (thus killing all the apple clones that were eating in to the hardware sales), and that is what makes them a bunch of cocksucking bastards. Sun uses SCSI drives, does that make them open?
No, I was more lamenting that musicians are forced to sell their rights to a corporation in order to have any chance at airplay, concert booking in good venues, or even get their damn cd on a shelf in a store.
That wasn't what I said. Read my comment again. It is a violation of law to make copies, then sell the copies, or sell the original without including or destroying all copies.
It's a violation of copyright law, and one that I agree with. You can't make copies of a product and sell it without permission of the copyright holder.
I just would prefer the copyright holder to be the person that CREATED it, instead of some corporation, but these kind of statements are the justification that the RIAA uses to try to force these stupid laws through.
1.44MB DD disks will NOT last 90 years. In fact, they'll last far less than 5 years in most cases. There's a real good reason that type of media has gone the way of the Dodo.
And who writes and publishes said "modern dictionary"? I think that answers that question.
No one is debating the copyright infringment is illegal, the disagreement is with taking a civil crime, and trying to make it sound like a violent act.
And for our next trick, we're going to reveal our dubious patent on the carburetor and claim that the intake manifold is an infringing work because it depends on our intellectual property.
Ah-HA!
My car distribution is fuel-injected! You can't sue me, I don't have your infringing carburetor! Screw you, SCO!
It's common practice to have evidence hidden from the public review. It requires a very good reason to do so, and I can't remember what the damn term is (can someone enlighten me?), but it can and does happen.
A better solution would be for customers to file a class-action suit against SCO for false advertising or something to that effect. Either way, SCO loses.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, being as how it, like MOST keyboards, is designed for usage with two hands, I really don't think you're in the demographic.
BTW, what exactly are you doing that requires one-handed typing, ?
I was a fan of the strategic commander myself, it was great for playing Alice once I got everything mapped the way I wanted it. I've still got it, I just haven't had a real compelling reason to plug it back in lately. (Although I should see if I can hot-key a bunch of Starcraft things to it,....)
Let's do the math, shall we?
~300,000 patents a year, / 3,000 examiners=300 patents per examiner a YEAR. so, each examiner only really has to examine ONE PATENT A DAY.
Must be tough.
You're forgetting that is a radio transmitter. It's going to be difficult for an inventory control system to tell how many widgets are on the floor, because all of them will be yelling the same id at the reciever at the same time. Also, these suckers are built to be kind of a pain to deactivate, so how does it know that THIS widget's been purchased?
"Open" doesn't mean "I can do whatever I want with it", especially in this case.
No, you're wrong. The ENTIRE orginal point of this was for inventory tracking of items on an individual level. To use it like a barcode is currently used is stupid since RFID's are more expensive. There has to be an added benefit, in order to justify the cost of upgrading to it.
And there are ALREADY systems in place that can do exactly the kind of tracking you're talking about. Have you ever been to Gameworks? You get a card that has a unique ID. This card plugs in to every reader in the center, and those readers talk to a central database that tells them how much money is left, and recieves instructions to debit a certain amount. Do you have any idea how many of these cards Gameworks goes through in a week? And they're ALL unique. Hell, you could apply the same concept with credit and debit cards. The only difference is is you're tracking inventory instead of money, and you're using radio frequency instead of a mag-strip. Everything else is the same.
And don't kid yourself. Stores ALREADY have inventory tracking systems in place, that tell them how much of what item should still be in the store, based on how many of xx UPC has been listed as sold. RFID makes the process more precise, through easier tracking, and unique identification. Another added benefit if they place scanners throughout the store, is they can locate items that have "moved", and direct customers to the location of the item they want, or more easily put it back on the correct shelf.
BTW, they're much closer to the 5 cent mark than the 30-50 cent mark. Wal-Mart wouldn't even consider the use of these if they weren't dirt-cheap already.
YOU'RE missing the point. The point is to develop an inventory-control system that is more effective at stopping shoplifters. If you can cut the tags off, people will still attempt to shoplift items. Embedding the tags makes this a lot more difficult.
Yes, that was the general idea. I think RFID's can be a fantastic idea, especially if they set up a reliable way to quickly and easily identify you. You could in theory set up an account with a store, then just walk in, grab what you want, and walk out, and the store would automatically debit you. Of course, then they have a list of what you bought, cross-referenced with other information. What they are allowed to do with that information is what we should be concerned about.
Why not simply port the UPC system from bar codes to radio?
Because the entire stated point of the RFID tags is for inventory control and as a shoplifting deterrent. No unique ID's destroys both of those benefits, and just makes this a more expensive version of something else that already works fine. The privacy risks can be mitigated if people are proactive and get legislation passed that will prevent abuses of the information from taking place.
"Meant for" and "used for" are not necessarily the same thing. As another poster stated, SS numbers were not originally intended to be your ID number, they were intended specifically for government benefits.
And the numbers are unique. Unique means that there isn't another article that has the same ID. This means that they DON'T have to be destroyed at point of sale, as the scanners will check to see if the item you're trying to carry in or out is in the database, and if so, if it has been listed as sold or not. Something you buy at another store won't be listed as inventory.
The other problem is that the RFID's can be sewn in to clothing, or become part of the packaging, (like a cereal box), which means it's very difficult to dispose of.
I'll repeat my above comment, watch "Minority Report" if you want an idea as to why this RFID thing could be a bad idea.
RF stands for radio frequency.
ID stands for identification. In this case, a UNIQUE ID.
So, you're carrying a radio transmitter around, that sends this ID to whatever happens to be listening. If you don't understand where this can be a bad idea, watch "Minority Report", and mentally replace all of the eyeball scanners with radio recievers.
I had a farquaad. Yummy, but really small,.....
That SOUNDS good, until you add in the motherboard and bios. Apple's bios is a proprietary design, and you can install an Apple OS without it. They did this way back when to eliminate competition in the marketplace (thus killing all the apple clones that were eating in to the hardware sales), and that is what makes them a bunch of cocksucking bastards. Sun uses SCSI drives, does that make them open?
No, I was more lamenting that musicians are forced to sell their rights to a corporation in order to have any chance at airplay, concert booking in good venues, or even get their damn cd on a shelf in a store.
That wasn't what I said. Read my comment again. It is a violation of law to make copies, then sell the copies, or sell the original without including or destroying all copies.
It's a violation of copyright law, and one that I agree with. You can't make copies of a product and sell it without permission of the copyright holder.
I just would prefer the copyright holder to be the person that CREATED it, instead of some corporation, but these kind of statements are the justification that the RIAA uses to try to force these stupid laws through.
This is what I'd like to see SciFi do, a-la Dune.
1.44MB DD disks will NOT last 90 years. In fact, they'll last far less than 5 years in most cases. There's a real good reason that type of media has gone the way of the Dodo.
And who writes and publishes said "modern dictionary"? I think that answers that question.
No one is debating the copyright infringment is illegal, the disagreement is with taking a civil crime, and trying to make it sound like a violent act.
Piracy is the willful copying of an expressive medium for which you do not hold the right to do so.
No, piracy is robbery commited on a boat.
And for our next trick, we're going to reveal our dubious patent on the carburetor and claim that the intake manifold is an infringing work because it depends on our intellectual property.
Ah-HA!
My car distribution is fuel-injected! You can't sue me, I don't have your infringing carburetor! Screw you, SCO!
That, and you're chances of getting drivers that aren't complete ass are better if you wait a year.
It's common practice to have evidence hidden from the public review. It requires a very good reason to do so, and I can't remember what the damn term is (can someone enlighten me?), but it can and does happen.
The problem with ATI, however, is their historically shitty drivers. So you get screwed either way.
A better solution would be for customers to file a class-action suit against SCO for false advertising or something to that effect. Either way, SCO loses.