I believe one main reason that hand counting is no longer considered acceptible is the trustworthy of the counters.
Sure, you can have double-counts and triple-counts, but in a land where the campaign costs almost as much as budget of the office-holder, you can also double-bribe and triple-bribe.
That's why the security of these automated systems is so important... they *must* be more secure than a bunch of volunteers hand-counting.
In Australia, there just isn't the cash-flow to support that sort of shenanigans.
Bribery? Surely Not! In USA, Lies tell politicians, and kickbacks get Haliburton^H^H^H^H^H^H^H corporations.
People in the Transport & Logistics industry want to use RFID in warehouses and in shipping... the problem is, the technology has not yet been capable of the requirements.
When you have a package travelling down a conveyor at 300 ft/minute, and you need to identify that package, RFID has not until now been viable. If two packages are less than a few feet apart (which they often are in high-rate conveyor sortation systems) and the RFID tag is at the back of the first, and at the front of the second, it becomes very difficult to tell which tag the reader read first, and thus to sort the package correctly.
This is a big reason RFID hasn't made it into automated warehouses in a big way, yet.
Of course, there are other benefits (scanning the contents of a truck before it leaves the warehouse, and confirming the contents of a picked pallet) but most of these are confirmation tasks, not sorting or distribution tasks, which is the main purpose of an automated distribution system.
IANAQP, but it seems that if the intended receiver can decode the photons, any person in the middle could also decode the same photons and retrieve the message.
The key point here is that by observing them, the person in the middle changes their quantum state, thus making it immediately obvious to the intended receiver that the channel is insecure. So depending on the delay between the receiver determining this, and indicating to the sender to halt transmission, someone could still capture at least some data.
Or do I just have no clue what I'm talking about?
As the poster noted, light on the technical details... what are the error rates? is there any chance that their could be accidental quantum state changes, especially given that single photon transmission is really just *average* single photon transmission (sometimes more, sometimes none?)
As with most technologies, RF ID tags can present a major benefit... but (as has been extensively noted here on slashdot) will present some concerns ot people used to the current situation.
Firstly, when people say "improve inventory tracking, from manufacturing to the shelf", do they really realise how much goes on in that simple statement? There are many stages involved in a supply chain like Walmarts, and RF ID tags will improve the accuracy and efficiency of every single one of them. Manufacturing -> Central Storage -> Local Storage (within 100mi of store) -> Store Storage (back rooms) -> Shelves. At each level there are significant levels of automation (packing, conveying and sorting, and distribution). The improved accuracy could ensure that a truck leaving a central warehouse for a local warehouse would always contain exactly what is required... even a.1% error rate is too large when dealing with Walmart's volume. Ideally, the extra accuracy would result in passing on of at least some of the savings to the consumer/naive.
But it doesn't even stop there... tracking of product on the shelf can result in more efficient consumer shelf stocking... how often have you wanted a product to find the shelf empty? With RF ID tags, the store will know it's empty as soon as it becomes empty, and Drone_X can replace the shelf product almost immediately.
Regarding the privacy concerns, you cannot stop a store knowing what you are purchasing at the instant of departure... even with good old fashioned human eyes and manual calculation. The concern most people have is that the tracking will continue into their personal lives.
a) I predict that most RF tags will be in packaging or cases. and
b) in situations where they aren't, they could provide enough of a personal benefit that people will be able to deal with the risk of Big Brother knowing... e.g. the fridge that tells you when you're low on product X, or more importantly, exactly how long Product Y with what looks like might be mold on it has been in the fridge (or is it just french cheese?). As another poster mentioned, a device could indicate when your wallet or keys get left behind or stolen. another possibility is smart washing machines that will warn you that you've just put a cashmere sweater on a high heat cycle or a a PC interface to your wardrobe that will tell you if that shirt you wanted to wear is in the wardrobe or in the wash.
There are people that would be willing to pay for these services, and they are most easily enabled by RF ID.
Ultimately, I think consumer pressure will ensure that there will be a way to remove, or disable RF ID tags, but I think that before too long, most people won't want to because they will become too useful in the home.
By the way, the store doesn't have to disable them to prevent double charging... assuming tags have unique IDs, the system can simply log that ID_XYZ has already been paid for and shouldn't be charged again. What's that? concerned that someone knows you entered the store?... when was the last time you used a credit card or debit card in Walmart?
I have to say it all looks very cool... but from my understanding of the article (call me stoopid if you so desire) the pattern was predicted based on various things such as the elements involved and temperature. ie. a limited number of factors. Surely that means that there is a realistic limit to the number of patterns that can be created?
I mean, it's possible that this limited number of patterns would be enough to create useful (ie. computational/mechanical) structures at the 100 x nano level, but I can't see this technology leading to the complete matter pattern replication mentioned earlier.
Not to say that we won't someday see complete matter pattern replication, just that methinks this aint it.
The mix of CLI and GUI you're describing exists in a lot of engineering design tools, AutoCAD and PLC programming software to name two. The Rockwell programming software has a gui to edit ladder logic but supports a "dot-command" interface. Hit the "." button and a window pops up and lets you type the CLI command, or whatever you want. Very easy to get used to. Pity about the ladder logic.
I'd love to see some movies made of some SPL programs.
Leo di Caprio might actually be able to act if all he had to say was "Speak thy mind!"... but the dirty codpieces and square roots of lying pigs-offal might get him down a bit.
Has anybody heard of Rate Distortion Theory? Shannon proved many moons ago that for a given distortion of a signal, there is a minimum rate. And visa versa. If you want a lower data rate, you must put up with more distortion. He also showed how this lower rate can be calculated, without having to have an algorithm to generate it.
Of course the interesting thing is what you define distortion as.
General definition: The difference between the decompressed signal and the original signal. This is generally measured as Mean Square Error (MSE).
The cleverness behind MP3, DivX and the upcoming Jpeg2000 (although not the only cleverness, each has lots of cleverness in different ways) is that the distortion is localised to frequency bands (spatial or temporal, your pick) to which humans have a low sensitivity. There is also work being done for jpeg2000 on looking at masking signals (ie activity in a certain band will effectively mask distortion in that band)
But, none of these are getting below Shannon's lower bound, they're just redistributing the distortion.
Anyhoo, this claim of 'full-screen' 'high-quality' (nicely defined terms!) over 28.8 is most likely bollocks if you define full screen and high quality the way anybody with a brain would.
Unless those tricky changing laws of physics are changing faster than we thought...
-Perc.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe one main reason that hand counting is no longer considered acceptible is the trustworthy of the counters.
Sure, you can have double-counts and triple-counts, but in a land where the campaign costs almost as much as budget of the office-holder, you can also double-bribe and triple-bribe.
That's why the security of these automated systems is so important... they *must* be more secure than a bunch of volunteers hand-counting.
In Australia, there just isn't the cash-flow to support that sort of shenanigans.
Bribery? Surely Not! In USA, Lies tell politicians, and kickbacks get Haliburton^H^H^H^H^H^H^H corporations.
People in the Transport & Logistics industry want to use RFID in warehouses and in shipping... the problem is, the technology has not yet been capable of the requirements.
When you have a package travelling down a conveyor at 300 ft/minute, and you need to identify that package, RFID has not until now been viable. If two packages are less than a few feet apart (which they often are in high-rate conveyor sortation systems) and the RFID tag is at the back of the first, and at the front of the second, it becomes very difficult to tell which tag the reader read first, and thus to sort the package correctly.
This is a big reason RFID hasn't made it into automated warehouses in a big way, yet.
Of course, there are other benefits (scanning the contents of a truck before it leaves the warehouse, and confirming the contents of a picked pallet) but most of these are confirmation tasks, not sorting or distribution tasks, which is the main purpose of an automated distribution system.
-Perc
IANAQP, but it seems that if the intended receiver can decode the photons, any person in the middle could also decode the same photons and retrieve the message.
The key point here is that by observing them, the person in the middle changes their quantum state, thus making it immediately obvious to the intended receiver that the channel is insecure. So depending on the delay between the receiver determining this, and indicating to the sender to halt transmission, someone could still capture at least some data.
Or do I just have no clue what I'm talking about?
As the poster noted, light on the technical details... what are the error rates? is there any chance that their could be accidental quantum state changes, especially given that single photon transmission is really just *average* single photon transmission (sometimes more, sometimes none?)
Anyone that has a clue care to enlighten?
Firstly, when people say "improve inventory tracking, from manufacturing to the shelf", do they really realise how much goes on in that simple statement? There are many stages involved in a supply chain like Walmarts, and RF ID tags will improve the accuracy and efficiency of every single one of them. Manufacturing -> Central Storage -> Local Storage (within 100mi of store) -> Store Storage (back rooms) -> Shelves. At each level there are significant levels of automation (packing, conveying and sorting, and distribution). The improved accuracy could ensure that a truck leaving a central warehouse for a local warehouse would always contain exactly what is required... even a
But it doesn't even stop there... tracking of product on the shelf can result in more efficient consumer shelf stocking... how often have you wanted a product to find the shelf empty? With RF ID tags, the store will know it's empty as soon as it becomes empty, and Drone_X can replace the shelf product almost immediately.
Regarding the privacy concerns, you cannot stop a store knowing what you are purchasing at the instant of departure... even with good old fashioned human eyes and manual calculation. The concern most people have is that the tracking will continue into their personal lives.
a) I predict that most RF tags will be in packaging or cases. and
b) in situations where they aren't, they could provide enough of a personal benefit that people will be able to deal with the risk of Big Brother knowing... e.g. the fridge that tells you when you're low on product X, or more importantly, exactly how long Product Y with what looks like might be mold on it has been in the fridge (or is it just french cheese?). As another poster mentioned, a device could indicate when your wallet or keys get left behind or stolen. another possibility is smart washing machines that will warn you that you've just put a cashmere sweater on a high heat cycle or a a PC interface to your wardrobe that will tell you if that shirt you wanted to wear is in the wardrobe or in the wash.
There are people that would be willing to pay for these services, and they are most easily enabled by RF ID.
Ultimately, I think consumer pressure will ensure that there will be a way to remove, or disable RF ID tags, but I think that before too long, most people won't want to because they will become too useful in the home.
By the way, the store doesn't have to disable them to prevent double charging... assuming tags have unique IDs, the system can simply log that ID_XYZ has already been paid for and shouldn't be charged again. What's that? concerned that someone knows you entered the store?
I have to say it all looks very cool... but from my understanding of the article (call me stoopid if you so desire) the pattern was predicted based on various things such as the elements involved and temperature. ie. a limited number of factors. Surely that means that there is a realistic limit to the number of patterns that can be created?
I mean, it's possible that this limited number of patterns would be enough to create useful (ie. computational/mechanical) structures at the 100 x nano level, but I can't see this technology leading to the complete matter pattern replication mentioned earlier.
Not to say that we won't someday see complete matter pattern replication, just that methinks this aint it.
-Perc.
The mix of CLI and GUI you're describing exists in a lot of engineering design tools, AutoCAD and PLC programming software to name two. The Rockwell programming software has a gui to edit ladder logic but supports a "dot-command" interface. Hit the "." button and a window pops up and lets you type the CLI command, or whatever you want. Very easy to get used to. Pity about the ladder logic.
-Perc.
I'd love to see some movies made of some SPL programs.
Leo di Caprio might actually be able to act if all he had to say was "Speak thy mind!"... but the dirty codpieces and square roots of lying pigs-offal might get him down a bit.
-Perc
Has anybody heard of Rate Distortion Theory? Shannon proved many moons ago that for a given distortion of a signal, there is a minimum rate. And visa versa. If you want a lower data rate, you must put up with more distortion. He also showed how this lower rate can be calculated, without having to have an algorithm to generate it. Of course the interesting thing is what you define distortion as. General definition: The difference between the decompressed signal and the original signal. This is generally measured as Mean Square Error (MSE). The cleverness behind MP3, DivX and the upcoming Jpeg2000 (although not the only cleverness, each has lots of cleverness in different ways) is that the distortion is localised to frequency bands (spatial or temporal, your pick) to which humans have a low sensitivity. There is also work being done for jpeg2000 on looking at masking signals (ie activity in a certain band will effectively mask distortion in that band) But, none of these are getting below Shannon's lower bound, they're just redistributing the distortion. Anyhoo, this claim of 'full-screen' 'high-quality' (nicely defined terms!) over 28.8 is most likely bollocks if you define full screen and high quality the way anybody with a brain would. Unless those tricky changing laws of physics are changing faster than we thought... -Perc.