Discussion:
RFID thread
(too old to reply)
frag
2005-09-06 14:28:27 UTC
Permalink
A few people commented in the "RFID is nasty" thread that we'd have
people lurking outside our houses with their readers and antenna
checking out all the groceries we have.

Received Insights catalog today with this on the cover:-

Datalogic Jet 001-511 RFID reader. (inc bluetooth & barcode scanner)

Cost £1599.99 ex.

Operating range : 10cm

So unless you arrange everything along your window sill, it ain't going
to work! :)
--
frag
Suzuki VStrom 1000 K2, Honda Africa Twin (for sale), Volvo S80 2.4 170
BOTAFOT#6, DS#5, exKoTBOTAFOTL, DFV#3,BOD#7,MKA&E#1 (Oak Leaf Cluster)
UKRMHRC#11 UK-R-M FAQ : http://www.ukrm.net/faq/index.html
MikeH
2005-09-06 14:42:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by frag
A few people commented in the "RFID is nasty" thread that we'd have
people lurking outside our houses with their readers and antenna
checking out all the groceries we have.
Received Insights catalog today with this on the cover:-
Datalogic Jet 001-511 RFID reader. (inc bluetooth & barcode scanner)
Cost £1599.99 ex.
Operating range : 10cm
So unless you arrange everything along your window sill, it ain't going
to work! :)
That's going to narrow the doors in Tescos quite a bit.
--
Mike Hall
R1100S
doetnietcomputeren
2005-09-06 15:02:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by frag
Operating range : 10cm
So unless you arrange everything along your window
sill, it ain't going to work! :)
that's like receiving a monkeybike catalogue and assuming you could use it
to circumnavigate the globe.

well you *could*[1] but there's far better machinery suited to that
particular task.

I maintain, RFID is here, it has been for a long time, it's here to stay
and will only proliferate. The anti-lobby just need to get used to it.


[1] except for the wet bits
--
Dnc
Ginge
2005-09-06 15:06:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by doetnietcomputeren
I maintain, RFID is here, it has been for a long time, it's here to stay
and will only proliferate. The anti-lobby just need to get used to it.
I see a gap in the market for farraday cage shopping bags.
doetnietcomputeren
2005-09-06 15:24:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ginge
I see a gap in the market for farraday cage
shopping bags.
Thieves have been lining shopping bags with foil for years already, to get
around security tags.
--
Dnc
Rope
2005-09-08 03:24:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ginge
Post by doetnietcomputeren
I maintain, RFID is here, it has been for a long time, it's here to stay
and will only proliferate. The anti-lobby just need to get used to it.
I see a gap in the market for farraday cage shopping bags.
There was one of those police programs on the other night where they raided
a drug dealers house and showed a bag lined with tin-foil for just such
purposes.
--
Rob_P
UKRM(at)indqualtec.co.uk
uppercase(d) BBIWYMC#1 BOG#11? MRO#31 IBCDBBB#1(kotl)
FJ1200, CCM130
Rebel without a clue
tallbloke
2005-09-06 15:29:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by doetnietcomputeren
I maintain, RFID is here, it has been for a long time, it's here to stay
and will only proliferate. The anti-lobby just need to get used to it.
So you wouldn't regard having an RFID chip embedded in your vehicle
numberplate as a privacy issue then? Just get used to being continuously
monitored?
--
tallbloke
Tasmin350i MatchlessG80
BONY#1 DIAABTCOD#8 OSOS#27 SKA#3
sweller
2005-09-07 06:52:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by tallbloke
Post by doetnietcomputeren
I maintain, RFID is here, it has been for a long time, it's here to
stay and will only proliferate. The anti-lobby just need to get used
to it.
So you wouldn't regard having an RFID chip embedded in your vehicle
numberplate as a privacy issue then? Just get used to being
continuously monitored?
Have you got something to hide or are you some kind of luddite that wants
to take us backwards?

If we don't take these great strides forwards we'll simply be giving in
to terrorists.
--
Simon
tallbloke
2005-09-07 07:12:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by sweller
Post by tallbloke
Post by doetnietcomputeren
I maintain, RFID is here, it has been for a long time, it's here to
stay and will only proliferate. The anti-lobby just need to get used
to it.
So you wouldn't regard having an RFID chip embedded in your vehicle
numberplate as a privacy issue then? Just get used to being
continuously monitored?
Have you got something to hide or are you some kind of luddite that
wants to take us backwards?
If we don't take these great strides forwards we'll simply be giving in
to terrorists.
If we don't wake up to what's happening we'll be sleepwalking into the
surveillance society.
--
tallbloke
Tasmin350i MatchlessG80
BONY#1 DIAABTCOD#8 OSOS#27 SKA#3
sweller
2005-09-07 07:15:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by sweller
Post by tallbloke
Post by doetnietcomputeren
I maintain, RFID is here, it has been for a long time, it's here to
stay and will only proliferate. The anti-lobby just need to get
used >> > to it.
Post by sweller
Post by tallbloke
So you wouldn't regard having an RFID chip embedded in your vehicle
numberplate as a privacy issue then? Just get used to being
continuously monitored?
Have you got something to hide or are you some kind of luddite that
wants to take us backwards?
If we don't take these great strides forwards we'll simply be giving
in to terrorists.
If we don't wake up to what's happening we'll be sleepwalking into the
surveillance society.
It's only a problem for those who want to destroy freedom and our way of
life. Or is that what you want?
--
Simon
tallbloke
2005-09-07 07:23:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by sweller
Post by sweller
Post by tallbloke
Post by doetnietcomputeren
I maintain, RFID is here, it has been for a long time, it's here
to stay and will only proliferate. The anti-lobby just need to get
used >> > to it.
Post by sweller
Post by tallbloke
So you wouldn't regard having an RFID chip embedded in your vehicle
numberplate as a privacy issue then? Just get used to being
continuously monitored?
Have you got something to hide or are you some kind of luddite that
wants to take us backwards?
If we don't take these great strides forwards we'll simply be giving
in to terrorists.
If we don't wake up to what's happening we'll be sleepwalking into the
surveillance society.
It's only a problem for those who want to destroy freedom and our way of
life. Or is that what you want?
Tell you what. Lets insist that all our public servants wear the tags
first so we can see how well it works.
--
tallbloke
Tasmin350i MatchlessG80
BONY#1 DIAABTCOD#8 OSOS#27 SKA#3
sweller
2005-09-07 07:31:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by tallbloke
Post by sweller
Post by tallbloke
Post by sweller
If we don't take these great strides forwards we'll simply be
giving in to terrorists.
If we don't wake up to what's happening we'll be sleepwalking into
the surveillance society.
It's only a problem for those who want to destroy freedom and our way
of life. Or is that what you want?
Tell you what. Lets insist that all our public servants wear the tags
first so we can see how well it works.
I can see the protection of our way of life and improved security for
employees being as good as reason as any; it would be hypocritical of us
to keep insisting on improvements to workplace safety but to reject this.

If it also means the spin off logistical and data management benefits,
err, benefit the customer it can only be something we should encourage
and embrace.

I think you're only taking the 'ultra' view to bolster your lefty
credentials. Real life doesn't work like that.
--
Simon
tallbloke
2005-09-07 08:00:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by sweller
Post by tallbloke
Post by sweller
Post by tallbloke
Post by sweller
If we don't take these great strides forwards we'll simply be
giving in to terrorists.
If we don't wake up to what's happening we'll be sleepwalking into
the surveillance society.
It's only a problem for those who want to destroy freedom and our way
of life. Or is that what you want?
Tell you what. Lets insist that all our public servants wear the tags
first so we can see how well it works.
I can see the protection of our way of life and improved security for
employees being as good as reason as any; it would be hypocritical of us
to keep insisting on improvements to workplace safety but to reject this.
If it also means the spin off logistical and data management benefits,
err, benefit the customer it can only be something we should encourage
and embrace.
I think you're only taking the 'ultra' view to bolster your lefty
credentials. Real life doesn't work like that.
I was thinking more of the pilot project requiring all MP's and Home
Office Civil Service to wear them. Let's see how keen they are to embrace
their own arguments. After all, the house of commons is at more risk of
terrorist attack than 23 Anystreet Yourtown n'est pas?
--
tallbloke
Tasmin350i MatchlessG80
BONY#1 DIAABTCOD#8 OSOS#27 SKA#3
sweller
2005-09-07 08:03:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by tallbloke
Post by sweller
I can see the protection of our way of life and improved security for
employees being as good as reason as any; it would be hypocritical of
us to keep insisting on improvements to workplace safety but to reject
this.
If it also means the spin off logistical and data management benefits,
err, benefit the customer it can only be something we should encourage
and embrace.
I think you're only taking the 'ultra' view to bolster your lefty
credentials. Real life doesn't work like that.
I was thinking more of the pilot project requiring all MP's and Home
Office Civil Service to wear them. Let's see how keen they are to
embrace their own arguments. After all, the house of commons is at more
risk of terrorist attack than 23 Anystreet Yourtown n'est pas?
Their primary aim /must/ be protecting innocent people.
--
Simon
tallbloke
2005-09-07 08:34:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by sweller
Post by tallbloke
I was thinking more of the pilot project requiring all MP's and Home
Office Civil Service to wear them. Let's see how keen they are to
embrace their own arguments. After all, the house of commons is at more
risk of terrorist attack than 23 Anystreet Yourtown n'est pas?
Their primary aim /must/ be protecting innocent people.
I see what you mean. If that's the case, they'd be way down the list.
--
tallbloke
Tasmin350i MatchlessG80
BONY#1 DIAABTCOD#8 OSOS#27 SKA#3
sweller
2005-09-07 08:43:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by tallbloke
I was thinking more of the pilot project requiring all MP's and Home
Office Civil Service to wear them. Let's see how keen they are to
embrace their own arguments. After all, the house of commons is at
more >> risk of terrorist attack than 23 Anystreet Yourtown n'est pas?
Their primary aim must be protecting innocent people.
I see what you mean. If that's the case, they'd be way down the list.
I'm sorry I can't do this anymore because (a) it's made me feel poorly
and (b) I'm beginning to believe it.
--
Simon
tallbloke
2005-09-07 08:52:39 UTC
Permalink