Your levi jeans are spying on you!

[Isabo]

http://supertalk.superfuture.com/showthread.php?t=20974

[Joeaksa]

Wonderful. Just what we need is more of this crap in our lives...

[red-beard]

As predicted by Star Trek....

Soon we will all be chipped. Then they will implant the "pain chip". It will be for our own good. Only criminals will actually have them activated, so why care, citizen? You're not a criminal, are you?

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Yep. "If you've got nothing to hide, what's the problem", right? Fear and panic! Booga booga! The world is trying to hurt you! You need the government and its policies for your own good and protection!

Worth noting that Bush has become a master and indeed has built his entire presidential term on exactly this kind of "fear-based" government intrusion into peoples' lives. Good job there red states! Way to go!

[ChrisBennet]

As a partner in an RFID related business let me bring a little information to the discussion.
1) The majority of RFID chips are passive devices. They have no batteries and must be powered by the scanner/receiver's radio waves. This requires the scanner to either be in very close proximity (handheld scanner) or a have a large powerful antenna (fixed doorway scanner). The doorway scanners are several thousand dollars I think (we don't use them).
2) Active RFID chips have their own power source (like a watch battery). These chips can be read from a distance. The battery size limits how small these chips can be - think thick coin sized.

Calling them "spy chips" is like calling Porsche "death cars" but I guess the pejoritive "spy chips" sells more magazines and books to the ignorant.

-Chris

[aknapp]

"Out of respect for our customer's wishes, we are not going to discuss any specifics about their test"

Double-speak, as Orwell would have put it. How many of those customers wish to have an RFID chip in their jeans. RESPECT?

The RFID chip in its current state is stepping stone with far more serious future implications, all done under the guise of "marketing and advertising".

[island911]

What next? . . will people have some sort of unique, easily idetifiable feature? . .. like a face.

Like Chirs sez; RFID's have sucko range.

I'm amazed at how easliy people are frightened by a properly spun article. (I guess that's why we have so many Lib's) Anyway, RFID chips are supper low on my Orwellian threat list.

[nostatic]

like any technology, RFID depends on the application. We have done research on some cool applications for location-based services and gaming. But I also realize the personal privacy issues involved. Even for passive devices.

It isn't Orwell yet. But it has the potential to be an incredibly invasive technology.

[CJFusco]

There is a very extensive book on this topic called SPYCHIPS by Albrecht and McIntire.

The most offensive part about the RFID technology, IMHO, is the increase in the level of manipulation of advertising.

[island911]

Yet really, it's technology which has the potential to be an incredibly invasive technology.

IMO, Cameras (and related) linked to processing power will continue to be the future Orwillian threat.

[pwd72s]

Orwell was an optimist.

[on-ramp]

i dont wear Levi jeans so I have nothing to worry about.

when they start putting 'em in Dockers, then I start to worry.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

What I'm wondering is why Levis would care to track peoples' movements anyway. . . Although that's perhaps moot in light of the more glaring BLATANT violation of personal privacy here. This absolutely, positively should be "opt in" ONLY. Not "opt out" or "we just won't tell anyone".

The people that promulgate this kind of crap are truly heartless ba$tards who ought to be dragged out into a field, drawn and quartered and their heads impaled on stakes as a warning to future traitors to a free society. That'd make me feel better about it.

This technology WILL be exploited and abused. No question.

[Sonic dB]

Wow. I had no idea. Hope they sew the chip for my jeans in the crotch, so it will get the hell banged out of it by my package.
They wont know what hit them.

BTW Interesting BBS forum that one is...

[hatpix]

Cheap workaround if you're worried.

"The comment about disabling RFID tags using a microwave oven is correct. The small strip antennas inside the tags just carry that high-frequency, high-power RF to the chip, burning it out in less than a second."

and

"What would work, however, is a device with a contact plate that pinpoints RFID tags in products, then zaps them with a burst of RF energy in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz range or higher. Assuming the antenna of the device isn't resonant at the frequency you blast it with, if you hit it with enough power, you'll chop it up"

[vbaron]

As technology improves, RFID will easily morph into "spy chips" - smaller batteries, devices that use less power, etc.. Even now, think how many times you may pass through some sort of scanner entering or leaving a store.

Anyway, why do the tags need to be embedded in the clothing? A removable tag would work just as well.

Just more power for Big Brother.

[CJFusco]

Originally posted by on-ramp
i dont wear Levi jeans so I have nothing to worry about.

when they start putting 'em in Dockers, then I start to worry.

Abercrombie and Fitch puts RFID tags in every article of clothing they've sold since 2003. There are others.

[Milu]

Isn't something of the sort used in ski wear so you can be found if buried under snow?
Still find the direction we are going in disturbing.

[island_dude]

I can see lots of reasons why they (the retailers) would want to have RFIDs on avery garment. The largest single clothing retailer is TJX. They own a huge number of brands. Being able to track each garment would tell them who was visiting what store wearing what styles. They would be able to find how how many times a customer comes to shop but does or does not buy something. It would help them locate merchandise that has walked. It could end up coming right back into a store being worn by a potential shoplifter.

A really frighteing thing would be if there was cooperative relationship between DHS and the retailers. It is not hard to imagine that given history of credit card transactions they could get the RFID tags associated with the items and then atttempt to put those items on a watch list to see where the items go. It would take a huge amount of processing, but not out of the realm of the possible.

[CJFusco]

Originally posted by island_dude
I can see lots of reasons why they (the retailers) would want to have RFIDs on avery garment. The largest single clothing retailer is TJX. They own a huge number of brands. Being able to track each garment would tell them who was visiting what store wearing what styles. They would be able to find how how many times a customer comes to shop but does or does not buy something. It would help them locate merchandise that has walked. It could end up coming right back into a store being worn by a potential shoplifter.

A really frighteing thing would be if there was cooperative relationship between DHS and the retailers. It is not hard to imagine that given history of credit card transactions they could get the RFID tags associated with the items and then atttempt to put those items on a watch list to see where the items go. It would take a huge amount of processing, but not out of the realm of the possible.

Oh, there are certainly very beneficial ways in which RFID can and will be used... the danger lies in the technology being exploited by corporations (or government) to track and manipulate. That's what I think people are worried about. As long as RFID is used for stop-loss and finding buried skiiers, fine; there are already patents out there, however, for nearly-microscopic chips which would be installed into human skin...