As guns don’t kill people, people kill people, we should instead just implant an RFID chip into every gun owner. Each gun could include an RFID reader/writer that will inhibit firing unless it successfully reads an ID of an authorized gun owner. It can then write the ID of the gunman/woman into a tiny chip imbedded in the base of every bullet. Ballistics-matching becomes a thing of the past.
This technology is wasted on packs of razor blades.
Nah, I was just thinking of Wal-mart no longer needing people to wander around the store and actually replace stock. Or just about every store anywhere no longer needing people to physically inspect inventory.
As far as I know, UPC Codes and scanners have yet to actually replace any workers-- they’ve just made them faster.
And it’s not like we’re talking about replacing skilled workers with these machines (unlike the Luddite movement). We’re talking about taking people whose only skill is picking shit up and putting it back on a shelf and throwing them on a welfare line :rolleyes:
RFID will not remove the need to put goods on shelves. RFID on packaging will improve flow through the supply chain, thereby reducing the number of out-of-stock situations, so I suppose there could be some labor saving there. However, out-of-stock conditions are detected already using perpetual inventory and computer assisted ordering programs. These have nothing to do with RFID.
You’re kidding, right? The UPC and scanner technology allows faster processing, so the workers finish quicker, so the retailer says: “Hey, I could save a bunch of cost by firing some of you, but I won’t - I’ll let you have the rest of the day just doing nothing”.
For an article on the effects of UPCs and scanning, see here. Note the frequent use of the term “labor savings”.
Razor blades are compact, high-value items that are often ripped off in large quantities and resold to other retailers, such as convenience stores. Being able to tell the cops that X packs of razor blades with the following IDs were ripped off this morning. A few days later, a cop with a scanner can go thru other stores. If the stolen blades are found in a store, a good case can be made that the store has been receiving stolen goods.
The tags might also make it more difficult for large quantities to be stolen in the first place. If management sees 25 packs of blades moving in one batch from their normal stock location to the front door, Officer Friendly can be waiting to intercept them.
Another application in retail (even with the US$0.10/tag price) is tagging OTC medications that contain pseudoephidrine, which can be used to synthesize methamphetamine.
Hey, ScoobyTX - my comment was tongue-in-cheek. I know about this technology - see my more sensible posts.
[nitpick][hijack]
High cost items. Middling value.
[/np][/hj]
If it means I can shoot anyone that doesn’t have an imbedded chip, I’m sold.
It is a great invention. RFID, like barcode scanner technology, have improved accurate high speed inventory handling by several orders of magnitude. Large scale retail like Walmart is damn near impossible without barcode technology.
In disagreement with Amarone RFID tags are currently running .75-1.25 each right now. Last I heard it would not be a feasible technology for mass use until it is below .50 per tag. Also the tags can be read from about 3 feet or so. The case I pointed out in the GD thread has been successfully prototyped of RFID systems checking in recieved goods as the forklift unloads them from the truck via scanner.
Tagging clothing discreetly would be difficult if not impossible. Where do you hide a 1/4"x3/4" RFID tag on a t-shirt that could not be easily removed. These tags are not “pinpoint sized” like the CNN article says. I could see heavier clothing like jackets having a tag included between layers of material. Quality jackets, especially leather ones are also more attractive targets for theft making RFID detection of their movement more attractive.
As far as drive by checks, spare me. Dousing a house with enough RF energy to generate a powerful enough reply from RFID tags to penetrate the walls of your house would probably freak out if not fry other electronics.
I would be more concerned with things like “Active RFID” in electronics or appliances that are plugged into house power. Something like that could be detected from outside the home.
Start talking about RFID tagging convicted felons/sex offenders and we may have a fun thread on our hands.
Well, Wal*Mart believes thay are only paying .10
** As I have stated elsewhere, the range of passive RFID depends mainly on the size of the antenna in the reader. A rule of thumb (although technological advances will no doubt make it obsolete) is that the range is approximately the size of the antenna. The size of reader that you will see in a POS lane will restrict the range to a few inches. Back in the warehouse (or within the door frame), you can certain get a range of a few feet.
Now I’m in total agreement with you here.
Depends. Will his face be on a milk carton - “have you seen me?”
If so, that would be okeydoke with me. 