Posted on 11/24/2005 1:38:18 PM PST by Nasty McPhilthy
Right now the gewneral public can't even tell when something has RFID in it - there ought to be a small handheld detector.
Did you see the guy who showed up to the UN conference with with badge that had RFID wrapped in tin foil? Th U.N detained him.
"I'm guessing Jessica Lunsford's parents wished she had had one...and for that matter, why not someone like John Evander Couey? "
They are really short range and nobody as of yet is talking about implanting them.
"I'm guessing Jessica Lunsford's parents wished she had had one...and for that matter, why not someone like John Evander Couey?
There are pros and cons to this argument"
And the cons would include the ability for any child molester to come up to a child and tell their name, address and anything else that was encoded -that would be a leg up in convincing kids to go with the stranger.
The military is talking about implanting them in soldiers, and the can be tracked for a quite a long distance
It's too late.
I think there are some misconceptions about RFID. It's relatively short range, it's not like GPS. There are uses of it (like Tommy Thompson's) that should be said no to. There are also uses of it that don't threaten our security.
Low-frequency RFID systems (30 KHz to 500 KHz) have short transmission ranges (generally less than six feet). High-frequency RFID systems (850 MHz to 950 MHz and 2.4 GHz to 2.5 GHz) offer longer transmission ranges (more than 90 feet). In general, the higher the frequency, the more expensive the system. RFID is sometimes called dedicated short range communication (DSRC).
http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid7_gci805987,00.html
I am assuming that we are releasing prisoners in the WOT with RFID implanted in them so we can find out whom they associate with and where they go.
Also: I am furious that police departments in the USA do not deliberately implant bicycles and other commonly stolen items with RFID devices, so they can lure scum to steal them and go to jail before they steal MY BIKE or other item belonging to ME. I lost a $300 bike in 2004 in Walnut Creek, California. The police just shrugged. They should have been out there using a Flypaper Strategy like we are using in Iraq. Same enemy almost: rifraff from Oakland are almost 100% anti-Bush and pro-Saddam...and they are the ones who go to the Republican communities of the East Bay of San Francisco to steal anything that isn't nailed down.
We need to take some lessons from Iraq, where I hope RFID is being used...and apply them to the anti-Bush criminal areas of the USA...at least in terms of planting valuable items like bicycles in nice areas that lie near poor areas...and cleaning up the poor areas by proactively trapping and arresting the scum that goes into the nice areas to steal.
Most who would disagree with me, probably have never been robbed of a $300+ item.
Also keep in mind those distances are "max distance readable by a commercially-viable reader", not "max distance readable by a price-no-object federal law enforcement reader"
If you buy it from Walmart it probably already has RFID in it.
With the right detector I can drive by your house and tell you what's in your medicine cabinet.
"Also keep in mind those distances are "max distance readable by a commercially-viable reader", not "max distance readable by a price-no-object federal law enforcement reader""
Yes, that's why I more than doubled the stated maximum range but the truth is I don't know what systems the government has... but it's not really the government that worries me - it's when anybody can buy a detector for a couple of hundred dollars and spy on their neighbors and the kids wear ID bracelets that every pedophile can read.
seems like a good idea for kids or certain adults like hikers.
Sorta like the Social Security number?
We hollered like hell that it was just a way for the gubm'nt to infringe (remember that word?) on us Americans as a free people. We were given all sorts of gubm'nt assurances (heh!) that it would never be used for anything but Social Security purposes.
Now look. You can't even get a driver's licence without disclosing it so the gubm'nt can trace you. They even claim that if you have one of the old SS cards that has "Not For Identification" on it, is invalid and that you have to get a new one that does not have that written on it.
We really DO trust the gubm'nt when they ASSURE us that RFID won't be abused. Yezzir! Sure do! Yup!
Without a doubt this technology will be abused unknown to average folks. Look at On-Star. It has such temendous capabilities but you hear nothing on what is really capable of doing.
Every On-Star capable auto can track and bug it's occupants. On-Star is just a license for the user interface.
It makes you wonder what is being done with the data that is collected from it.
RFID requires a scanner that has to be within one meter of the chip to detect it. Unless Big Brother plans on placing one scanner every couple of meters within the United States I don't think you really have anything to worry about.
"RFID requires a scanner that has to be within one meter of the chip to detect it. Unless Big Brother plans on placing one scanner every couple of meters within the United States I don't think you really have anything to worry about."
It depends on the detection frquency used - it can be a couple of hundred feet or more - check the link in post #6.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.