Walmart Begins Rollout of RFID and EPC Tags 462
paroneayea writes "There's a lot about RFID tags in the news today. Wal-Mart is officially beginning to use RFID tags on its merchandise. We've heard about Wal-Mart's plans to introduce RFID tags in the past, but this is the first time that this is actually being put into use. To quote the article: 'Wal-Mart is billing this as a trial, but Simon Langford, Wal-Mart's manager of RFID strategies, told RFID Journal that this is the beginning of the company's planned roll-out of EPC (Electronic Product Code) technology.' Meanwhile, California does something right for a change and introduces a bill that will limit the use of RFID tags in stores and libraries to protect the privacy of customers. IBM, which plans to be a major manufacturer of RFID tags, bashes critics of RFID tags as 'anti-retail.'"
UPC (Score:4, Funny)
IBM (Score:2, Funny)
Re:UPC (Score:3, Insightful)
As I learned with EDI, it's the big dogs which drive the technology. GM insisted their suppliers use EDI or they wouldn't be suppliers. EDI made rapid progress in the auto supplier industry, Ford got on the badwagon, too, as it made logistics simpler.
With a big dog like Walmart wagging the RFID tail, suppliers will find other customers willing to use th
Re:RFID info (Score:3, Informative)
You know they're scared when... (Score:4, Interesting)
"Katherine Albrecht has some sort of weird thing in her mind that helicopters might descend and follow you, I mean, how low are these things going to fly?" said Shearer. "I don't understand it basically. She has a particular view, that she's doing God's work and is going to protect us from the globalisation of retailing."
It's been a while since I really scrounged through the CASPIAN sites, but I don't recall reading anything about "helicopters might decend" (and Google [google.com] seems to agree with me). And a large number of folks in this country think that "doing God's work" is a Good Thing, and would take offense at "God's work" being used as a negative epithet.
They even try to say she's "anti-retail". What the heck does that mean? If anything CASPIAN is pro-retail, trying to preserve the ability of non-registered human beings to buy staple goods at a fair price [nocards.org]. What's anti-retail about that?
If the RFID industry thought Albrecht was on the fringe, they'd ignore her. When you see IBM's mouthpiece painting Albrecht as a rabid conspiracy theorist, you realize they know she's not on the fringe anymore. And they're scared.
The open question remains: if the chips are so innocuous, why is the RFID industry so scared of this lady?
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, label them as "the RFID industry" to distance yourself, and dehumanize them.
"Dehumanize them"? Wal-Mart is a corporate entity. IBM is a corporate entity. They aren't human in the first place, therefore I *can't* de-humanize them.
The problem is when we *humanize* these megacorporations. Then, we are in danger of expecting them to behave in a humane way. The mom & pop store on the corner can be trusted exactly as much as its owner can be trusted. A shareholder-owned corporation can be trusted to do one thing and one thing only: attempt to make money for its shareholders. Remember when Wal-Mart used to be the "Made in the USA" company? When that quit being profitable, it quit being a slogan.
Distributors, who are people, will decide when, where, and how.
Distributors are people? If I can see one and talk to one, sure. Last time I was at Lowe's, I talked to an *employee* of a distributor. He would have no more control over RFID tags than I would. No, it's companies -- who are NOT people -- who will decide when, where, and how. And I don't like it.
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:3, Interesting)
An Opportunity (Score:3, Insightful)
May I propose a bright Side?
We GIVE thousands of bottles of medicine to hospitals in Iraq. The day they arrive they are taken out the back door and distributed by a mafia blacl market.
That and not a fanatical religion is what is standing in the way of progress.
Progress in developing countries can be measured as the time it takes for people to assume that dishonest acts will be punshished.
Transparency.org tracks public perception regarding corruption for va
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:5, Insightful)
The point made (parent thread) about CASPIAN is right on: if you are leading you never acknowledge the competition as it only gives them power they otherwise lack; when they are already on par or beating you, you mention them. The fact than CASPIAN is mentioned at all, and particularly in disparaging, ad hominae attacks already means that the issues raised legitimate and important enough that they no only can't be simply ignored. It also suggests that the pro-RFID has only self-serving economic arguments against them with no constructive strategy to address the real issues. They've failed to properly do a "stakeholder analysis".
I strongly believe that RFID can be a really good thing for all involved but only if the privacy issues are dealt with structurally and architecturally through standards definitions and legal protections.
Punishment - a key difference (Score:3, Insightful)
You've made some of the most thoughtful replies on the topic, so I'll answer this one:
What other things comprise a corporation? Do you know of a corporation that has turned over decision making responsibility to a non-human?
Here's one big difference: a person can be punished in a number of ways, when he or she commits a crime. These range from financial penalties, to loss of freedom for a varying length of time, to the ultimate penalty of death. For individ
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:5, Insightful)
Its for inventory. Why should I care how Wal-mart or any company manages their inventory? If they try to keep them embedded in the items you purchase such as shoes, or pants, then I'll take issue. Else, its a non-issue. Give it a rest.
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:5, Informative)
If someone could associate your purchase of a jacket to you, maybe because you used a credit card to make the purchase, then that person or organization could track your movements across the world. The technology used to read the tags is relatively passive. You walk through a doorway with a tag on, and it could be scanned.
This is the fear. It is unclear to me how unique the ID's are, and if they could be used this way.
And as all RMS followers know, as soon as the information is collected, whether it is illegal or not, it will find a way to get into someones hands that you don't want to know it.
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:3, Insightful)
She takes the idea that tagged merchandise can be loaded into trucks, and shipping companies can track their trucks with GPS, and then speaks out about satellite monitoring of RFID.
She's a little heavy on the FUD.
As far as the work of the Big Guy in the Sky, while I've never heard her mention it publicly, I know that she is a mark-of-the-beast-er. I find the beliefs kind of silly, but if you translate t
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:5, Insightful)
Because enough people will take what she says as absolute truth and not actually look into the issue themselves. Particular to this is using derogatory terms -- you mentioned the use of "God's work" as an epithet, but what else would you call "spy chips". Mob mentality -- if you convince enough people that some object or power is evil and dangerous, even the safest, most harmless devices will get banned in the backlash.
There are definitely scary, privacy-invading uses of RFID tags -- but there are also beneficial uses that don't invade privacy. The problem is not the tags, in and of themselves. It is in the data that can be stored on them and who can access that data. She does have valid points, and the RFID industry would do well to heed her concerns. Her aim does not appear to be working to find the optimal path that works for both sides -- it is totally consumer oriented.
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:3, Insightful)
Right on the first part, wrong on the second. Better inventory control means a lowered cost of operating but who says the savings are going to be passed along to the consumer? If I had to guess, I'd say that Walmart is going to pocket any extra profits they come into as a result of this.
As a person who only studies economics by being a consume
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:3)
Until enough competing companies are benefitting from the reduced cost, then they should be trying to undercut the other guy again.
At least in the instance of RFID tags, I don't see this as being a particularly bad effect. It's a savings through efficiency.
The same thing tends to happen with off-shoring of labor, but
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:5, Insightful)
This scheme is nothing new; Walmart is enormously succesful precisely because of their cutting-edge inventory management systems, and they have _always_ passed the savings on to their customers. The direct, immediate connection between them saving money and their customers seeing lower prices and better stock management is why there are so many WalMarts. It's the key to their success.
It's kind of interesting to study -- they have an incredibly low profit margin compared to other stores in their industry, and that low profit margin has made them one of the biggest companies in the U.S.
-Billy
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:5, Insightful)
Which a large number of people find offensive.
Neither your offense nor theirs confers any behavioral obligations upon the other.
As it happens I really don't like yellow. I don't know why, I just don't. It offends me. I do, however, recognized that as my problem, not the problem of the people who paint their kitchens yellow or drive yellow cars.
It seems to me that if you wish to be effective in doing God's work (and there are some God fearing people who find that idea offensive. It is taking the Lord in vain. He is perfectly capable of doing his own work), the first thing you have to do is learn not to offended by people who take exception to that. Anger ( and offense is a form of anger) is not one of the Christian tools.
Peace, brother.
KFG
Illegal on doorways in US (Score:5, Interesting)
1. These devices are low power low frequency devices which must be VERY close to the antenna since the anteanna is providing the power for the chip. They don't contain batteries.
2. If used on a passageway, think of those with pacemakers passing through this 'exciting' antenna doorway.
3. People with passive entry systems such as those on BMW or Volvo will be disturbed to know Wal-Mart is reading their Key-Fobs (which contain RFID tags) when they pass through the doorways. And note that these RFID tags data is encrypted, so the DMCA can play a role here. That is, the ID is not encrypted, but if they think its one of their tags, and start trying to read the data, they could get into trouble.
Side note. man people predict passive entry will replace key-less entry within 10 years. if this is the case and were all walking around with RFID keys to our cars, privacy concerns could go up quite a bit.
Re:You know they're scared when... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's "anti-retail" if you try to limit the use of RFID tags to just in-store use. The retailers can always find some use of out-of-store tags in such a way to "enhance" their hold on the customer. At the most basic level, the live tags can be used by anyone who wants to pay a fee to Wal-Mart to gain access to the (Wal-Mart customer) information they get off of pinging the tags when they come by their own properties.
In America, placing any restrictions upon commerce is now viewed as being "anti-business", much like criticizing the political leadership or military is viewed as "anti-American". These views are very apt; they just demonstrate as clearly as possible that the corporations are in total control of the economic environment (rather, they think they have to right to be in control) and those that disagree must be condemned and eventually forced to accept their hegemony.
Understand RFID first, then you'll understand why. (Score:5, Informative)
There are two types of RFID tags: Active and passive. Active tags have a battery and transmit a signal. They cost a few bucks apiece; they're cheap enough for a lot of good uses, such as locating expensive mobile equipment in hospitals ("Oh, the machine that goes, 'Ping!" is on the third floor women's bathroom!"), but far too expensive to track consumer items -- say, a can of soup. They're also pretty large, since they need an antenna and a battery.
Passive tags are powered by the radio waves themselves. These are the ones that will eventually be cheap enough that they can be put on individual cans of soup, maybe in two to three years.
In order for a passive tag to get enough power to transmit its unique identification number, a few things need to happen. The tag itself -- although it's a very small chip -- needs a rather large antenna to pick up enough energy to get power. The smallest ones I've seen are about 3" long. The RFID reader needs to have a VERY powerful microwave transmitter and antenna. The devices I worked with required me to be at least nine inches away from them most of the time to keep from getting cooked. Even with this powerful reader and large antenna, I've had to hold tags about a foot away from the antenna for a good second or three to see them show up.
Now what are we afraid of regarding RFID? Well, we're afraid that beyond the point of sale, someone will put a reader on us and know all about us or be able to track our movements, because we'll be covered in these RFID tags with unique identifiers.
Now we've seen technology advance, but Physics is Physics. A tag with an antenna no smaller than 3" in size has to be held within a foot of a reader powerful enough to warm your skin for a second to transmint 30-odd bits of data. This is not going to change unless the laws of Physics change first -- there is no technology to change this.
You're going to be able to find RFID tags in your stuff, because the large antenna will give itself away. And you're not going to patiently stand and pose next to a high-powered reader while it tries to sort out all of the tags you're wearing ("Excuse me, can you kneel down so I can get the one on your eyeglasses? Now lift your feet, I can't see your shoes..."), unless you're cold and want to warm up really fast.
What I've laid out here is not common knowledge. That's a big part of the reason I'm writing this now: I know that Slashdot readers are concerned about the issue and are capable of understanding the science behind the issue. Once you understand the issue, you realize that the government isn't going to be using this to track your movements -- from a foot away. People are not going to be able to surreptitiously scan you to learn all about you -- while asking you to stop and pose for the antenna. You're not going to be covered in three-inch-long RFID tag antennas without your knowledge.
I believe that you should be taking neither my word for it nor CASPIAN's. You should do your own research and learn. Don't co-opt someone else's point of view or trust that they've done their due diligence just because you share the same political point of view as he or she does. You may be pro-EFF, just like me -- that doesn't mean you should trust what I've said. You may have beliefs similar to Albrecht's -- but you shouldn't trust that she's done her homework, either!
In practice, you, me, and everyone else does trust the leaders of organizations we agree with to have done their due diligence and to know more than we do about issues. And we do co-opt their points of view. That is why IBM is speaking out: Because it's clear that although Albrecht doesn't understand RFID technology, people are listening to her.
I'm concerned enough about the preservation of civil liberties to donate regularly to the EFF. After working with RFID technology for the past several months and seeing its inherent limitations, I feel that we have little, if anything, to fear from this technology. But don't take my word for it because I claim this is true; do your own research.
Re:Understand RFID first, then you'll understand w (Score:3, Informative)
The main benefit of the RFID tag over the UPC label is that you don't have to have the tag aligned a certain way and visible to activate it.
In the supply chain leading to the store, lots of products are buried in a pallet, and organizations need to know what's in there (and how many) to track their shipments efficiently. With RFID tags, the pallet need not be opened to know exactly what's in it. In the warehouse, workers can remain a safe dis
OK, so now, what can we do. (Score:5, Funny)
And no, i dont want to stick my clothes in a microwave oven..
Its invasive and i refuse to walk around notifying my purchasing habits. ( yes, i do pay cash.. )
Re:OK, so now, what can we do. (Score:2, Funny)
Thanks (Score:2)
I really was serious. I guess you dont mind invasion of your privacy.
Re:Thanks (Score:2)
Please explain how you can go into Walmart and shop in private. Unless your shoplifting you can't do it.
Auto Pay (Score:3, Insightful)
This is where you drive up your baskart to the register, it gets scanned in basket, and you get billed for the cost. Its supposed to be 'convenient'
It also would be able to easily record all the serial numbers of the tags and attach to your buying habits.. with the ability to identify you at a later date purely due to the tags, in order to do 'targeted marketing' as you shop..
Yes this assumes you pay electronical
Re:OK, so now, what can we do. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:OK, so now, what can we do. (Score:2, Funny)
So you walk around naked, in home-made clothes?
Re:OK, so now, what can we do. (Score:2)
Simple. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:OK, so now, what can we do. (Score:2)
Isn't anyone concerned about this quote? (Score:5, Interesting)
I am more concerned with a bunch of aristocrats setting policy without knowledge than what Wal-Mart is doing.
I also fail to see the privacy issue. The tags do not tell the store WHO you are. They can't see you walk out and say, "Joe took a walk-man out of the store" they can only say that one left.
Besides, where was the concern when tags were placed inside of CDs and DVDs? Is this just another "attack Wal-Mart" parade? Wal-Mart is big, but they still are only 8% of the retail market... which makes them anything but a monopoly.
Re:Isn't anyone concerned about this quote? (Score:5, Informative)
The tags don't give your name away, but your credit card does. Personally, I use cash whenver it's not too incovnenient, but the mjoriy of purchases, especially those over $40, are made with credit cards. The store then has the ability to see what RFID tags you bought (along with the products) and see where you take them.
Re:Isn't anyone concerned about this quote? (Score:2)
As for where you take them, you'll do like 100% of their customers do - take them out of the store when you're done with your transaction.
Re:Isn't anyone concerned about this quote? (Score:2)
pallets and cases.
pallets and cases.
do you bring those home with you?
Re:Isn't anyone concerned about this quote? (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally, I look forward to the day when I pull my shopping cart up to the register and it gives me my total.
Re:Isn't anyone concerned about this quote? (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's say its a piece of clothing that you buy. Every time you re-enter the store, they know who you are and can start tracking your purchasing habits even if you decide to pay cash for your purchases that day.
Then one day the government decides they don't like you and issue a warrant for your arrest. Walmart could be compelled by the PATRIOT act [slashdot.org] to turn over any information about you and possibly notify the authorities if you show up in any of their stores. They know who you are because six years ago you used a credit card to purchase your lucky hat with an RFID tag on it.
Re:Isn't anyone concerned about this quote? (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually at some point they can. Once you go to the checkout, you'll likely be identifiable via non-cash payment (debit/credit card, check, or a customer discount card). Putting together the clues from the items you have and the items you actually stopped to check out may be possible, depending on the item you initially pick up (if you check out items before one you actually purchase, they likely won't be able to detect these).
They can't see you walk out
Actually they can. The article about IBM discussed ID bracelets that could track people to make sure they didn't leave the property (for safety of course, but still a form of tracking).
The RFID technology will present some privacy concerns that shoppers should at least be aware of. I'm not saying that the technology is necessarily bad, but as consumers, we should at least have an idea of what's going on.
Wrong, they cannot see YOU walk out. (Score:2)
Now if your the only person in the store and you leave with the item you just bought they could do it. However in a busy store and especially with a popular sale item they are not going to be able to say Joe was the 3rd person out in the last 5 minutes with item x.
As far as correlation between you and your purchase, if you don't pay with cash they already have that, RFID doesn't change the picture.
Re:Wrong, they cannot see YOU walk out. (Score:2)
Excerpt
For one thing, RFID tags have far greater capacity than bar-code labels for storing information. While the familiar universal product code (UPC) labels on typical retail packaging fit only 12 to 14 bits of information, current-generation RFID tags could accommodate up to 96 bits. Consequently, while bar-code labels are
Re:Isn't anyone concerned about this quote? (Score:5, Insightful)
While all this putting together of credit card info and gathering of RFID's, there's also a live *person* handling the transaction!
If you *didn't* want people to know you just bought underwear at a Wal*Mart, you'll need to send a friggin servant or wear a decent disguise.
Re:Isn't anyone concerned about this quote? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Isn't anyone concerned about this quote? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Isn't anyone concerned about this quote? (Score:3, Interesting)
First off, 8% of all retail is fucking huge. Many times bigger than any competitor. Remember that retail includes selling any kinds of goods, whatsoever.
Secondly, they ARE a monopoly in many parts of the country for general merchandise, and are quickly taking over grocery s
More info: (Score:2)
The Arkansas-based company posted $256 billion in revenue for the 52-week period that ended Jan. 31 -- more revenue than International Business Machines, Coca-Cola, Time Warner and Microsoft combined.
You want to target a big, nasty corporation? There are none that come close to Wal-Mart, as far as consumer products go.
Here's the privacy issue (Score:2)
You aren't alone, and that's a shame.
To properly illustrate all the privacy concerns would take hundreds of pages, but let's gloss over the main one.
We needn't speculate either, we can use a real world example -- Prada stores. Prada, in an RFID trial, put an RFID chip into their customer's "Prada Shopper Card." When a frequent buyer of Prada walked into their store, the scanner would pick up the RFID from the card, and a salesperson would immediately know who the
Re:Isn't anyone concerned about this quote? (Score:3, Insightful)
Go California. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Go California. (Score:2)
Before I started doing that people always said "well, what do you have to hide?", now they look at me wondering if I'm being sarcastic or dead serious. And they usually get my point as well.
soon embedded in merchandise (Score:5, Funny)
Customer walks into wallmart
Automated Computer: Good morning shopper, I see the pack of ultra ribbed, extra small condoms in your pocket is about to expire, and you only have one left - you can find another on aisle 20.
Be sure to check out our special on superlube 4000 while your there
Wife: since when did you use a condom with me?
Or possibly this.... (Score:3, Funny)
See our special on blow up dolls on aisle 21.
Nothing to worry about (Score:2, Troll)
It's not as if there are any laws preventing you from tampering with products that you own
Re:Nothing to worry about (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Nothing to worry about (Score:3, Funny)
My Rights?? (Score:4, Insightful)
I think michael and the rest of you paranoid bunch need to give up this anti-RFID crusade. If you don't like RFID, don't purchase it. If someone else does, then that's their business, quit your hysterical bitching.
Re:My Rights?? (Score:2)
It's not them tracking their merchendise through their DC's and stores that upset people - it's the fact that these transmitters are very small, very hard to remove, and will probably continue to broadcast long after you've purchased your items and left the store. Meaning, burglars looking for a house with lots of good stuff in it could drive by with a scanner to see
Re:My Rights?? (Score:5, Insightful)
False. They don't "broadcast" anything. They're passive receivers. They are unpowered. They respond to radio stimulation. They no more "broadcast" a number than the money in my wallet is "broadcasting" serial numbers.
False. The scanners used to detect the passive tags can only do so from a short distance (on the order of a few inches, maybe a foot or two). It is extremely technically impractical to build a scanner powerful enough to scan and detect items several dozen yards away. What you're suggesting is as absurd as claiming that my garage door opener will potentially open up garage doors all over the city when I press the button while pulling into my driveway. Not to mention the problem of discerning quantum signals from a mess of more than 5 devices shouting "Here I am!" all at once. These detectors can't discriminate between more than a few tags simultaneously without getting confused.
False. Uncle Sam, if he were seriously interested, wouldn't waste time driving by your house with one of these massively powerful, imaginary scanners that can read all the tags in your house (while not getting confused with the tags answering from your neighbors' houses). He'd simply use the USAPATRIOT act to subpoena your bank records and see what you've bought.
False. People have always sought to dictate what people can and can't do in the privacy of their own homes. Witness the anti-sodomy laws that are still on the books in some places.
RFID tags are the least of my worries (Score:5, Insightful)
That said, I personally go to Walmart once a year and buy regular commodity crap like toiletries, household supplies, etc. Plus they usually will change my car's oil for $10 less than the other guys. But I go in there knowing I've already checked my soul at the door. RFID is the least of my worries.
Re:RFID tags are the least of my worries (Score:2)
Re:RFID tags are the least of my worries (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:RFID tags are the least of my worries (Score:2)
Or go to Walmart where they do not have those cards but RFIDs, that while can be tracked, your purchase is not (not yet anyway) linked to your name?
Walmart is just replacing KMart, so who cares? (Score:3, Insightful)
The small downtown stores were killed 15 years ago by the surburban strip malls. Nothing to do with Walmart.
Re:RFID tags are the least of my worries (Score:5, Insightful)
LOL. You want to live inside a little closed community, never poking your nose out, convinced that every time you buy something made by foreign devils you are trading a piece of your soul for it -- be my guest.
I am living in a global world. Most of the stuff I buy, both cheap and expensive, comes from different countries -- Japan, China, Germany, Mexico, etc. Periodically -- oh, horrors! -- I actually go on trips to foreign countries and leave a chunk on money there, paid for hotels, and food, and services, and what not.
Local independent retailers? What's that? Ah, those horse-and-buggy guys who had, basically, no selection at all and strangely high prices? I am not sorry to see them go. For example, am quite happy to have a Home Depot in my town -- the local hardware store never had what I needed and charged around three bucks for a pair of nails...
My local community is the world.
Re:RFID tags are the least of my worries (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you actually think that if the closest retail outlet is 1.5 hours away no one will open up a store closer to take the market? Bullshit.
Re:RFID tags are the least of my worries (Score:3, Funny)
I go to Wal Mart once a year for my $2.97 gallon jar of pickles. [fastcompany.com]
History repeats itself (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:History repeats itself (Score:3, Interesting)
I want some way to burn out RFID's after I buy something. If Wal-Mart won't supply it, I'll have to buy one [businesswire.com].
Burn-out device (Score:5, Interesting)
Any EEs out there want to comment on the feasability, complexity, and possible cost of such a device?
(I think a microwave oven works fine, but it's hardly portable...)
Re:Burn-out device (Score:3, Insightful)
And I don't think wearing a moo moo would allow you to hide one of the devices either.
Re:Burn-out device (Score:3, Funny)
The good thing is RFID could reduce costs... (Score:5, Insightful)
The funny thing is all these people talk about privacy and stuff and I bet they wouldn't even encrypt their email.
Re:The good thing is RFID could reduce costs... (Score:2)
The customers are not tagged with it.
...Until they leave Walmart with an RFID-tagged item. We need safeguards to ensure that RFID-tags are only enabled within the retail environment, and are "switched off" once the consimer has made their purchase.
The funny thing is all these people talk about privacy and stuff and I bet they wouldn't even encrypt their email.
<sarcasm>Love the generalisation. "These people". Very open-minded.</sarcasm>
Connecting info to individuals (Score:3, Insightful)
But what I DO have a problem with is if they connect that information to me personally, wether it be with a shopping ID or whatever. If they start being able to flash personal adds while I'm checking out like: "did you forget your condoms?" because I bought them last time, but didn't this time, I would have a field day in tahiti with my lawyers.
I think it's probable that even without legislation stores will eventually limit themselves, but I say: why let it get to that point? Prevent individual logging now, and limit it to aggregate like TiVo does.
I'd just like to point out... (Score:5, Informative)
Result? Wal-Mart gets improvement in their shipping systems, not the Point-of-sale systems. Interestingly, it provides no improvement in loss control, something some wal-marts have serious problem with.
Idiot (Score:2, Insightful)
NO, that is NOT what we are concered about. We're not all fscking idiots.
I don't want into a store or into work and have a scanner read off 32 unique product codes identifying every item on my body.
Heay Bob! What are you doing with that Victoria's Secret black lace bra? Isn't that the one Sally wore in this morning?
-
Tin Foil Liner... (Score:3, Troll)
I knew it was coming to this. Now I'm ready!
Once I leave the store, nobody will ever know what I bought (except Visa, my bank, and their business partners, and Walmart and their business partners, and whoever is behind me at the checkout, and the girl who checks me out, and the kid who bags it, and the old guy who checks my receipt, and the guys operating the 10,000 security cameras at the store).
Tempest in a teapot! (Score:5, Interesting)
Well here we have another RFID Tempest-in-a-teapot.
One of the princiapl tenets of capitalism, is that entities that supply better value will succeed, to the expense of entities that do not.
If Wal*Mart has decided that using this technology will allow them to continue to provide the products that people wish to purchase (and based on their position in retail marketers, they must be doing something right) by cutting down on overhead, then so be it.
I have a fundamental failure to understand why this issue (RFID in general, and Wal*Mart's decision to use it in particular) brings out the tin-foil-hat contingent.
I can see some organizations being opposed to it from a self-preservation standpoint. Consider the following hypothetical example:
Because RFID allows inventory to be counted more rapidly, and more accurately, Wal*Mart can eliminate 30% of night-shift merchandise counters - the UCW would oppose the measure.
Counterargument: Because RFID allows inventory to be counted more rapidly, and more accurately, Wal*Mart decides to do shelf-count nightly instead of weekly, this generating a net increase in associate hours.
(The astute reader will note that I am ignoring alleged impropriety in Wal*Mart's relationship with their associates for the simple reason that it is orthogonal to this issue)
Developer tools for RFID? (Score:2, Interesting)
I've been playing with the RFID kid from Phidgets [phidgets.com]; it's about 100 bucks to get started with a reader and some chips of your own. Unfortunately for a newbie like me, it's not as easy as working with a barcode reader -- you've got to access the hardware
RFID Tag Range (Score:2)
Of course, 802.11 technology has an approximate range limit of 150ft. Or does it? [newswireless.net]
I understand that there's a fundimental difference between a wifi node a
Another reason... (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't understand this store. They censor CDs that have explicit lyrics without any on-the-package indication. Yet, they sell guns? Seems like two sets of values to me.
I hate Walmart
About Packaging (Score:4, Insightful)
People who are not weary of RFID always point to things such as
Sure that's valid right now, but how about the cost decreasing benefits of NO packaging. Gilette Razor blades for instance, packaged in a big box so they are harder to steal.
They can sell the idea of embedded chips, by saying it decreases packaging costs (which it will). Then, you can't throw it away.
Further, if anyone has noticed, ANY media which can be used as advertising IS used as advertising. From buses, The Internet, to the damn program Guide on your Cable Box, even the products in Movies. How long before RFID is used for that as well, once they have sold the idea of embedded chips.
Re:Another reason... (Score:3, Informative)
Irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe they should use greencards to track their illegally hired under paid immigrant employees.
Follow Existing Practice! (Score:4, Interesting)
Now note that the cashier has to put the tag close to a magnetic plate to disable it so you can leave the store without setting off the alarm system (doesn't always succeed, but does usually).
So imaging a bagfull of stuff you just bought, all decked out with RFID tags. The same alarm-detector at the door that seeks undisabled anti-theft tags can be modified to emit (AFTER passing the anti-theft test) a signal to permanently disable the bag-full of RFID tags. Why not? All the tag-makers have to do is ALLOW them to be disable-able!
Re:Follow Existing Practice! (Score:3, Informative)
Strike 2 against Wal-mart (Score:3, Insightful)
And the problem with the electronic draft of your checking account is the lack of controls that prevent them from drafting your account AS MANY TIMES AS THEY WANT TO!
Don't think it can happen? Well I got news for you. Not only can that be done, but they can also modify the amounts and draft it again.
It happened to me, which is why I don't shop at Wal-mart any more, or anywhere else that uses said technology. I got lucky, in that my bank ended up covering the difference because the base mistake that caused the merchant in question to modify the draft was the bank's mistake (a supposedly invisible to the users conversion of their checking system).
Beware, Wal-mart doesn't care about the customer and never has.
About time. (Score:5, Insightful)
You may be able to say Copyright infrigement does not equal theft. But can you say walking out of Wal-mart with items isn't theft? How could it invade your privacy by them tracking their inventory? Its not your goods unles you purchase them. You can demand that there be no RFID tags on products that you buy. You could go some where else. Here in AR we know that it is possible to compete and stay in business against Wal-mart. I find it hilarious that those in other states are afraid to compete against a little chain store from AR.
people vs. BIG Corps (Score:2, Insightful)
A magnetic pulse generator does strange things to RF devices. Anyone know
I want RFID. (Score:5, Insightful)
I want to be able to go up to any item in my house, and say, "What is this?"
I then want to see the specs appear on my computer screen.
I want to be able to go up to any item in my house, and say, "I'm happy to lend this." I'd like my neighbors, if they are looking for a vacuum cleaner, to be able to see that there is a willing lender nearby.
I don't care if my neighbors scan my apartment, and find out that I have underwear, and a toaster, and books.
"Naughty" stuff is not going to leave a store with RFID. If they're willing to ship in a brown paper bag, then they're smart enough to ship with the RFID tag taken off.
California doing something right? A real laugh. (Score:4, Interesting)
I can agree to limits about monitoring outside of the store; that's a clear cut invasion of privacy. However, as far as monitoring what gets picked up off a shelf and returned, etc. That's just silly to try and block. Store personnel could (though not as efficiently) monitor customers behavior visually and get the same knowledge.
It seems to me that the general public, rather than trying to slather on a bunch regulation onto business, has a responsibility to shop in those places that have products, services, and policies that they desire. If you think WalMart is going to somehow compromise your privacy, don't shop there. There are thousands of mom and pop shops that can't afford the technology anyway that sell the same products and are dying for your business. If the extra price is worth the privacy you'll not shop WalMart.
If you consumer/privacy advocates want to engage in a moral approach to this problem: encourage a boycott and encourage people to take a little damn responsibility for goes on in their own lives.
What the article really says (Score:5, Informative)
It differs from primary RFID in some fundamentally practical ways too. Everyone in the supply chain has a vested interested in making secondary coding work. If (and this is a far from certain "if" at this point) RFID can reliable track a carton out of a manufacturer, into a truck, into a Wal-Mart distribution center, into another truck, and finally into a local Wal-Mart, it will simplify life. (Before anyone jumps on the fact that the RFID tag makes it into the local Wal-Mart - the tag is attached to the corrugated shipping carton which is discarded and recycled when all the product is removed and placed on the shelves).
In contrast, there are a number of people who have a vested interest in not having primary RFID work. Aside from people concerned about privacy, there is an incentive to kill tags if they are used in an automatic checkout system. I foresee jammers, zappers, all kinds of shady, quasi-legal devices.
Anti-Retail due to consumer spying.... (Score:4, Insightful)
I was just watching a news piece on last night's local TV broadcast about how sophisticated the cameras have become at Home Depot stores. Apparently, their entire store is covered by cameras on the ceiling, and photos are taken and digitally stored of each person as they make purchases at the checkout counter.
They were bragging about how a murder case was solved in this manner, because a label and UPC code were found on the handle of a rake used in the crime. This traced it back to Home Depot, where they were able to input the UPC code and retreive perfectly clear photos of the person buying the rake. Home Depot claims they store all of this information for at least 1 year.
Perhaps just as interesting was that despite Home Depot's assertion that "This information is only used internally, and not provided to govt. agencies or any private outside individuals." - the police were able to get those photos of the guy buying the rake just by walking in a store and asking for them.
Target stores are also known for using sophisticated surveillance systems (and similar to Home Depot's setup, they're obviously able to retreive photos of who bought what in the past - as witnessed by the recent case where the college student faked being kidnapped, and was caught when they showed camera footage of her purchasing duct tape and rope, etc. at the local Target store just before it happened).
A private investigator interviewed on the news was quoted as having obtained this type of evidence from a retail store in New York, after he was hired to try to spy on a suspected cheating husband. (He purchased lingerie on his credit card, and then tried to claim his card was stolen - so the P.I. obtained photographic evidence that it was indeed him buying the items.) They asked the P.I. if he had permission to obtain this information from the retail store. He said no, but he had "confidential sources" that got it for him anyway.
That's the problem with all of this stuff. Once this type of data is indexed and stored somewhere, it has the potential to fall into the wrong hands - and eventually *will* do so. It's only a matter of time.
Well, DUH (Score:3, Insightful)
From driving down wages and destroying small businesses to employing illegal aliens to driving near-slave labor in other countries, Walmart is just a HUGE can of worms. Just another notch in the belt IMO.
And those are just the political reasons. Dirty stores. Merchandise and boxes all over the isles.
Make it known that you don't want to shop there, for RFID and the other noted reasons. I'm sure walmart will say it will immensly cut down on theft, but honestly, with the amount of businessnes they do, they probably don't notice it anyway. They will say that this will drive down prices for the consumer, but the consumer hardly benefits from this at all. Walmart will benefit by improved inventory control/tracking/ potentially seeing customer buying habits.
Re:RFID tags (Score:4, Funny)
What, the shitty merchandise, disgusting customers, dirty stores and appalling customer service isn't enough? Any one of those alone would stop me from shopping anywhere.
Re:RFID tags (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:RFID tags (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:RFID tags (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:RFID tags (Score:4, Informative)