What is Digg?81 Comments
- ahole, on 10/12/2007, -2/+56Privacy is dead! This will not turn out good!
- Alfdog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+38If you snort it you become all "Lawnmowerman"ish.
- dominasian, on 10/12/2007, -1/+38@alfdog
if you snort it then drug dealers can tell if your in the area - griz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+30If you add it to cocaine, it becomes a tool for law enforcement agents to track criminals.
- longofest, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21guys, take a deep breath. The amount of RF interferance these tiny chips would encounter if placed inside the body would be enormous. Yes, there are embeddable chips, but they are bigger (at least bigger than this), and able to transmit more power. These would be very susceptible to RF interference (i.e. your skin).
- griz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Not an issue if that Tatoo is made from RFID tainted ink.
- griz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17NEW! EMplus, now with Super RF blocker. Available at your local Pharmacy.
- Wolfman~K, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16doubtfyl they'd hold up in the body, let alone in liquid at all, but yeah scary scary *****. We are going to have to add a EM sweep to our daily rituals.
- 2mnml2live, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13If you haven't, read Neal Stephenson's 'The Diamond Age'. The future is now, and it's scary.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16Uh....folks? If something like this has made it out into public view....
a.) Imagine how many decades ago the military / spooks had this....
b.) Imagine what the military / spooks have got now....
Seriously. Civilian tech. is DECADES behind the secret stuff. - eleventybillion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12There's a lovely image I'll have to carry with me for the rest of the day....
- novusopiate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12If not injected, I bet ingested. Could chips hold up in stomach acid?
- asimo8, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Would something like this be small enough to inject into the bloodstream?
- Chromatik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Oh the possibilities... Now the governments only problem is the fact that the barcode tattoo on my head isn't visible when I'm wearing my tinfoil hat.
- Dumbledorito, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11But at least we'll be able to record where it went!
- Shirokun, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11We'll need RFID blocking clothes or something.
Maybe we can break it while being exposed to some electromagnetic device or something.
There must be some way to get rid of it! - nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12You could inject them into the blood stream, but they would immediately get picked up by your liver or stuck in capillaries. They might be tiny, but they still need to be connected to an antenna. The problem with chips this small is you can't really do anything with them. Even single transistors generally are made on a big chunk of silicon so they can be packaged. As will all devices like this, packaging is the problem. A company called Alien Technology has been trying to develop ways to self-assemble small chips like this onto a package. Despite hundreds of millions of dollars in funding, their approach of fluidic self-assembly is nothing more than a picture and a dream they show investors when asking for even more money.
- barc0001, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9It's not the size of the chip that matters, it's the antenna size. Look here:
http://www.alientechnology.com/products/rfid_tags.php
See that little tiny black dot right in the middle of that small yellowish area on that "squiggle" tag? That's the chip, but the whole rest of the squiggle tag is the antenna that makes it work. You still need the antenna to be about a quarter wavelength of the frequency in order to capture enough energy from the radio signal to energize the tag and cause it to broadcast. No antenna, no workee. The smallest tags are still an inch or so in length and are subject to all sorts of read issues unless properly oriented. Believe me, this stuff doesn't work nearly as well as CSI: would make you think it does.
To make a tag and antenna package the size of this dust work you'd need to be into the terahertz frequencies... - schroeder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Tip of the day: Always nuke your cocaine first!
- Dumbledorito, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Either one would need to subject oneself to an EMP every so often, or one could add even MORE chips to cause "noise" among the receivers; it would be like dumping a bucket of spit, blood, and used condoms into a crime scene to contaminate the DNA evidence.
- lordmetroid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Time to get my cloth in line with the newest fashion, faraday's cage!
- Dumbledorito, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6And a birth control device.
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5It's been shown that you can "bluejack" a phone from > 100 meters, when Bluetooth was supposed to have a range of only 10 meters. Build a bigger antenna and you'll be able to pick up these serial numbers from a distance far greater than the original spec.
- LizardSlayer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Notice the RFID ads - top right of this thread.
There a new patent for Edible RFID...
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220070008113%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20070008113&RS=DN/20070008113
...so you can track *****. - inajeep, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Also doubles as a recipe for a hernia.
- Protean1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Recipe for the solution;
Guts from one used microwave oven,
a large metal salad bowl,
an inverter and a car battery or two
An external frame backpack.
Warning - do not use around devices containing valuable data.
White lab coat and glacier goggles optional - ProximaC, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I work for a company that is on the bleeding edge of RFID tracking and barcode software. There is really nothing advanced about having the chips this small because, as has been said a few times, the antenna size needed so they can "absorb" and "reflect" enough power to be read by a scanner. The main thing about making them this small is driving down the cost. One of the main drawbacks to RFID right now is the prohibitive cost of the labels. I would write more, but if I don't walk by the scanner that records when I get back from lunch I'll get fired.
- TroubleInMind, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Absolutely. Mites. Aerostats. Toner. Stephenson nailed it totally. Read this book.
- FishPoisonCon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3this isn't really anything new, smart dust has been around for at least 6 years now.
http://www.computerworld.com/mobiletopics/mobile/story/0,10801,79572,00.html
http://robotics.eecs.berkeley.edu/~pister/SmartDust/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_dust - DeFex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3if you get a whole bunch of them mixed up togerther the scanner would probably not be able to read anything but noise.
if they put it in money then they can scan the money when it is given from a bank machine or bank, then re-scanned when the stores or whoever put it back in the bank. then they know how you spend all your money.
maybe you can fry the chips by putting money in the microwave. - onionizer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I don't really get why they keep following the path of RFID devices. Nanostructured chemical communicators were deployed in afghanistan years ago, with networking and surveillance capabilities.
- PathDaemon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3But what if the tags are.....
....IN YOUR CLOTHES!! - Leomarth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@Dumbledorito
I don't think that would actually work. They're working on RFID grocery store checkouts where you just push your cart through a large sensor. Computers are fast enough that they could capture all the codes pretty quick and sort through which ones are relevant or not. - 100101111, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3the end of the world is near :-(
- Philodox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3except skin and hair are both terrible conductors
- totorototoro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3That is some weird *****, right there.
- Sp1k3, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4*****, now it's even easier for the Government to chip us! I just love technology sometimes!
- Timmmm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It would be trivial to encapsulate them in some polymer. Pretty amazing technology. What kind of range can you read them at?
- theojanke, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Finally! Someone that actually understands this and isn't overly paranoid.
- lordmetroid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You can be happy you aren't immigrating then. ***** immigration laws. No way I would subject myself to this tyranny!
- RicktheBrick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I can see the check out at any grocery. It would consist of a conveyor belt which would pass by a reader and at the end the clerk would stand and bag them. Every product should be serialized. Id should be required when buying alcohol or tobacco. If they find them in the possession of a minor than the police could trace who purchased them. If they find that they were stolen than they could fine the store for not protecting them well enough.
- ralpharama, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4That's pretty small. I could have literally hundreds in my pocket (lint).
- printenv, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Just get an MRI
On another note, I would hate to see what those things would do to ones lungs. - moofree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Sounds like that episode of Futurama with the dream commercials.
- inajeep, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Mix 'em with toner. Will they survive the fusing process on a laser printer? I couldn't find it in the deep linking nor can I read Japanese. As the tags shrink doesn't the distance of operation do too?
- Philodox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You want to know what the read range on these things are? Probably a few millimetres. Anybody trying to track you would get arrested for sexual harassment if they wanted to get that number off of you.
- xOCxKILLSx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2From a Logistics standpoint this is awesome( I'm a logistics major) Inventory tracking would be so much simpler if every item was embedded with one of these. with this technology you just load up you shopping cart and walk out of the grocery sotre. you credit card is automatically billed for the items you took with you. no lines, no checkout stands.
- dimension128, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You used the wrong emote. a ":-)", or a ":-D" would work.
- JasonPrini, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Is that because you would have a hard time working the timing of the leap-frogging?
I see it as sort of a brain. A volume of individual RFID "cells" that can communicate with each other. But instead of grown axons and dendrites like in neurons, these RFID "cells" use wireless radio communications, and power each other. They would feature the ability to reconfigure the connections between RFID "cells" almost instantly.
Each time a radio signal is absorbed, used to compute, and then broadcasted by a RFID "cell" it would reduce in power. So there would need to be a sort of "heart-beat" master radio signal "pushing" communication through the system.
Just thinking out loud.. There's probably lots of reasons why this can't work. - Namco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Holy crap! My tin foil hat isn't going to be enough on this one.
-
Show 51 - 80 of 80 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is