🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 11 May 2006 19:59:43 -0400, "Don K" <dk@dont_bother_me.com>
wrote:

>"Ari Silverstein" <abcarisilverstein@yahoo.comxyz> wrote in message 
>news:1ksnfkieaosro.186oh2btlmb8f$.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Thu, 11 May 2006 08:52:54 -0700, Joshua Putnam wrote:
>>
>>> On one hand, nothing in the cited legislation says anything about
>>> RFID, and RFID tracking seems like a ridiculous proposal that no
>>> politician would expect to get away with.
>>
>> Now for the reality.
>>
>> http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/articleview/1951/1/1/
>> -- 
>
>
>The original diatribe was that drivers licenses are going to
>contain RFID for the purpose of unlimited domestic surveillance.
>
>First, there are pros and cons to the various technologies that could
>make the card machine-readable, so to say it will be RFID is just speculation.
>
>Secondly, even if RFID ends up being used, it will not lend itself
>particular well to unlimited surveillance a la Big Brother. You might
>want RFID to identify a box of Pop Tarts from 20 feet away, but a
>personal ID info would need to be tightly contained. The RFID passport
>is sufficiently shielded to prevent detection further than 10 cm.
>The coupling to the device could be reduced even more, or the
>card might even need to be inserted into a shielded ATM-type
>machine to prevent eavesdropping and identity theft by the bad guys.
>
>Don
>

... At least that's what "they" want you to think.