🚀 go-pugleaf

>That assumes permanent RFIDs on stuff like that, very unlikely,
>if only because they can then be a problem at the checkout.

The people who put the permanent RFIDs on probably couldn't care
less what the people running a checkout counter think.  (Probably
they'll at least try to use codes that don't overlap with merchandise,
if there is such a standard, but not much else).  They just know
that for the purpose of what THEY want to do with the RFID (which
may have nothing to do with selling merchandise), it's cheaper to
have them permanent, or their use requires them to be permanent.

Example:  hard disk drives and subassemblies for them currently
have bar codes containing the serial numbers for tracking warranty
information (at least most of them do).  My bet is that these
manufacturers would like to use RFID instead, if it's cost effective,
so they can identify returned merchandise without having to open
the package (and reject those without a RMA set up, and route the
package to the appropriate group based on product type).  RFID is
probably easier to scan than bar codes as the drive makes its way
through the repair process.  Now, granted, most people don't carry
hard drives with them into a store, and there is little interest
in tracking people trying to smuggle hard drives through customs.
The interest is in tracking them at the factory.

Now consider that other electronics manufacturers might get the
same idea for other stuff:  cell phones, iPods, PDAs, and similar
stuff that *is* often carried around.  Result:  a lot of permanent
RFIDs being carried around by people, even though the people putting
them there have no interest in tracking people.

>> and the store doesn't really have to care WHAT they are on.
>
>You can obviously avoid that if you're mindlessly
>paranoid by not taking your cards into the store.
>
>And they can keep track of what is purchased using particular
>credit cards etc without bothering with RFID right now anyway.

True.  I don't usually bother paying for stuff with a credit card
in person anyway, unless it's a large purchase where I feel
uncomfortable carrying that much cash.  Credit cards are mostly
good for mailorder.

>I couldnt care less if they keep track of what I have bought.

Really?  You couldn't care less if they STEAL it from you?
The government is not the biggest threat here.

>> To avoid thinking you are a different person every time you change
>> pants, items seen together often are linked together as being the
>> same person.  The first time they see your driver's license and
>> credit card.  The next time they see the credit card and your new
>> wallet.  The next time they see your new wallet and your running
>> shoes.  Now all of these are grouped together in one record.
>
>See above on permanent RFIDs on the stuff you wear.
>
>And if you dont like that, its completely trivial to zap those RFIDs anyway.

It may well be made illegal to zap the RFID on my driver's license,
passport, or other government-issued ID, or if it's not, it causes
you to be held overnight in jail while they identify you.  Or perhaps
you just can't pay by check anywhere until your driver's license
responds properly.

>> Pretty soon they've got a pretty good inventory list
>> of the RFID items you sometimes carry with you.
>
>Fat lot of use that is to anyone.

Stores put a lot of effort into tracking customer purchases with
loyalty cards, and they make money selling the info.  Don't you
think they would jump at a way of identifying customers (even if
they don't have a name, etc. yet) that can't easily be traded around,
doesn't require the customer to remember the card, and doesn't
require the customer to present the card at the register?  Even if
it's not 100% accurate, it's probably more accurate than the existing
system.

I'm sure the stores would love to set prices individually for
individual people or groups (although some laws may prevent
that currently).  This kind of RFID tracking might be reliable
enough to make it possible, most of the time.

>> Some adjustment might be used to account for shared clothing
>> or gifts (which means they can track who you share stuff with).
>
>Completely off with the fairys, as usual.

You're saying that's not possible?  Isn't that what the NSA is trying to
do with domestic phone records, find out who associates with who?

>> If they even once accept payment in the form of a check
>> or credit card, they've got your name, account number, and
>> maybe an address or phone number.  Now consider what happens
>> when half of the stores in a given city share this info with each other.
>
>If you dont like that, pay cash.

Some merchants do not accept cash.  Just because I trust some
merchants with credit card info does not mean I trust all merchants
with credit card info.

>And they dont bother with the current
>system which doesnt use RFID anyway.
>
>Its just another of your silly little luddite fantasys. 

You're calling me a luddite?  The guy who enjoys spending most of
his time with tech?

					Gordon L. Burditt