Frankly, I think this is a horrible idea. Even if they claim, which they don't, that it won't be used to monitor you willy-nilly the very fact that they can is too much. Tis a shame really, as part of my youthfull dreaming I think I could quite like living there for at least a short while.
Posts: 1621 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Arguements exist for and against it. Personally, it's a disgusting abomination that is yet another step to techno-oppresion.
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't like the fact that this info is going to be accessible for commercial purposes. Other than that, what is the big deal? What exactly do you think the number on your license plate is for?
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You don't have to have a car to live. Is it my imagination or is the auto less central to the English lifestyle than in America? In America it is successfully marketed as being a symbol of our freedom, when it is actually an instrument of our bondage to foreign oil... yada yada.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
rivka, the problem is that the information can be used for all sorts of "privacy" problems.
Lets say someone wants to run for public office. Who's to say that someone won't "leak" the fact that this person's been visiting the local adult video store regularly? Or a woman divorces her husband and subpoenas (is that the right word?) the RFID info to show that he's been cheating on her? Why should the government be allowed to know all of this about us?
Yes, yes, it can help with car theft. But so can the high-tech anti-theft systems that you can buy with new cars.
It also makes it very easy for the government to ticket the public more. This isn't "wrong," but it's really terribly annoying. Would you mind if the police were allowed to search your property randomly in order to ticket you for violations (like copying movies onto videotape, having mp3s on your computer, etc)?
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
So park at the donut shop and walk to the adult book store, or girlfriend's flat. Or introduce resonable doubt that it is necessarily you that always drives your car. It won't take many cases of folks trying to engineer this data to frame people (like in the fugitive with the cell phones) before that particular scenario becomes irrelevant.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Assuming that RFID detectors are only allowed on publicly-owned property, how is this worse/different than the cameras that are everywhere? And the red-light cameras and automatic speeding cameras that already exist?
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
My problem is that it's more knowledge about my actions being transmited and controlled by the government. As a conservative, I will instantly oppose any such measure simply out of reaction, whether or not its reasonable. But in this case I don't think this measure is worth the sacrifice in liberty it entails.
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thats not the issue. With this, they can place monitor stations and collect information whenever and as often as they wish. With only a number, as on all current plates, it is significantly more difficult, and stationary monitoring stations work poorly without high intensity lamps and slow moving traffic, which makes them highly visible, and avoidable.
My issue isn't that its a id on my actions or my car, but rather an innocent until proven guilty sort of thing. They don't need to collect that information so they shouldn't. Part of living in a civil, non-oppressive society is that your not being monitored 24/7 because of what you could do. The government doesn't assume that you are a criminal until you have done something. With that sort of thing, I might as well break laws simply to live up to expectations. Or perhaps everyone should just spend several years in prison so that once we commit these crimes we're most certainly going to commit we'll already have it out of the way?
I used to think that EasyPass for the turnpike was a step down this road, but I now believe that it is something different. It is a voluntary system. I have no problem with that. It is the do-it-or-die nature of this that I really have a problem with.
There are limits to the extent that society has to intrude on our personal privacy to keep things together and running correctly. This steps far outside of those bounds. Anything that allows continuous groundless monitoring of the citizenry is too much.
Posts: 1621 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
afaik, the little cameras over the traffic intersections don't record all the passing vehicles for posterity, but take a photograph when triggered.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
HollowEarth, you are a wise, wise wo/man. You've really impressed me with your well worded arguement.
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The red light and speeding cameras are wrong too, for the same reasons.
I do realize this isn't America thats doing this, and things are different there. However I would have opposed the cameras that plaster the UK as well.
Rivka, you are very quick to say that this doesn't matter and why should we care. Can you give me some reason why I should think this is a good idea? Why should they collect this information, we already have red light and speeding camera that do the same thing. We have other systems, such as on-star that can locate a stolen car. What do I as an average citizen gain from this? Beyond my already stated reasons for disliking it, this idea smacks of gratuitous use of technology. Technology because we can, not because we should.
Posts: 1621 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Given that we're on the verge of implementing RFID devices on nearly all American consumer goods, where do you plan to emigrate?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
RFIDs on consumer goods are for tracking in the warehouse. They allow the companies to keep up-to-the-moment records of their stock.
They're likely going to be used in bulk (like per crate), but even if they were individual, the RFIDs aren't going to work once the battery runs out. And it won't be illegal to destroy an RFID attached to the mattress you bought.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
oh these will have the ability to see anywhere they want. The article mentioned a 100 meter distance, didn't it?
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
Good thing none of my students ever read this site.
I wonder how long it will take for radio-baffles to become a common addition to exterior walls of parking garages?
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Frankly, I don't know about RFID technology in particular. But anyunpowered transistor/diode/oscillator/resonator/reflector can be made to chirp/transmit by hitting it with a sufficiently energetic electromagnetic(radio/microwave/etc)beam at the proper frequency. So I wouldn't know why an RFID tag would need a battery: the RFID transmitter can provide all the power that a properly designed tag would need to respond.
And while "it won't be illegal to destroy an RFID attached to the mattress you bought", finding it will require greater than Princess&ThePea sensitivity. RFID tags placed in pets and livestock are smaller than a grain of rice. And the only reason that they are that large is for the convenience of the human implanting or removing those tags. Unless RFIDtags are deliberately designed&marked for removal, one would need a bug(electronic spy) detector to even find the darn things.
posted
The problem isn't the existence of more information. Information is always a two-edged sword, yes, but its accumulation is inevitable. The real potential for abuse lies in the government's willingness to hoard this power for itself (and a select few powerful friends). The best we can hope for is to circulate public databases as widely as possible. Thankfully, the people who'd consider this distopic are dying off slowly but surely.
Posts: 1839 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I doubt it's that famous. Cypherpunk types have been claiming the moral high ground for decades now, and a disturbing number of otherwise intelligent people buy it.
Posts: 1839 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
If companies are going to go out of their way to hide RFID tags in their products, then some people are going to go out of their way to boycott them. I think that many of the same people who would have problems with licence plate RFIDs would have problems with hidden RFIDs in consumer goods.
It seems much more likely that the companies will try to avoid the PR problem and only use RFIDs for bulk, or place them openly on the packaging instead of inside the product.
People had similar concerns with the information tags on ID licences, that bars and clubs would start gathering detailed information on their patrons. At least you could boycott or complain to the managers, or refuse to have your card swiped (like people refuse to give their phone numbers at grocery stores/radio shack).
But passive monitoring by the government is just such a larger step in that direction. The benefits certainly don't outweigh the privacy concerns.
Posts: 1892 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
If that move (by Britian) bothers you, then you better add Singapore to your list of places you can't live as well.
Their person-survelliance is much much more instrusive than simply on their cars (according to my brother-in-law who goes their regularly for business)
quote:"The UK demonstrates a pathology of antagonism toward privacy", he said. "The rate of growth of video surveillance, communications surveillance and information collection has exceeded the growth rate in such countries as Singapore and Israel."
posted
Most RFID tags are no more obnoxious than a bar code. Blockbuster will likely be moving towards them for inventory management in the not so distant, for instance.
Of course, when bar codes came out, many people called them the mark of the beast (some still do).
And there are more complex RFID tags that could be made more intrusive very easily.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
RFID is being used as a bar code. Or rather a Barcelona nightclub is offering members RFID implants which give them the right to walk past the doormen/bouncers without waiting in line, to purchase drinks/etc without cash or credit card, etc.
It's easy to imagine the next step in the US, in which the federal government registers travelers and then implants RFID chips which allow owners to walk through security without going through most of the routine.
posted
I'm going to back this up. I don't think it's as bad as you think. So what if someone knows where my car is at a certain time? It's not like there's going to be someone monitoring me, solely, copying down whenever I pass one of these things. It's not like that. Why would 'they' care that I go to a grocery store on Thursdays? If they do care, why should I care?
If I'm an MP, someone who knows my car or my number plate could easily figure out I go to a porn store by simply following me. But although this will make it easier to do that for the person in charge of this information it will be as easy (or as difficult) for the average random person to access it as it was before.
The mud/fog/rain argument is valid. Although English number plates are much larger than American/Canadian plates, in the continual bad weather (especially in winter) of England it's not always easy to read the number plates. This will solve this problem.
Electronic payments will be much easier for the people doing the charging. And more difficult to evade for those driving.
If these things are so easy to implant or drop off, chances are they could already be used. "Oh here's a car owning to a suspicious person, I'll casually attach one of these..." Presto, and easy way to find the position of this car every so often.
Also, it'll make stealing cars more fun. You'd have to either get rid of the darn thing (with a sledgehammer or somesuch- a microwave is suggested) or avoid checkpoints.
The real point is, if people are watching you, they're already doing it.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm somewhat confused about why people are so worked up about this...considering if someone really wants to get dirt on you, not having an RFID radio isn't going to stop them, and it's not as if they're uncommon, heck my school uses them for getting in and out of dorms. Having RFID tags doesn't automatically mean that they'll have the ability have you as a dot on a map and track you. It means that as you go by a reciever they'll know you're in the vacinity, tracking is a whole different animal. Tracking would require having recievers everywhere within "view" of each other to allow triangulation by a system that knows the state of all the recievers, and if someone wanted to track you that badly, it'd be a whole lot easier (and cheaper) to just hire someone to follow you. What it will helpful for though, is that if say a car was stolen, the police would know the RFID and keep it in a database that would probably be accessable to patrol cars, and if they see it (they'd probably have to notice the car being suspicious...you can't track every single car no matter what, there's too much information, you've gotta have a reason to pay attention to something), then they could follow it, might actually bring up the police's record, heavens knows the US police have a horrible record (compaired to other countries). I'd look foward to having this sort of system, it'd make life a little faster, and keep my (currently) non-existant car safer. Satyagraha
Posts: 1986 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The fact that tabs could be kept on my actions currently doesn't mean that I shouldn't care about this. The fact that RFID tags are or will be used on almost all consumer good doesn't mean that I shouldn't care about this.
Currently keeping tabs on someone's actions is a proactive step. Someone, somewhere has to decide to do it. It requires spending money and diversion of manpower.
I don't know that stations will be set up that just scan the passing traffic. But they wouldn't have to be. Automated speed traps could do it. Hell, if we're going to have all this tech, including flags for certain id's seems like a simple step.
The net effect of all of this is that the cost of keeping track of people becomes lower, allowing it to become more common. This is the same idea as clear or mesh backpacks in schools. The school needs "reasonable cause" to search your bag. Reasonable cause being they can't just decide on a whim to search but have to have something, at least a rumor, to initiate the search. A clear or mesh bag makes this easier to get, as if they think they see something in your bag they can search. Whether this is a good thing in school or not is a debate for another thread, but the outcome is the same. Cause becomes easier to attain, and intrusion becomes easier.
RFIDs on consumer goods don't have the sinister feel that this carries. Consumer good tags won't be a unique personal idenitifier in the same way that a tag that is linked to your personal info is. Okay yeah so they could possibly lead to more targeted advertising, but I can live with that.
As I said before, the root of my distaste for this is really that it assumes that this information should be easily collectable. It smacks of predetermined guilt and suspision of the general public.
I arrived at Penn State last week and as I was signing up for my chemical engineering computer account I was sharply berated about bringing food or drink into the labs, or having parties, ie alcohol, in the labs. I have long hair, and a comment was made about that as well. All of this before I had even done anything. I don't like being scolded before I have committed a single transgression. Scold me, yell at me, fine me, jail me, but only once I have commited the crime. Before then there is no reason to berate me. You can give special emphasis to following the rules, thats fine, but there is a difference between that and treating someone as if they have already broken the rules. These tags on your car are the same way. It assumes that this data will need to be accessable because we cannot be trusted to act in a manner that won't require it to be available. Hence, I have a problem with it.
Remember, government exists to serve the people. The need to protect the people must be carefully balanced with the need to ensure personal privacy. And the ablity to monitor with no reason oversteps those bounds.
Posts: 1621 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wasn't saying not caring, I'm just stating the point that it's no different from having a normal licence plate. All this thing does is allow them to identify something from further away and in bad weather. Heaven forbid, that they'll want to figure out who's speeding down the freeway in a snowstorm. Satyagraha
Posts: 1986 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
Wow, I'm tired.
