Beaucaire From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5804 times:
At least that's what the "OPTAG" project -financed by the EEC in Brussels- claims .
The obscure excuse is to trace down more easily retardent passengers, who are responsible for the delayed departure of about 5% of all flights.
In reality it clearly opens the door for an increased use of active RFID chips,that would help authorities to trace our movements and wherabouts .INitial applications for airtravellers can easily be expanded for other obsure reasons..
Watch out what's comming !!
BlueFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5689 times:
Other airlines are studying a less intrusive system in which the RFID chip is embedded into a boarding pass, with no camera involved, just strategically located readers to figure out whether the reason you're not on board on time is is because your boarding pass is having a last glass or suffering from having had too many last glasses.
Haggis79 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5627 times:
Quoting Embajador3 (Reply 5): This is unbelievable, i just hope that this does not go any further.
if we (i.e. the people) don't stop it, it will....
something that's funny in a sad way is that I can easily imagine all those "security enhancements" brought upon us (not only in aviation, also in daily life) having occurred regardless if 9/11 had happened or not... the only thing that would have been different is the rationale - maybe "organized crime" instead of "terrorism".
Something a lot of people fail to understand: you can't defend freedom by taking freedom away... but, sadly, that's what the consensus of most people in these days seems to be - security over freedom and screw the collateral damage.
Beaucaire From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5612 times:
To me this really is a door-opener for other RFID applications ,always under the disguise of a utility for service oriented use.In reality it helps to supervise us a little more.
We are already today subject to RFID use without our knowledge ( you buy some textiles,books,consumer goods- they are tagged and traced via powerful RFID readers..)
Aloha717200 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5447 times:
Makes me wonder...a person like me who enjoys walking to all the obscure corners of the airport and photographic things...might be detained or removed from the secure area for "suspicious" activity.
already at Denver TSA followed me quite a bit as I took photos of the terminal architecture and aircraft outside. I can't see this chip serving to do anything to make a person like me feel more comfortable at the airport.
Of course this is purely selfish. the honorable thing to do is just hang up my camera and take the chip, and disappear amongst the sea of faces.
Thorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5197 times:
There are simple ways to counter this BS. You can either bend your boarding pass a couple of times to destroy the antenna of the RFID chip or you can put in into some aluminum foil that doesn't let the radio waves through. You could also put it in a microwave, if you have one with you, that destroys the chip.
This Big Brother crap is already in usage in public transportation systems in Portugal. I once could hardly leave the subway system in Lisbon because I (unintentionally) folded my ticket in my coat and destroyed the chip by doing so.
AirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 5095 times:
Good discussion, and some good points raised but I'm also interested in some. However, the general mantra on a.net is 'if you've nothing to hide why object to security measures'.......in which case, may I ask, why the objections to this, or what's the difference in being fingerprinted/eye scan taken? The only difference I can see (and I'm most genuinely and certainly not wishing to offend) is that Americans don't have to undertake those procedures when entering the US, but would have to for 'international' travel and thus I can see objections from that quarter. Would that be a fair assessement of the difference?
RedChili From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 5036 times:
Quoting Haggis79 (Reply 6): if we (i.e. the people) don't stop it, it will....
The problem is that we, the people, have no choice in post-democracy Europe. Most EU countries didn't care about asking whether the people wanted the EU constitution or not. And when the constitution was rejected in the few countries that had a chance to state their opinion, the constitution was repackaged as the "Lisbon treaty" and approved without a referendum in all countries except Ireland. And Ireland, which voted no, has basically been told by the EU to fix the problem in some way.
The leaders of the EU will introduce whatever they want to have no matter what the people think.
Cubsrule From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4799 times:
Quoting AirNZ (Reply 14): in which case, may I ask, why the objections to this, or what's the difference in being fingerprinted/eye scan taken?
Well, one difference (which has nothing to do with this anti-American nonsense you espouse) is that the fingerprint/eye scan provides the authorities with your location at a moment in time. That's different from a system which can locate you continuously. While cell phones make such a thing theoretically possible now, I'm not aware of any government that is doing it.
DocLightning From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4216 times:
I'm fine with it as long as it's not implanted and as long as it's a temporary measure.
RFID tags are so cheap, just pop them in the boarding pass. When the passenger boards, he surrenders the pass. End of story. You're only tagged while you're in the airport. What are you worried about? That the government will find out that you're taking a leak? You've already given up your privacy by entering an airport, so I don't see what this takes away.
Now, as soon as they start with a permanent or implanted version, that's a different story.
Cubsrule From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4162 times:
Quoting Knid (Reply 19): I'm pretty sure your govt does it...
Asking a judge when there's suspicion of wrongdoing is quite a bit different than doing it to everyone.
The fact that we make people surrender their passports when they are accused of crimes in no way implies that it would be acceptable for the government to run around willy-nilly taking people's passports.
RDUDDJI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 3204 times:
I sell RFID systems. While they are awesome in many respects, their Big Brotheresque abilities are quite scary. They have RFID dust now that someone can sprinkle on your shoulders to track you.
The good news is that tags and readers are still too expensive for an airline that issues hundreds of thousands of BPs per day.
I worked on an RFID project at UA with bagtags. Even at 5 cents a piece, the cost is into the multiple millions per year before you even add in the hardware... Airlines for the most part aren't going to make that investment with little or no return... (Just because they find you doesn't mean they can get you on the plane)
Beaucaire From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (4 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2284 times:
Quoting RDUDDJI (Reply 21): They have RFID dust now that someone can sprinkle on your shoulders to track you.
and that's just the beginning..
I'm following this technology because I think the abusive use and ever increasing application-scenarios are a genuin threat for normal citizens.CIA and FBI or ony private company can profile candidates for recruitment based on their purchase profile for chemical drugs,travel attitudes,alcohol purchases ,type of books they buy,films they watch..( confirmed in several books I read written from previous CIA case-officers) Based on this profile the agencies can determine if a candidate is prone to be alcoholic,dependent on special drugs,instable in his family-life,or a combination of all.
A combination of RFID chip tracing and facial recognition software ,licence plate tracking and mobile triangulation can allow the permanent supervision of most citizens.