Re: OT - RFID chips in passports next year

In article <Xns96FF51346C992jyanikkuanet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Jim Yanik <jyanik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>russotto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Matthew Russotto) wrote in
>news:xdedndq0854u2vneRVn-rQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>
>> In article <Xns96FE4E4ACB013jyanikkuanet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>> Jim Yanik <jyanik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>That still doesn't matter about the weak OUTPUT response from such
>>>RFID chips.
>>>How big do you think a "highly directional,hi-gain,low noise antenna"
>>>would have to be,for receiving?
>>>(at typical RFID freqs,say under 800Mhz)
>>>Do you think people will be WALKING around with them?
>>
>> Hell, no. Those walking around will have much simpler antennas;
>
>With less gain and directionality. And they STILL will not be wandering
>around with them and all that monitoring gear.And they will also be in a
>noisy environment.

Anyone walking around would merely need an antenna no bigger than a
cordless phone antenna. They could scan anyone near them. "All that
monitoring gear" could fit in the space of a cell phone.

>> Certainly vans aren't beyond possibility. Nor antennas placed on
>> buildings near where people gather.
>
>
>Better get your tinfoil hats ready.

Do you really think governments can't see any utility in tracking
people who gather and traverse certain areas? If they made it public,
they'd claim this was for catching terrorists, of course, by mining
the data for people who seemed to be casing those areas. And they'd
even use it for that. But once the data is collected, it's ripe for
misuse.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
.

Relevant Pages