[LINK] RFID & Related issues

[rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au]

Geoffrey wrote:
 >4) I have some difficulty with the "old cow" theory. .... you could 
probably think of a
 >scenario with ANY technology to make it look bad....or good for that 
matter.

Pessimism is, however, the only quality that works in favour of "first, 
get it right". Once a system is in place, people are remarkably 
resistant to abandoning it if it doesn't work, or fixing it properly 
(for eg look at NSW's DNA database). The IT industry's long history is 
to build it, then when it goes wrong, say "oh, that wasn't supposed to 
happen".

 >
 >How about the "I will save lives theory" with RFID. I understand there 
are over 10,000
 >patients die each year in Australia due to either incorrectly 
administered drugs or "interference"
 >with other drugs. A system based on RFID could be used to prevent such 
things.

I don't know enough to dispute the numbers, but the ID technology only 
offers a marginal improvement, whether it's RFID, face recognition, or 
whatever. It's the "back end" and the data quality that makes the 
difference.

Most of the "consumer-side" RFID proposals contain embedded assumptions:
- the data is already high quality;
- all that's needed for a perfect outcome is a perfect data key; and
- "this" is a perfect data key.

(The same assumption is, of course, made about biometrics.)

Even if the data key were perfect, it doesn't guarantee the predicted 
outcome.

Richard C
[By the way: it is pleasant to have the electronics industry taking part 
in the Link debate...]