I see a couple of obvious problems with the listed technology.
The first is storage. The company I work for makes garbage bags on a roll
(hence the name ROLLPAK CORP). We generate these rolls 24/7/365. I have
over 4000 sku's now. That's 4000 barcodes. Now I'm going to multiple 4000
by the 1000's of rolls I make every day?????? If I had to have the data
collection system assign a unique ID for each roll which went through our
system just think about the number of data records that would be created.
How would I realistically send that level of detail to my customers?
At what point do I run out of available unique ID's to use?
What organization is going to control the assignment of the codes? (same
org that assigns UPC codes for a company?)
Frankly WHY would a company want to know that? The RFID tags make sense if
you control the level of detail, say case level or skid level depending on
the product. But to take it to the level of a single roll of bags or single
can of pop, single Twinkie???
This idea sounds like many theoretical ideas. Works great in theory. Make
no sense in the practical world.
We will be working with RFID tags next year to apply to our cases of
product. I think the technology has promise but we as implementers have to
make sure the theory guys (i.e. consultants) don't have us drowning in a sea
of needless data.
Alan Wyne
IS Manager
Rollpak Corp
-----Original Message-----
From: profox-bounces (AT) leafe .DOT com [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com]On
Behalf Of Bill Arnold
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 11:14 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: RE: [OT] MIT to uncork futuristic bar code
Hi Dan,
If only it were just cans of coke
I think what we're seeing is an underlying trend towards a day when
every physical thing bears a unique identify. So be it, we may as well
say, because it's inevitable.
It's even possible that this particular device will be usurped by
another, smaller and even more powerful, now that interest is churning.
It's either that or this version will be improved over time. Maybe a
version will generate micro-signals that would allow people to know a
whole lot about a home without even going inside. Police, government ...
not to mention hackers, will be delighted with the possibilities.
About the only thing that would surprise even us is the speed with which
changes like this can be implemented. We're not talking a hundred years
before manufacturers are routinely churning out products bearing unique
ids. We may not even be talking 10.
We read every day about all these big things going on in the world, from
these inventions to invasion, but there doesn't seem to be anything
going on about what our elected representatives are doing to protect
(dare I say strenthen?) individual rights and liberties in this new age.
Will mfg's be permitted to add some sort of transmitter to these
devices? Would we be responsible to carry tagged ID cards? One in every
car?
Technology is changing so many things so fast, but many of the benefits
gravitate upwards to the government and wealthy, and nobody seems very
interested in what it all means to us, the ordinary people of this
planet.
With respect to these devices, someone should be pushing for legislation
that prohibits these devices from ever generating signals. Reason: we
simply don't want authorities or hackers even considering the
possibilities. But I wonder if anyone in Congress is even thinking along
these lines?
Bill
> Bill: (moved to [OT])
>
> The first thought that comes to mind is, "Who gives a rat's ass about
> individual cans of Coke?" However, I guess some marketing genius
> (substitute words: "idiot", "asshole", etc.) would probably
> like to know
> the migration patterns for coke cans, how far they stray from
> their factory
> before being consumed, etc. And that will be a HUGE data
> processing job,
> and provide lots of employment for us programmers. Or the
> ones in India. :-(
>
> Dan Covill
>
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]
©2003 alan wyne |
