Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Wireless Networking Privacy Hardware

Delta Air Invests $25 Million in RFID for Luggage 206

Posted by CowboyNeal from the extreme-package-tracking dept.
securitas writes "The New York Times' Barnaby Feder reports on Delta Air Lines' plans to invest $25 million in RFID luggage tracking hardware and software over the next two years. This sounds very similar to the Jacksonville Airport RFID plan. McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas and Hong Kong International Airport have also announced plans to use RFID technology in their operations. More at the Cincinnati Enquirer and the Boston Globe."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Delta Air Invests $25 Million in RFID for Luggage More

Delta Air Invests $25 Million in RFID for Luggage

Comments Filter:

  • Cue "What about my privacy!?!?!" complaints here (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Along with all other tinfoil-hat ideas.

    The ones that go along with any mention of RFID, and drown out legitimate concerns.

    • Re:Cue "What about my privacy!?!?!" complaints her (Score:5, Funny)

      by peterprior ( 319967 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @08:46AM (#9590938)
      I imagine Tin Foil hats are not allowed on aircraft. Something to do with interfering with radar / comms / etc
    • This is an important point! My tinfoil hats in my luggage may interfere with the RFID tracking! This means I'll lose my hats, the government wil be able to spy on me, and I'll lose my luggage!

      Do these people not think the issues through?
    • I would hope that isn't what you were trying to imply.

      Sure paranoids tend to be extreme, but it doesnt mean they arent correct, and often ahead of the curve.

    • Re:Cue "What about my privacy!?!?!" complaints her (Score:4, Insightful)

      by tsg ( 262138 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:43AM (#9591306)
      You might want to try understanding what people are complaining about before you assume the argument will be made here.

      Most of the concerns I've read about the use of RFID tags have been about:

      1) Persistence - the tags last as long as you have the item they are attached to and can be difficult to find or remove. Not an issue here. The article states in the very first sentence that the tags are disposable. They are also likely to be mounted in a clearly visible manner.

      2) Surreptitious - the tags can be read without the knowledge of the person holding them. Not really an issue here because the tags are attached to baggage that the customer is not going to be carrying with him.

      Do try to understand the issues before you discount them as "tinfoil-hat ideas".

    • I think that any such complaints would be unfounded.

      The article makes it clear that Delta is looking into RFID as replacement technology for (or maybe companion technology to) Barcodes for Airline-supplied luggage tracking systems. Every piece of luggage that leaves the check-in desk has a luggage tag on it supplied by the carrier / airport. This is not new. There is no increased erosion of privacy here.

      I think it is safe to assume that such tags are as temporary as the current Paper ones that they

      • I think it is safe to assume that such tags are as temporary as the current Paper ones that they attach to luggage or boxes.

        I do, too - but we're hoping for the best. Other posts wrongly ASSume that all RFID tags within consumer goods will be as easily removed...

        The potential for abuse is obviously greater than barcodes, which are (duh) visible. Many, many fears about this technology would be alleviated if the presence of RFID tags was not surrepitious. Instead of treating all customers like dolts, let's
    • I guess what it's going to come down to is this: which is more annoying, losing your luggage, or losing your privacy?

      Considering how LITTLE privacy we have in airports these days anyway, I'd rather take a little assurance that my drawers will make it on the plane after the security guards are done sniffing them.

  • ticket&rfid (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mirko ( 198274 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @08:38AM (#9590899) Journal
    I heard yesterday that people were now forced to label their cases while travelling using the French Railways, will it be possible that in a near future, they will be given RFIDs when purchasing train tickets ?
    What about the Swiss who have the "Abonnement General" ?
    Will they have to pre-order these ?

  • Now that's the first Good idea for RFID I've seen (Score:5, Funny)

    by Rhaize ( 626145 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @08:38AM (#9590900)
    well that and the cool little keyfobs we use at work. A while ago, I took the chip out of mine, and replanted it into my pen, confuses people when your opening the door with an inkpen. Seems like a good case for "the pen is mightier" quote

  • well, what do i trade for what (Score:4, Interesting)

    by rzuwik ( 124767 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @08:38AM (#9590904)
    do i let them know where my _oh-so-private_ luggage is?

    or do i prefer not having it lost every third flight across the atlantic and taking no responsibility for it?

    hmm...

  • Per airport (Score:5, Insightful)

    by afidel ( 530433 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @08:39AM (#9590909)
    is useless. There needs to be a standard definied AND there has to be a mapping back to the current barcode standard so that luggage can still be handled at airports that haven't yet upgraded.

    • Re:Per airport (Score:5, Informative)

      by glesga_kiss ( 596639 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:14AM (#9591102)
      Exactly. The ideal solution would be improved baggage tags that had both systems. This works because:
      • It works at enabled and non-enabled airports
      • It can be taken off by the owner when they get there

      This technology is a major improvement for baggage handling. Currently if a passenger disappears between checkin and departure, the plane cannot leave with their luggage on board. This proceedure predates recent security improvements. The baggage people have to dig through all of the bagage on the plane to find and remove that one bag. With a directional RFID detector, this is infinitely better. It will result in less delay and subsequently less cost to the passengers.

      RFID is only a privacy concern if it used badly. The same applies to just about anything. A

      • Re:Per airport (Score:4, Interesting)

        by stewby18 ( 594952 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:54AM (#9591394)

        Currently if a passenger disappears between checkin and departure, the plane cannot leave with their luggage on board. This proceedure predates recent security improvements.

        In theory, that's true. In practice, I can tell you it isn't. A year and a half ago, I had to cancel the second half of a two-part flight and drive instead. So when I landed, I told a gate attendant that I wouldn't be getting on my next flight (for which I was already checked through), and I'd need my baggage pulled. She phoned down and put in a request, along with a description of my baggage. A couple of hours later, they told me that my baggage had gone on without me, because they were too busy to get it.

        More recently, the plane for second leg of a trip never showed up, so instead of flying me to San Jose, they flew me to San Francisco. They happily put my luggage on the next plane to San Jose though, even though they knew I wasn't on it.

        Gives you a great sense of confidence, doesn't it?

        • If you tell them about it, they know you weren't trying to blow up the plane and just want your bag, which means it's no longer important enough to them that they'd actually make the effort to find it. If you didn't ask them to pull the bag and didn't get on the plane, they'd probably shut down the entire airport, find your bag, and have the bomb squad blow it up just to be safe.

          • Re:Per airport (Score:3, Insightful)

            by stewby18 ( 594952 )

            Great. So all a terrorist has to do is politely ask that their bag be pulled in order to have confidence that it won't? I feel so much better now.

    • Re:Per airport (Score:5, Informative)

      by MadHungarian ( 166146 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:21AM (#9591146)
      I am assuming the RFID will contain the same info as the current barcode. The 10 character IATA bag tag. and source/intermediate/destination airport. So baggage will be handled by new and existing systems. This code has a very short life. The data is usually deleted from the airlines database within a couple of days of the bag arriving at it's final destination. A some point the 10 digit IATA code is reused.

      Having worked in this industry, reading the current tag is a big pain. If you get an 80% accuracy rate consistantly - you are doing good. Usually he bag goes thru a scanner tunnel, with up to six laser raster scanners attempting to find and read the label. Any errors and the bag goes to a manual station where some low paid & bored baggage handler manually enters the next destinaion info. RFID has got to be better.

  • As long as they (Score:5, Insightful)

    by christrs ( 187044 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @08:40AM (#9590913)
    Put the RFID chips in their tags, so I can remove them when the flight is over, why should this be a big deal. They already use barcodes on the tags.
    • Pretty soon, everything sold at wal-mart will have a RFID tag attached to it. For some things, they're permanently embedding them in the products. You might end up with a piece of luggage which has a tag permanently installed at the factory. It would be possible to associate that tag with your name either at the store (credit card purchase) or at the ticket counter at check in, giving an ability to track who's going where by their luggage.

      Just something to think about.

  • BYO RFID! (Score:5, Funny)

    by BandwidthHog ( 257320 ) <inactive.slashdo ... icallyenough.com> on Friday July 02, 2004 @08:42AM (#9590924) Homepage Journal
    What hilarity could ensue if I packed my own RFID tags? Of course, this would assume that I had the capability to encode them, knew Delta's encoding scheme, and wasn't scared by the thought of losing either my luggage or my personal freedom, but hey, what a hack, right?

    DELTITE #1: "Uhh, Dave, the system shows 1,337 bags just came off that DC-9. I'm taking my lunch break now, let me know how that turns out."

    DELTITE #2: "!"
  • The new airbus A380 will be capable of holding over 800 passengers in full economy mode. Knowing the general vicinity of your bag out of 1200 (assuming 1.5 bags stowed per psgnr) is still only limiting it to a pile of 800.

    • Re:Like the nightmare is going to go away (Score:4, Insightful)

      by TopShelf ( 92521 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:07AM (#9591048) Homepage Journal
      This won't help you find your bag within that pile, but what it will do is let you know that your bag is indeed in the right pile, without having to dig through and scan each barcode. That, in and of itself, is a very good thing...
      • Sure it could. RFID readers can be printed onto contact paper, which can line the hold of the plane. I don't know that they would bother on a plane since they probably don't need to know *exactly* where it is, only that it is in fact in there. But in other situations like a retail store or warehouse RFID tags let them know *exactly* where something is: "Yes Ma'am, we do have one of those items left, someone misplaced it and it's on the end-cap by register 3, third shelf down, near the back."

    • Re:Like the nightmare is going to go away (Score:4, Insightful)

      by LiquidCoooled ( 634315 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:08AM (#9591057) Homepage Journal
      But scanning each piece of luggage as it passes on the conveyor belt into the aircraft should let the crew know:

      1) That your luggage did indeed pass the doorway and is on the plane.

      2) Which quadrant/hold it is stored in.

      I say this is a damned good thing, and perfect use for RFID.
      • They should be capable of telling you that with normal barcode scanning. The real advantage of the RFID route is *verifying* your bag is on the plane - i.e. walking around with a powerful-enough scanner trying to pick up the ID of your bag's tag - and possibly, in the future, better routing of the bag to/from the terminal.

        We all know how long it can take for bags to make it to baggage claim... what if the workers could just drop *all* the baggage onto a conveyer belt or belts, not worring about where it go
        • This is exactly the future I can see by using RFID.

          Scanners on the entrances/exits of all doorways and belts would allow your individual bag to be tracked along is journey - all without having to individually pick up and orient the item so that the barcode scanner can see.

          Its the same thinking that supermarkets are wanting, but when we move into items which go home with us, the privacy issues increase.

          I have no problem in using the right tool for the job, and can only see practical benefits with using th
    • ...still only limiting it to a pile of 800.

      At least I'd know it's in the pile, which is a hell of a lot better than being told it's "probably on another flight" and "should be here within a few days." Followed, of course, by the unspoken: "and we might deliver it to the address you just gave us that we might have written down. Maybe."

  • Doesn't anyone (Score:2, Funny)

    by Threni ( 635302 )
    think of the implications for the privacy of luggage? Suitcases have rights...feelings..emotions too, you know!

  • Getting ridiculous!! (Score:3, Funny)

    by goldspider ( 445116 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @08:48AM (#9590945) Homepage
    Gah, now they're going to be able to track my luggage, and by proxy, ME!! What is this world of corporate greed and total information awareness coming to??

    ...oh wait, you mean they can use it to find my luggage when it gets lost or shipped on the wrong flight?

  • Track the bags to its owner (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cOdEgUru ( 181536 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @08:49AM (#9590947) Homepage Journal
    I, just as anyone else here, is worried over the potential abuse of this system, but there can be improvements as well.

    I dont know whether its such an issue here, but outside US, anyone or anything can walk in to a baggage terminal and walk off with someone else's bag with out being stopped. And Usually this happens when the owner of the baggage hasnt gotten to the baggage terminal from the gate. What if Delta has a counter where travellers once they collect their baggage and on their way out, can scan their RFID's, verify they were the rightful owner of the bag and then remove the RFID to go their own merry way? Someone trying to steal the baggage could get flagged since his RFID will still be in place when he attempts to leave..

    This might lead to long lines again in the baggage terminal and can cost the airline more, but does this make sense?

    • Re:Track the bags to its owner (Score:5, Interesting)

      by afidel ( 530433 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:05AM (#9591042)
      Why should there be lines, have "lanes" with RFID readers embedded in the floor with spaces between. The passenger gets an RFID tag to go with his boarding pass, then when you grab your bags you walk through a "lane" with your baggage and boarding pass. If a bag leaves without the accompanying boarding pass token having been read within x seconds then sound an alarm for the baggage personell. This way your personell can just deal with people who lost their RFID tag or flagged incidents that apear to be theft, and lost luggage, even if RFID eliminates 90% of problems (not likely) that still leaves millions of incidents per year.
    • It's not "misplaced luggage" that's the problem, the industry is being coy and cute, it's more like stolen luggage, or luggage broken into, then purposely "lost" to hide evidence of the theft. Happens all the time, been a dodge they been underplaying for years now. Over the years in the US, you are more likely to have your luggage stolen and broken into by airport employees than from random people just taking luggage. Here's a recent example [nola.com] of some of the trusted "homeland security personnel" in action.
      • Well, not all break-ins are bad...

        A few years ago (pre "homeland security"), I was coming back from Lincoln, NE. Plane delayed, plane delayed more, plane cancelled. Rerouted who knows where (sent to airport sort of near home, then to airport very far from home, then back to airport nearest home).

        Get home, no luggage. Surprise, surprise!

        24 hours later, still no word from airline, so I call them (US domestic carrier). They have a record of having received my bag, but have no idea where it is (and actual

    • What's to stop somebody from taking the luggage, going to the restroom, and just taking out what they deem valuable? Don't get me wrong, I'd much rather have a system like that in place than today's 'snatch and go' scam.
      • >What's to stop somebody from taking the luggage, going to the restroom, and just taking out what they deem valuable? Don't get me wrong, I'd much rather have a system like that in place than today's 'snatch and go' scam.

        How about an RFID sensor on the bathroom door that alerts security? Just a thought.

    • but does this make sense?

      No. Baggage has to be tracked during transport. I agree with you RFID can and will be abused a number of ways, but tracking baggage will not be one of them.

      And the reason is! |drumroll| Bags are already tracked!! :) Its just by those stupid tags they stick to your luggage. So it doesn't really matter, regular tag or rfid tag eh? :)

    • I, just as anyone else here, is worried over the potential abuse of this system, but there can be improvements as well.

      Could someone please explain exactly how this system could be abused? There's two things here that almost everyone (save for one poster above) has missed. Most importantly, they ALREADY KNOW/SHOULD KNOW where the luggage is going. If they don't, they aren't doing their job. That's what those spiffy barcodes (as earlier poster mentioned) are for. Secondly, even if you had no lugg

  • Privacy not that important (Score:4, Funny)

    by birdwax2k ( 787311 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @08:51AM (#9590969)
    I don't care if they know where my suitcase is, just as long as they don't know there is a dead hooker in it.

    remember, what happens in vegas, stays in vegas.

  • Good news, sir! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 02, 2004 @08:58AM (#9590997)
    "We can positively confirm that your baggage has been sent to South America."

    "But, I'm in New York and I leave for California tomorrow."

    "No, problem. We can give you realtime tracking information as your baggage follows you around the country."

  • ever been on a flight (Score:4, Interesting)

    by way2trivial ( 601132 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:00AM (#9591016) Homepage Journal
    where someone checked in with luggage- then missed the plane?

    damn annoying.. they have to find the suitcase and offload it.. I'm sure this will make that a whole damn lot faster..

    I often wonder what makes a person miss the flight at that point.... it's gotta be sex...

    • It's annoying, but it's damn suspicious. Pan Am flight 107 blew up over Lockerbie due to a bomb placed in luggage which was checked but the person associated with it never made it on. Ever since then they yank lugguage without a passenger.

      Sure, most of the time it's probably a missed connection, but it's definitely worth it.

      However, to my knowledge, there has never been an actual bomb detected this way.
      • >However, to my knowledge, there has never been an actual bomb detected this way.

        How would you ever know if a bomb were detected this way? They grab the luggage and throw it into a pile until the owner comes to pick it up. I don't think they do additional searches/scans of it.

        • If the bomb were on a timer, it would blow up. I doubt the owner of the bomb comes back to claim it.

          The bomb might have a pressure fuse to keep it from blowing up prematurely in the event of a delayed flight; I don't know how sophisticated they are. That would keep the bomb from being detected.

          I imagine that once the luggage has sat for months that they open it up to see who it belongs to, or maybe they sell it at a yard sale, but perhaps they just throw it out.
          • I imagine that once the luggage has sat for months that they open it up to see who it belongs to, or maybe they sell it at a yard sale, but perhaps they just throw it out.

            In the US, it's sold - there's an outfitthat sells the bag and contents. Apparently it's a big operation.

  • I might as well be the one to post this... (Score:4, Funny)

    by pHatidic ( 163975 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:01AM (#9591018)
    In other news, slashdotters spend 25 million on tinfoil.

  • one REALLY nice use (Score:5, Interesting)

    by johnpaul191 ( 240105 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:09AM (#9591070) Homepage
    many years ago (before elevated security) my uncle had a dog in the dog-safe cargo area of an airplane..... in short they lost the dog and it somehow got diverted to a wharehouse. he was pretty much told there was no easy way to find the dog if someone didn't hear it bark by chance. after much yelling they let him search a wharehouse. by the time he found the dog it had been there for over 2 days with no water. in the end the dog recovered 100%, but i am sure this kind of situation would make you think they are not so bad. if the RFID tags are slapped on like the current barcodes, is it a big deal? you rip it off at baggage claim. it's not like your bag get's a permanant tag on it that will track its traveling history.

    it has to suck if a passenger ends up getting bumped from a flight last minute and Todd the baggage handler has to find that one passenger's bags. Actually last night my brother's flight was super delayed because some guy in first class threw a hissy fit about something and was ejected from the plane. it was while first class was still boarding so well in advance of the plane being loaded. theys till had to go in and find his luggage and pull it out. that has to be a lot of digging......

    • Funny story this (Score:2, Interesting)

      by joemc91 ( 757436 )
      This, in a round about way, reminds me of something I learned in class the over day (the part about losing the dog). In the 727 there's a switch affectionately refered to as "the puppy snuffer". It closes a valve in the cargo hold the allows air out of the plane. If it's closed, no fresh air can get down there, nor can the area be heated since no air is circulating.

      On a side note about the RFID tags. Purdue's Aviation Technology department has been doing research into this with United Airlines at their
    • Who the hell thinks of sending a dog in a carrier to a warehouse? I mean really! Even if the dog was packed in a crate, you'd surely notice.
      • i never understood how that would happen... this was probably about 30 or 40 years ago ... not that it explains someone ignoring the dog and parking him next to the Ark..... but i guess back then when a military guy (he was in the Army) flips out about losing his dog they might let him look for himself. i guess today you would be hosed.

  • Delta going bankrupt? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Fulton Green ( 40325 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:10AM (#9591075) Homepage
    The Atlanta Journal-Constitution recently asked some "what if" [ajc.com]-type questions in response to speculation that Delta might file for a Chapter 11 reorg by the end of the year. I thought it kind of interesting when juxtaposed against their $25M proposal for RFID-bagtag thing.
    • The industry average cost for mishandled bags is $400 per bag. Use of RFID tags will reduce mishandled bags by a lot RFID tags have a 99% read rate compared to less than 75% read rate for bar coded tags. This means that Delta will need to hire fewer employees to manually encode bags that cannot be automatically encoded by barcode scan tunnels The bottom line is that DAL is implementing this because it will pay for itself in less than six months

  • I thought they were broke!! (Score:3, Funny)

    by dentar ( 6540 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:17AM (#9591119) Homepage Journal
    Considering what Delta charges Cincinnatians (the most expensive airport (or #2) in the nation) they should be able to afford a BUTLER to carry each piece of luggage.

    Of course, the rest of the time, the airlines all whine about being broke and ask congress for a big bailout.

    • Meanwhile, the small airlines (like jetblue) have fantastic customer service and flights at half the price.

      The real reason that Delta is failing is because theyve got a broken business plan and refuse to adapt. If they dont adapt, they should die. Period.

  • $25 million is small potatoes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by YouHaveSnail ( 202852 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:17AM (#9591120)
    $25 million doesn't seem like all that large an investment, IMO. What does a single plane cost, after all? My guess is that they'll save $25 million over a few years just in terms of saved labor.

  • It's real use (Score:5, Funny)

    by OctaneZ ( 73357 ) <ben-slashdot2 @ u m a . l i t e c h.org> on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:25AM (#9591162) Journal
    Before RFID:
    Baggage Claim Desk: Your luggage was diverted.
    Me: oh no to where?
    Baggage Claim Desk: Bulgaria.

    After RFID:
    Baggage Claim Desk: Your luggage was diverted.
    Me: oh no to where?
    Baggage Claim Desk: Bulgaria.
    • Actually, more like:
      Before RFID:
      Baggage Claim Desk: Your luggage was diverted.
      Me: oh no to where?
      Baggage Claim Desk: Bulgaria?

      After RFID:
      Baggage Claim Desk: Your luggage was diverted.
      Me: oh no to where?
      Baggage Claim Desk: Bulgaria!

  • This is NOT a privacy issue (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bshroyer ( 21524 ) <<bret> <at> <bretshroyer.org>> on Friday July 02, 2004 @09:52AM (#9591379)
    As of about ten years ago, air travelers in the US were informed that we were to leave our privacy behind at the security checkpoint. After presenting proof of id, submitting all bags for inspection, and stepping through a detector, the traveler knew that the "authorities" had a record of who they were, where they were going, and what they were (and weren't) carrying.

    Face it. If you want privacy in your travel, you have two choices: avoid airports, or develop a very good false identity.

    Given that I've left my privacy behind at the security checkpoint, anything that makes it easier for the airlines/airports to handle and transport my bags back to me at my final destination can't be seen as anything but a positive development.

  • Is this safe? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by plumby ( 179557 )
    I'll admin a reasonable amount of ignorance before asking this question.

    Mobile (cell for you Yanks) phones are banned from flights due to (I presume) radio interference. Will hundreds of RFID tags not pose a similar risk?

    Also Fewer than a million of the 80 million or so bags Delta handles in an average year fail to reach their final destination

    So around 1 in 80 bags ends up on the wrong flight? So, assuming 1 bag/passenger, around 7 bags get lost on a typical 747 flight? That sounds an awful lot to me.

    • Mobile (cell for you Yanks) phones are banned from flights due to (I presume) radio interference. Will hundreds of RFID tags not pose a similar risk?

      RFID tags are passive, meaning they only emit radiation when probed by a scanner. So, no interference with the plane electronics.

    • Mobile (cell for you Yanks) phones are banned from flights due to (I presume) radio interference. Will hundreds of RFID tags not pose a similar risk?

      Off topic, but is there an American that exists who doesn't know what the term "mobile phone" means? It's true that many people still misapply the term "cellular" to their mobile phones, but they know what "mobile" means.

      I return your derogatory use of the word Yank, you Yank. :)

  • Didn't I see this on a test somewhere? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ryanvm ( 247662 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @10:19AM (#9591580)
    Slashdot is to RFID as Greenpeace is to:
    A) Puppies
    B) Trombones
    C) Nuclear power generation
    D) Trees

    Let's get this straight people - RFID tags are not the devil. They are a technology with the potential to be VERY useful. Do we really have to see EVERY story about EVERY use of RFID tags in the world? Why don't you guys hold off until someone, somewhere actually does something Orwellian with the technology before you spurt the hackneyed, luddite, anti-RFID propaganda?

    Oh and just because you disagree doesn't mean I'm trolling. Fuck, that concept is tired too. Where's my coffee?

    • But don't you know? RFID tags are evil. See, somehow the electromagnetic energy used to read them somehow scans your brain and destroys your privacy. Sure, on the surface you might think that they're not too different from barcodes, but that's just what they want you to think. Barcode lasers don't have the privacy-removal side effect!

      Sure, Narc's like you will argue that the only real difference between a bar code and an RFID tag is that an RFID tag isn't "immediate line-of-sight", but that's just b

    • Re:Didn't I see this on a test somewhere? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by tsg ( 262138 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @11:32AM (#9592284)
      Let's get this straight people - RFID tags are not the devil.

      Let's get this straight, not every story about RFID tags is condemning their use.

      Do we really have to see EVERY story about EVERY use of RFID tags in the world?

      This is a tech website. This is a story about tech. Nowhere in either the summary or the article is there any mention of privacy concerns.

      Why don't you guys hold off until someone, somewhere actually does something Orwellian with the technology before you spurt the hackneyed, luddite, anti-RFID propaganda?

      Why don't you hold off on complaining about hackneyed, luddite, anti-RFID propaganda until someone actually posts some?

  • Can we get some real innovations in travel? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hellfire ( 86129 ) <deviladv.gmail@com> on Friday July 02, 2004 @10:40AM (#9591807) Homepage
    Don't get me wrong, this is great for the current system of taking 2 hrs to get people through security checkpoints, loaded onto the plane, along with tons of luggage, and then offloading them.

    I just took a flight to boston from Philadelphia. The entire trip from parking at philadelphia to landing at boston took close to 3 hrs. It's probably 6 hours drive to boston. I'm not really saving much time here. Fortunately my company paid for it, but it was amazingly expensive because it was booked last minute for a customer.

    What I want to see is the Air Taxi system that NASA and the FAA were working on. This was an overhaul in the Air Traffic control system which would open up new options in air travel. An Air Taxi could simply be a small prop or smaller jet plane that would be cheaper to fly and maintain, and it would be a lot easier to get on and off... like a taxi!

    Or how about some MagLev trains? A 300+ Mph train on a safe and easy to maintain elevated track. If we could just find a way to create the infrastructure, we could make transportation more affordable and easier.

    As it stands, our current system is old and antiquated and inconvenient... and expensive! We need some disruptive technologies to get a foothold. Changing the nature of travel will solve more problems than trying to put patches on the current system. I consider this RF solution a patch on a much larger problem.
    • Small planes aren't much use in transatlantic crossings, or flying from one side of the world to another. Neither are maglev trains come to think of it. Our current system is the only one with the flexibility the fickle market desires.

      Remember - most of the rest of the world has passports, and isn't afraid to use them ;)

  • This is a good application (Score:4, Informative)

    by 99bottles ( 257169 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @10:52AM (#9591904)
    They've been using barcoded tags for years to sort luggage. This would save the trouble of having to use a reader on a specific target. It's already been pointed out, tear off the tags when you retrieve your bags and you're anonymous again.

    I work in a library, and RFID has been trying to make its way in for years. The tags for this type of use have a range of only a few feet. The applications range from inventory by just passing a reader down the rows of items while they're still on the shelf, to security gates that tell you what item(s) someone just walked off with, instead of just sending off an alarm and starting the guessing games, or checking in a half dozen items at a time by placing a stack on a reader.

    RFID is not always the beast...

  • Heh (Score:2)

    by Trejus ( 87937 )

    As an Atlantan, I can only hope that Delta is finally getting tired of being known as the short form of "Don't Expect Luggage To Arrive"

  • Presumably, the adhesive RFID tag has the originating and destination airport printed on it as well (article didn't mention this). Otherwise, Todd the baggage handler needs a battery-powered scanner to know if the bag should be on the plane or not.

    Ever watch the grocery clerk scan your groceries?

    {swipe} Darn, didn't read.
    {swipe} Darn, didn't read.
    {swipe} Darn .....

    Now imagine the same thing as bags fall off the belt onto the tarmac while Todd is changing batteries, or trying to get a damaged tag
  • Every time I fly Delta and check baggage, they strive to lose my luggage both ways, but they're guaranteed to lose the luggage on at least one leg of the trip. If they do *anything* differently, it will probably break their existing Service Level!!
  • Eventually everything will have a RFID in it and passengers and security officials could scan their luggage for initial counts of items inside the luggage and if scanners detect any deviations from that count can flag the luggage as suspicious.
  • (Reeally chipper video display)

    Hi folks!

    Look, I know that there have been some concerns about all of this Radio Frequency ID tags and such, but shucks, this is just a way to get your luggage to you faster! Sure, you have to fill out a few more forms and make sure your picture is attached to the luggage as well as a copy of your national ID card number, and golly, we know that takes a little more time. Aw shucks, just look at it this way, airports are big places with lots of people, so if you los
  • How can Delta afford this? Do they think the American taxpayers will allow another bailout of the airline industry?

    They need to be tightening their belts and spend their money carefully instead of shoving $25 Million into something that might not work out.

    -Nick
  • The industry needs to add this at all airports. Denver international was automated, but it was a disaster. The main reason is inability to dicern which bag was which. In fact, DIA's system can perfectly handle the outbound baggage. It was transfer/inbound that was horrible; Basically the none-marked baggage. Once all baggage is rfid, it will allow the system to be mostly automated, lowering costs. Likewise, there will be less lost luggage, perhaps even less damaged luggage since it will be machines rather t

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close