Two Visions of an RFID-Enabled Future

None of those statements, of course, are true. RFID interrogators, unlike video cameras, cannot be hidden. The kinds of passive tags that will be placed on consumer products require energy from the reader to work. As soon as a reader emits energy, any geek with $20 worth of electronics bought online can detect it. So any company spying on people would be quickly exposed, which would hurt its reputation and lose it customers.

I have yet to hear any explanation of how a company might benefit by spying on individual customers, or from gathering personalized information without its customers' knowledge. Companies could benefit from knowing that I like to buy tweed jackets, but not from knowing which specific tweed jacket I bought—and bar codes already provide that information. Companies could also benefit from marketing to people in stores—but only if they opt-in.

Consumers will always have a choice. If people are creeped out by retailers "spying" on them, other retailers will quickly advertise that they either don't use RFID, or that they kill tags before you leave the store.

On the other hand, to believe in the positive vision, as I do, you must accept several assumptions as well:

1. Companies will provide more information about their products to gain sales.
2. Food producers and sellers will want to reduce the costs of recalls and potential lawsuits through technology investments.
3. Hospitals will want to reduce lawsuits and improve efficiencies and patient safety through investments in technologies.
4. Retailers will invest in technologies that make them more efficient.
5. Governments will require companies to spend money to improve recycling.

All of these things not only seem entirely reasonable—they are already happening. In other words, we are already moving toward the more positive vision of the future. Unfortunately, it's difficult for the RFID industry and end users to promote the more positive aspects of RFID without sounding as if they are trying to convince consumers they should want something that's bad for them.

All we can do, I think, is continue to show the benefits, address the concerns raised about privacy and educate, educate, educate. Eventually, journalists like Lewan will be embarrassed to write articles that are so ill-informed.

Mark Roberti is the founder and editor of RFID Journal. If you would like to comment on this article, click on the link below. To read more of Mark's opinions, click here or visit the RFID Journal Blog.