This is the final part of an exclusive interview with Loïc Feinbier, an Accenture RFID expert, who unveils his personal interest, vision, advise and experience on RFID. Check parts 1, 2 and 3 for an introduction to Loïc, his interest and experience in RFID and his vision on the future of RFID.

Q: What is the funniest or most interesting application of RFID you’ve encountered?

There are loads, so I will give you a couple:

- For Science Fiction lovers, there are two interesting ideas about using RFID chips (not tags), the size of a grain of sand. One that circulated a while ago was to embed them into bank notes for anti-counterfeiting purposes. You won’t read them from a distance (but rather have to touch the chip) but that shouldn’t be a barrier. Although technically this could be doable today, I presume for now the killer is cost and fears of privacy violation (cash would lose its anonymity). A second, very interesting idea I read about some years ago, was to potentially pour hundreds of thousands of those tiny chips into crude oil, in order to be able to understand at a later point in the supply chain (e.g. at the refinery) what original barrel the raw material was coming from (e.g. in case of quality problems). I presume this one died either because the chips would ultimately be destroyed in some step of the process, or rather because they would be a threat to the process itself (after all it’s a lot of silicon swimming in your oil).

- One of my all time favorites definitively is that conductive beer glass (I believe originally developed by – believe it or not - Mitsubishi) which will understand from its conductive coating that the liquid level runs dangerously low, and transmits a signal to the reader embedded in the table that your beloved guest is about to get angry over the waiter having him wait so long.

Source: merl.com

- The US military’s though to embed RFID into firearms allowing only the soldier wearing the corresponding wristband to shoot, or FedEx’ trial to use RFID wristbands to unlock their truck by getting close to it (and lock it when leaving) are other all time classics. In general, most people think about presence when thinking about RFID, yet there are so many possible applications coming from proving absence (e.g. there’s accompany selling tamper proof electricity meters, that basically have an integrated tag and reader, storing if the tag has been out of sight from the reader, thus indicating the meter has been opened).

There are so many possibilities. I have subscribed to a newsletter informing me about new RFID related patents coming out on a weekly basis, and I can tell you: there is nothing you can’t think of. Write me if you want to have more examples…

One last thought on something that (in my view) has NOT really turned out to be an application of RFID, and that despite it being one of the major buzz phrases used for its marketing: it’s rewritable memory. This is something that has astonished myself for a while, but if you think of it, it is quite logical: we live in an ever-connected world where nationwide calls (and internet connections) now are literally free of charge – making tags with re-writeable user memory a real bad value proposition, considering that every additional ounce of silicon costs money (and the time you need to read and write to the memory adds on top of it). In my 5 years in this domain, I have only encountered a handful of scenarios where it made sense to actually write something onto the tag.

Q: Which application or development of RFID frightens you the most and why?

Nothing really seriously (I mean it’s not that we’re all gonna die because of RFID) but if I had to list some things to think about:

- Our current inability to cope with the volumes of data we will face and how to deduct valuable insight from it (at the same time this will create a big opportunity as mentioned before), as well as failure so far to come up with that ONE standard (and what if China really goes ahead and define their own set of standards?)

- Some potential environmental impacts are not negligible as billions of tags will mean millions of tons of additional waste (not sure what the half-life of silicon chips is) or items requiring recycling

- Maybe some upcoming form of “RFID terrorism” (not to confuse with industrial espionage, which I think is unlikely) where, with minimal equipment, I can freak up your RF environment in a way that you ain’t gonna have much fun with your 1 million Dollar worth of readers in your warehouse (but dense environment readers, anti-collision protocols and tag-talks-first / tag-talks-only systems will counteract)

- A bunch of hardliners (well, to be honest they don’t scare but rather bemuse me) who want to make us believe that RFID is dangerous while making money by selling useless (because RFID is not a serious threat to privacy in the first place) RF-shielding wallets to unknowing fools (but time and education will have their effect)

Q: How many RFID chips do you think you will have in your house in 10 years from now? And where?

Who cares? I already have at least a hundred at home

If you have any questions or comments to Loïc, just post your reaction by logging in via the link below.

The FIFA World Cup is getting closer, and more and more people try to obtain tickets via ‘non-regular’ ways. In The Netherlands, more and more reports about ‘black market tickets’ appear in the news. Prices are significanly higher than the official tickets: 500-2000 euro instead of 60-100 euro. But the question remains if these tickets will give you entrance into the stadium or not… According to the FIFA the tickets contain elements that can’t be copied: The tickets have a barcode, hologram and an RFID-chip. Barcodes are very easy to copy, holograms can be falsified as well (or stolen from the printer). But an RFID chip is very hard to copy. So what is the RFID chip used for? In 2004, the first announcements were made about the RFID chip: “Information on the chip will include data about the game and seating. Whether it will also include personal information, such as name and home address of the ticket holder, is still undecided. We don’t intend to make public exactly what information we will embed in the chip but all information will be in line with data privacy rules adopted by regulators. FIFA has no plans to track the movement of spectators, especially soccer hooligans.” In 2005 is it told that: “The small microchip on the ticket contains only access information, but no personal data.” According to the Data Protection Rules: “For all matches of the 2006 FIFA World Cup™ electronically controlled turnstile barriers will be used for access control. They are equipped with proximity readers which will be able to detect, using RFID technology embedded in a chip in a ticket, whether or not a ticket is valid. The RFID chip does not contain any personal customer data. To guarantee a smooth control at the stadium entrance the necessary data (inter alia personal data) will be transferred encrypted from the ticketing system to the access control system of the stadium (for further information, see FAQ). The chip offers access to these data and will be used to align the data with the data of the access control. The entrance will be registered on the chip as soon as the ticket holder passes the turnstile barrier. This is to guarantee the anti pass-back function (to prevent unauthorized double entrance) in case of network failures.” So, your name is name is only printed on top of the ticket, but not in the RFID chip in your ticket. Or is it? The text above seems contradicting. “The RFID chip does not contain any personal customer data.” Seems clear, right? But what about “To guarantee a smooth control at the stadium entrance the necessary data (inter alia personal data) will be transferred encrypted from the ticketing system to the access control system of the stadium (for further information, see FAQ). The chip offers access to these data and will be used to align the data with the data of the access control.” ‘Inter alia’ means ‘among other things’, ‘for example’ or ‘including’. So personal data is transferred from the ticketing system to the access gate, where your ticket (i.e. RFID chip) is read. And then this data is aligned - between the ticketing system and the data on your chip. So how can you align personal data, if it’s not on the RFID chip? Perhaps the FAQ gives more information, as the text above indicates. The only question containing RFID is: “17. Are there other ways to obtain tickets for the 2006 FIFA World Cup Germany ™? No. Tickets for the 2006 FIFA World Cup Germany ™ can be obtained only by the ways described at www.fifaworldcup.com. Every official 2006 FIFA World Cup Germany ™ ticket is issued with the applicant’s name and a so-called RFID chip. This enables security services at the stadiums to adjust necessary checks to the actual security situation. To avoid delays during these security checks we recommend keeping ticket and proof of identification ready at the stadium gate. This clear sales structure and the security measures are to prevent unauthorized ticket sales. We therefore advise against buying tickets from other sources.” So actually, no extra information here. The only option remaining seems to be the chosen one: The RFID chip contains a unique number, and that the same unique number is stored in the central database together with personal data. Only then it’s possible to manually(!) compare the name printed (with ink) on top of the ticket and the name in the central database, without storing the actual name on the RFIC chip. Good to know that your personal data is not on the RFID chip. But still no answer to the question if you can get in if you get your ticket via the non official channels. Well, if the ticket doesn’t have an RFID chip in it, you can be assured that it’s a fake ticket! But if it has one, there is no way for you to check if the ticket has been officially released, or that the RFID chip inside only bears the information ‘I’m not a released ticket’. In this case, you won’t see the game. And if you buy a ticket ‘in the street’ 10 minutes before the game starts, it’s quite unlikely that your name will appear on the ticket and in the central database. Then you can only hope that your identification (and from your ticket) is not checked. So be carefull where you get your tickets!

Deze maand staat wat SEALA betreft in het teken van de roadshow. In mijn rol als verantwoordelijke voor SEALA ben ik samen met Eric Lonbois (verantwoordelijk voor Sales) begonnen aan een tour waarin we de strategie van SEALA toelichten. Hoe organiseren we de werkzaamheden? Hoe werken we zowel langs industrielijnen als cross geography samen? Waar halen we onze groei vandaan? Et cetera. De SEALA strategie vloeit voort uit Horizon 2012 waar ik vorig jaar nauw betrokken bij ben geweest.
Het is de eerste keer dat we zoiets organiseren binnen SEALA. We zijn in Milaan, Buenos Aires, Breda en Parijs geweest en het wordt goed ontvangen. We geven aan op welke gebieden we ons verder specialiseren, waar we kiezen voor standaardisatie en industrialisering van de delivery en wat deze keuzen betekenen voor de carrièreplanning van de medewerkers. Deze duidelijkheid wordt gewaardeerd.

In de strategie besteden we ook aandacht aan GP2W thema’s. We willen de betrokkenheid van de mensen verder vergroten. Dat gaan we ondermeer doen door middel van affinity groups waarin zo’n 25 tot 30 mensen elkaar en hun leidinggevende om de paar weken treffen om ervaringen en ideeën uit te wisselen. Betrokkenheid vraagt om persoonlijk contact. Weten wat de ander bezighoudt, begrip voor elkaars business en eventuele geografische verschillen. Binnen SEALA hebben we daarom afgesproken zo specifiek mogelijk te communiceren, bij voorkeur face-to-face en zo min mogelijk via generieke e-mails.
Het kost me heel wat vlieguren, maar elke keer weer merk ik het effect van persoonlijk contact. Tijdens een roadshow, maar ook op kantoor in Amsterdam, of tijdens een borrel op de Amsterdamse Hockeyclub. Ik neem me dan ook voor zo persoonlijk mogelijk te communiceren. Betrap je me bijvoorbeeld op onnodige generieke mails? Laat het dan weten. Natuurlijk het liefst face-to-face, maar als het niet anders kan, dan graag via deze weblog. Krijg ik ook eens een reactie…

This is part 3 of an exclusive interview with Loïc Feinbier, an Accenture RFID expert, who unveils his personal interest, vision, advise and experience on RFID. Check part 1 for an introduction to Loïc and his interest and experience in RFID. In part 2 Loïc displayed his vision on the future of RFID. Next week the last part of this extensive story will appear on this weblog, so stay tuned.

Q: Do you think that RFID will become a de facto standard, like barcoding is now? And why?

Yes. It will probably never be as cheap as printing a barcode (although conductive ink and printed circuits might get us there) and almost certainly remain accompanied by barcodes (always need a human-readable fallback, right?), but it will have so many additional benefits.

And even if those benefits are impartially distributed (as is the case today with various industry mandates), the ones benefiting most from it will either make the others play nicely, or trade some of their benefits in exchange. On a global scale it will still be a win-win situation, and the longer the supply chain gets you will be using RFID in, the higher your ROI will be and the more participants will benefit from the original investment (remember the Fax machine).

Q: According to you, are there particular industries or types of products that fit the use of RFID more than others?

Obviously: YES. Can I give you an exhaustive list: NO.

If you’re talking physics of RFID and making it work, then I would say any product with a lot of free surrounding space (e.g. within the packaging), no liquids nor metals (contrary to most people’s perception the first is actually the greater enemy for RFID) and a taking place in a perfectly controlled environment (e.g. minimum radio interference, control over product orientation, etc.) should work to perfection.

Source: rfidproductnews.com

The reality is: RFID is weird. Every environment is different, every product behaves slightly different and every tag may perform differently, too. What this means is that even though there certainly are some product types that work significantly better than others (most cloth, paper or plastic products), the actual product is not the only factor and the value of such a statement is at best of theoretical nature.

In reality your biggest problem is not going to be your product (you can use a spacer to make tags work on containers full of liquid, or have somebody design a tag for you that actually uses the metal material to work even better; at worst you can change an ingredient against another), nor your packaging (you can redesign it, or use software to identify the best possible placement and orientation of your tags), nor choosing the right tag or reader.

It’s going to be the environment, because that’s the only thing you can’t control (poor you). Just as an example, the law of physics (and don’t hold me accountable if I don’t get it 100% right – the order of magnitude is correct) tell us that in free space a UHF signal (roughly somewhere in between 860-950MHz) emitted at 2W ERP, which is what is now legally permissible in most European countries, can still be sensed from about 80km away.

Now what do you think will happen if your neighbor’s warehouse on the opposite side of the street has 50 dock doors (which isn’t unusual for large warehouses) equipped with gate readers?

Q: What would you advise companies that are investigating RFID opportunities now?

Many things, but three really are key:

1) Without self-advertisement: get somebody to help you who really knows that stuff AND has a track-record to prove it. Nothing… nothing replaces hands-on experience in this domain.

2) Start doing something NOW (in fact I already told them 2 years ago but there weren’t many who wanted to listen to me). You can (and must) learn today what you will need to stay ahead of your competition tomorrow, just like you can start to build out your Silent Commerce (note the difference to RFID only) infrastructure as of now (you will only want ONE SINGLE solution to manage all your barcode scanners, RFID readers, sensors, displays, etc., and not multiple ones).

3) Apart from that I would most vehemently advocate that you think “out of the box”. From my experience the best RFID applications almost certainly lie in an area where you wouldn’t expect them…

Stay tuned for the last part of this interview when Loïc lists some very funny and interesting examples of RFID applications!
If you have any questions or comments to Loïc, just post your reaction by logging in via the link below.