In the March 31, 2008, publication of The Seattle Times, the following article appears about a University of Washington research team that is conducting a study into the positive and negative affects of Radio Frequency Identification (or RFID). This controversial technology has researchers, business executives, government officials, and consumers critically looking into how the introduction of monitoring chip-based technology will change our already "Techno-savvy" world. The term "Radio Frequency Identification" for many conjures up Orwellian-like images of "Big Brother" watching over our every move. But is this a fair depiction of the technology? The author of the story, Kristi Heim, states that RFID is a "relatively new" technology, but that is a stretch of the words. This technology has been around for years (goes as far back as the 1960’s), and is already in mass production. If you don’t believe me, then the next time you are lost backpacking, turn on your cellphone, and you will be found. The chief debate, like the World Wide Web before it, will be whether we should regulate the technology itself, or regulate the use of the technology. An extremely fine line is shaping up in this debate.
Like many technological advancements before its time, we need to proceed with caution on how RFID is implemented in our culture. Prudence demands that the technological benefits be allowed to fully mature before the need for regulation is commenced, but caution need also be maintained so that those technological benefits are not abused by third-parties or service providers. There is a tremendous amount of advantages that can be derived from RFID technology, but if systematic abuses are allowed to occur, either publicly or privately, then is the risk worth it? Finding, locating, and saving a stranded hiker in the Olympic National Forest is an obvious advantage to the technology, as is monitoring your child as he/she walks to school in the morning, but illegally obtaining consumer/patient information for fraud and identity theft purposes is a disadvantage no one wants to fall victim to.
My prediction is that with the development of RFID technology, we will see a rise in identity theft and consumer fraud cases in the State of Washington. Even with that said, the argument is about the "user" of the technology, not the "use" of the technology.
The Internet is the best example of why this technology should be allowed to develop, before it becomes heavily regulated. Many legislators back in the yearly 1990’s wanted to regulate the Internet and control much of the content that was displayed over the World Wide Web. Fortunately for many business executives, dot com billionaires, and consumers, the Internet was allowed to develop first before the need for regulations was incorporated into its use. Allowing the market (or public in general) to dictate the success or failure of this technology will go a long way in determining its proper use in our society – but this leaves the developers of RFID technology with a tremendous amount of responsibility that they must be accountable for.
Please click on the following link to access the story: UW Team Researches a future filled with RFID chips