D:\Documents and Settings\Ana\My Documents\Biserka-knjiga ...

need to compete on the level of logistics and actual contents – ingredients –
disappears. No wonder that opposition to the first generation passive (not two-way
communication or data storage on chip) enabler – RFID – is viewed with suspicion,
debate in mainstream media is virtually nonexistent, the RFID industry goes out of its
way to play down the privacy and security issues, light scenarios featuring innovation
and profit scenarios (building applications and services on e-bricks and mortar)
outnumber the dark scenarios, even to the extent that there are virtually none as these
scenarios immediately go into “doom-scenarios”. Frame the discourse and you frame
the debate. Any position looking critically at these ambient innovations is thus
considered by this very fact to be non-innovative, conservative and regressing to the
Luddite position of smashing the machines in favour of manual labour. Still, what
makes this move so special, what would – against all seemingly sensible odds – be
able to build a strong, broad, popular opposition? Privacy? Naive ideas of sharing are
corrupting notions of privacy, transparency and informational architecture
symmetry:
“Showing off your drinking triumphs to your friends? What if prospective
employers are watching? As these sites continue to grow in popularity, so too does
the value of the information on them to parties other than those directly involved.
Parents can see what their children really get up to at Uni’. Teachers can see what
their pupils really think. Potential employers can profile applicants based on their
online braggings and other shenanigans. While much of the content might be taken
humorously amongst friends, other parties might not see it that way” (Kerrison,
2006). 21
According to Professor Nigel Smart (Computer Science, Bristol) there is a “deep
societal problem emerging of people giving up their privacy without realizing it.
There’s little point in worrying about ID cards, RFID tags and spyware when more
and more people are throwing away their privacy anyway. And the potential
consequences are dire”. In September 2005, Hewlett Packard (HP) released the iPAQ
hx2000 series Pocket PCs equipped with Windows Mobile 5.0 OS. The HP hx2790 –
part of the hx2000 series – offers a biometric fingerprint sensor. In March 2005,
OMRON Corporation announced “OKAO Vision Face Recognition Sensor”, a face
recognition technology which can be implemented in PDAs, mobile phones or other
mobile devices with a camera function. Lenovo, China’s biggest PC manufacturer
which bought Thinkpad in 2004, sold its one millionth biometric laptop in December
2005. Casio Computer Corp. has developed a fingerprint sensor layered on top of a
1.2-inch LCD screen, “providing a convenient way for phone makers to incorporate
biometric security into their handsets”. Two major reasons for the growing success of
21 http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=7499
New realities, new policies?
35