Next Generation IPhone to take on NFC cashless technology.

hooradiation

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Cancer at 27.56 MHZ.

Given that mobile phones are in the same bracket of things that "might cause cancer" as coffee, I'm far more worried about the pot or so of that i manage to drink per day then I am about my phone.

Which is a round about way of saying "not at all".

studiorat

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Cancer at 27.56 MHZ.

More voodoo. Do these fear mongers ever tire of themselves?

@RTDH, I really think you believe this crap simply because you want to. Mobile phones have been tracked for at least the past 10 years since GSM anyway. Why are you stilling banging on about it?

Run_to_da_hills

studiorat wrote: »

More voodoo. Do these fear mongers ever tire of themselves?

@RTDH, I really think you believe this crap simply because you want to. Mobile phones have been tracked for at least the past 10 years since GSM anyway. Why are you stilling banging on about it?

Of course service providers, phone makers and governments etc won't disclose the dangers of mobile phones particularly so in that they are the ultimate tools for keeping tabs on the sheeple.

Your Average cell phone is omitting several different frequencies at once, more so in smart phones. GSM, Bluetooth, Wifi, and now RFID.

Run_to_da_hills

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Your Average cell phone is omitting several different frequencies at once, more so in smart phones. GSM, Bluetooth, Wifi, and now RFID.

Oh no! Not frequencies!
And that picture looks terrifying.

It's a good thing I actually know how radiation and radio waves work, otherwise your scaremongering propaganda might be effective.

Monty Burnz

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Of course service providers, phone makers and governments etc won't disclose the dangers of mobile phones particularly so in that they are the ultimate tools for keeping tabs on the sheeple.

Your Average cell phone is omitting several different frequencies at once, more so in smart phones. GSM, Bluetooth, Wifi, and now RFID.

Well, these phones have been ubiquitous for more than a decade - I've had one since about 97, so nearly 15 years. Where are all the cancer cases? I don't know a single person who's had cancer in their head.

studiorat

Never ceases to amuse me. A sniff of the word radiation and they run a mile. Oh no! Not the deadly frequencies!!!

Mobile phones are able to be traced by their very nature, they aren't called cell phones for no reason. It's no secret, people just don't care.

But hey! If you want to give a 4 year old a mobile phone like the ones in RTDH's favorite picture don't forget to get them one of these :

or this :

Mahatma coat

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Well, these phones have been ubiquitous for more than a decade - I've had one since about 97, so nearly 15 years. Where are all the cancer cases? I don't know a single person who's had cancer in their head.

Ah but, You dont walk around with your phone up toyour head all day do you

You mostly have it in your pocket

Mahatma coat

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Ah but, You dont walk around with your phone up toyour head all day do you

You mostly have it in your pocket

But MC, that shows that the rate has been going up since 1975, long before mobiles were in common use (let alone fit in your pocket) and there doesn't seem to be any sort of spike that would correspond with the sudden popularity of them...

Mahatma coat

why would there be a Spike for 'Sudden' Polularity?

Mahatma coat

Mahatma coat wrote: »

why would there be a Spike for 'Sudden' Polularity?

Because there was a sudden rise in mobile phone usage.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0933563.html
If mobile phones did cause cancer you would see cancer rates to spike accordingly to the sudden increases in usage.
However your graph shows no such thing. Instead it shows a steady rise starting well before common mobile phone usage.

Monty Burnz

King Mob wrote: »

However your graph shows no such thing. Instead it shows a steady rise starting well before common mobile phone usage.

And the most recent figure shows rates at the same level as 1997, when mobile phone usage was a fraction of what it is today...

The_B_Man

NFC requires close range, like as in inches, to be activated. Then the user is prompted for a PIN to release the info. You can't access any identifiable info without the user first entering the PIN.

johnnyskeleton

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

NFC / RFID phones will leave digital prints on every item purchased or transit turnstile that is tagged with.

All this information must be stored under the 2006 EU data retention for two years and can be accessed as evidence or used by the authorities should they need it. If they a a tip off about someone they can flag their account and track them live on the system.

So if you want to avoid detection while you commit an offence or conspire to overthrow the government, you simply give someone else your card, tell them to go on a spending spree and you will throw the authorities completely off the scent?

That actually could work in favour of someone accused of a crime (I couldn't have done it because I was in the other side of town at the time, and you have my records to prove it).

Run_to_da_hills

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

So if you want to avoid detection while you commit an offence or conspire to overthrow the government, you simply give someone else your card, tell them to go on a spending spree and you will throw the authorities completely off the scent?

That actually could work in favour of someone accused of a crime (I couldn't have done it because I was in the other side of town at the time, and you have my records to prove it).

This topic is on NFC technology in smart phones and not smart cards.

Remote access is not rocket science and has been used by PC manufacturers sorting out customer faults for years. It wouldn't take much for the authorities to request remote access to cell phone records, forward facing cam footage and voice recognition.

If they still had doubts to the authenticity of the owner of the phone they can easily check GSM cell site analysis records to triangulate the location where most calls are made to within about 15 feet. IE the persons residence.

Run_to_da_hills

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

This topic is on NFC technology in smart phones and not smart cards.

Remote access is not rocket science and has been used by PC manufacturers sorting out customer faults for years. It wouldn't take much for the authorities to request remote access to cell phone records, forward facing cam footage and voice recognition.

If they still had doubts to the authenticity of the owner of the phone they can easily check GSM cell site analysis records to triangulate the location where most calls are made to within about 15 feet. IE the persons residence.

So to actually use their new evil system to spy on us all, they have to use the old system?
Not particularly scary..

Run_to_da_hills

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

So if you want to avoid detection while you commit an offence or conspire to overthrow the government, you simply give someone else your card, tell them to go on a spending spree and you will throw the authorities completely off the scent?

It doesn't take much for the authorities to track down the unauthorised use of a card, most ATM and POS are time / date stamped and are monitored by CCTV.

robtri

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

It doesn't take much for the authorities to track down the unauthorised use of a card, most ATM and POS are time / date stamped and are monitored by CCTV.

giving your card to someone else is not unatuthorised use of the card...

you actually think the authoriities have the man power to do **** like this... lol....

Monty Burnz

robtri wrote: »

giving your card to someone else is not unatuthorised use of the card...

you actually think the authoriities have the man power to do **** like this... lol....

Pretty soon half the population will be working to spy on the other half. They could simplify things by getting you to spy on your own spouse.

Run_to_da_hills

robtri wrote: »

giving your card to someone else is not unatuthorised use of the card...

you actually think the authoriities have the man power to do **** like this... lol....

Chasing up digital prints on a suspect doesn't require too much manpower.

robtri

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Chasing up digital prints on a suspect doesn't require too much manpower.

yeah right.... take a lot of manpower...

Kinger83

King Mob wrote: »

Because there was a sudden rise in mobile phone usage.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0933563.html
If mobile phones did cause cancer you would see cancer rates to spike accordingly to the sudden increases in usage.
However your graph shows no such thing. Instead it shows a steady rise starting well before common mobile phone usage.

http://xkcd.com/925/

Run_to_da_hills

Three years later and it finally arrived and just in time for the global economy crash along with the death of hard currency the dawn of cashless enslavement. :eek:

Out with the old.



"Will the next iPhone replace your wallet? Apple set to take on Google with chip that could let you pay with a wave of your handset"



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2194639/Will-iPhone-replace-wallet-Apple-takes-Google-chip-payments-till.html

rameire

nice one, ive been waiting three years since you showed me what could happen, now its here, i cant wait to get it.

Jonny7

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Three years later and it finally arrived and just in time for the global economy crash along with the death of hard currency the dawn of cashless enslavement. :eek:

Out with the old.



"Will the next iPhone replace your wallet? Apple set to take on Google with chip that could let you pay with a wave of your handset"



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2194639/Will-iPhone-replace-wallet-Apple-takes-Google-chip-payments-till.html

Sounds quite convenient really. The Belgians have been cashless "enslaved" for 10 years now, what's so bad?

Run_to_da_hills

Jonny7 wrote: »

Sounds quite convenient really. The Belgians have been cashless "enslaved" for 10 years now, what's so bad?

If you scare them off too soon they won't buy into it.

BunShopVoyeur

Eh, some phones have that technology already..

Run_to_da_hills

BunShopVoyeur wrote: »

Eh, some phones have that technology already..

IPhones sell.

Sonics2k

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

IPhones sell.

So do the other phones that use this tech?

What exactly is the problem here?

BunShopVoyeur

Run_to_da_hills wrote:

IPhones sell.

So does the Galaxy S 3 for one.

At least be accurate...

Run_to_da_hills

Sonics2k wrote: »

So do the other phones that use this tech?

What exactly is the problem here?

IPhone markets.

They revolutionised the smart Phone more than any other manufacturer.

They also have a trendier following more than any other smart phone.

Sonics2k

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

IPhone markets.

They revolutionised the smart Phone more than any other manufacturer.

They also have a trendier following more than any other smart phone.

Doesn't answer my question.

I'm more than aware of the popularity of the iPhone and other Apple products, but I'm wondering exactly what the problem is with this system.

You're treating this as a CT, when numerous companies are openly planning it, and the tech industry, as well as it's fans and journalists, are greatly looking forward to it.

Corkfeen

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Sonics2k wrote: »

So do the other phones that use this tech?

What exactly is the problem here?

IPhone markets.

They revolutionised the smart Phone more than any other manufacturer.

They also have a trendier following more than any other smart phone.

They initially helped to boost the smartphone market but they aren't exactly innovators anymore, like my Android phone is higher performance and has many features that an iPhone does not... Samsung phones outsold the iPhone during the first quarter of this year I think..... I'm all in favour of being able to make cashless payments by the way, have yet to see a good argument against it.

Run_to_da_hills

Corkfeen wrote: »

have yet to see a good argument against it.

Either do I until such times as it becomes a fully blown and a state controlled commodity where one is left without a choice.

Sonics2k

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Either do I until such times as it becomes a fully blown and a state controlled commodity where one is left without a choice.

You do realize it's basically a Laser/Visa system, right?

Run_to_da_hills

Sonics2k wrote: »

You do realize it's basically a Laser/Visa system, right?

Difference is NFC Phones are a lot more flexible than card payment and you are not restricted to payment terminals.

They will also pinpoint the location of purchase to within meters, who purchased what, what was purchased, (Barcode references) topics of conversation leading up to the purchase. the identity of the other person making the purchase and content etc that is used on the phone that could build up a profile on the individual.

Corkfeen

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Difference is NFC Phones are a lot more flexible than card payment and you are not restricted to payment terminals.

They will also pinpoint the location of purchase to within meters, who purchased what, what was purchased, (Barcode references) topics of conversation leading up to the purchase. the identity of the other person making the purchase and content etc that is used on the phone that could build up a profile on the individual.

A statement such as that really needs to be backed up, the microphone is not constantly listening in on conversations....

Sonics2k

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Difference is NFC Phones are a lot more flexible than card payment and you are not restricted to payment terminals.

Sounds good to me. But they are dependent on the store having the needed tech to use it too.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

They will also pinpoint the location of purchase to within meters, who purchased what, what was purchased,
(Barcode references)

This already happens. It's called a receipt. I must hand out 20-30 a day at work when people pay with their laser or visa.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

topics of conversation leading up to the purchase.

Based on what exactly? This is fiction.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

the identity of the other person making the purchase and content etc that is used on the phone that could build up a profile on the individual.

Well of course the identity of person making the purchase is noted, it happens now with normal cards. It's a security feature and again, used for receipts.

You're also implying that the information -may- be passed on to a 3rd party of advertising. As is the law, this can be opted out of.

So the one CT you have here is the claim they will record you speaking. And once again, you have -nothing- to back this up. Just a wild swing and claim.

Run_to_da_hills

Sonics2k wrote: »

This already happens. It's called a receipt. I must hand out 20-30 a day at work when people pay with their laser or visa.

Would you give your mate a receipt if he asked you for a loan of e20?.

Sonics2k wrote: »

Based on what exactly? This is fiction.

Based on powers.

Sonics2k wrote: »

Well of course the identity of person making the purchase is noted, it happens now with normal cards. It's a security feature and again, used for receipts.


You're also implying that the information -may- be passed on to a 3rd party of advertising. As is the law, this can be opted out of.

So the one CT you have here is the claim they will record you speaking. And once again, you have -nothing- to back this up. Just a wild swing and claim.

The authorities have every right to listen into any conversion if they suspect "terrorist" or subversive activity.

Defining "terrorist activity" is another thing.In America or even the UK someone that blogs about 9/11 being an inside Job could now be considered a potential terrorist and a treat to national security and have their phone conversations monitored.

Monty Burnz

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Based on powers.

What does this have to do with what you are talking to your friends about before you buy?

Ministers have confirmed that any overseas country can ask the Home Secretary for communications data as part of criminal investigations.
Other public bodies can also allow access to the sensitive information as long as it does not break human rights laws, it has emerged.
The disclosures have prompted fresh concerns about the scale of the Government’s plan to monitor every email, phone call and website visit in the name of national security and crime-fighting.

Dominic Raab, the Conservative MP for Esher and Walton who obtained the new details, said: “It is deeply troubling that foreign authorities will be able to access all our phone, email, text messages, Skype and web-mail data.
“The Government has a lousy track record of its own in safeguarding this data. And if Whitehall can’t protect our privacy, what chance when it is shovelled off to Warsaw?”

Under the Communications Data Bill published last month, internet service providers and mobile phone companies will be forced to record all of their customers’ activity.
The times and details of calls and messages – although not their content – can then be accessed by police and the intelligence services.

Is this a deliberate misunderstanding on your part, tilting your head so the world looks how you want it to look to fit your pre-determined view?

Run_to_da_hills

Monty Burnz wrote: »

What does this have to do with what you are talking to your friends about before you buy?



Is this a deliberate misunderstanding on your part, tilting your head so the world looks how you want it to look to fit your pre-determined view?

You get an up and coming fascist administration like whats happening in America right now. If they are permitted to snoop through your e_mails and Facebook accounts no doubt they will do the same to your phone conversations.

You deny 9/11 on your blog and make a NFC purchase of bullets for your legally held shotgun for deer hunting you will be immediately red flagged as a potential terrorist, no doubt they will have an interest in listening in to your conversations.

Monty Burnz

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

You get an up and coming fascist administration like whats happening in America right now. If they are permitted to snoop through your e_mails and Facebook accounts no doubt they will do the same to your phone conversations.

How? And that report refers specifically to the UK, not the US, and that report specifically says that human rights will not be breached (e.g. right to privacy), so even if there was an up and coming fascist administration in the US (which there isn't), what would that report have to do with it anyway?

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

You deny 9/11 on your blog and make a NFC purchase of bullets for your legally held shotgun for deer hunting you will be immediately red flagged as a potential terrorist, no doubt they will have an interest in listening in to your conversations.

Who is monitoring everybody's purchases, blogs and so forth?

(although, in truth, the US would be much better advised watching the far-right nutters whose blogs you love as there are 4 times more far-right terrorist attacks in the US than all others combined, I think I recall reading)

Sonics2k

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Would you give your mate a receipt if he asked you for a loan of e20?.

If it was a transfer from my bank account, as is the case with this technology, one would automatically be set.

If I transfer money from my bank account to someone elses, it's immediately noted on my account. There's no difference.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Based on powers.
The authorities have every right to listen into any conversion if they suspect "terrorist" or subversive activity.

Defining "terrorist activity" is another thing.In America or even the UK someone that blogs about 9/11 being an inside Job could now be considered a potential terrorist and a treat to national security and have their phone conversations monitored.

Total stretching and has nothing to do with my post. Again.

You also -completely- ignored a section of that very article to try and twist it to your own opinion as Monty Burnz points out.

You accuse the likes of Obama of dishonesty, when your own posts are dripping with lies, half-truths and fact twisting to suit your own agenda.

Run_to_da_hills

Monty Burnz wrote: »

How? And that report refers specifically to the UK, not the US, and that report specifically says that human rights will not be breached (e.g. right to privacy), so even if there was an up and coming fascist administration in the US (which there isn't), what would that report have to do with it anyway?

The UK and Us are bed buddies when it comes to sharing information and their elite agenda to invoke fascism through any means possible.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Who is monitoring everybody's purchases, blogs and so forth?

That's certainly the direction where all this is heading.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

(although, in truth, the US would be much better advised watching the far-right nutters whose blogs you love as there are 4 times more far-right terrorist attacks in the US than all others combined, I think I recall reading)

So in other words anyone that speaks out about US Government policies should be under surveillance, rounded up and detained indefinitely in mental homes or FEMA concentration camps. Well that's certainly the way the US is heading when you have left wing fascism take control.

Sonics2k

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Well that's certainly the way the US is heading when you have left wing fascism take control.

Are you not seeing the amazing problem with that very sentence?

Monty Burnz

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The UK and Us are bed buddies when it comes to sharing information and their elite agenda to invoke fascism through any means possible.

Well neither of them have that agenda, but what does it have to do with anyone anyway? That report specifically refers to the UK authorities allowing foreign police to access UK phone records. The article has no relation to the point you were trying to back up, you can see that, right?

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

That's certainly the direction where all this is heading.

Perhaps it would be, if it weren't for that pesky respect for human rights that we tend to have in Europe:

A separate EU-funded research project, called Adabts – the Automatic Detection of Abnormal Behaviour and Threats in crowded Spaces – has received nearly £3 million. Its is based in Sweden but partners include the UK Home Office and BAE Systems.
It is seeking to develop models of "suspicious behaviour" so these can be automatically detected using CCTV and other surveillance methods. The system would analyse the pitch of people's voices, the way their bodies move and track individuals within crowds.
Project coordinator Dr Jorgen Ahlberg, of the Swedish Defence Research Agency, said this would simply help CCTV operators notice when trouble was starting.
"People usually don't start to fight from one second to another," he said. "They start by arguing and pushing each other. It's not that 'oh you are pushing each other, you should be arrested', it's to alert an operator that something is going on

"A lot of it is very academic and very science-driven [at the moment]. Our budgets are shrinking, our human resources are shrinking and we are looking for IT technology that will help us five years down the line in reducing crime and combating criminal gangs," he said.
"Within this Project Indect there is an ethical board which will be looked at: is it permissible within the legislation of the country who may use it, who oversees it and is it human rights compliant."

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

So in other words anyone that speaks out about US Government policies should be under surveillance, rounded up and detained indefinitely in mental homes or FEMA concentration camps. Well that's certainly the way the US is heading when you have left wing fascism take control.

Definitely the right-wing nutters should be monitored as they are by far the most dangerous people in America. If, like the recent right-wing terrorists such as the Sikh Temple attacker and the murderous right-wing militia who planned to kill Obama, they represent a danger to the public, they should be tackled by whatever means.

Will I Amnt

I for one would be delighted with a cashless society in the morning.
I'm not a terrorist so I don't really give a f**k that someone knows I bought a choc ice in Tesco on the way home from work.
Plus I don't have to handle notes from people who have recently pissed on their hands or wiped their arse or pulled the mickey off themselves.

I rarely use cash as it is.If I can pay with laser or visa that's the way I'll go,
Hurry up and bring it on.

Run_to_da_hills

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Definitely the right-wing nutters should be monitored as they are by far the most dangerous people in America. If, like the recent right-wing terrorists such as the Sikh Temple attacker and the murderous right-wing militia who planned to kill Obama, they represent a danger to the public, they should be tackled by whatever means.

Obama creates all these false flag events like the Aurura and Wisconsin to push his own UN agenda nothing more. He won't be happy until Martial law is fully implemented and his Fema Concentration camps start filling up of ordinary law abiding citizens that respect the American constitution that their fore fathers fought for..

If Hitler had NFC phone technology he would have tracked down and rounded up more Jews in a fraction of the time.

al28283

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Obama creates all these false flag events like the Aurura and Wisconsin to push his own UN agenda nothing more. He won't be happy until Martial law is fully implemented and his Fema Concentration camps start filling up of ordinary law abiding citizens that respect the American constitution that their fore fathers fought for..

why?

Monty Burnz

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Obama creates all these false flag events like the Aurura and Wisconsin to push his own UN agenda nothing more.

No he doesn't.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

He won't be happy until Martial law is fully implemented and his Fema Concentration camps start filling up of ordinary law abiding citizens that respect the American constitution that their fore fathers fought for..

The concentration camps that don't exist?

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

If Hitler had NFC phone technology he would have tracked down and rounded up more Jews in a fraction of the time.

Yes, he probably would have. How many people has Obama rounded up to date with all of his 21st century technology?

Sonics2k

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Obama creates all these false flag events like the Aurura and Wisconsin to push his own UN agenda nothing more. He won't be happy until Martial law is fully implemented and his Fema Concentration camps start filling up of ordinary law abiding citizens that respect the American constitution that their fore fathers fought for..

If Hitler had NFC phone technology he would have tracked down and rounded up more Jews in a fraction of the time.

Yeah you've been sprouting this for a few weeks now, but nothing has happened to even slightly indicate it a Martial Law or concentration camp implementation.