Verma estimates 75 per cent of products must be tagged as they move through manufacturing supply chains in the retail space for RFID to truly be successful for everyone and to realize its maximum benefit. And that's where the real importance of this pilot project lies.
RFID won't budge much beyond its stalled current level of use unless every retailer and supplier sees how the technology can quickly pay for itself and deliver the kinds of efficiencies and functions that truly make businesses better. Everyone must get on board. Proof of RFID's value must be real. The pilot must tell all and be a true and truthful test -- otherwise Canadian businesses will remain unconvinced. While it would definitely help the cause of RFID to have a good news story at the end of the project, Mr.
Wilkes insists the work being done by the consortium is not simply an industry effort to promote the use of a desired technology. We want to be able to quantify that benefit. We want to then come to our industry and say it makes sense. Follow us on Twitter: globetechnology Opens in a new window.
Report an error. Editorial code of conduct. And I was made into being the spokesperson for Satan, and actually I received death threats from groups of people after having conducted and posted the experiment. Why has it taken this long for a professional from industry to say something? I think that the community, the biohackers, the enthusiasts, they so much want it to happen. KM: Is the main problem with the implant the lack of interoperability between service applications?
Or it is a security or privacy issue for you? Or simply failure of the implant to do what it is supposed to do? AS: I think that in principle, it is the cost-benefit. So what is the cost of the technology? And what is the benefit? And is it worth anything to me? Has it enough worth to me to bear the cost of carrying an implant? And I think this is going to be the same with implantable technology and I think that it is good that we are past the NFC and RFID implant technology, and we are starting to talk about how this technology should be, and what would be that technology and how would we integrate this technology, and what kind of scenarios and what kinds of use cases.
If I put a sensor that is in my bloodstream and that sensor tells me things about my diet, and the way I live my life, that if we scientifically looked at it, could prolong my life by five or ten years, would that be interesting? If I eat healthier, and if I have this chip that I can share with my doctor, or whomever, is that worth anything or not? I think most people would agree that if I could have a warning three days before the stroke, then I do not have to go through that.
Then would you do that? And maybe you would not but then I think many would do that. What are some of the advantages and disadvantages to this approach? AS: If a perfect innovation methodology exists, please let me know. Friction occurs sometimes here since successful corporations have now fine-tuned [their] operations engine to be efficient, rationally managed, governed by routines and rules, striving for calculated outcomes, and its planning is seldom month-by-month-quarter-by-quarter.
KM: You know, wearing is different to bearing. In what way should implants be treated differently to wearables in design, development, and deployment? Because as I said, I think the two things that need to happen at the same time are finding out and experimenting.
We need to find a way to secure the process, the management, the governance. Subscribe Login Search. Do the chips ever go bad? And are there batteries that need to be replaced? Login and post your comment! Login Register Now Not a member? Handling Holiday Fulfillment Ed. Note: This article was previously posted at Retail TouchPoints. Labor shortages, stressed s More Best Practices ». More Case Studies ».
0コメント