In article <ac5d434c030210047d03@[205.199.118.202]>, tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May) wrote: }At 8:52 PM 8/20/95, Hadmut Danisch wrote: }>These transponders are already used for many year. They inject }>them in pigs and cows to identify them. And some car manufacturers }>put the into the ignition keys as theft protections. } }The subcutaneous animal things are only detectable at very short ranges. }Typically, a vet (animal doctor) uses a handheld wand to pick up the }signal. Useful for tracking pets, farm animals, etc. Yep, and it uses a nine digit number, what convienience. }There has so far been no known uses of this on humans, at least as a matter }of routine. Possibly some developers have tried injecting themselves, for }the usual reasons. Nope, those are in the works, well biotelemetry devices are. }Implausible. The theft detectors are not picking up specific transponders, }just the "on" or "off" state of the things attached to clothing, books, }CDs, etc. (I say "things" because some of them are strips inserted in }books, some are tag-like things clamped to clothing, etc.) They'll need to change those, kids are having too much fun attaching them to the innocent before they leave the store.. }Again, the infrastructure is lacking. The simple detectors in stores would }have to be upgraded to track more sophisticated transponders. The stores }would have to cooperate, etc. Implausible. The infrastructure is in place for the implantable short range devices all that is needed is a reader at a credit terminal. No, I don't see this as being implemented. Check out the pattent office for some interesting new devices in the works. One is has wide bandwidth outgoing channel and a low bandwidth incomming control channel. Range on the outgoing channel is 300 yards. This is through the skin.