Micro Dots. Other than guns - what else should they be used for? Discuss!

[applegrove]

Fingerprints for car parts
Dec 8th 2005
From The Economist print edition

Security: People have fingerprints, but objects do not—unless you spray them on in the form of thousands of tiny microdots, that is


"WHILE “smart dust” remains a technological fantasy, a distant cousin is already being used to protect valuable items around the world. The “microdots” produced by DataDot Technology, an Australian firm, are tiny polyester particles, just one millimetre wide, that can be sprayed on to valuable items such as car parts. Under ultraviolet light and a magnifying glass, any one of these thousands of dots can reveal the host vehicle's unique identity number. Of course, a car thief could try to scrape off the microdots, but their sheer number makes that impractical; a single dot is enough to identify a stolen component. Warning stickers enhance the dots' deterrent effect.

And it seems to be working: according to a study published by Australia's National Motor Vehicle Theft Reduction Council in 2004, thefts of BMWs are down more than 60% since the carmaker began using microdots in 2001; thefts of Subaru vehicles fell by more than 90%. Ford, Porsche, Audi and Lotus are also using the technique in Australia. And the idea is spreading. Mitsubishi and Volkswagen have been experimenting with the dots in Britain and Taiwan respectively, and Nissan uses them in America on some of its most expensive headlights. Microdots can also safeguard laptops, boats, farming equipment—almost anything, in fact. In 2004, police in Florida caught a corrupt parking-meter official using planted microdotted coins.

Advertisement
Though the idea of microdotting dates from the 1940s, it became economically viable only with the advent of laser etching in the 1990s. Las Vegas casinos were among the first to use the dots, in an effort to root out fake gambling chips. Australian investors then bought the rights, motivated in part by Australia's high rate of car crime. Even though steering-wheel locks, satellite tracking and immobilisers had helped to reduce car thefts, trade in stolen parts remained a problem. The use of microdots is changing that.

Creating the dots themselves is fairly straightforward. The hard part, says Ian Allen, DataDot's boss, has been convincing carmakers and insurance companies to adopt them. After all, the idea of spraying a car with dots sounds strange—but it is not as dotty as it seems. "

http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_VNQQDTD

[stillcool]

1. Micro-dots....

Philip Agee mentioned them in his CIA Diary book...that was published around 1972. Same technology?...

[applegrove]

2. I have no clue. I was thinking about guns in these last months. As

happens when our cities in Canada begin to suffer, and I thought there has to be a better way.

Then you end up in posts with NRA types - and they are very informative when it comes to american laws and it gets you thinking they whyfore & whereart of laws. There has to be a way for police to get information on ownership and type of weapon at the site of a situation. Was thinking of my pet and microchips.

Then I read the article in the economist.

[LunaSea]

3. herd management

http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/about/index.shtml

can you say moo....?

[applegrove]

5. Illegal arms dealers!

[ThomWV]

4. Acid

[applegrove]

6. I knew someone would say that. Why anyone would ever be tempted

to take acid I do not know. Perhaps to make more dead heads so they can have friends.

[Warren DeMontague]

7. As a deadhead

I'll try to ignore the nastier aspects of your ignorance-riddled remark. (Any Deadhead worth his or her salt will tell you, we don't need to "make more" of us.. shit, there's hardly enough tickets as it is) During my own "reckless youth", I spent enough time around people on various substances to know that the dumbest, meanest, most ignorant fuckers on the planet are usually the drunks, followed close behind by cokeheads (explains a bit about the guy in the WH, I think)... Most of the Deadheads I know are intelligent, thoughtful, creative, kind people, (Ann Coulter notwithstanding) and I know a lot of people with what I consider deep spiritual insights into the interconnectedness of all things and natural empathy for all of humanity, who would argue that they had their levels of that kind of awareness enhanced by their experiences with psychedelics.

But, to each his own. Personally, I can't understand why anyone would be tempted to belong to a church. That's just me.

[applegrove]

8. Sorry. I will admit that some illegal substances make for a placid

and otherwise law abiding populace (check out Nelson BC). But these drugs are dangerous for kids at times. And that unfortunately is when some experiments take place. And more than one life has been ruined or a mind blown - and resulting illnesses, etc.

Not my own life experience. But it is something that should be regulated against and not celebrated.

I'm not saying that deadheads or dope smokers do not lead worthwhile, creative, full lives. It is just that they support creeps with their habits. Confuse teens. And a mind is a terrible thing to waste. There are dangers. And they should be regulated against and enforced. It is always a shame when the course of somebodies life is set by decisions they make as kids. And that is not the case for people who get an innocent kick out of some drug - but those are the lucky ones. Some people get addicted. It leads to other things.

I'm all for medicinal dope, by the way.

[mike_c]

11. you know what I like about long time stoners and deadheads...?

They tend not to be judgemental about things they have so little apparent experience with.

[applegrove]

12. Hell I'm not perfect. Neither are deadheads.

[ThomWV]

35. What A Very Nice Thing To Say

It never occured to be, but you're right of course.

[Old and In the Way]

16. "And a mind is a terrible thing to waste."

Your programming was quite a success. I know plenty of sober people with wasted minds. They are the ones that never bothered to exercise them. They let the TV think for them, they believe in Bible tales, and they vote Republican.

And stop dragging strawmen, like kids, into your argument.

[applegrove]

19. My point about kids is that some of them end up as strawmen. Because

they got into drugs and for one reason or another - it destroyed their lives. It does happen.

[Warren DeMontague]

36. booze destroys a shitload of lives, too.

yet still you 'celebrate' it with your avatar.

The question, as always, is- does prohibition do any good, and is having a nanny state tell ALL adults they can't have a substance --because some people can't handle it-- the appropriate response?

[applegrove]

37. Alcohol doesn't lead to other drugs necessarily. And at the time

temperance came about - social change had occured. Men working in factories for the first time - brought home cash every week. They had the preverbial two cents to rub together. And for some families - the two cents went to booze. And it was a terrible social dilemma because there was nothing - no social safety net in place to feed or cloth or school the kids of an alcoholic. Alcohol was made illegal. Then mitigating effect of alcoholism was combatted. So society opened up again. Yes - alcohol is bad if used to excess. Some people in some families are gentically pre-programmed to become very ill if they drink one drop.

Alcohol - for most alcoholics - is not the hardest drug to quit. And its ill affects are long term.

There is a mix of policies affectig alcohol.

[Warren DeMontague]

38. I count at least two sentences of utter BS in your post.

"Alcohol doesn't lead to other drugs necessarily".

And what, precisely, DOES? If you've ever spent any time in a bar, you've noticed that alcohol leads to all kinds of shitty decision making.

"Alcohol - for most alcoholics - is not the hardest drug to quit."

Really? Are you an alcoholic? Ever been physically addicted to alcohol? Ever seen anyone with the DTs so bad they risked heart failure and required medical attention?

Listen, jack, I'm sure you think your intentions here are good, but you're spouting D.A.R.E. propaganda that is pure baloney, and I really don't think you have any idea what you're talking about. We'll have to agree to disagree. Peace.

[applegrove]

39. Peace.

[NuttyFluffers]

42. DARE propaganda helped make all my peers hardcore stoners

:7
well, for that nancy reagan, we thank you. we never really realized how shitty and out of his gourd ronnie was until we realized after being totally baked and watching rerun clips of ronnie on TV that his were the only lips moving in sync. couldn't be a better tip off that all y'all republican assholes were full of shit.
:evilgrin:

[applegrove]

43. Don't call me a repuke! That is what y'all means?

[NuttyFluffers]

60. remove hypersensitivity stick from sphincter and chill

it's called talking in the 2nd person. don't know half these posters here from adam, so why would they be included in "we" and why would you be excluded into the 'you' in "y'all"? just 'cause english is a piss poor language now to differentiate between 1st and 2nd person ain't my problem.

damn, exhibiting more paranoia than at a brownie party worrying who is gonna eat the very last one. :evilgrin: chill :smoke:

[applegrove]

63. No - I wasn't sure. I'm bad at pronouns. Cause I empathize and "you"

that sounds like me but actually means them - is peppered throughout my writing. Just verifying what you meant. Not a strength of mine.

[shanti]

47. oh good grief

PLEASE! get educated about "drugs" and stop listening to propaganda!

[applegrove]

48. Sorry. Have not been reading. Know from first hand experience. We

all know the kids who were into everything. And the ones who just drank & rarely smoked dope. You are not the only one who was ever young. You make it sound like doing drugs is such an exclusive thing - a special thing - only devout can really understand - I feel that way about cigarettes. Then once I've quite for a week the cloud of denial is lifted and I realize it is a big nothing. Nothing sacred or special.

[Warren DeMontague]

32. Well, we disagree. I happen to believe consenting ADULTS

should be free to make up their own minds about what they want to do with their own bodies. From a purely philosophical standpoint, I don't think it's any of the gummint's fucking business one way or the other- although from a practical standpoint, I think the Netherlands has the right track.

A mind is certainly a terrible thing to waste- and as another poster pointed out, while also taking you to task for your immediately dragging the perpetual drug war strawman ("kids") into your argument- there are lots of stupid fucking people running around high on little more than FOX News and the gas fumes from their monster trucks. Clearly, from your the two-dimensional, cartoon cliches contained in your posts, you don't know a whole hell of a lot about psychedelics. And personally, I don't have rose-colored glasses on about ANY substances, and I've been clean and sober (nothing stronger than green tea or coffee, for me) for YEARS.. But I know enough about it all to know that in terms of real danger, addictiveness, and damage to people's lives, not too much out there comes close to alcohol and nicotine. Heroin and Coke are clearly dangerous and addictive, but I'm of the opinion that a "harm reduction" approach combined with fully funded treatment and HONEST education is a more sensible social approach to those drugs than criminalization and increasingly expensive mass incarceration. Same with Meth- which is evil, but it's made from LEGAL ingredients, and you see people turning to it in precisely those places where the "drug war", mostly aimed at pot, has worked especially well.

I think if we could get past our fear-based, inquisition-like hysteria around psychedelics, we would find that for SOME people, they can be extremely benfeicial tools for insight, self-awareness, and understanding - as well as fascinating lenses through which consciousness can examine itself. Witness Leary's success at treating alcoholics with psilocybin before he was demonized. I don't think demonization OR celebration alone is the appropriate response to something that is NOT black and white -- honesty is the appropriate response IMHO... but you can't be honest about something if you don't know what you're talking about.

[applegrove]

45. As to your fist line on consenting adults - I agree that is the way

things should be except in areas that result in injury or death. Because kids have a lack on perspective (hey I was a teen once)on life and feel they are infalible. So they need to be regulated on cars & sex education and the like. Drugs - most are terribly addictive. And they can destroy a life in one day at times, sometimes within a month - but mostly within a few years a life could be permanently marred.

Alcohol doesn't work so fast for the most part. Unless you come from a family witout the enzyme to process alcholol at all.

[Warren DeMontague]

62. Again, you are misinformed.

If you really think alcohol can't destroy a life in a day, you've never seen an accident caused by a drunk driver or read a story about a frat pledge killed by alcohol poisoning.

arguing that "most drugs are terribly addictive" and somehow different than alcohol is not borne out by the facts, either. Some people can use alcohol recreationally, some cannot. This is identical to the experience borne out with most drugs. There are people who have done just about every drug under the sun and not had it destroy their lives, and there are people whose lives have fallen apart due to things like twinkies and video poker. Again, arguing that prohibition is magically warranted because those "bad" illegal drugs -which you're lumping into one big group, but really are all very different from one another- is a ridiculously facile, and ultimatly intellectually disingenuous, argument. For instance, the evidence continually bears out the FACT that marijuana is not physically addictive for most people (I won't say all because someone will pop up an anecdote about someone's cousin's brother who supposedly was "physically addicted" to it, but I really don't think that happens with that particular substance) and in terms of dangerousness, it is far, far LESS dangerous than alcohol and nicotine. That's a medical FACT. (Want to talk about substances that almost no one can use, particularly young people, without getting seriously hooked on, uh, cigarettes are BY FAR the worst offender there) ... and if you look at where the lions share of our "Drug war" expenditures and energy go, the drug war is essentially a pot war. It's a war on pot smokers, and its a total waster of money and destroyer of lives, far more lives than legal, regulated, TAXED marijuana- legal for ADULTS just like alcohol is- would ever destroy.

As for psychedelics, again, if you're lumping them in with your statement about how "most drugs are terribly addictive", its clear that you really don't know jack diddly squat about psychedelics. People generally don't get addicted to psychedelics the way they get addicted to alcohol, nicotine, heroin, etc etc. Those substances just don't work that way. Personally, when I was much younger, I dabbled in a few areas (deadhead and all, you know) but ultimately it was clear that, as you alluded to, I was one of those people who can't drink alcohol, and yeah, judging by my family history, I think there's certainly a genetic component there. And my life is interesting enough these days without having to alter my consciousness in other ways to get there. My experiences with alcohol, and the damage I've seen it cause (one of my best friends was killed by a drunk driver) could have turned me into a hard-core prohibitionist on EVERYTHING. But I don't think human nature responds very well to that tack, I think it causes far more problems than it ever "solves", and I firmly believe people have to make their own choices and mistakes. If someone is drunk or on drugs and commits a crime- drives a car, robs a bank, neglects their kids- then they're a criminal and should be dealt with as such. But turning people into criminals for nothing else than using a substance, I think, is ridiculous and fundamentally wrong. Far better, humane, and more effective, from my experience, to focus on treatment for the people who actually become addicted, whether that's to booze, or something else.

And I greatly disagree with your assertion that, for alcoholics, alcohol is not the hardest drug to quit. I was a regular pot smoker throughout my teens, and I had NO problem quitting that at all. And alcohol was a bitch to quit. My experiences as a youth with certain other chemicals (not too different from Bill Gates' take on the matter) were the kinds of things where I know I took away what I was supposed to learn from those experiences- There wasn't even anything remotely resembling 'quitting' involved. To paraphrase the Dead song, "I got what I came for, then was ready to go". In fact, the only drug I've ever heard alcoholics complain of having more trouble quitting than booze is.... drum roll please....


nicotine...


Shit, I've been in some AA meetings where I've wished I had brought an oxygen mask.

It's difficult to understand from your post- you agree that consenting adults should be free to make up their own minds 'except in areas that result in injury or death'.. Well, that's a pretty broad swatch for the government to control people, actually. Skiing can result in injury or death. So can driving a car. So can sex. And then, again, you bring kids into it. Lots of things, in society, are legal for adults, not for kids- alcohol, cigarettes, porn. I think it's intellectual laziness to continually defend the proposition of telling consenting adults what they can or cannot do with their OWN bodies (and turning large numbers of them into criminals, in the process) by continually dragging "kids" into it. If I'm having a debate about fried chicken, and I keep bringing up baseball to back up my points, what the fuck kind of debate is that? Yes, some things aren't for kids. But that doesn't justify, in my mind, a wholesale program of incarcerating millions of non-violent ADULTS for making choices -even dumb ones- about what to do their own bodies.

Prohibition didn't work with alcohol, and ultimately I think it will be proven to be a ridiculously ineffective, brutal, and crime-causing "solution" to the issue of other drugs as well. For the 40 Billion a year we spend on the DEA, we could fund a lot of education and treatment on demand. And most of that goes to fighting pot smoking, which I consider ludicrous. There is NO reason, in my mind, that pot shouldn't be legal, regulated, and taxed- for ADULTS.

[shanti]

46. well first off

you can quit calling it "dope", if you really do believe in medical marijuana, that is. your negative bias is apparent.

you might as well call ALL drugs "dope", for that matter.

[applegrove]

49. Will pot do?

[shanti]

61. yes n/t

[skids]

13. How would you know a deadhead broke into your house?

He'd still be there! :silly:

Hippy humor aside, I actually find it pretty funny that there are a good number of progressives out there that haven't figured out what a farce the whole War on Drugs is. Not just the law enforcement side of it, but all the pseudo-science propaganda and general prejudice that props it up.

[applegrove]

15. I find it funny that if someone thinks they would only make cocaine

legal - all problems would go away and dealers could make a living out of it. Nobody makes a living selling sugar.

[Old and In the Way]

10. "Why anyone would ever be tempted to take acid I do not know."

Because you haven't, I'm sure you don't. For those who have, most will chuckle at your self-imposed limitations.

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. The blue micro dots

seemed to be better than the green ones. :)

[leeroysphitz]

30. Green and blue???

I haven't seen anything but PURPLE and not since the mid 80's for those but then I'm (somewhat) young.

[proud2BlibKansan]

34. Yes you're just a babe

My friends and I were were discussing micro dots when you were watching Sesame Street. LOL

[DoYouEverWonder]

50. Giggle, giggle

You know I had my first cigarette when I was 12. I had my first joint when I was 14. By the time I was 22 there wasn't much I hadn't tried. So guess what, I somehow survived to live a happy, successful and productive life. Now pass the joint and let's stop arguing.

[leeroysphitz]

25. Wow ignorance seems to ABOUND on DU tonight... n/t

[applegrove]

26. Nobody has ever made it into a mental hospital and burdened for

life because of a weakness acid brought to the forefront - that may never have been activated?

[leeroysphitz]

28. and no one has ever been so admitted without it or from

issues brought about by an ignorant and repressive culture of conformity? Nice try but you'll have to do better than that.

[applegrove]

29. I agree that hate against gays or race should be illegal. So should

endemic structural problems caused by bias.

I think there should (and are, or used to be) laws against that too.

I think gays should drop a class action suit against wealthy mega-churches preaching hate.

[leeroysphitz]

31. Remember Arthur Miller. n/t

[DoYouEverWonder]

51. Would you like to site a few examples?

Yes some crazy people do acid and other drugs. But I don't think I've ever met anyone who went crazy because of acid. I'd like to see some documentation for your claim. Thanks.

[SPKrazy]

27. To break on through to the other side!

Acid, shrooms, and other stuff

tried it all in my day

not proud, nor ashamed of this.

did I break on through to the other side?

might have, but i don't remember!:hippie:

Did dance and dance and dance in the hot hot sun listening to the Dead

Also got lost in OKC

Somehow made it home.

Ergo, my belief in a higher power.

[killbotfactory]

33. I saw a documentary on LSD

A british guy took mescaline on live television. It looked like great fun, and to this day says it was a pretty neat experience.

The father of LSD recently turned 100, and still endorses it's use under some circumstances.

-----

"I had wonderful visions," Albert Hofmann said, recalling his first accidental consumption of the drug.

"I sat down at home on the divan and started to dream," he told the Swiss television network SF DRS. "What I was thinking appeared in colors and in pictures. It lasted for a couple of hours and then it disappeared."

Hofmann, who also had bad experiences with the drug, continues to insist it should be legalized for medical treatment, particularly in psychiatric research. But LSD's reputation has been as turbulent as some acid trips.

-----

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060110/ap_on_re_eu/switzerland_lsd_inventor

I've never tried it myself.

[Old and In the Way]

40. You might want to read "Doors of Preception" by Aldous Huxley

Fascinating read on the sensory filtering system of the mind. Something like 98% of the stimulus that is processed by your senses is disgarded. The certain parts of the brain acts as a filtering mechanism to create a continuing construct that is your normal day-to-day consciousness. LSD upsets the chemical balance in the filter mechanism, sorta throws the door wide open....the trip is all about fantastic mental constructs, solving koans, and, in a real sense, an awakening to a higher level of consciousness. I admit to taking more than my fair share of acid in the 70's. But eventually, the trips became predictable and less fun - I was becoming caught in a tiresome control war between Mr. Ego and Mr. Id. :-)

It can be dangerous, I think it affects everyone's individual personality differently. It can be the most beautiful and profoundly enlightening experience or it can be a literal waking nightmare. Make no mistake, it is a state of insanity (ie, not your normal, "sane" waking state). Very powerful stuff. I know it has changed my outlook on life and the nature of reality....in a good way.

[timtom]

52. You're remarks

speak volumes (as does your avatar).

[applegrove]

53. I'm not supposed to speak my mind when I OP something about

micro-dots and it turns into a pro-dead head link?

I was trying to get innovative. Sorry - I'm not going searching for documentation when this isn't the point of the originals post.

Fine with me if it turns into a discussion on some other topic. I was just trying to keep the conversation going - and apparently I managed. That. But I'll have to draw the line on research.

[Warren DeMontague]

54. Honestly, maybe you should have thought of that when you used a throwaway

two-line post to casually and snidely bash Deadheads. In case you haven't noticed (And not all Deadheads do drugs, either) there's a lot of us here on DU. We are, as they say, everywhere.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

55. If My Words Did Glow With The Gold Of Sunshine. And My Tunes, Were Played

on the harp unstrung. Would you hear my voice, come through the music. Would you hold it near as it were your own?


Don't sweat the small stuff impeach, sing it with me, it'll feel good! :)

[Warren DeMontague]

56. The man has a point.

:hippie:

[janx]

57. You cannot post the words MICRO DOTs and expect

anything else if you realize that some people in this forum are over forty years old...

:rofl:

[applegrove]

58. I got one CIA reply out of it too. Must have been in his or her 60s.

[DavidDvorkin]

9. Republicans

We'll know where they are at all times.

[applegrove]

14. LOL. (to myself) Don't laugh. I'm sure repukes have thought of it.

For us!!!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

20. This isn't like RF ID though, it isn't readily trackable until you already

have it in possession.

[applegrove]

22. I'm not saying replace the systems that work. I am saying so that

the gun, model, make, owner - could be identified in a few momments, in a situation.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

23. Oh Absolutely applegrove, I agree with your logic completely. But I

was responding to the other poster about tracking republicans and knowing where they were :)

[applegrove]

24. Sorry.

[mike_c]

18. vasectomy reversal (top THAT for unusual microdot uses!)....

http://www.maleinfertility.org/new-reversal.html

What's New in Male Infertility Treatment at Cornell
Vasectomy Reversal: The Microdot Method for Precision Suture Placement


Figure 2: Sutures (double aramed 10-0 monofilament 70 micron sutures) are exited precisely throughh the center of each microdot.

[applegrove]

21. Your picture aside - we are getting into a scary area.

[jody]

41. Why do you say guns? Gun serial numbers are effective/efficient and very

difficult to completely remove since metal retains the serial number impression for some distance below the surface.

[applegrove]

44. Cause Police cannot scan the serial number off a gun in a "situation".

Whereas with microcots - it might be possible to scan from afar. As the dots are on every surface of the gun - if it was painted on - like it is in mercedez car parts.

The whole micro-dot discussion has been coming up in the gun forums. Someone says it is wholly unfair that they cannot have a beebee gun - shaped like & in the colors of an assault rifle (exactly) .. and it gets one thinking. Why would police need to be able to tell one gun from another quickly? And of course..the same issue came up again today.

[-..__...]

59. "Should" be used for (other than guns).

Could be used for, sure... why not. "Should"? I don't think so.

If a gun owner/collector wishes to voluntarily have this technology applied to his/her firearms as a means of recovery in the event of theft, then fine.

Personally, I'd be opposed to the idea if this technology could in anyway be used (or lead up to), as a firearms registration database.

The following article suggests that the technology is workable without having to resort to "registering with an official government-type agency". However, I have my suspicions when it is
suggested that firearms "should" be marked with these micro-dots.

http://www.tsra.com/microdot.htm

"Recovering Stolen Firearms

Imagine this--you return home one evening and find your house ransacked. You run to where you keep your firearms and find the worst. Gone are your best rifles, pistols or your most prized possessions from your gun collection.

You call the police and they take a report. A few days later, they call and say they have recovered what may be some of your guns. However, no one can be sure since the thieves filed off the serial numbers and any other identifying marks. You know they are yours, but how can you prove it?"

""He (the collector) came and told me of his dilemma. He wanted a way to mark or 'register' his collection privately, without registering with an official government-type agency or without registering through any type of insurance company. The Micro-Dot was the solution to his problem," Roberts said."

[applegrove]

64. Well - you lost me at firearms registration database - because you

seem so afraid of that database - when really - guns are scarier and gun violence results in many more deaths a year .... what 20,000 or 30,000 than a database.