posted on Jan, 28 2007 @ 07:49 PM
You really can't describe that ink thing as a tattoo chip. There is no chip.
I haven't been able to tell what they're doing, actually. They don't have any patents filed that I've been able to get my hands on. A tatted bar
code in RF absorber wouldn't work well as I posted back on the last thread involving that stuff.
It might be as some one posted late, it's not really a bar code as they described as much as it's a collection of absorbers with slightly different
resonant points, being that there's more than one company with a similar technology. At any rate, you'd have to have maybe 30-40 points to assign an
ID number to everyone. (don't know the world populace at the moment, too lazy to look)
If that's what they're doing, you'd have to get close or run people through a pen to separate out the returns from everyone else nearby.
But that wouldn't be related to the hafnium oxide insulator trick that you're posting about.
Smaller chips wouldn't necessarily hold more information. Whether or not the part would shrink at all depends on whether it's pad-bound or
logic-bound. You have to have big transistors and structures to handle certain types of I/O. The little 65nm transistors won't get it for I/O,
they're only good for on-chip logic, they can't even drive cross-chip data lines. Most medium sized logic parts like the verichip and other stuff of
that complexity and type are pad bound, meaning the I/O structures involved with coil modulation, rectification of the incoming interrogator field to
provide power and so on, are larger than the logic involved. You can't shrink the part smaller than the I/O ring. So even if you had really small
logic structures, it ends up being a dot in the center of a big pad/IO ring. No gain.
If you have a Pentium sort of part, the logic inside the pad ring is far larger in size than the pad ring. So in that case, shrinking the logic
feature size will shrink the part, since the part is logic bound. At some point, the pads will come together in a ring and at that point, further
logic shrinkage won't help reduce the part size.
However, for a part that has to run on millionths of an Amp like a passive RFID part, especially one that has to use that little bit of power to run
some EEROM bits, you will not be using 45nm logic, because that's nuts. You'd use big, cheap 180nm super low power stuff. Because the hafnium oxide
trick is for reducing leakage in super dense logic parts like CPUs. It isn't really applicable here. Doubly so if you're talking that ink trick,
since that doesn't use logic, or any sort of integrated circuit at all.
At any rate, more storage on an implant would be nuts. What good would it serve? What would the incentive be? Distributed relational data bases
wouldn't need it. If I were an NWO designer, if such exists, I would never put any data on there other than an ID number and some sort of CRC or hash
to tell me if you'd screwed with it. After all, you'll be out of reach 99.9999% of the time. I can't possibly update the info unless I have you
present in front of a chip interrogator. Nor can I access it. And if you destroyed or altered it, I'd lose the data. The only point of having local
storage would be for those cases when the police or whatnot might need to get information on you and were not in reach of a radio link of some sort,
and that's unlikely.
Edit: clear up a bad turn of phrase
[edit on 28-1-2007 by Tom Bedlam]