The biohack.me forums were originally run on Vanilla and ran from January 2011 to July 2024. They are preserved here as a read-only archive. If you had an account on the forums and are in the archive and wish to have either your posts anonymized or removed entirely, email us and let us know.

While we are no longer running Vanilla, Patreon badges are still being awarded, and shoutout forum posts are being created, because this is done directly in the database via an automated task.

Flat NFC tags

garethnelsonuk
garethnelsonuk
October 2015
edited October 2015
in RFID/NFC
A thought occurred to me just now inspired by my old "NFC tattoo" - how about coating a flat NFC tag in something solid and bioproof and implanting it to get better antenna coupling?

Comments

Displaying all 6 comments
  1. Benbeezy
    Benbeezy
    October 2015
    I have seen it done. I've seen people take a normal NFC chip and take it apart and coat it in silicone. This does give a lot better range, as he was claiming to be able to read it from about an inch away. but it also came with like 5 stitches and a lot more pain.
  2. Proxy
    Proxy
    First Anniversary Second Anniversary Third Anniversary Fourth Anniversary Fifth Anniversary Final Anniversary First Post 10 Posts 100 Posts You Look Familiar
    October 2015
    For the price of pain and a few more stitches? That honestly seems like a smoking deal in my eyes. Past those easy points what other cons would it have?
  3. fonix232
    fonix232
    October 2015
    Larger surface that can get torn and thus expose the internals, plus we don't exactly know what kind of effects does the 13MHz wavelength have on human biology at an extended time of use. 

    Oh and also as it would have a definitely different flexibility, it would be awkward to move around. A totally rigid thing would be less weird, but imagine a differently, but still flexible thing being inside you, an extra layer.
  4. trybalwolf
    trybalwolf
    First Anniversary Second Anniversary Third Anniversary Fourth Anniversary First Post 10 Posts 100 Posts You Look Familiar Paging Mr. F Fifth Anniversary
    October 2015
    @fonix232 I don't imagine it would be to bad having it under your skin, at least no worse than standard cosmetic silicone subnormal implant (stars, skulls, etc.).

    Also (assuming we are talking about passive chips here), you will only be exposed to the 13.56MHz waves as much as you scan it with a reader. There would be no constant exposure.
  5. garethnelsonuk
    garethnelsonuk
    October 2015
    Even with constant exposure, we're constantly bombarded by RF signals at all frequency ranges with no proven ill effects unless the amplitude is SERIOUSLY high and you're right next to the transmitter.
  6. Cassox
    Cassox
    Second Anniversary Third Anniversary Fourth Anniversary Fifth Anniversary Final Anniversary First Post First Anniversary 100 Posts You Look Familiar 1000 Posts 500 Posts 10 Posts Welcome Committee Paging Mr. F Have Some Cake We Have Touchdown I'm Not Dead Yet!
    October 2015
    Actually, check with Amal from DT. I know he's already done this as well. If I remember correctly, there was some issue with the parylene. He might still be developing it. I'm not sure.
Displaying all 6 comments