Bluetooth stickers help you find things when you lose them

StickNFinds are Bluetooth location stickers the diameter of a quarter (but thicker than a quarter). You attach them to television remote controls, pets, children, or other things that you need to locate. The batteries last about a year. The StickNFind smart phone application helps you find your missing items and life forms. It is also advertised as a kind of early warning system: "stick the Stick-N-Find on your wife’s car. Once she pulls in the driveway, you get a notification, clean your mess, and go wash dishes before she comes in." That is some fast dishwashing.

The company that makes StickNFind is seeking $70,000 on Indiegogo. So far they've received close to $40,000 with 42 days left in the campaign.



    1.  Put a stickNfind on it (or it’s case), then use your friend’s, spouse’s, roommate’s, etc phone to find it!

  1. this is a great idea.
    I read the quote about washing the dishes before your wife gets out of the car to my roommate. he goes “more like put the joint out and turn off the porno.” XD

  2. I believe you misunderstand, the idea is to actually be in the act of washing dishes when your wife walks in, this is often even better than having the dishes washed already (your strenuous efforts easily overlooked).  Pro Tip: Be surprised when she comes in, because you were washing dishes SO HARD that you didn’t even notice she was home!  

    1.  This sort of trick might make up for the fact that my lady friend will no longer need me for the most frequent task of finding where she left things.  

      Two questions

      1. Is it that the blue tooth antenna is not directional that you can’t have a round radar showing the direction?  ( I would think you could add that funcion based on having the thing assume in that if things get further away that they are behind you, etc….  Maybe put a little compass in the sticker.

      2.  Does the signal not fade as the battery loses power, wouldn’t that cause everything to look far away at the end of the year?

      ok 3

      3.  How fine is the resolution?  If I move 6 inches closer to something does it know that or do I have to move feet to pick something up?

  3. I think these would be great to drop into my kids’ shoes ala Nike+.  Cut a little mold under the insole, and then be able to stress a little less in places like disneyland.

    1. Aren’t children a little large to lose sight of if they’re within 30 feet of you, which is the range of Bluetooth? I mean, if you can’t see them when they’re that close, you’re probably in a mosh pit. Or a Justin Bieber concert, so they’re already lost. Or…?

        1. I think it depends on the strength of the reader, because the RFID is just a passive chip that you bounce the signal off of. I have heard around 40′. The only problem I can think of here is triangulation. The bluetooth chip is active and can give a second reference point to help isolate the location. One reference point and ‘ping’ on an RFID ship would probably be harder to map. Also RFID is not as ubiquitous as bluetooth on smartphones.

  4. Reminds me of the Alien motion detector. +10pts if you make it make that creepy sweeping noise as well.


  5. “the first feature is a radar screen that will display all your devices in a familiar radar like screen…”

    i must be out of it, as i don’t have any radar screens to base my familiarity

  6. As if this device will be used only to find “lost objects”.
    In the 19th century Walt Whitman wrote about the Right to Loaf, an idea in opposition to hard working, Puritanical America.

    It’s time for people to understand they have the right to be somewhere free of detection and that includes people’s partners or high school kids who decide to cut a class or the whole day.

    Constant monitoring of human beings does nothing to insure security or safety but security has become a big business that has convinced too many people with any authority over others that it does.

    1. Yeah, I envision MiB furtively sticking random citizens with these things.  They’ll need a velcro model, too, so they can just flip them like Spider Tracers at passerby.  Then they just need to make sure there’s always an agent within range of each taggee.  Hmmm, new word? 

  7. Not that he’s anything like a dead ringer or anything, but the guy looks juuuuust enough like Jason Jones that when he started talking about the Virtual Leash feature at 1:37, I half-expected the little girl to explode when she got too far from the phone.

    1.  I also recognized this from one of Doctorow’s books.  ‘Makers’?  I don’t remember which…

      1. It was Makers indeed, and that was my first thought on seeing this article. Finally, Cory can stop all that tiresome production of actual interesting original content and get down to the real brass-tacks hard grind of endless patent suits. That’s what makes the economy tick.

      1. Paranoid much?  It has a tiny radius.  Any human wearing one is going to be within easy sight of you.  You also need to somehow get the tag on them.  If someone is breaking into your house and putting tags on your clothing, I think you have WAY bigger problems than the fact that when you are in plain sight they can also pick you up on their hand held.  

        If you have a psycho stalking you, this isn’t going to make it any easier for them.  Relax.

        1. An employer could track an employees by attaching something like this to the employee’s car or dropping it in a bag, purse, etc. A “friend” could do the same thing. Maybe this device doesn’t quite have those capabilities but you can see one coming that does.

          Paranoid? No, but protective of my civil liberties and privacy and thinking the future doesn’t look too good in those respects.

          1. To me it’s the same thing as testing employees for drug use; a total abuse of power and disdain for civil rights. people who say it shouldn’t bother anyone unless they have something to hide might as well line up for their microchips now, before the rush. (semicolon alert!)

        2. Please don’t condescend. Myself and about 2/3 of all the women I know have been stalked by someone we met or had someone we dated (or married) aggressively monitor and track us. It’s quite common. I’m concerned about devices that make it easier for people to be monitored constantly by the state, corporations & employers, by “psychos” (by which you seem to mean random strangers) but also by the statistically most likely people – abusive partners (usually – from a strictly statistical standpoint again) these are men. 

          It would be very easy for someone whom you know casually, or whom you are trapped in an abusive relationship with, to make use of this to harass you. Monitoring where you are going, when you leave, when you return, how long you stay away, who you spend time with, these are very common acts of abusers, and this would absolutely make it easier for them. 

          1.  You said it better than I did. Thanks. I hope it gets through to some of those who feel no threat due to their skin color, gender, sexual orientation, or religion, the ones who can’t imagine being targeted by the people who look  just like them.

          2. First, I never said anything about random strangers. My best friend who was stalked was stalked by a “psycho”, who was her ex-boyfriend. Anyone stalking anyone gets a solid “psycho” rating in my book.

            More to the point, you are missing my point.  My point is that this, from a purely technological point of view, can’t do what you fear.  No one can stalk you with it.  It finds stuff within a few tens of feet radius.  That is it.  Your stalker has to be looking at at you in order track you in which case he can just,  you know, use his eyes.  

            More to the point, if there is someone who has that much access where they could covertly put a tag on you, and these are not that small, so I am struggling to figure out where they could hide it, without you noticing, they are close enough to get your cell phone.  This glorified RFID tag can’t track you to the ends of the earth, but your cell phone can.  A reasonably technologically literate person can drop a stealthed program that reports your every single move via GPS.  I have such a program sitting on my phone for finding it if it is lost or stolen.

            I’m not saying that your fears of stalking aren’t valid, just that this is the wrong technology to be afraid of.  Your cell phone is vastly more capable and a few orders of magnitude more scary.  Hell, a boring old camera is scarier and can track you better.  Worrying about this glorified RFID tag is like worrying about the effects of high altitude solar radiation while you are in a crashing airplane with its wings ripped off.

          3. rattypilgrim, you can only get so much out of devices this small. In order to get to appreciable stalker distances, you have to go up significantly in antenna size and power.  Guess what?  THOSE device already exist.

          4. Thanks, that information is relevant to me and addresses my concerns. Whenever I see articles about tracking devices, I am concerned if these issues are not directly addressed.

            I see no need to “relax” about that, because that is one of the first things we should ALL be concerned about when there are new technologies waved around excitedly – how do they affect the situation of the most vulnerable? 

            Too often the default assumption is that we shouldn’t be so suspicious. Why shouldn’t we? Aren’t there a lot of vulnerable people who are abused every day in all kinds of ways? And isn’t technology complicit in that alongside everything else? Nothing makes technology by default be a neutral force.Therefore, convenience, or simple newness is not enough for me to be excited about tech unless I know it isn’t going to make things worse for people.

  8. You could have an entire market for disc golfers if you could loose the light and speaker option, hopefully allowing it to be more arrow dynamic. I would love to see this, even help push it here in Austin, tx.either way, I am going to try this existing version.

Comments are closed.