An article on BBC mentions how little iris scanning has actually been tested, and that China, for instance, is refusing to use it because of possible dangers, or at least, perceived dangers. Which has me wondering, could there be actual dangers from iris scanning, say a malfunctioning laser damaging the eye? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3003571.stm -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
At 09:08 AM 05/07/2003 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote:
An article on BBC mentions how little iris scanning has actually been tested, and that China, for instance, is refusing to use it because of possible dangers, or at least, perceived dangers. Which has me wondering, could there be actual dangers from iris scanning, say a malfunctioning laser damaging the eye?
One thing the article said was: > The report found that iris recognition did better than most > but one manufacturer's claim of a 0.5% false identification rate > ballooned to 6% during the DOD tests. > With 13 million people currently on the FBI's watch list, > any large scale biometric system could mean millions of people > being detained when crossing borders. While the point they're trying to make is about false positives, the THIRTEEN MILLION PEOPLE ON THE FBI WATCH LIST just kind of slides by. That's equal to 5% of the US population, on Federal watch lists. (Yes, obviously some of those are foreigners, but then half the US population are young enough that hopefully almost none of them attract Federal attention...) What an outrage!
On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 11:04:34AM -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
One thing the article said was: > The report found that iris recognition did better than most > but one manufacturer's claim of a 0.5% false identification rate > ballooned to 6% during the DOD tests.
> With 13 million people currently on the FBI's watch list, > any large scale biometric system could mean millions of people > being detained when crossing borders.
While the point they're trying to make is about false positives, the THIRTEEN MILLION PEOPLE ON THE FBI WATCH LIST just kind of slides by. That's equal to 5% of the US population, on Federal watch lists. (Yes, obviously some of those are foreigners, but then half the US population are young enough that hopefully almost none of them attract Federal attention...) What an outrage!
Yes, I noticed that. I was wondering (hoping, actually) that a large portion of those were outside the US, but even so... -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
hi,
Thats the fuzzy factor and that limits the scope of
iris scanning.By the way how many people really get
caught by iris scans?
Sarath.
--- Harmon Seaver
On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 11:04:34AM -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
One thing the article said was: > The report found that iris recognition did better than most > but one manufacturer's claim of a 0.5% false identification rate > ballooned to 6% during the DOD tests.
> With 13 million people currently on the FBI's watch list, > any large scale biometric system could mean millions of people > being detained when crossing borders.
While the point they're trying to make is about false positives, the THIRTEEN MILLION PEOPLE ON THE FBI WATCH LIST just kind of slides by. That's equal to 5% of the US population, on Federal watch lists. (Yes, obviously some of those are foreigners, but then half the US population are young enough that hopefully almost none of them attract Federal attention...) What an outrage!
Yes, I noticed that. I was wondering (hoping, actually) that a large portion of those were outside the US, but even so...
-- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com
At 11:04 AM 5/7/03 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: ...
While the point they're trying to make is about false positives, the THIRTEEN MILLION PEOPLE ON THE FBI WATCH LIST just kind of slides by. That's equal to 5% of the US population, on Federal watch lists. (Yes, obviously some of those are foreigners, but then half the US population are young enough that hopefully almost none of them attract Federal attention...) What an outrage!
Yep. Along with the obvious civil liberties problems there, this implies some incredible level of waste of resources monitoring and harassing mostly innocent people, while spending far fewer resources on actually catching the guys shipping the Pakistani nuke in and loading it on a truck for shipment to D.C. --John Kelsey, kelsey.j@ix.netcom.com PGP: FA48 3237 9AD5 30AC EEDD BBC8 2A80 6948 4CAA F259
participants (4)
-
Bill Stewart -
Harmon Seaver -
John Kelsey -
Sarad AV