3 ms·
Your mother doesn't view you through a 0.3MP camera in a dimly lit room with no flash when deciding if the person in front of her is her child. Further, if I t
by emidln 6y ago
Your mother doesn't view you through a 0.3MP camera in a dimly lit room with no flash when deciding if the person in front of her is her child.
Further, if I take a high resolution photo of you, and then go to your mom and ask for money by presenting her the picture, she won't accept that picture as proof that I am you (although she may suspect I'm blackmailing or otherwise threatening you). This, moreso than qualms about the resolution/quality of the sensor is the GP's point. If the sensors are accurate, that specific set of bits that is translated as your fingerprint will not change. If someone knows those bits, it's extremely likely they can convince the sensor they are you. From our example, once I have your picture, I can tell your mother I'm you--and she'll believe me!
- dustinmoris 6y agoSo your qualm is low quality biometric scanning, not biometrics itself? So we agree that biometrics are the most secure form of authentication and we are only debating on the quality of the technology, which we know is getting better day by day, yeah?
- emidln 6y ago> Further, if I take a high resolution photo of you, and then go to your mom and ask for money by presenting her the picture, she won't accept that picture as proof that I am you (although she may suspect I'm blackmailing or otherwise threatening you). This, moreso than qualms about the resolution/quality of the sensor is the GP's point. If the sensors are accurate, that specific set of bits that is translated as your fingerprint will not change. If someone knows those bits, it's extremely likely they can convince the sensor they are you. From our example, once I have your picture, I can tell your mother I'm you--and she'll believe me! You skipped the second paragraph, so I helpfully requoted it.
- GranPC 6y agoIt rather sounds to me like you have run out of arguments.