Well, a better statistic is the false positive rate. They have a one in a million false positive rate. If they did do a full scan, they would have 30 MILLION fa

Well, a better statistic is the false positive rate. They have a one in a million false positive rate. If they did do a full scan, they would have 30 MILLION false positives. If they improve their speed a 1000 fold, it brings their scan time to a day and a half. If they improve their false positive rate by a 1000, they would still have 30,000 false positive events. Edit: I guess the point is that the purpose of the device is not full scans, nor are full scans really needed, or maybe not even helpful.