If I have to choose the organisation that stores and manages my biometric details, I would prefer a democratic elected government much more than any private company. With an elected government , I can at least undo my mistake at the next election. When Tim Cook calls the democratically elected EU institutions crap, this just confirms my point. I don't want to put the control over my biometric details in the hands an arrogant CEO, who thinks he is allowed much more than any other person because his company is so successful.
Well you can change your vote, but restrictive legislation is almost never repealed so your mistake continues to bite your ass to remind you never to give the government an inch. At least it should do. With Apple or any other commercial enterprise, you have at least the option to 'not' use them; with legislation, there's no choice. Actually TC said the "ruling" was "political crap". Trolling based on a lie and opinion is sooo 101.
I see a lot of negative reactions. My own predilections run in the direction of protecting privacy from Big Brother, so I agree with that sentiment.
However, isn't fingerprint tech a form of biometrics? If that can be walled-off, why not, say, an iris scan?
That's an interesting question. Though dated, I have some experience in fingerprint tech. In 1967-68, I worked for IBM on a project for the Clark County, NV (Las Vegas) Sheriff's Department -- where we converted hundreds of thousands of index cards into a digital format for inclusion into a database. The index cards contained typed/handwritten summary information about anyone who came in contact with the Sheriff's Department.
The project lasted over a year, and I spent a lot (a whole lot) of time with Sheriff's department personnel. One of the things I learned was that finger prints weren't an exact form of identification. Rather, they were used as a filter to narrow down the search to individuals whose fingerprints had similar characteristics. At that time, the evaluation of the filtered candidates was done by hand. I suspect that tech has changed that, but I don't think it is, yet, a fully-automated process of identification.
A somewhat surprising finding was that the prevailing attitude within the Sheriff's Department was that people should not be forced/required to register guns that they buy/own. It was explained to me that this would allow the Federal Govt. to confiscate the guns on a whim
FWIW, I've never owned or had a gun.
Sheriffs are generally a good first line of defense against the Federal government and the potential for constitutional rights trampling.
Example: Not so long ago this organization was was making a concerted effort to recruit sheriffs nationwide to join this organization. https://www.oathkeepers.org/about/
Biometric technology is growing by leaps and bounds and its god to know that the government wants to integrate products funded by them with such big names. Hopefully this endeavor bears fruit in the future.
Comments
Actually TC said the "ruling" was "political crap".
Trolling based on a lie and opinion is sooo 101.
Example: Not so long ago this organization was was making a concerted effort to recruit sheriffs nationwide to join this organization. https://www.oathkeepers.org/about/