I dismissed this guy a long time ago as a Microsoft (or more precisely, mediocre and big-company biased) shill -- then I read a few of his articles and gained a bit of respect for him.
And then I read this and I'm back to square one.
Forest/trees man. He just sounds like he's trying too hard to hand-wave away serious flaws in biometrics by trying to reassure us "well, it's not likely to happen to you personally, so you shouldn't worry about it," which is always always the worst, and perhaps most dangerous privacy argument ever given -- because of its unreasonable effectiveness against the "common man."
And then I read this and I'm back to square one. Forest/trees man. He just sounds like he's trying too hard to hand-wave away serious flaws in biometrics by trying to reassure us "well, it's not likely to happen to you personally, so you shouldn't worry about it," which is always always the worst, and perhaps most dangerous privacy argument ever given -- because of its unreasonable effectiveness against the "common man."
Done with this guy, I am.