Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Identix (IDNX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ron Ohio who wrote (11836)	1/4/1999 5:34:00 PM
From: jean	Respond to of 26039

FYI...LexisNexis now has sites on airport and banking security as well as a hospital and health services site. Jean

To: Ron Ohio who wrote (11836)	1/4/1999 6:07:00 PM
From: David	Respond to of 26039

I haven't seen the Gartner report (who wants to spend that kind of money?), but here are two possible reasons: (1) Iris recognition differentiates between users probably better than any other biometric system. (2) It is expensive, but it doesn't have to be. By 2002, Gartner is betting it will be cost-competitive. Having given those reasons, I am not convinced. It's one thing to have a biometric that differentiates better than any other; it's another thing to have one that adds value to the application. As far as I can tell, fingerprints give you all the differentiation you might need for any given purpose. Second, no matter what the cost, there are a lot of places where cameras just aren't going to be as convenient as fingerscanning -- such as portable computers, many POS devices, and consumer items, including phones and cars. Finally, iris recognition appears to be later to the starting gate. By the time it gets there, it could be too late. Unless a major biometric firm wants to take over the technology. We've seen that before.

To: Ron Ohio who wrote (11836)	1/4/1999 6:56:00 PM
From: steve	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 26039

Ron, They must know something... The only thing that I might be able to add to Davids post is that the existing database for fingerprints would be a strong argument for fingerprints for the criminal element. It has been suggested that being intoxicated or doped up hinders Iris scanning results. Customer base for the jails seem to imbibe a bit. Might hinder the Friday night crowd from getting some last minute cash at ATMs. Maybe even difficult during the cold season <sneeze> X>) Then again, you have to touch the fingerprint sensor(excluding DDSI, if it works). A possible concern could be sanitation. I haven't seen anything addressing that. Don't even know if that is a concern. I'm kind of looking at it from a six of one or a half a dozen deal. There is room for both and as David suggests, IDX might be looking... steve