The reason I'd use a biometric vs a keyed trigger lock is for speed and ease of use in the dark. If I have to give it a little squeeze to get it to release, zero concern. Does it secure the firearm? Yes. Is it 100%, no. Show me one that is.

p.s. in a random sampling, the twenty-three 15 year old boys in my algebra class, none of them own or plan to buy a flat piece of bent metal that precisely fits in a lock of this type, let along lock picking tools. The determination that this lock is no good is based on tests that have little to do with the intended function.

It was designed to reach death level G forces and maintain long enough to kill anyone who isn't wearing a g-suit. The funny thing is, it has been reported that some people are simply naturally resistant to G-forces. They are still researching why.

So technically it would kill like 99 percent of the people who rode it, but Urbonas factored in this possibility. Riders would be fitted with a biometric monitoring system. If one go around wasn't successful, for whatever reason, the coaster would not apply brakes to stop at the station and would cycle you through again before your brain had a chance to recover.

https://media.ccc.de/v/biometrie-s8-iris-en#video&t=77

Biometrics are a secure method of authentication/identification, because... tech 'n shit.

[author flagged as a spammer - redacted]

I think the main reason gun manufacturers don't make the biometric locks (as Obama and many other politicians call for) is fear of litigation when that lock fails.

To see safer guns (from children finding and using them) I would support a bill with some form of legal immunity from these types of lawsuits.

Congratulations. You've managed to capture the entire diversity of the US by visiting several times and not get shot or had a gun pointed at you. This is like forming an opinion about whether sharks will bite humans after you've laid on the beach once or twice and have never been bitten. Searching for some relevance here... and ... nope, none.

Agreed, if your gun is in a traditional safe, it's not much good when the burglars or home invasion psychos kick in your front door at 2 a.m. Jim Jeffries is indeed a funny guy, but like many who don't understand what "for protection" means to some homeowners here in the US, you might want to cite a bit more credible source or at least educate yourself.

Thanks to biometric safes and locking devices, it is quite easy to have a secured gun in a safe at arms reach, accessible to only one person, that can be unsecured, ready to fire in about 4 seconds. I know this to be true, because I have such a setup, and we practice what to do when the home alarm goes off just like we practice fire drills.

The distressing part is I absolutely hate having to be in such a situation. I'm no cowboy and this isn't the wild west, but when families around me are having their doors kicked in in the middle of the night by armed thugs, or having one or two fuckheads follow them up the driveway for an easy push-in robbery accompanied by beatings, shootings, molestation and sometimes killing, I decided that there would be no way I could live with myself if something tragic ever happened to my family at the hands of these nut jobs, knowing I might have been able to do something to stop it. And no, one can't relay on the local police to take care of these crimes. Around here, even with a top notch alarm system in the house that goes directly to dispatch, the cops usually arrive to clean up the blood and take statements, and almost never in time to stop the crime or catch the criminals.

Do you have house, car, fire or life insurance? Sure, but you hope you'll never have to use it. So, what's so unbelievable about a gun for protection? What do you suggest? You appear to think it's silly to state it's for protection... so does one simply relying on hope, faith or good luck in never having to witness your wife or child being duct taped to a chair while criminals rummage through your house, or having their head kicked in or bloodied on the end of a baseball bat?

Just a suggestions, but try to spend some time as an actual resident in a country before you pretend to understand it, consider yourself fortunate that you don't live in such a situation, and for fucks sake stop with the snide, morally superior judgement of those who do. If you can muster that, on a guess that you might be from NZ but really don't know, I'll stop telling everyone that Kiwi's really do fuck sheep, especially on National Lamb Day when it's a competition rather than just a hobby.

Have fun.

1...2...3...4...5. 5 out of 5 that are bullshit, misleading, or just plain bad ideas.

Generating power from your bike and/or water pipes. BS and misleading.
Biometrics, already demonstrated to be -way- too easy to fool, and there is no way to revoke them. Won't even begin to address the misleading claims that "as always, you can opt in or out of the system."
Mind-reading - right. They can't even manage natural language accurately, after spending 25 years on commercial products. I'm sure brain scans are easier, though.
The gaps between information haves and have-nots will cease to exist. Anyone that believes that, raise your hand. Anyone?
Analytics, deciding for you what you want to see. Because living 100% of the time in your own personal echo chamber is such a great way to stay in touch with reality. The knowledge level of Faux News viewers provides a reasonable estimate of how well that works.

In short, total bullshit. But what else would one expect from IBM, a company that sells nothing else.

Britsh people write good (better?)
http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/loser-britains-identity-crisis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_identity_card_(United_Kingdom)

Biometrics in the patriot act:
http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/05/biometric

This bill has sponsors in the senate
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703954904575110124037066854.html

__________________
If you read those links you would know that biometrics aren't needed to prevent illegals working here in the USA.
So the government is not quite telling the truth.
However it will make it harder for hoods to steal checkbooks when their id card doesn't match their fingerprints. No doubt the fingerprint machine will have handcuffs built in.

Department of Homeland Security. That's reason enough to not hold the Olympics in the USA. I'm a Caucasian male in his mid-twenties with no criminal record and I don't dress like a hippie or a terrorist, yet whenever I arrive at a US airport, I am treated like one.

On my first post-9/11 trip to the US, I was disgusted by the security measures at my departing airport in Düsseldorf, Germany. But compared to the arrival at JFK, it was a fucking breeze. Heavily armed guards on an airport? As if we landed in bloody Beirut.

We traveled in a group of four and one of us, a French of Tunesian heritage, was snatched and detained in a backroom for three hours while the rest of us where searched thoroughly and stripped of all electronic equipment (notebooks, mobile phones, MP3 players). They made an image of the only unencrypted HDD and kept the other three notebooks. They were mailed to our home addresses four months later. All the while we were barked at and ordered around. Now, all four of us spoke English rather well and were well dressed, so I can't even imagine what it's like for many others.

Your DHS demands more information about me in advance to any flight than my own bloody mother knows. And that's from a country that is part of the Visa Waiver Program. Fuck, crossing the intra-German border prior to '89 was more pleasant than travelling into the US as a foreigner. Biometric passport, Orwell would be proud.

Oddly enough, the Travel Promotion Act, intended to lure visitors back into the US, aims to impose a $10 fee upon entry into the US. That's some fucking logic.

Edit: "Data helps prevent crime before it happens. Smarter public safety for a smarter planet." <<-- that's an IBM info tablet on airports and again, Orwell would be proud.

surely if there are enough people out there who know how to do this, the banks should get their finger out of their Ass and add some real security measures?

biometrics: fingerprint or signature (easy to fake a signature, but almost impossible to fake the pressure points you create when you write your signature and the speed you write it)

>> ^leveric:
Radio tracking sounds a bit scary, but what's wrong with biometric information? On file retinal scans seem like a nice way to help prevent identity theft.

That wouldn't be so bad if retinal scans would remain an elected process, not a compulsory one.

Radio tracking sounds a bit scary, but what's wrong with biometric information? On file retinal scans seem like a nice way to help prevent identity theft.

LOL!
________

Normally I would scoff at a biometric lock on a trailer, but if it's on cinder blocks then there's a WORLD of difference.

In reply to this comment by Camhuffman:
Actually I just bought one for my cinder-block foundation trailer.
In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
You're right, shatterdose. However, people who would buy something like this would most likely be well inside the upper-income bracket, and the thieves who prey on upper-income targets are smarter and more resourceful than most. Obtaining a fingerprint from their intended victims probably wouldn't be too difficult if they were determined. They could lift it off their cars, mailboxes, or even off the door handle itself and then proceed accordingly. However I believe the main point of this video is that a supposedly perfect lock was beaten in more than one way, and without great difficulty.

don't forget the privacy aspect to this - with the new locks comes the 'requirement' to submit your prints, and in future other biometric collection and storage will be 'required' by companies using those kinds of locks.

For those who like to go right to the highlights,
After a three-minute intro, here’s a rough breakdown:
Minute 4: 3D technologies, with traditional screens and “fogscreens”
Minute 8: networked cars/smart houses. This includes a segment of the DARPA Grand Challenge: completely autonomous vehicles navigating a desert obstacle course.
Minute 18: humanoid robots, including a background on Honda’s ASIMO
Minute 24: future in cyber-security (yep, hackers still exist!)
Minute 31: next generation surveillance and biometric systems, including not only photographing citizens, but identifying as well.
Minute 38: archival recovery; holographic crystals with microscopic images.