Just thought you might be interested in seeing this article. I know here in Texas that Kroger and Heb are doing fingerprint assisted quick check out as well. There is actually a digital fingerprint machine in our little towns Brookshire Brothers to go along with your check cashing. Eeek.

Speeding Up The Checkout Line With Biometrics March 13, 2002

A Seattle supermarket next month will begin using a service that lets shoppers use fingerprints to authorize payment for groceries. By Jennifer Maselli

Customers at the Thrift Way supermarket in Seattle next month can speed through the checkout, using personal ID numbers and their fingerprints to authorize payment for groceries.

"It's really about customer convenience and security," says Paul Kapioski, president and owner of Thrift Way, which is using biometric E-payment software from Indivos Inc. to set up the service. "For one, you won't have to dig your credit cards out of your purse or wallet, and you're assured that no one else is using your cards in our store." He adds that deployment was relatively simple because existing point-of-sale machines didn't have to be replaced. Readers on the credit-card machines at the checkout counters capture customers' fingerprints and send encrypted data to one of Indivos' four data centers. That fingerprint is matched against the one scanned into the database when the customer enrolled in the program. After authentication, the transaction is routed through conventional financial networks like any other credit-card or debit-card transaction.

The use of biometric identification for E-payment authentication has been slow to catch on in the United States. Analysts have said biometric technology makes perfect sense for E-payments and will help lower the risk of identity theft, but there have been few deployments. One barrier to deployment is that the United States lags far behind Europe and Asia when it comes to wireless technologies, says James Van Dyke, research director for research firm Jupiter Communications.

Another barrier is that there are too many options, Van Dyke says. "There are about 12 different types of biometric authentication and verification technologies out there, and that will only confuse consumers and inhibit standardization," he says. The industry needs to standardize on two or three technologies, he says, adding that the ones that seem to make the most sense right now are fingerprint and voice scanning because they're less-intrusive and data-intensive compared with iris and facial scanning.

It will be about five years before biometrics infiltrates the E-payments space, analysts say, but use of the technology by the government and businesses could help consumers grow accustomed to the idea.

Businesses mostly use biometrics for employee authentication. For example, Symetric Sciences Inc., a Montreal company that develops software to track clinical trials of pharmaceutical products, has embedded NetNanny Software Inc.'s BioPassword technology in its products. Pharmaceutical company employees who use Symetric Sciences software are authenticated based on the rhythm of their typing. BioPassword, which is priced at $100 per seat for 50 users, records and ties a person's unique typing style to that individual's network account for user authentication. It doesn't require special hardware and is installed on a corporate network, with each desktop running a BioPassword client.

-- Doreen (animalwaitress@yahoo.com), March 20, 2002

Answers

Krogers tried that in mich last year,, with 3 check out lanes, noone went thru them,,so they removed them,, if people refuse to use the technology,, then the stores will pull them,, they dont want to loose miney

-- Stan (sopal@net-pert.com), March 20, 2002.

Stan is right. If everyone would just refuse to use the damned things, they would be gone very, very soon. Just make use the manager of the store you boycott knows why you are not shopping there any longer, or why you are not using the "for you convenience" check out lines. Brookshires still uses the Loyalty card here, but I notice they are having a lot more parking space available than they used to.

-- Green (ratdogs10@yahoo.com), March 20, 2002.

I guess it depends on where you live and what you do, and also if you've perhaps been a victim of identity theft.

For example, you may not mind a three-hour security wait each way at the airport if you only fly once a year, but it gets old really fast if you are a business traveler--I'm sure a lot of them would get a fingerprint card if it meant going back to showing up 20-30 minutes before their (probably only domestic) flights. Also depending upon what you do for a living you may have already had to provide fingerprints just to get employment, so it's not like they don't already have the info....

Same with loyalty cards and so forth. People will look at it in the sense of "how will it benefit me?" and assess it from that point--if the benefits outweigh the negatives, then....

Although I think the rhythm-typing mentioned at the bottom is useless. I don't type the same way all the time (except consistently badly), and what happens if you are trying to type with one broken arm? How are they going to get around that? A simple thumprint ID would be better....

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), March 20, 2002.

What I can't figure out is WHY anyone would go through that much trouble to verify who you are, then forget about it after verifying truth. And who keeps tabs on who can access this system? Does this mean that all these different companies are hooked up to one big a** database to verify this information. Seems like a lot of trouble to know if the person buying the underwear is really me.

Just a matter of time before we start naming our kids 4440009- section23y-subcategory b.

-- j.r. guerra in s. tx. (jrguerra@boultinghousesimpson.com), March 20, 2002.

Oh, I agree that it is too much trouble for everyday things like underwear shopping (although, like I said, if you shop with a credit card and you've had to deal with cleaning up after having your credit ruined by identity theft, you might think differently).

On the other hand, for specific cases (like frequent flyers, working at a company where tight security is especially important), you might want an ID that is easy to use.

I think the security of the information (how it is collected and safeguarded) is going to be the biggest issue here. And any system is only as good as the people working with it.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), March 20, 2002.

GT don't let President Select Strangelove get his claws into you, vis a vis identity checks, just for the sake of convenience.

-- joj (jump@off.c), March 20, 2002.

The thing is, joj, that times are changing. We have crime that we didn't have before because of new technology available (credit card fraud, internet fraud, and so forth). As crime has evolved so will crime-fighting techniques have to evolve.

I realize that many are against ID systems of any sort, but I have yet to see anyone post any other viable solutions. Do you want to have to fly totally naked, without luggage (as in no checked baggage, only a change of clothing?) after you have passed through an x-ray? That would speed the lines up, but it would also cause health concerns, not to mention the inconvenience of having to ship everything ahead of your leaving.

I bring up the frequent flier (there, now I've spelled it correctly) as an example of how the current security issues are taking a toll on the productivity of that business flier. You can't get much done at the airport. Most smart people do not even use their laptops except for games because people do try to see what's on your screen. Someone who flies in for the day is spending 5-6 hours at the airport, not including flight time.

All that wasted time adds up to money. If you hire a lawyer or other professional, for instance (and they have to fly out to you), and they charge by the hour, they are not going to absorb the hang time spent at the airport, they are going to charge it to you as part of travel expenses.

For those of us able to stay on our homesteads, it is easy to make light of others' difficulties in getting around after 9/11. But, unless you are willing to eschew all modern marvels (like computers and the internet), someone has to provide/manufacture/create that stuff, even though we may be acquiring it second, third, or fourth hand. That someone has to be able to get their job done efficiently. For them it is a necessity, rather than a convenience, issue, and I don't think it is quite fair to regard them with contempt when they are trying to find a workable solution to getting around in society.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), March 20, 2002.

Well GT, it directly affects me and my business. My business partner does most of the traveling, let's see... 7 trips in 8 weeks right now. I wouldn't ask her to put her thumbprint down to get on a plane and I won't do it myself. Reasoning that a complete police state is necessary because life isn't safe and we have the illusion that money is columns on a ledger just doesn't cut it with me. Aside from that, I honestly don't believe that they will attempt the hijacking thing again, it played out and we closed the gate after he cows had all left the barn.

-- Doreen (bisquit@here.com), March 21, 2002.

So you think that there will never be another terrorist act in the US? I wish I could believe that.

But would your business partner be willing to fly naked instead, or without any baggage, checked or otherwise? Or would she just stop flying altogether and go into some other business that didn't require it? You're still restricting your freedoms, but in a different way.

Like I said, the biometric stuff may never come down to "the buying underwear" level, but for highly vulnerable areas, like the military, security conscious employers, flying, some way has to be found to let the good guys in and keep the bad guys out. I don't see it turning the whole country into a police state--I mean gee, you can't even get everyone on direct deposit ;)

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), March 21, 2002.

GT, you just don't get it. Why should WE be treated like criminals and tracked and harrassed and made to be inconvenienced and treated like cattle when WE didn't do anything to bring about the ire of "the terrorists" anyway? And I didn't say that I don't think that there will be another attack, I said that I don't think there will be another hijcking using the plane as a bomb. Huge difference. Believe me, no one would want my business partner flying naked, including herself. Those planes are cold, in case you have forgotten.

Also I take serious exception to you espousing the idea that it is OUR decision to limit our freedoms when we have seemingly 3 congressmen who know the Constitution and our "reprhensitives" have failed terrifically at doing what they are supposed to be there to do. Frankly, I ain't getting my moneys worth and I want reformation and accountability NOW. Not requests from the CEO of the US Corporation to not look too carefully at evidence of prior knowledge. If you aren't mad yet you are NOT paying attention! This isn't about technology it is about CONTROL.

I predict that since we now have all our little color codes in place and more amazingly solid evidence all of a sudden that Saddam is involved with the Al Queda that we have another horrific act of terrorism here very shortly. Did I mention that I love being wrong? Yet I don't see how Joe Citizen has encouraged this ire in Muslims. I do see how US MILITARY and US Federal Government has. We all fell asleep at the switch so we get to pay for it. Yippee. I won't give up one more inch of my God given freedom.PERIOD. Convenience or no.

-- Doreen (bisquit@here.com), March 21, 2002.

Doreen, it has already been discussed on this site how citizens of a country ARE responsible for what their military and government do in their name. This apparently is the justification for killing civilians in war (declared or not).

-- john hill (john@cnd.co.nz), March 21, 2002.

Doreen: go girl!

GT, all this security is only going to control innocent people, for the most part. Do you really feel safer with all the incompetence at the airports?(I mean, "the increased security". Come on! They take away my wife's eyeglasses screwdriver, and my nail clippers, for chrisakes, but do they take away your plastic billy club? How about your blackjack (oh, yeah, they will certainly see your sock with the sand in it, right? How about your plastic credit card, filed to a razor's edge? I've NEVER had them check the edge on my credit card.

I've also "accidentally" passed my wife's camera bag over the check point, to avoid it's getting exrayed. NO problem. Instead, they made me take all the change out of my pocket! It's a joke.

There is a lot less safety in all this extra security than there is in living in harmony with all the world's citizens, and not acting like the Lord of the Flies.

Have you noticed, there have been no terrorist attacks on Mexico, Costa Rica, Danmark, Sweden, Canada, New Zealand?

Why do you suppose that is? Could it have ANYTHING to do with the fact that these countries aren't throwing their weight around all over the world, trying to force other countries to become scale models of themselves?

John, what does one have to do to NOT be considered responsible for the policies of one's government? Does actively campaigning against George Strangelove before his Selection give us any redemption? How about speaking out whenever possible against his policies on killing innocents? How about speaking out against nuclear "convenience" weapons? How about organizing peace demonstrations against His Highness and all his knights?

-- joj (jump@off.c), March 21, 2002.

Joj, in theory, the military are controlled by the government and the government are controlled by their need to retain voters' support. If enough people make their disapproval known to the government the government can be expected to change it's ways. Like I say, that is the theory as I understand it applying to my country.

I hesitate to suggest what one should do when the theory breaks down but I would suggest that the pen is still mightier than the sword!

Such little influence you may feel you have over your central government please remember it is more than the hundreds of millions of world citizens have who are also likely to be effected by what ever happens next.

You mentioned a list of countries that have not been subjected to attacks by terrorist organisations. Practially the very first thing that POTUS did after 9/11 was to advise all such countries that they were either "with or against" the USA, significantly most of those countries elected to support the USA and are now undoubtedly potential targets ourselves, perhaps our leaders feared one sort of terror over another.

Don't tell Ernest but special forces, including his 'boy scouts' from Canada, led the recent military 'Anaconda' campaign in Afghanistan. Too bad it has came to practically nought.

-- john hill (john@cnd.co.nz), March 21, 2002.

Joj, I think it is honestly because no one pays attention to anything happening anywhere other than in one of the "Big Five" countries-- that's why.

As to giving up control, well, money (or any medium of exchange) is a form of control--you have it, you can do what you want relative to how much you have. Also, how many people obey laws not because they feel they are just, but out of fear of punishment for being caught disobeying them?

And, as much as people complain about the US, we sure have a lot of people wanting to come live here.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), March 21, 2002.