On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 08:46:35 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
Seattle attorney Brandon Mayfield has a different opinion on
that 60% match.
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-on-brandon-mayfield-case
The press release was dated May 24, 2004. Fingerprint technology has probably improved in the last 21 years.
I suspect that obtaining a single fingerprint from a plastic bag is
probably less reliable than a smartphone scanner.
On 1/19/2025 6:04 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 08:46:35 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
Seattle attorney Brandon Mayfield has a different opinion on
that 60% match.
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-on-brandon-mayfield-case
The press release was dated May 24, 2004. Fingerprint technology has probably improved in the last 21 years.
I suspect that obtaining a single fingerprint from a plastic bag is probably less reliable than a smartphone scanner.
Yes, but the case was so egregious I remembered it.
On 1/19/2025 5:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 20:46:38 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 23:02:07 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 14:43:14 2025 AMuzi wrote:
Or by vector pattern matching:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4350704
I would have a real problem using Chinese security measures.
I guess "would have" means you're not currently having a problem. If
it's not a "real problem", what other type of problem might you have?
An un-real problem perhaps?
You bought a phone made in Korea. How about a Korean company with R&D
in Arizona?
<https://integratedbiometrics.com>
They're also FBI certified.
"Certified Products List"
<https://fbibiospecs.fbi.gov/certifications-1/cpl>
And yet again - page not found.
Both links pop right up for me.
On 1/19/2025 6:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 20:46:38 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 23:02:07 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 14:43:14 2025 AMuzi wrote:
Or by vector pattern matching:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4350704
I would have a real problem using Chinese security measures.
I guess "would have" means you're not currently having a problem. If
it's not a "real problem", what other type of problem might you have?
An un-real problem perhaps?
You bought a phone made in Korea. How about a Korean company with R&D
in Arizona?
<https://integratedbiometrics.com>
They're also FBI certified.
"Certified Products List"
<https://fbibiospecs.fbi.gov/certifications-1/cpl>
And yet again - page not found.
?
Yet again, both links work for me. I don't know what you keep doing
wrong, Tom. Isn't there someone who can show you how to follow a link?
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 20:58:55 -0300, Shadow <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 23:25:26 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 20:46:38 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 23:02:07 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 14:43:14 2025 AMuzi wrote:
Or by vector pattern matching:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4350704
I would have a real problem using Chinese security measures.
I guess "would have" means you're not currently having a problem. If
it's not a "real problem", what other type of problem might you have?
An un-real problem perhaps?
You bought a phone made in Korea. How about a Korean company with R&D >>> in Arizona?
<https://integratedbiometrics.com>
They're also FBI certified.
"Certified Products List"
<https://fbibiospecs.fbi.gov/certifications-1/cpl>
And yet again - page not found.
Biden made it available to unlawful extraterrestrials only, so
I can see it perfectly in Brazil
//Certified Products List
Data last updated: 1/16/2025
The products listed are certified by the FBI as tested and in
compliance with the FBI's Next Generation Identification (NGI) Image >Quality Specifications (IQS). The review of the test data was
conducted by the FBI?s Criminal Justice Information Services Division.
The certification process is not intended to endorse one product over
a competitor's product but merely to certify the product meets FBI
Image Quality standards. //
After Trump takes office all the links will work for Americans
again.
That won't help Tom. My guess(tm) is that Tom has a list of left
wing, Democrat, perversive, fact checking, parental control, and other
sites that Tom finds distracting or distressing. He probably has site blocking software running on his personal mainframe or whatever he's
using. Something like this:
<https://blocksite.co>
Or, he might be stuffed his list of disagreeable sites into his
Windows DNS hosts[1] file and sending them to /dev/null[2]. <https://blocksite.co/blog/digital-mindfulness/most-blocked-sites>
[1] For Windows, it's located at:
C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts <https://www.liquidweb.com/blog/dns-hosts-file/>
[2] /dev/null is the bottomless black hole at the base of Cull Canyon,
where the politically disagreeable are dumped and buried in "deep
mud".
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 20:58:55 -0300, Shadow <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 23:25:26 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 20:46:38 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 23:02:07 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 14:43:14 2025 AMuzi wrote:
Or by vector pattern matching:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4350704
I would have a real problem using Chinese security measures.
I guess "would have" means you're not currently having a problem. If
it's not a "real problem", what other type of problem might you have?
An un-real problem perhaps?
You bought a phone made in Korea. How about a Korean company with R&D >>>> in Arizona?
<https://integratedbiometrics.com>
They're also FBI certified.
"Certified Products List"
<https://fbibiospecs.fbi.gov/certifications-1/cpl>
And yet again - page not found.
Biden made it available to unlawful extraterrestrials only, so
I can see it perfectly in Brazil
//Certified Products List
Data last updated: 1/16/2025
The products listed are certified by the FBI as tested and in
compliance with the FBI's Next Generation Identification (NGI) Image >>Quality Specifications (IQS). The review of the test data was
conducted by the FBI�s Criminal Justice Information Services Division.
The certification process is not intended to endorse one product over
a competitor's product but merely to certify the product meets FBI
Image Quality standards. //
After Trump takes office all the links will work for Americans
again.
That won't help Tom. My guess(tm) is that Tom has a list of left
wing, Democrat, perversive, fact checking, parental control, and other
sites that Tom finds distracting or distressing. He probably has site >blocking software running on his personal mainframe or whatever he's
using. Something like this:
<https://blocksite.co>
Or, he might be stuffed his list of disagreeable sites into his
Windows DNS hosts[1] file and sending them to /dev/null[2]. ><https://blocksite.co/blog/digital-mindfulness/most-blocked-sites>
[1] For Windows, it's located at:
C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts ><https://www.liquidweb.com/blog/dns-hosts-file/>
[2] /dev/null is the bottomless black hole at the base of Cull Canyon,
where the politically disagreeable are dumped and buried in "deep
mud".
On Sun Jan 19 18:39:57 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 1/19/2025 5:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 20:46:38 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 23:02:07 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 14:43:14 2025 AMuzi wrote:
Or by vector pattern matching:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4350704
I would have a real problem using Chinese security measures.
I guess "would have" means you're not currently having a problem. If
it's not a "real problem", what other type of problem might you have?
An un-real problem perhaps?
You bought a phone made in Korea. How about a Korean company with R&D >>>> in Arizona?
<https://integratedbiometrics.com>
They're also FBI certified.
"Certified Products List"
<https://fbibiospecs.fbi.gov/certifications-1/cpl>
And yet again - page not found.
Both links pop right up for me.
Then ask yourself why my BitDefender blocks them. BitDefender is the best protection on the market.
On Sun Jan 19 18:44:47 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 1/19/2025 6:04 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 08:46:35 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
Seattle attorney Brandon Mayfield has a different opinion on
that 60% match.
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-on-brandon-mayfield-case
The press release was dated May 24, 2004. Fingerprint technology has
probably improved in the last 21 years.
I suspect that obtaining a single fingerprint from a plastic bag is
probably less reliable than a smartphone scanner.
Yes, but the case was so egregious I remembered it.
If you go into a DMV for a license you have to submit a fingerprint. These detectors are run by a full powered desktop computer and usually require about 15 seconds minimum to catalog a SINGLE fingeprint.bottom of the heap. If he couldn't get a recommendation from that he must have been really incompetent.*
If you are arrested you have all of your fingerprints taken and it is not electronic but the old ink and paper method. These are cataloged through rather powerful computers.
Liebermann with all of the intelligence of a clam wants you to believe that a smartphone can recognize a fingerpriunt with 93% accuracy in a small fraction of a second.
It is things like this that caused him to never hold an engineering position. Not to mention that he must have really alienated someone to never have gotten a recommendation at the QC job he started at. QC people are not well thought off and are at the
On Sun Jan 19 18:39:57 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 1/19/2025 5:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 20:46:38 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 23:02:07 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 14:43:14 2025 AMuzi wrote:
Or by vector pattern matching:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4350704
I would have a real problem using Chinese security measures.
I guess "would have" means you're not currently having a problem. If
it's not a "real problem", what other type of problem might you have?
An un-real problem perhaps?
You bought a phone made in Korea. How about a Korean company with R&D
in Arizona?
<https://integratedbiometrics.com>
They're also FBI certified.
"Certified Products List"
<https://fbibiospecs.fbi.gov/certifications-1/cpl>
And yet again - page not found.
Both links pop right up for me.
Then ask yourself why my BitDefender blocks them. BitDefender is the best protection on the market.
If you go into a DMV for a license you have to submit a fingerprint. These detectors are run by a full powered desktop computer and usually require about 15 seconds minimum to catalog a SINGLE fingeprint.
If you are arrested you have all of your fingerprints taken and it is not electronic but the old ink and paper method. These are cataloged through rather powerful computers.
Liebermann with all of the intelligence of a clam wants you to believe that a smartphone can recognize a fingerpriunt with 93% accuracy in a small fraction of a second.
It is things like this that caused him to never hold an engineering position. Not to mention that he must have really alienated someone to never have gotten a recommendation at the QC job he started at. QC people are not well thought off and are at thebottom of the heap. If he couldn't get a recommendation from that he must have been really incompetent.*
On 1/20/2025 10:55 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sun Jan 19 18:39:57 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 1/19/2025 5:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 20:46:38 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 23:02:07 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 14:43:14 2025 AMuzi wrote:
Or by vector pattern matching:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4350704
I would have a real problem using Chinese security measures.
I guess "would have" means you're not currently having a problem. If >>>>> it's not a "real problem", what other type of problem might you have? >>>>> An un-real problem perhaps?
You bought a phone made in Korea. How about a Korean company with R&D >>>>> in Arizona?
<https://integratedbiometrics.com>
They're also FBI certified.
"Certified Products List"
<https://fbibiospecs.fbi.gov/certifications-1/cpl>
And yet again - page not found.
Both links pop right up for me.
Then ask yourself why my BitDefender blocks them. BitDefender is the
best protection on the market.
On 1/20/2025 10:52 AM, cyclintom wrote:the bottom of the heap. If he couldn't get a recommendation from that he must have been really incompetent.*
On Sun Jan 19 18:44:47 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 1/19/2025 6:04 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 08:46:35 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>
Seattle attorney Brandon Mayfield has a different opinion on
that 60% match.
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-on-brandon-mayfield-case
The press release was dated May 24, 2004. Fingerprint technology has
probably improved in the last 21 years.
I suspect that obtaining a single fingerprint from a plastic bag is
probably less reliable than a smartphone scanner.
Yes, but the case was so egregious I remembered it.
If you go into a DMV for a license you have to submit a fingerprint. These detectors are run by a full powered desktop computer and usually require about 15 seconds minimum to catalog a SINGLE fingeprint.
If you are arrested you have all of your fingerprints taken and it is not electronic but the old ink and paper method. These are cataloged through rather powerful computers.
Liebermann with all of the intelligence of a clam wants you to believe that a smartphone can recognize a fingerpriunt with 93% accuracy in a small fraction of a second.
It is things like this that caused him to never hold an engineering position. Not to mention that he must have really alienated someone to never have gotten a recommendation at the QC job he started at. QC people are not well thought off and are at
California DMV requires a fingerprint for driving license?
Not here in WI.
Attorneys, however, are fingerprinted for their law license
in most (all?) States, along with many other professional
licenses including bartenders, insurance agents, public
school teachers and more.
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:52:19 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
wrote:
If you go into a DMV for a license you have to submit a fingerprint. These detectors are run by a full powered desktop computer and usually require about 15 seconds minimum to catalog a SINGLE fingeprint.
I renewed my drivers license at the Capitola DMV 2 months ago. They
used a machine like this to do a "live scan": ><https://anshinotary.com/your-complete-guideline-about-live-scan-fingerprinting/>
I didn't check how long it took, but my guess(tm) is about 3 minutes
most of which was the clerk typing something into the computer while I
was doing battle with the eye exam.
On 1/20/2025 10:55 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sun Jan 19 18:39:57 2025 AMuzi� wrote:
On 1/19/2025 5:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 20:46:38 2025 Jeff Liebermann� wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 23:02:07 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 14:43:14 2025 AMuzi� wrote:
Or by vector pattern matching:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4350704
I would have a real problem using Chinese security measures.
I guess "would have" means you're not currently having a problem.� If >>>>>> it's not a "real problem", what other type of problem might you have? >>>>>> An un-real problem perhaps?
You bought a phone made in Korea.� How about a Korean company with R&D >>>>>> in Arizona?
<https://integratedbiometrics.com>
They're also FBI certified.
"Certified Products List"
<https://fbibiospecs.fbi.gov/certifications-1/cpl>
And yet again - page not found.
Both links pop right up for me.
Then ask yourself why my BitDefender blocks them. BitDefender is the
best protection on the market.
Hey dumbass. If BitDefender was blocking them it would tell you it was >blocking them then give you to option to bypass the block. It wouldn't
say "file not found".
IOW, you're simply fucking up as usual.
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 11:38:27 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/20/2025 10:52 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sun Jan 19 18:44:47 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 1/19/2025 6:04 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 08:46:35 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>
Seattle attorney Brandon Mayfield has a different opinion on
that 60% match.
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-on-brandon-mayfield-case
The press release was dated May 24, 2004. Fingerprint technology has >>>>> probably improved in the last 21 years.
I suspect that obtaining a single fingerprint from a plastic bag is
probably less reliable than a smartphone scanner.
Yes, but the case was so egregious I remembered it.
If you go into a DMV for a license you have to submit a fingerprint.
These detectors are run by a full powered desktop computer and usually
require about 15 seconds minimum to catalog a SINGLE fingeprint.
If you are arrested you have all of your fingerprints taken and it is
not electronic but the old ink and paper method. These are cataloged
through rather powerful computers.
Liebermann with all of the intelligence of a clam wants you to believe
that a smartphone can recognize a fingerpriunt with 93% accuracy in a
small fraction of a second.
It is things like this that caused him to never hold an engineering
position. Not to mention that he must have really alienated someone to
never have gotten a recommendation at the QC job he started at. QC
people are not well thought off and are at the bottom of the heap. If
he couldn't get a recommendation from that he must have been really incompetent.*
California DMV requires a fingerprint for driving license?
Not here in WI.
Attorneys, however, are fingerprinted for their law license
in most (all?) States, along with many other professional
licenses including bartenders, insurance agents, public
school teachers and more.
No fingerprints for drivers licence in Florida, either, but they do
take them for the carry permits.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 13:30:14 -0500, zen cycle
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/20/2025 10:55 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sun Jan 19 18:39:57 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 1/19/2025 5:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 20:46:38 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 23:02:07 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 14:43:14 2025 AMuzi wrote:
Or by vector pattern matching:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4350704
I would have a real problem using Chinese security measures.
I guess "would have" means you're not currently having a problem. If >>>>>>> it's not a "real problem", what other type of problem might you have? >>>>>>> An un-real problem perhaps?
You bought a phone made in Korea. How about a Korean company with R&D >>>>>>> in Arizona?
<https://integratedbiometrics.com>
They're also FBI certified.
"Certified Products List"
<https://fbibiospecs.fbi.gov/certifications-1/cpl>
And yet again - page not found.
Both links pop right up for me.
Then ask yourself why my BitDefender blocks them. BitDefender is the
best protection on the market.
Hey dumbass. If BitDefender was blocking them it would tell you it was
blocking them then give you to option to bypass the block. It wouldn't
say "file not found".
If BitOffender was looking a web page on the internet, it would say
"404 Site No Found" or something similar. Web pages and documents are
quite different.
IOW, you're simply fucking up as usual.
Close. I think he's lying (as usual). Somehow, I'm being accused of
posting a link that Tom cannot view, or maybe tampering with the web
site, or maybe even tampering with his computer. Those are not going
to happen. For example, if I post:
<https://www.google.com>
Tom would likely claim that he can't find Google. Anyway, I'm not
worried because I don't think there's anyone reading rec.bicycles.tech
that believes anything that Tom writes.
On 1/20/2025 2:55 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 13:30:14 -0500, zen cycle
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/20/2025 10:55 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sun Jan 19 18:39:57 2025 AMuzi� wrote:
On 1/19/2025 5:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 20:46:38 2025 Jeff Liebermann� wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 23:02:07 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sat Jan 18 14:43:14 2025 AMuzi� wrote:
Or by vector pattern matching:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4350704
I would have a real problem using Chinese security measures.
I guess "would have" means you're not currently having a problem.� If >>>>>>>> it's not a "real problem", what other type of problem might you have? >>>>>>>> An un-real problem perhaps?
You bought a phone made in Korea.� How about a Korean company with R&D >>>>>>>> in Arizona?
<https://integratedbiometrics.com>
They're also FBI certified.
"Certified Products List"
<https://fbibiospecs.fbi.gov/certifications-1/cpl>
And yet again - page not found.
Both links pop right up for me.
Then ask yourself why my BitDefender blocks them. BitDefender is the >>>>> best protection on the market.
Hey dumbass. If BitDefender was blocking them it would tell you it was
blocking them then give you to option to bypass the block. It wouldn't
say "file not found".
If BitOffender was looking a web page on the internet, it would say
"404 Site No Found" or something similar. Web pages and documents are
quite different.
that's nitpicking.
Whether his browser displays "file not found", "page
not found", "site not found", "page/site/file/ not available" or
whatever ever message would indicate the the link doesn't direct to the >intended file, website, or page, is completely irrelevant.
If
BitDefender was blocking them it would tell him it was blocking them
then give him to option to bypass the block. It wouldn't say "[whatever]
not found".
IOW, you're simply fucking up as usual.
Close. I think he's lying (as usual). Somehow, I'm being accused of
posting a link that Tom cannot view, or maybe tampering with the web
site, or maybe even tampering with his computer. Those are not going
to happen. For example, if I post:
<https://www.google.com>
Tom would likely claim that he can't find Google. Anyway, I'm not
worried because I don't think there's anyone reading rec.bicycles.tech
that believes anything that Tom writes.
+1
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 716 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 54:57:17 |
| Calls: | 12,117 |
| Calls today: | 8 |
| Files: | 15,010 |
| Messages: | 6,518,640 |
| Posted today: | 2 |