I would hate to be the poor victim of a finger-jacking. Its much easier to surrender a set of keys to an armed person than a finger if they want to break in.

How much more then, if it's a retinal-scan "security" device, and an _eyeball_ is involved? In many parts of the world, fingers are routinely removed very rapidly simply for mere baubles -- jewellery. This is a fact. Eyeballs can be gouged out quite rapidly also... if a sufficient motive exists.

The bottom line? if you don't want to be losing odd parts of your anatomy, then _don't_ be so bloody STUPID in thoughtlessly attaching your "security" authorisations to it! Indeed; we should all be campaining stridently _against_ such devices in the first place, before such acts *do* become despicable routine criminal activities, and yet more fodder for some news-hack's payroll.

http://www.physorg.com/news3080.html

And, here we go -- mere hours, and we have a 'leading' motive already! So... who's going to be the first, then? Come on! IBM has to _sell_ these things! So shift your brain into neutral, and pull out your wallet already -- while you still have enough fingers to do it with.

Oh -- and while you're at it, here's some light reading material for your entertainment perusal, while you're whiling away the hours in recovery:

http://www.againsttcpa.com/tcpa-faq-en.html

After all; don't forget -- IBM has already "thoughtfully" incorporated this into some of their laptop products, too.

So *good!* to be living in the New Millennium ™, eh?

is this dude a load, or what?

I think so too. It is great, that someone agrees about it. I had met many people who were against it. But it is nice to know I am not alone with such opinion.