Future of FaceID

[JF Mezei]

How will Apple react to widespread wearing of masks everywhere?
This effectively makes current FaceID a hassle since you have to wait
for it to fail before you can enter PIN.

It would not surprise me to see the very next release (14.5) include
changes to ease use of phone. (I suggest showing pin pad below the clock
right away instead of waiting for FaceID to fail.)

Or skipping authentication with a timer different from the sleep timer.
(aka sleep timer is 2 minutes, but you get 15 minutes between
requirement to authenticate).


And for the 2020 iPhone, I have to wonder if it is possible for Apple to
pivot very fast at this stage and go to TouchID. That would require a
pretty big redesign of bezel this late in the game.

Can FaceID be an effective security measure if it acts only on eyes and
top part of nose? Apple could allow one to register a facemask profile
that limits authentication to eyes, forehead and top of nose).


Facemask at store makes ApplePay really ackward. There is a apy to pay
by entering PIN, but much worse than with FaceID.

I know that FaceId has allowed Apple to do away with the home button and
this increase screen real-estate. But if FaceID become too inconvenient
when facemasks are now de-facto standard.

[nospam]

In article <FxfwG.153557$FY5....@fx39.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> How will Apple react to widespread wearing of masks everywhere?

by updating face id to detect masks.

> This effectively makes current FaceID a hassle since you have to wait
> for it to fail before you can enter PIN.

not anymore. 13.5 will switch to the passcode screen if it detects a
mask.

> And for the 2020 iPhone, I have to wonder if it is possible for Apple to
> pivot very fast at this stage and go to TouchID. That would require a
> pretty big redesign of bezel this late in the game.

not possible. the 2020 iphone design was finalized last year and the
2021 models are almost done now.

[sms]

On 5/17/2020 11:39 AM, JF Mezei wrote:

<snip>

> And for the 2020 iPhone, I have to wonder if it is possible for Apple to
> pivot very fast at this stage and go to TouchID. That would require a
> pretty big redesign of bezel this late in the game.

The most reputable analyst, Ming-Chi Kuo, stated that Touch ID would not
reappear until 2021 (other than of course the new SE which has the old
Touch ID). Some analysts have predicted 2020 but their records are not
as good as Ming-Chi Kuo's record.

The Android flagships are all moving to ultrasonic fingerprint readers
under the screen which work extremely well (other than the little snafu
where the Samsung S20 was learning the screen protector biometrics
rather then those of the actual finger!).

> Can FaceID be an effective security measure if it acts only on eyes and
> top part of nose? Apple could allow one to register a facemask profile
> that limits authentication to eyes, forehead and top of nose).

I don't like what I'm seeing at stores where they customer removes their
face mask to use Face-ID. Besides being illegal (in most urban counties
in California), it exposes the cashier at the one place where social
distancing is difficult.

Trader Joe's in my area has a routine to avoid this issue: 1) You place
your basket or cart as the cashier steps back. 2) The customer steps
back onto the X. 3) Your order is rung up and bagged. 4) The cashier
steps back and tells the customer to pay. I haven't seen anyone pay cash
when I've been there so I don't know how that works. Everyone I've seen
has paid with a credit or debit card, or their phone. Trader Joe's is
also limiting the number of customers to 25 at a time at the store I go
to. Face coverings are mandatory. They disinfect the baskets and carts.
They'll spritz customer's hands with hand sanitizer if desired. No
re-usable bags are permitted and they are not charging for paper bags.
No samples anymore of course.

> Facemask at store makes ApplePay really ackward. There is a apy to pay
> by entering PIN, but much worse than with FaceID.
>
> I know that FaceId has allowed Apple to do away with the home button and
> this increase screen real-estate. But if FaceID become too inconvenient
> when facemasks are now de-facto standard.

Screen real estate is no longer an issue because of under-screen 3D
ultrasonic fingerprint readers which are also more secure. It's just a
question of when, not if, Touch-ID makes a comeback. Even pre-Covid-19
it was planned because of other reasons, but it would be in addition to
Face-ID, not instead of it. So if not on the iPhone 12, it'll be on the
iPhone 15 (they'll likely skip 13 and 14 for superstitious reasons).

[sms]

On 5/17/2020 1:30 PM, sms wrote:

<snip>

> The most reputable analyst, Ming-Chi Kuo, stated that Touch ID would not
> reappear until 2021 (other than of course the new SE which has the old
> Touch ID). Some analysts have predicted 2020 but their records are not
> as good as Ming-Chi Kuo's record.

Forgot the link, here goes:
<https://www.iphoneincanada.ca/news/touch-id-kuo/>.

[nospam]

In article <r9s6tr$324$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> The Android flagships are all moving to ultrasonic fingerprint readers
> under the screen which work extremely well (other than the little snafu
> where the Samsung S20 was learning the screen protector biometrics
> rather then those of the actual finger!).

you keep trolling this rubbish, despite it being demonstrably false.

ultrasonic fingerprint readers do not work well, and far more than 'the
little snafu', which if that had happened to apple, you would never
have dismissed it so easily.

<https://www.androidcentral.com/in-screen-fingerprint-sensors-suck>
In-screen fingerprint sensors are slow and unreliable. Stop using
them.

So far, the implementation of both these technologies has
left...well...a lot to be desired.

Being slower than regular fingerprint sensors is the best case
scenario. The worst is having these in-screen sensors regularly
misread your fingerprint, requiring you to give multiple attempts
before your phone finally unlocks.

> > Can FaceID be an effective security measure if it acts only on eyes and
> > top part of nose? Apple could allow one to register a facemask profile
> > that limits authentication to eyes, forehead and top of nose).
>
> I don't like what I'm seeing at stores where they customer removes their
> face mask to use Face-ID. Besides being illegal (in most urban counties
> in California), it exposes the cashier at the one place where social
> distancing is difficult.

it's not illegal, nor is even necessary.

face id detects the mask and reverts to a passcode, which can then
authenticate apple pay.

you do not have an iphone with face id, and as usual, are talking out
your ass.

> Screen real estate is no longer an issue because of under-screen 3D
> ultrasonic fingerprint readers which are also more secure.

false to both.

screen real estate is still very much an issue until true depth cameras
can be put behind them and ultrasonic fingerprint readers are easily
spoofed, at least for the ones that have been released so far.

> It's just a
> question of when, not if, Touch-ID makes a comeback. Even pre-Covid-19
> it was planned because of other reasons, but it would be in addition to
> Face-ID, not instead of it.

more fabricated bullshit.

you have no way to know what apple's future plans are. even people
within apple don't know what other groups are doing.

> So if not on the iPhone 12, it'll be on the
> iPhone 15 (they'll likely skip 13 and 14 for superstitious reasons).

utterly hilarious. you really work hard to troll.

apple didn't skip mac os 10.13 or 10.14, nor did they skip ios 13. they
also didn't skip the iphone 4 and apple watch series 4, another
superstitious number.

even their very first computer, the apple i in 1976, sold for $666.

[JF Mezei]

On 2020-05-17 17:08, nospam wrote:

> ultrasonic fingerprint readers do not work well,

Apple has been late with some tech (like fingerprint recog) but when it
delivered, it delivered a far superior response. So I would not write
this off just because others have not had a good enough produyct, unless
te underscreen readers are really flawed at the core and cannot work.

> it's not illegal, nor is even necessary.

Face masks are legally mandatory in many areas that are releasing
lockdowns. Amtrak for instance goes down to the details of under what
circumstances you are allowed to bring down mask to eat.

Also, from a patholoogical point of view, the last thing you want is for
someone to handle their mask on and off because that that point, their
hands become contaminated and spread whatever they may have coughed.

> face id detects the mask and reverts to a passcode, which can then
> authenticate apple pay.

As of today, faceID tries to identify you and fails after timeout and
then reverts to passcode.

Quickly recognizing a face mask still requires you wait for the pin pad
to appear. Might as well make it appear under the clock right away.

> you do not have an iphone with face id, and as usual, are talking out
> your ass.

So now you are claiming the iPhone Xs does not have FaceID ?

> you have no way to know what apple's future plans are. even people
> within apple don't know what other groups are doing.

I suspect Apple will make a statement soon on upgrades to the software
to help those stuck with FaceID phones.

[sms]

On 5/17/2020 5:19 PM, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2020-05-17 17:08, nospam wrote:
>
>> ultrasonic fingerprint readers do not work well,
>
> Apple has been late with some tech (like fingerprint recog) but when it
> delivered, it delivered a far superior response. So I would not write
> this off just because others have not had a good enough produyct, unless
> te underscreen readers are really flawed at the core and cannot work.

nospam is wrong of course™. The latest generation of ultrasonic 3D
fingerprint sensors work extremely well. Not sure where Apple's design
is in termo of being ready but they could always just use Qualcomm's.

Qualcomm's first generation worked fine (other than the issue of screen
protectors being able to be registered as valid fingerprints which has
been fixed).

> Face masks are legally mandatory in many areas that are releasing
> lockdowns. Amtrak for instance goes down to the details of under what
> circumstances you are allowed to bring down mask to eat.

All the Bay Area counties now have some sort of face covering
requirement. All of them mandate them inside businesses, some go further
and mandate them any time you can't social distance, even outdoors.

> Also, from a patholoogical point of view, the last thing you want is for
> someone to handle their mask on and off because that that point, their
> hands become contaminated and spread whatever they may have coughed.

Exactly. Today when I used my Samsung phone to pay at Walmart (can't do
that with an iPhone since only Samsung phones work at businesses that
don't take Apple Pay or Google Pay), I unlocked Samsung Pay with a
fingerprint.

The bottom line is that even post-Covid we will become more like Japan,
Korea, and China in terms of wearing face coverings in stores. Touch-ID
will come back for multiple reasons. First, in countries where face
masks have always been common, fingerprint readers, or the lack thereof,
affects consumer choices in phones. Second, there's a goal of doing dual
biometrics, both finger and face or iris and face, or iris and finger.
Third, 3D ultrasonic fingerprint readers are more secure than facial
recognition systems.

[nospam]

In article <cwkwG.170170$cJ2.1...@fx47.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > ultrasonic fingerprint readers do not work well,
>
> Apple has been late with some tech (like fingerprint recog) but when it
> delivered, it delivered a far superior response. So I would not write
> this off just because others have not had a good enough produyct, unless
> te underscreen readers are really flawed at the core and cannot work.

you snipped to alter context.

sms repeatedly claims that ultrasonic fingerprint readers are more
secure.

that is *false*. wildly false.

> > it's not illegal, nor is even necessary.
>
> Face masks are legally mandatory in many areas that are releasing
> lockdowns. Amtrak for instance goes down to the details of under what
> circumstances you are allowed to bring down mask to eat.

you snipped to alter context yet again.

removing the mask *momentarily* to authenticate face id is not illegal,
nor is it necessary.

nobody said anything about removing it entirely, or when eating on
amtrak or in a restaurant.

> > face id detects the mask and reverts to a passcode, which can then
> > authenticate apple pay.
>
> As of today, faceID tries to identify you and fails after timeout and
> then reverts to passcode.

exactly.

> > you do not have an iphone with face id, and as usual, are talking out
> > your ass.
>
> So now you are claiming the iPhone Xs does not have FaceID ?

your reading comprehension is shit.

nobody said anything about the iphone xs.

sms claims to have an iphone 6s. he has never used an iphone with face
id and knows absolutely nothing about how it works.

> I suspect Apple will make a statement soon on upgrades to the software
> to help those stuck with FaceID phones.

they already did.

[nospam]

In article <r9sm6u$mco$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:


> The latest generation of ultrasonic 3D
> fingerprint sensors work extremely well.

no they very definitely don't.

<https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/7/18299366/samsung-galaxy-s10-fingerpri
nt-sensor-fooled-3d-printed-fingerprint>
In a post on Imgur, user darkshark outlined his project: he took a
picture of his fingerprint on a wineglass, processed it in Photoshop,
and made a model using 3ds Max that allowed him to extrude the
lines in the picture into a 3D version. After a 13-minute print (and
three attempts with some tweaks), he was able to print out a version
of his fingerprint that fooled the phone¹s sensor.

<https://mashable.com/article/in-display-fingerprint-readers-suck/>
Unlike physical fingerprint readers such as Touch ID on the iPhone
8 (and older), the Pixel Imprint sensor on the back of Google Pixel
phones, or the reader on the back of the Galaxy S9 and Note 9,
in-display fingerprint readers are slower and less responsive.
...
To shrug and give new phones launching in 2019 the same break for
including half-baked in-display fingerprint readers simply because
it's new tech is not OK. It's unacceptable to spend $1,000 for a
Samsung Galaxy S10+ only to get a fingerprint reader that's inferior
to the one on the previous Galaxy S9.

I've tried just about all of the in-display sensors ‹ Galaxy S10,
Huawei Mate 20 Pro, OnePlus 6T, and even the one on the new Nokia
9 PureView ‹ and none of them live up to the hype.

<https://www.slashgear.com/samsung-in-display-fingerprint-scanner-speed-
has-an-unreliable-fix-16616986/>
In practice, the first iterations since last year¹s Galaxy S10 and
Galaxy Note 10 were regarded to actually be less secure and less
accurate because they were easily thrown off by a third-party screen
protector. Even after Samsung pushed an update to address that,
many users complained about how it looked and felt slower than
in-screen scanners from less expensive phones.

> Not sure where Apple's design
> is in termo of being ready but they could always just use Qualcomm's.

nope. apple is not going to use technology that is not secure as well
as slow and unreliable.

> Qualcomm's first generation worked fine

were 'worked fine' means 'slow, inaccurate, and easily spoofed'.

see above for links.

> (other than the issue of screen
> protectors being able to be registered as valid fingerprints which has
> been fixed).

repeatedly dismissing the screen protector issue reveals your true
agenda.

> The bottom line is that even post-Covid we will become more like Japan,
> Korea, and China in terms of wearing face coverings in stores. Touch-ID
> will come back for multiple reasons.

the only reason is cost. touch id is cheaper to manufacture than face
id.

> First, in countries where face
> masks have always been common, fingerprint readers, or the lack thereof,
> affects consumer choices in phones.

false.

the iphone x, xs, xr and 11 series sell *extremely* well in china and
elsewhere that masks are common.

> Second, there's a goal of doing dual
> biometrics, both finger and face or iris and face, or iris and finger.

there is no such goal, nor is that even a good idea.

> Third, 3D ultrasonic fingerprint readers are more secure than facial
> recognition systems.

more of your deceptive disingenuous rubbish.

the issue is not 'facial recognition systems', but specifically apple's
face id, which is *extremely* secure, much more so than any fingerprint
sensor on any smartphone.

android facial recognition systems are a joke. anything is better than
that.

[JF Mezei]

On 2020-05-17 21:36, nospam wrote:

> you snipped to alter context.

My point is that while others hae not yet succeeded with on-screen
fingerprint, it doesn't mean Apple doesn't have something up its sleeve
that would make it work.

> removing the mask *momentarily* to authenticate face id is not illegal,
> nor is it necessary.

Again, check jurisdiction. In France, facemasks are mandatory in public
transport. At train stations, they setup separate lines OUTSIDE for
each train line and release X numbers of passengers when a train with X
available setas pulls in. Thexe X passengers then line up to go through
the payment kiosks, and the last place you want to pull down your mask
is there.

Secondly, handling your mask is the exact last thing you want to do. If
you have listened to non-US facts (since US government spouts out
nothing that is real) , you will know that a mask can be more dangerous
if not handled properly becaise it collects all sorts of nasty stuff.

So sorry once mask is on, you don't touch it and remove it whenever you
need to see the time on your phoen.

> nobody said anything about removing it entirely, or when eating on
> amtrak or in a restaurant.

Eating IN a restaurant isn't something tyhat is happening, except in red
states USA. the point here is that your own experience wherever you
live do not apply everywhere in the world.

Remember that over 50% of iPhone sales happen outside of the USA, and
that would be a much higher number if you count only the red states in
the Republik of Trumplandia.

>> As of today, faceID tries to identify you and fails after timeout and
>> then reverts to passcode.
>
> exactly.

You had stated that FaceID recofnizes face masks (present tense). This
is a theoretical future.

> your reading comprehension is shit.
>
> nobody said anything about the iphone xs.

The accusation was made that an argument I had raised was boguys because
I didn't even have a phone with FaceID, an accusation that was made by
your ilk many times against me.

[nospam]

In article <1YlwG.201089$872....@fx38.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> My point is that while others hae not yet succeeded with on-screen
> fingerprint, it doesn't mean Apple doesn't have something up its sleeve
> that would make it work.

they might, but it doesn't currently exist in any shipping product.

sms claimed that ultrasonic fingerprint sensors are great. he is wrong.
they are slow, unreliable and easily spoofed, and he keeps dismissing
major security flaws.

>
> >> As of today, faceID tries to identify you and fails after timeout and
> >> then reverts to passcode.
> >
> > exactly.
>
> You had stated that FaceID recofnizes face masks (present tense). This
> is a theoretical future.

nope. the feature has *already* *been* *announced* and is in 13.5.

> > your reading comprehension is shit.
> >
> > nobody said anything about the iphone xs.
>
> The accusation was made that an argument I had raised was boguys because
> I didn't even have a phone with FaceID, an accusation that was made by
> your ilk many times against me.

nobody said anything about what phone *you* have.

sms claimed face id is not secure. he is wrong.

[Lewis]

In message <FxfwG.153557$FY5....@fx39.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> How will Apple react to widespread wearing of masks everywhere?
> This effectively makes current FaceID a hassle since you have to wait
> for it to fail before you can enter PIN.

There is no waiting. Current iOS brings up the password screen
immediately when you are wearing a mask.

--
We only remembers that the elves sang. We forgets what it was they
were singing about. --Lords and Ladies

[Lewis]

In message <170520201708076866%nos...@nospam.invalid> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <r9s6tr$324$1...@dont-email.me>, sms
> <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

>> The Android flagships are all moving to ultrasonic fingerprint readers
>> under the screen which work extremely well

Complete and udder lie. Refuted many times.

> you keep trolling this rubbish, despite it being demonstrably false.

He loves lying, he's as bad as trollboi.

> <https://www.androidcentral.com/in-screen-fingerprint-sensors-suck>
> In-screen fingerprint sensors are slow and unreliable. Stop using
> them.

They are insecure garbage.

> you do not have an iphone with face id, and as usual, are talking out
> your ass.

No, hes actively lying.

--
What we have here is a failure to communicate.

[Leo]

On 2020 May 17, , sms wrote
(in article <r9s6tr$324$1...@dont-email.me>):

> I don't like what I'm seeing at stores where they customer removes their
> face mask to use Face-ID. Besides being illegal (in most urban counties
> in California), it exposes the cashier at the one place where social
> distancing is difficult.

Everyone should use a cellular Apple Watch and leave the mothership at
home. Does any of the stuff you peddle have that capability?

leo

[JF Mezei]

On 2020-05-17 22:02, nospam wrote:

> nope. the feature has *already* *been* *announced* and is in 13.5.

Apple press release or some leak? ( detecting face mask by FaceID).

I wonder how it works in principle.

[JF Mezei]

On 2020-05-17 22:07, Lewis wrote:

> There is no waiting. Current iOS brings up the password screen
> immediately when you are wearing a mask.

I wore a mask this week, and that was not the case. 13.4.1

[Ant]

https://www.cnet.com/how-to/apple-wants-to-make-face-id-work-better-with-your-face-mask-heres-what-we-know-update/
https://www.reddit.com/r/iOSBeta/
etc.
--
..!.. illness like COVID-19/2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2!
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org /
/ /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.ma.cx. Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 17.05.20 um 20:39 schrieb JF Mezei:

For three or max four months?
Thats all guessworking at a very low level.

[sms]

It's in the 13.5 beta. Other features related to Covid-19 are also in 13.5.

[sms]

On 5/17/2020 10:37 PM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 17.05.20 um 20:39 schrieb JF Mezei:

<snip>

>> I know that FaceId has allowed Apple to do away with the home button and
>> this increase screen real-estate. But if FaceID become too inconvenient
>> when facemasks are now de-facto standard.
>
> For three or max four months?
> Thats all guessworking at a very low level.

It's not going to be just for three or four months. Already we are
seeing new surges in the places that relaxed their shelter in place too
soon.

Remember, long before Covid-19 the limitations of Face-ID had become
apparent in countries where masks had been commonly worn. If you've been
to China, masks in cities have been worn due to air pollution and
sandstorms for decades. In Japan, masks are also often worn, but for
medical reasons. See
<https://atadistance.net/2019/07/03/face-id-face-masks-lost-iphone-sales/>
which pontificated about an iPhone variant, only for China, with
Touch-ID under the screen (just like they have iPhone variants with dual
physical SIM cards only for China).

Of course there are multiple reasons why iPhone sales in China have
struggled, Face-Id is just one of many. Donald Trump, lateness with
dual-SIM models, fewer localized apps than Android, lack of fingerprint
reader, and no 5G are also contributing factors. Many of those issues
can be readily solved either by Apple or by U.S. voters. Dual SIM was
solved with the Xr and Xs Max (but nearly a decade after Chinese and
Korean models had dual-SIM capability). The iPhone 12 will have 5G.
Trump will hopefully be defeated in November. The iPhone 12 or 13 will
have a fingerprint reader.

There are other reasons for the return of fingerprint readers as well.
Remember, not to replace Face-ID, put to provide an alternative when
it's not practical as well as to provide for dual biometric authentication.

The only real questions now are a) whether Touch ID will be ready for
the iPhone 12 in 2020 or if it will be delayed until 2021, and b) which
technology they'll use, Qualcomm's or their own patented system:
<https://www.macrumors.com/2019/12/03/2020-iphone-ultrasonic-fingerprint-reader-qualcomm/>.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 18.05.20 um 09:19 schrieb sms:

> On 5/17/2020 10:37 PM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> Am 17.05.20 um 20:39 schrieb JF Mezei:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> I know that FaceId has allowed Apple to do away with the home button and
>>> this increase screen real-estate. But if FaceID become too inconvenient
>>> when facemasks are now de-facto standard.
>>
>> For three or max four months?
>> Thats all guessworking at a very low level.
>
> It's not going to be just for three or four months. Already we are
> seeing new surges in the places that relaxed their shelter in place too
> soon.

Where I live it is not mandatory to wear these masks. Eben if Iwould I
could enter the code.

BTW: There is no *scientific* study on this planet that these masks
without filter are useful or in any way efficient.

This is exactely the reason why the Swiss Gouvernment did not make them
mandatory.

[Leo]

On 2020 May 18, , Joerg Lorenz wrote
(in article <r9te8k$u12$3...@dont-email.me>):

> BTW: There is no *scientific* study on this planet that these masks
> without filter are useful or in any way efficient.

If they stifle the spread of a sneeze or cough to any degree, they are. You
would think that within all the “studies” that governments have funded
over all the years, that would be one. It’s within all the studies
somewhere. You wearing one may not protect you. You wearing one will
protect others.

leo

[Wilf]

Glad to hear that. I love faceID and never liked touchID and hope that
even if they bring back the latter, that they will still keep faceID

Wilf

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 18.05.20 um 10:02 schrieb Leo:

> On 2020 May 18, , Joerg Lorenz wrote
> (in article <r9te8k$u12$3...@dont-email.me>):
>
>> BTW: There is no *scientific* study on this planet that these masks
>> without filter are useful or in any way efficient.
>
> If they stifle the spread of a sneeze or cough to any degree, they are. You

Why is it so difficult to understand *scientific*?
Do you have any idea what scientific means?

> would think that within all the “studies” that governments have funded
> over all the years, that would be one. It’s within all the studies
> somewhere. You wearing one may not protect you. You wearing one will
> protect others.

You believe everything you are told?
Your argument is by no means rational or plausible.

[Leo]

On 2020 May 18, , Joerg Lorenz wrote

(in article <r9tfom$b8a$1...@dont-email.me>):

>
> Why is it so difficult to understand *scientific*?
> Do you have any idea what scientific means?

I actually do. I have a BsChem and fifty years of life experience after it.
I also know what scientific means right now. Strip the governmental
garbage, produce the scientific results quickly, analyze the results, make
a decision, rinse and repeat until things are correct. Do you disagree?

> You believe everything you are told?
> Your argument is by no means rational or plausible.

I don’t believe anything I’m told regarding covid. Not by anybody. I do
believe that common sense sometimes doesn’t require peer reviewed
studies.
Here’s a hint for you as of right now regarding covid. Are you ready?
Nobody knows shit. We’re dealing with a six month old alien baby, but the
World is working on it with our best minds. Take that to the bank.
Your ignorant rant made me sleepy.

leo

[Arlen Holder]

On Sun, 17 May 2020 14:39:32 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:

> How will Apple react to widespread wearing of masks everywhere?

FaceID is, was, and always will be a silly marketing gimmick.
o Let Apple MARKETING spin their wheels trying to spin it again.

As a marketing gimmick - it works on the masses wonderfully.
o The Face-ID gimmick plays beautifully to the hoi polloi...

But nobody intelligent falls for marketing gimmicks like Face-ID.
--
Hint: Every iPhone ever sold is wide open today to 0-day bugs.

[Chris]

Ahem...

https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2013.43
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7186508/

As has been stated for years, the masks prevent (or at least reduce the
possibility of) those who are infectious from spreading it to others.

> This is exactely the reason why the Swiss Gouvernment did not make them
> mandatory.

It's a complex question, especially given the shortages to frontline
staff. I would not favour mandatory mask wearing if health and care
workers were not able to get what they need.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 18.05.20 um 12:08 schrieb Chris:

> On 18/05/2020 08:42, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> BTW: There is no *scientific* study on this planet that these masks
>> without filter are useful or in any way efficient.
>
> Ahem...
>
> https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2013.43
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7186508/
>
> As has been stated for years, the masks prevent (or at least reduce the
> possibility of) those who are infectious from spreading it to others.

This is a claim but by no means a scientific study with repeatable results.

>> This is exactely the reason why the Swiss Gouvernment did not make them
>> mandatory.
>
> It's a complex question, especially given the shortages to frontline
> staff. I would not favour mandatory mask wearing if health and care
> workers were not able to get what they need.

This has nothing to do with the decision.
Frontline medical people wear completely different masks and devices
than you do when you shop at WalMart's or use public transportation.

[nospam]

In article <BCmwG.40123$2k3....@fx32.iad>, JF Mezei

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > nope. the feature has *already* *been* *announced* and is in 13.5.
>
> Apple press release or some leak? ( detecting face mask by FaceID).

apple announcement.

> I wonder how it works in principle.

it detect the mask and switches to the passcode. duh.

[nospam]

In article <r9tcui$rcb$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> Remember, long before Covid-19 the limitations of Face-ID had become
> apparent in countries where masks had been commonly worn.

nope. iphones with face id were the top selling phones overall.

>
> Of course there are multiple reasons why iPhone sales in China have
> struggled, Face-Id is just one of many. Donald Trump, lateness with
> dual-SIM models, fewer localized apps than Android, lack of fingerprint
> reader, and no 5G are also contributing factors.

more of your bullshit.

<https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/04/29/apples-iphone-11-took-top-sp
ot-in-china-outperformed-larger-smartphone-market>
"iPhone 11 was the best-selling smartphone model in Q1; it has topped
China's best-selling models list for 7 consecutive months," added Qi.
"Consumers continued to purchase iPhones from e-commerce platforms
despite the shutdown of Apple stores across China during February."

> Many of those issues
> can be readily solved either by Apple or by U.S. voters. Dual SIM was
> solved with the Xr and Xs Max (but nearly a decade after Chinese and
> Korean models had dual-SIM capability). The iPhone 12 will have 5G.
> Trump will hopefully be defeated in November. The iPhone 12 or 13 will
> have a fingerprint reader.

yesterday you said there would not be an iphone 13, skipping to 15.

the next iphone, which if history is any guide will be 11s, will not
have a fingerprint reader.

[nospam]

In article <r9te8k$u12$3...@dont-email.me>, Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch>
wrote:

> BTW: There is no *scientific* study on this planet that these masks
> without filter are useful or in any way efficient.

oh yes there are.

[Lewis]

In message <BCmwG.40123$2k3....@fx32.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2020-05-17 22:02, nospam wrote:

>> nope. the feature has *already* *been* *announced* and is in 13.5.

> Apple press release or some leak? ( detecting face mask by FaceID).

Public betas are not "leaks"

> I wonder how it works in principle.

I'm sure you'll make something up that is entirely wrong.

--
Psychic convention cancelled due to unforeseen problems.

[Lewis]

It's in 13.5. I forgot that it was still in Public beta since everyone I
know is running it now.

It has been widely covered on dozens (if not hundreds) of websites.


--
'There's Mr Dibbler.' 'What's he selling this time?' 'I don't think
he's trying to sell anything, Mr Poons.' 'It's that bad? Then
we're probably in lots of trouble.' --Reaper Man

[nospam]

In article <slrnrc51a1....@ProMini.lan>, Lewis

<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> >> There is no waiting. Current iOS brings up the password screen
> >> immediately when you are wearing a mask.
>
> > I wore a mask this week, and that was not the case. 13.4.1
>
> It's in 13.5. I forgot that it was still in Public beta since everyone I
> know is running it now.
>
> It has been widely covered on dozens (if not hundreds) of websites.

it was on cnn and also the local tv news.

[sms]

Of course there is. The masks are not protection for YOU, they are
protection for everyone else.

"Researchers found that micro-droplets fell out of the air within 1.5
meters of the person who was wearing a mask, versus 5 meters for those
not wearing masks. When combined with social distancing, this suggests
that masks can effectively reduce transmission via micro-droplets.

Another recent study showed that unfitted surgical masks were 100%
effective in blocking seasonal coronavirus in droplets ejected during
breathing.

If only people with symptoms infected others, then only people with
symptoms would need to wear masks. But experts have shown that people
without symptoms pose a risk of infecting others. In fact, four recent
studies show that nearly half of patients are infected by people who do
not themselves have symptoms."

This video may help you understand the spread of droplets, and droplets
from people's mouths spread the virus:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=19&v=UNHgQq0BGLI>.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 18.05.20 um 13:09 schrieb nospam:

*ROTFLSTC*

[nospam]

In article <r9u25c$sai$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> >
> > BTW: There is no *scientific* study on this planet that these masks
> > without filter are useful or in any way efficient.
>
> Of course there is. The masks are not protection for YOU, they are
> protection for everyone else.

it's both.

>
> Another recent study showed that unfitted surgical masks were 100%
> effective in blocking seasonal coronavirus in droplets ejected during
> breathing.

another unnamed study which can be ignored, since nothing is 100%
effective.

[nospam]

In article <r9u51l$2ag$1...@dont-email.me>, Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch>

wrote:

> >> BTW: There is no *scientific* study on this planet that these masks
> >> without filter are useful or in any way efficient.
> >
> > oh yes there are.
>
> *ROTFLSTC*

you are ignorant.

[Wilf]

On 18/05/2020 15:16, nospam wrote:
> another unnamed study which can be ignored, since nothing is 100%
> effective.

Indeed so. Nothing is 100%. Should we therefore hold back from doing
anything at all until 100% certainty is reached?

Wilf

[nospam]

In article <r9ubjs$80n$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Wilf <wi...@replyto.newsgroup>

wrote:

> > another unnamed study which can be ignored, since nothing is 100%
> > effective.
>
> Indeed so. Nothing is 100%. Should we therefore hold back from doing
> anything at all until 100% certainty is reached?

the point is that any study that claims 100% anything is flawed,
assuming such a study even exists, which is unlikely given that sms
likes to make up all sorts of shit just for kicks.

[sms]

LOL, this reminds me of the advertising campaigns of the two second-tier
wireless carriers in the U.S.. They proclaimed "no network reaches 100%
of people." The implication was that every network was equal because
they all were not at 100%. I guess that some people fell for that logic.

[nospam]

In article <r9ucm9$5nn$2...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> >> another unnamed study which can be ignored, since nothing is 100%
> >> effective.
> >
> > Indeed so. Nothing is 100%. Should we therefore hold back from doing
> > anything at all until 100% certainty is reached?
> >
>

> LOL, this reminds me of the advertising campaigns of the two second-tier
> wireless carriers in the U.S.. They proclaimed "no network reaches 100%
> of people." The implication was that every network was equal because
> they all were not at 100%. I guess that some people fell for that logic.

that was not the implication.

[Chris]

Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 18.05.20 um 12:08 schrieb Chris:
>> On 18/05/2020 08:42, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> BTW: There is no *scientific* study on this planet that these masks
>>> without filter are useful or in any way efficient.
>>
>> Ahem...
>>
>> https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2013.43
>> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7186508/
>>
>> As has been stated for years, the masks prevent (or at least reduce the
>> possibility of) those who are infectious from spreading it to others.
>
> This is a claim but by no means a scientific study with repeatable results.

Are you claiming those two scientific papers are not reproducible? Based on
what evidence. Plus, that wasn't your original claim. There *are*
scientific studies supporting the use of non-medical masks.

>
>>> This is exactely the reason why the Swiss Gouvernment did not make them
>>> mandatory.
>>
>> It's a complex question, especially given the shortages to frontline
>> staff. I would not favour mandatory mask wearing if health and care
>> workers were not able to get what they need.
>
> This has nothing to do with the decision.
> Frontline medical people wear completely different masks and devices
> than you do when you shop at WalMart's or use public transportation.

Not always. I've seen plenty exemples on the news of people using clinical
masks. Need to remember that several types of mask are used clinically. So
yes, forcing people to use masks could impact on availability to clinical
staff - especially as Joe Public will be charged more for it.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 18.05.20 um 19:06 schrieb Chris:

> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>> Am 18.05.20 um 12:08 schrieb Chris:
>>> On 18/05/2020 08:42, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>>> BTW: There is no *scientific* study on this planet that these masks
>>>> without filter are useful or in any way efficient.
>>>
>>> Ahem...
>>>
>>> https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2013.43
>>> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7186508/
>>>
>>> As has been stated for years, the masks prevent (or at least reduce the
>>> possibility of) those who are infectious from spreading it to others.
>>
>> This is a claim but by no means a scientific study with repeatable results.
>
> Are you claiming those two scientific papers are not reproducible? Based on
> what evidence. Plus, that wasn't your original claim. There *are*
> scientific studies supporting the use of non-medical masks.

Why do you think you know it better than the tops shots in our
gouvernment? Is this the Trump-style kind of science?

You lack credibility anyway. No link no nothing to a study and the
results or an article in a reputed medical journal.

Done and EOD.

[Chris]

Leo <leobla...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 2020 May 18, , Joerg Lorenz wrote
> (in article <r9tfom$b8a$1...@dont-email.me>):
>>
>> Why is it so difficult to understand *scientific*?
>> Do you have any idea what scientific means?
>
> I actually do. I have a BsChem and fifty years of life experience after it.
> I also know what scientific means right now. Strip the governmental
> garbage, produce the scientific results quickly, analyze the results, make
> a decision, rinse and repeat until things are correct. Do you disagree?
>
>> You believe everything you are told?
>> Your argument is by no means rational or plausible.
>
> I don’t believe anything I’m told regarding covid. Not by anybody. I do
> believe that common sense sometimes doesn’t require peer reviewed
> studies.

Sigh. There's no such thing as common sense when comes to science. There's
only evidence and whether it supports a hypothesis or not.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 18.05.20 um 19:06 schrieb Chris:
> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:

>> This has nothing to do with the decision.
>> Frontline medical people wear completely different masks and devices
>> than you do when you shop at WalMart's or use public transportation.
>
> Not always. I've seen plenty exemples on the news of people using clinical
> masks. Need to remember that several types of mask are used clinically. So
> yes, forcing people to use masks could impact on availability to clinical
> staff - especially as Joe Public will be charged more for it.

Perhaps in Trumpistan.
And in the meantime completely OT.

[Chris]

Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 18.05.20 um 19:06 schrieb Chris:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> Am 18.05.20 um 12:08 schrieb Chris:
>>>> On 18/05/2020 08:42, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>>>> BTW: There is no *scientific* study on this planet that these masks
>>>>> without filter are useful or in any way efficient.
>>>>
>>>> Ahem...
>>>>
>>>> https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2013.43
>>>> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7186508/
>>>>
>>>> As has been stated for years, the masks prevent (or at least reduce the
>>>> possibility of) those who are infectious from spreading it to others.
>>>
>>> This is a claim but by no means a scientific study with repeatable results.
>>
>> Are you claiming those two scientific papers are not reproducible? Based on
>> what evidence. Plus, that wasn't your original claim. There *are*
>> scientific studies supporting the use of non-medical masks.
>
> Why do you think you know it better than the tops shots in our
> gouvernment?

I never claimed I did. You on the other hand claimed to know "exactly"
their decision process.

>
> You lack credibility anyway. No link no nothing to a study and the
> results or an article in a reputed medical journal

The links are literally quoted above. Incredible denialism.

> Done and EOD.

Oh really? ;)

[sms]

Not if you're a believer in Donald Trump. Then you can ignore all the
evidence and just go by your feelings. Inject bleach. Don't wear a face
covering and proclaim that governments that require them are tyrannical
for trying to slow the spread of disease. Whatever. Darwin was
apparently wrong.

[JF Mezei]

On 2020-05-18 13:14, Joerg Lorenz wrote:

> Perhaps in Trumpistan.

No, it's rge republic of Trumplandia :-)

But outside of the USA which currently has 0 credibility on antying to
do with COVID because all has to be cleared by White House's srript
writing staff, there are very credible statements on masks.

Masks, on their own, do not solve the problem. But by limiting reach of
infected droplets as one coughts/shouts, it also makes the 2m separation
even stronger protection.

However, the infected person will be handling his/her mask, get hands
full of the virus and then touch something. That is why it is still
important for everyone to continue to wash hands and nebver touch face
with fingers.

The problem is that resuming life requires times when people cannot keep
distance, for instance in public transit. Masks reduce the odds of
transmission in such cases (they do not eleminate).

[JF Mezei]

On 2020-05-18 13:31, sms wrote:

> Not if you're a believer in Donald Trump. Then you can ignore all the
> evidence and just go by your feelings. Inject bleach.

Trump was inviting bids for product placement during his presentations.
Abott Labs paid to have Trump say their name all the time, and Trump was
hoping for bids from various disinfectant companies to decide which one
he would constant name when suggesting people inject themselves with it.

As a charlattan/snake oil saleman, Trump wants to earn money for doing
advertsiing during his infomercials (aka: press conferences in the White
House studios).

[Chris]

The less said about that moron, the better.

> Whatever. Darwin was
> apparently wrong.

He's playing the long game ;)

[nospam]

In article <r9uur0$esp$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> >> Sigh. There's no such thing as common sense when comes to science. There's
> >> only evidence and whether it supports a hypothesis or not.
> >
> > Not if you're a believer in Donald Trump. Then you can ignore all the
> > evidence and just go by your feelings. Inject bleach. Don't wear a face
> > covering and proclaim that governments that require them are tyrannical
> > for trying to slow the spread of disease.
>
> The less said about that moron, the better.

except for stuff like this:

<https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-hes-taking-malaria-d
rug-in-case-he-gets-virus/ar-BB14gGDF>
Trump told reporters he has been taking the drug, hydroxychloroquine,
and a zinc supplement daily ³for about a week and a half now.² Trump
spent weeks pushing the drug as a potential cure for COVID-19 against
the cautionary advice of many of his administration's top medical
professionals. The drug has the potential to cause significant side
effects in some patients and has not been shown to combat the new
coronavirus.

Trump said his doctor did not recommend the drug to him, but he
requested it from the White House physician.

"I started taking it, because I think it¹s good," Trump said. "I¹ve
heard a lot of good stories.²

[Alan Browne]

On 2020-05-17 14:39, JF Mezei wrote:
> How will Apple react to widespread wearing of masks everywhere?
> This effectively makes current FaceID a hassle since you have to wait
> for it to fail before you can enter PIN.

I use a mask when shopping.

The hassle level is about a 2 on the open ended hassle scale, though I
did "downgrade" to a 6 digit passcode in lieu of my more complex
passcode which is WhenWiIIMeZeiGr0wUp?4321.

I tried to set the "alternate look" (whatever it's called) but it told
me to remove my mask....

[Arlen Holder]

On Mon, 18 May 2020 02:11:54 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

> Complete and udder lie.

You have to smile and cry when Lewis posts what he just posted...
o Essentially, I never personally met anyone _that_ incredibly ignorant.
--
And yet, people as dumb as Lewis seem to abound on this newsgroup.

[Chris]

Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2020-05-17 14:39, JF Mezei wrote:
>> How will Apple react to widespread wearing of masks everywhere?
>> This effectively makes current FaceID a hassle since you have to wait
>> for it to fail before you can enter PIN.
>
> I use a mask when shopping.
>
> The hassle level is about a 2 on the open ended hassle scale, though I
> did "downgrade" to a 6 digit passcode in lieu of my more complex
> passcode which is WhenWiIIMeZeiGr0wUp?4321.

Defeats the whole point of the security of FaceID, though, doesn't it?
Plus, we pay extra for the now useless technology. Didn't have these
problems with Touch ID.

[nospam]

In article <ra00hi$avt$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> > I use a mask when shopping.
> >
> > The hassle level is about a 2 on the open ended hassle scale, though I
> > did "downgrade" to a 6 digit passcode in lieu of my more complex
> > passcode which is WhenWiIIMeZeiGr0wUp?4321.
>
> Defeats the whole point of the security of FaceID, though, doesn't it?

not at all. it's still locked and encrypted.

nobody is going to bother brute forcing it unless the phone owner is a
target, in which case they have bigger problems.

however, a longer numeric pin code will make that more difficult while
still being easy to enter.

> Plus, we pay extra for the now useless technology. Didn't have these
> problems with Touch ID.

touch id does not work with gloves, which most people are also wearing.

[Lewis]

In message <180520201751027350%nos...@nospam.invalid> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Trump said his doctor did not recommend the drug to him, but he
> requested it from the White House physician.

Who is, sadly, probably giving him a placebo.

> "I started taking it, because I think it¹s good," Trump said. "I¹ve
> heard a lot of good stories.²

It can have fatal side-effects, so hopefully he *IS* taking it.

--
"Rosa sat, so Martin could walk. Martin walked, so Obama could run.
Obama ran, so our children can fly." (paraphrased from NPR)

[Lewis]

In message <ra00hi$avt$1...@dont-email.me> Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>> On 2020-05-17 14:39, JF Mezei wrote:
>>> How will Apple react to widespread wearing of masks everywhere?
>>> This effectively makes current FaceID a hassle since you have to wait
>>> for it to fail before you can enter PIN.
>>
>> I use a mask when shopping.
>>
>> The hassle level is about a 2 on the open ended hassle scale, though I
>> did "downgrade" to a 6 digit passcode in lieu of my more complex
>> passcode which is WhenWiIIMeZeiGr0wUp?4321.

> Defeats the whole point of the security of FaceID, though, doesn't it?

For many people the security of FaceID is pretty irrelevant right now.
My phone has left the house *at all* about once every two weeks. Most of
those times, I saw no other people.

> Plus, we pay extra for the now useless technology. Didn't have these
> problems with Touch ID.

Oh right, you live in the "touch ID is perfect: fantasy world and
repeatedly ignore the many many issues with touch ID (wt hanfs, old
hands, sweat, gloves, cold, heat, etc etc).

--
'Why?' he [Rincewind] said. The world is going to end. 'What, again?'

[Chris]

On 19/05/2020 13:00, Lewis wrote:
> In message <ra00hi$avt$1...@dont-email.me> Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>>> On 2020-05-17 14:39, JF Mezei wrote:
>>>> How will Apple react to widespread wearing of masks everywhere?
>>>> This effectively makes current FaceID a hassle since you have to wait
>>>> for it to fail before you can enter PIN.
>>>
>>> I use a mask when shopping.
>>>
>>> The hassle level is about a 2 on the open ended hassle scale, though I
>>> did "downgrade" to a 6 digit passcode in lieu of my more complex
>>> passcode which is WhenWiIIMeZeiGr0wUp?4321.
>
>> Defeats the whole point of the security of FaceID, though, doesn't it?
>
> For many people the security of FaceID is pretty irrelevant right now.
> My phone has left the house *at all* about once every two weeks. Most of
> those times, I saw no other people.

The main reason people leave the house is to buy food. Where upon
selecting the items, they need to be paid for and what is the most
contact-free way of doing that? Apple Pay! Except you can't with FaceID
and a mask, which means you have to drop down to the inherently insecure
PIN at exactly the place you don't want "shoulder" surfers. The nice big
screens making viewing your PIN easy from 2m metres away.

So, no. Not "irrelevant".

>
>> Plus, we pay extra for the now useless technology. Didn't have these
>> problems with Touch ID.
>
> Oh right, you live in the "touch ID is perfect: fantasy world and
> repeatedly ignore the many many issues with touch ID (wt hanfs, old
> hands, sweat, gloves, cold, heat, etc etc).

Please point to where I said TouchID is perfect. IMO there are simply
fewer issues with TouchID than FaceID - masks are just another example.

[Alan Browne]

On 2020-05-19 03:06, Chris wrote:
> Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>> On 2020-05-17 14:39, JF Mezei wrote:
>>> How will Apple react to widespread wearing of masks everywhere?
>>> This effectively makes current FaceID a hassle since you have to wait
>>> for it to fail before you can enter PIN.
>>
>> I use a mask when shopping.
>>
>> The hassle level is about a 2 on the open ended hassle scale, though I
>> did "downgrade" to a 6 digit passcode in lieu of my more complex
>> passcode which is WhenWiIIMeZeiGr0wUp?4321.
>
> Defeats the whole point of the security of FaceID, though, doesn't it?
> Plus, we pay extra for the now useless technology. Didn't have these
> problems with Touch ID.

Most of the time Face ID is what allows me in. 6 digits is plenty
secure for the code.

[Alan Browne]

Which is a terrible idea for most people since the gloves pickup stuff
and people then spread it to their steering wheels, shift lever, phones,
etc. ... or of course, touch their face.

Best to simply wash one's hands often as well as clean oft touched
surfaces and devices.

[nospam]

In article <bv-dnSye1vYUnFnD...@giganews.com>, Alan Browne

<bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:

> >
> > touch id does not work with gloves, which most people are also wearing.
>
> Which is a terrible idea for most people since the gloves pickup stuff
> and people then spread it to their steering wheels, shift lever, phones,
> etc. ... or of course, touch their face.

remove the gloves before getting back into the vehicle. put them in the
trunk if they're not disposable.

some stores have trash cans at the doorways so that gloves or masks are
not tossed in the parking lot.

> Best to simply wash one's hands often as well as clean oft touched
> surfaces and devices.

yes.

[nospam]

In article <ra0tjp$lhg$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> >
> > For many people the security of FaceID is pretty irrelevant right now.
> > My phone has left the house *at all* about once every two weeks. Most of
> > those times, I saw no other people.
>
> The main reason people leave the house is to buy food. Where upon
> selecting the items, they need to be paid for and what is the most
> contact-free way of doing that? Apple Pay! Except you can't with FaceID
> and a mask, which means you have to drop down to the inherently insecure
> PIN at exactly the place you don't want "shoulder" surfers. The nice big
> screens making viewing your PIN easy from 2m metres away.

where did you get the ridiculous idea that pin codes are inherently
insecure??

the default six digit pin code is *more* secure than touch id (assuming
it's not something stupid like 111111 or 123456). a longer pin code is
even better.

people standing at least 6 feet away are unlikely to see what you tap
in even if they were trying to snoop, which they aren't. they just want
to be done and get out of the store.

but if you're that paranoid, simply hold the phone facing away from
anyone nearby, or just use an apple watch. problem solved.

not only that, but knowing a pin code by itself is useless. someone
would *also* need your phone, which means they would have to follow you
out into the parking lot and steal it, and that's after you have a
several minute lead while they're still waiting for their groceries to
be rung up, and that's also assuming that they are successful in
stealing it.

> So, no. Not "irrelevant".

it's an absurd concocted scenario, making it entirely irrelevant.

> >> Plus, we pay extra for the now useless technology. Didn't have these
> >> problems with Touch ID.
> >
> > Oh right, you live in the "touch ID is perfect: fantasy world and
> > repeatedly ignore the many many issues with touch ID (wt hanfs, old
> > hands, sweat, gloves, cold, heat, etc etc).
>
> Please point to where I said TouchID is perfect. IMO there are simply
> fewer issues with TouchID than FaceID - masks are just another example.

false.

touch id is affected by significantly *more* issues, including wearing
gloves in the cold winter months or in many industries (e.g., medical,
food prep), sweaty hands in the hot summer months, wet or dirty hands,
unreadable fingerprints, those without fingers and those with motor
skill impairments where they easily can't touch a sensor.

the only issue with face id is wearing masks and nobody expected that
there would be a global pandemic where that is common. it's also
temporary and will return to being rare after there is an effective
vaccine and/or treatment.

[Lewis]

(10^6) * 80 ms is 22 hours. That means someone having your phone and
being able to automatically check every password without triggering the
iOS delay on wrong choices.

A ten digit PIN is good for up to 25 years.

If you use letters and numbers (single case) a six-digit password would
take 6 1/2 years. Add upper and lower case (A-z, 0-9) and you're well
over a century.

(62^6) * 80 ms = 52,592.8107 days

Make it 7 digits, and it's 9000 years.


--
Penny: The only nice thing about losing magic? The radio signals in my head
went out, too.
Kady: All’s quiet on the psychic front?

[Lewis]

If people are stupid, they are going to be just as stupid with or
without gloves.

Gloves are a definite aid to preventing contamination.

> Best to simply wash one's hands often as well as clean oft touched
> surfaces and devices.

Yes, you wash your hands after you take off the gloves.

--
I'd like to move us right along to a Peter Gibbons. Now we had a
chance to meet this young man, and boy that's just a straight
shooter with upper management written all over him.

[Chris]

Exactly. Gloves are only useful if changed regularly and when moving
between high/low risk areas. The general public have terrible glove
technique, to render the benefits useless.

> Best to simply wash one's hands often as well as clean oft touched
> surfaces and devices.

Yup.

BTW TouchID still works with thin, surgical gloves.

[Alan Browne]

On 2020-05-19 13:11, nospam wrote:
> In article <bv-dnSye1vYUnFnD...@giganews.com>, Alan Browne
> <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> touch id does not work with gloves, which most people are also wearing.
>>
>> Which is a terrible idea for most people since the gloves pickup stuff
>> and people then spread it to their steering wheels, shift lever, phones,
>> etc. ... or of course, touch their face.
>

> rem...

It's a terrible idea because most people don't have the discipline to
use them properly.

[Alan Browne]

On 2020-05-19 14:45, Lewis wrote:
> In message <bv-dnSye1vYUnFnD...@giganews.com> Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>> On 2020-05-19 06:38, nospam wrote:
>>> In article <ra00hi$avt$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I use a mask when shopping.
>>>>>
>>>>> The hassle level is about a 2 on the open ended hassle scale, though I
>>>>> did "downgrade" to a 6 digit passcode in lieu of my more complex
>>>>> passcode which is WhenWiIIMeZeiGr0wUp?4321.
>>>>
>>>> Defeats the whole point of the security of FaceID, though, doesn't it?
>>>
>>> not at all. it's still locked and encrypted.
>>>
>>> nobody is going to bother brute forcing it unless the phone owner is a
>>> target, in which case they have bigger problems.
>>>
>>> however, a longer numeric pin code will make that more difficult while
>>> still being easy to enter.
>>>
>>>> Plus, we pay extra for the now useless technology. Didn't have these
>>>> problems with Touch ID.
>>>
>>> touch id does not work with gloves, which most people are also wearing.
>
>> Which is a terrible idea for most people since the gloves pickup stuff
>> and people then spread it to their steering wheels, shift lever, phones,
>> etc. ... or of course, touch their face.
>
> If people are stupid, they are going to be just as stupid with or
> without gloves.

Easier for people to wash their hands than manage gloves.

> Gloves are a definite aid to preventing contamination.

They are useless unless people think of every little thing they do while
wearing them.

[Alan Browne]

On 2020-05-19 14:44, Lewis wrote:
> In message <bv-dnS2e1va7nFnD...@giganews.com> Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>> On 2020-05-19 03:06, Chris wrote:
>>> Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2020-05-17 14:39, JF Mezei wrote:
>>>>> How will Apple react to widespread wearing of masks everywhere?
>>>>> This effectively makes current FaceID a hassle since you have to wait
>>>>> for it to fail before you can enter PIN.
>>>>
>>>> I use a mask when shopping.
>>>>
>>>> The hassle level is about a 2 on the open ended hassle scale, though I
>>>> did "downgrade" to a 6 digit passcode in lieu of my more complex
>>>> passcode which is WhenWiIIMeZeiGr0wUp?4321.
>>>
>>> Defeats the whole point of the security of FaceID, though, doesn't it?
>>> Plus, we pay extra for the now useless technology. Didn't have these
>>> problems with Touch ID.
>
>> Most of the time Face ID is what allows me in. 6 digits is plenty
>> secure for the code.
>
> (10^6) * 80 ms is 22 hours. That means someone having your phone and
> being able to automatically check every password without triggering the
> iOS delay on wrong choices.

Yeah. I'm a real target for that sort of thing. Last time shaking a
martini and seducing the Congressman's wife while fending off KGB agents
with my Walther PPK, a Chinese agent in cahoots with Mossad almost got a
hold of my phone ...

[nospam]

In article <eJqdnTdwMvMVyFnD...@giganews.com>, Alan Browne

<bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:

> >>> touch id does not work with gloves, which most people are also wearing.
> >>
> >> Which is a terrible idea for most people since the gloves pickup stuff
> >> and people then spread it to their steering wheels, shift lever, phones,
> >> etc. ... or of course, touch their face.
> >
> > rem...
>
> It's a terrible idea because most people don't have the discipline to
> use them properly.

most people don't know how to properly use masks either, to where there
has to be articles such as this:

<https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/well/live/coronavirus-face-mask-mist
akes.html>

[nospam]

In article <ra1kbc$kc6$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> BTW TouchID still works with thin, surgical gloves.

sometimes, but definitely not reliably.

[JF Mezei]

On 2020-05-19 14:45, Lewis wrote:

> Gloves are a definite aid to preventing contamination.

Please explain the mechanism by which normal citizens get protection by
wearing rubber gloves.

[sms]

Glove technique is easily taught. I guess since I'm married to an RN who
teaches her staff about proper glove technique, as part of "Standard
precautions" for infection control, I picked it up as well.
<https://www.cdc.gov/infectioncontrol/basics/standard-precautions.html>.
There are additional procedures for properly donning and removing gloves
that are just common sense so you never touch any potentially
contaminated surfaces.

I recall being in a Safeway supermarket, getting sandwiches made, and my
wife commenting on the fact that the employees in the deli were
practicing proper glove technique to the extreme. They went through so
many pairs of gloves making two sandwiches that I wonder how they could
make any money on a $3.99 breakfast sandwich.

[sms]

On 5/19/2020 2:55 PM, Alan Browne wrote:

<snip>

> Easier for people to wash their hands than manage gloves.

Yes, if they're somewhere where washing their hands is possible. Also
better to wash your hands than use hand sanitizer, but that's not always
possible either.

> They are useless unless people think of every little thing they do while
> wearing them.

It's second nature to not cross-contaminate, if you have an ounce of
common sense.

[nospam]

In article <ra1ocp$dbv$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> I recall being in a Safeway supermarket, getting sandwiches made, and my
> wife commenting on the fact that the employees in the deli were
> practicing proper glove technique to the extreme. They went through so
> many pairs of gloves making two sandwiches that I wonder how they could
> make any money on a $3.99 breakfast sandwich.

you've previously said that you observed grocery store workers handling
food and money using the same gloves, something which concerned you.

[nospam]

In article <ra1oh0$dbv$2...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> > They are useless unless people think of every little thing they do while
> > wearing them.
>
> It's second nature to not cross-contaminate, if you have an ounce of
> common sense.

that rules out most of the population.

[Chris]

Yet definitely better than Faceid with a mask...

[sms]

On 5/19/2020 8:22 AM, Chris wrote:

<snip>

> The main reason people leave the house is to buy food. Where upon
> selecting the items, they need to be paid for and what is the most
> contact-free way of doing that? Apple Pay! Except you can't with FaceID
> and a mask, which means you have to drop down to the inherently insecure
> PIN at exactly the place you don't want "shoulder" surfers. The nice big
> screens making viewing your PIN easy from 2m metres away.

A contactless credit card is just as contact free, with no phone,
unlocking, and at least in the U.S. there is no need to enter a PIN with
a credit card. Most U.S. credit cards are finally contactless. But in
Chip & PIN countries things are not so easy.

Or buy an old iPhone 6s for the duration of the pandemic if you need to
use Apple Pay while wearing a mask and don't want to enter a PIN. For me
there's a financial benefit to using Apple Pay, Google Pay, or Samsung
Pay, since one credit card I have gives 50% more cash back for mobile
payments than I can get with another card (3% versus 2%).

[Chris]

Which is ridiculous. Chefs and cooks don't wear gloves, so there's no need
to for good hygiene.

[Chris]

sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 5/19/2020 8:22 AM, Chris wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> The main reason people leave the house is to buy food. Where upon
>> selecting the items, they need to be paid for and what is the most
>> contact-free way of doing that? Apple Pay! Except you can't with FaceID
>> and a mask, which means you have to drop down to the inherently insecure
>> PIN at exactly the place you don't want "shoulder" surfers. The nice big
>> screens making viewing your PIN easy from 2m metres away.
>
> A contactless credit card is just as contact free, with no phone,
> unlocking, and at least in the U.S. there is no need to enter a PIN with
> a credit card. Most U.S. credit cards are finally contactless. But in
> Chip & PIN countries things are not so easy.

Contactless Chip and PIN is just as easy except there's a limit: £45 in the
UK. Above that you have to enter the pin.

That's the advantage of Apple Pay, there's no limit apart from at (stupid)
retailers that implement the same contactless limit as the physical card.
Yes, Tesco, I'm looking at you!

>
> Or buy an old iPhone 6s for the duration of the pandemic if you need to
> use Apple Pay while wearing a mask and don't want to enter a PIN. For me
> there's a financial benefit to using Apple Pay, Google Pay, or Samsung
> Pay, since one credit card I have gives 50% more cash back for mobile
> payments than I can get with another card (3% versus 2%).

Cashback is not really a thing here, because of the limit CCs can charge
retailers.

[nospam]

In article <ra2sai$omp$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>

wrote:

> >> BTW TouchID still works with thin, surgical gloves.
> >
> > sometimes, but definitely not reliably.
>
> Yet definitely better than Faceid with a mask...

except that most people do *not* wear thin surgical gloves, even during
the pandemic.

restaurant and grocery store workers might, but they're not going to be
using their phone while on duty.

touch id will *not* work with the usual gloves, such as winter gloves,
protective gloves, etc.

[nospam]

In article <ra3028$fe1$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Chefs and cooks don't wear gloves, so there's no need
> to for good hygiene.

of course there is, and they do, as well as masks.

<https://www.cnbc.com/video/2020/04/16/ny-chef-cooks-for-frontline-hospi
tal-workers-fighting-coronavirus.html>
Wearing latex gloves and a medical mask he cooks and packs 200
hot meals a week and personally delivers them to local hospital
workers in NY's Westchester county, one of the state's earliest
COVID-19 hotspots

[Lewis]

Not for many people, no.

--
Truth is seen through keyholes

[Lewis]

Are you serious?

Wait, yes, you probably are.

--
Cecil is made of blood and unfinished leather

[Chris]

On 2020-05-20 12:08:59 +0000, nospam said:

> In article <ra3028$fe1$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Chefs and cooks don't wear gloves, so there's no need
>> to for good hygiene.
>
> of course there is, and they do, as well as masks.

Not routinely in any restaurant or commercial kitchen. The only people
who wear gloves for food prep are those who don't understand good
hygiene or have a plaster/bandage on their hand.

>
> <https://www.cnbc.com/video/2020/04/16/ny-chef-cooks-for-frontline-hospi
> tal-workers-fighting-coronavirus.html>
> Wearing latex gloves and a medical mask he cooks and packs 200
> hot meals a week and personally delivers them to local hospital
> workers in NY's Westchester county, one of the state's earliest
> COVID-19 hotspots

That's nothing to do with food hygiene but to protect him and his
coworkers during the crisis.

[nospam]

In article <ra3es5$fri$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>

wrote:

> >> Chefs and cooks don't wear gloves, so there's no need
> >> to for good hygiene.
> >
> > of course there is, and they do, as well as masks.
>
> Not routinely in any restaurant or commercial kitchen. The only people
> who wear gloves for food prep are those who don't understand good
> hygiene or have a plaster/bandage on their hand.

they do now.

> > <https://www.cnbc.com/video/2020/04/16/ny-chef-cooks-for-frontline-hospi
> > tal-workers-fighting-coronavirus.html>
> > Wearing latex gloves and a medical mask he cooks and packs 200
> > hot meals a week and personally delivers them to local hospital
> > workers in NY's Westchester county, one of the state's earliest
> > COVID-19 hotspots
>
> That's nothing to do with food hygiene but to protect him and his
> coworkers during the crisis.

exactly the point.

[Chris]

On 2020-05-20 12:08:58 +0000, nospam said:

> In article <ra2sai$omp$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>> BTW TouchID still works with thin, surgical gloves.
>>>
>>> sometimes, but definitely not reliably.
>>
>> Yet definitely better than Faceid with a mask...
>
> except that most people do *not* wear thin surgical gloves, even during
> the pandemic.

You're now making my argument for me. During the pandemic people *are*
wearing masks which favours touchid over faceid. Faceid encourages
people to touch their mask which is the *biggest* mistake anyone can
make when wearing a protective mask.

> restaurant and grocery store workers might, but they're not going to be
> using their phone while on duty.

Correct. Rendering the point irrelevant.

>
> touch id will *not* work with the usual gloves, such as winter gloves,
> protective gloves, etc.

Correct. In cold climates people are accustomed to taking their gloves
off when necessary. Not a big deal. If you're wearing protective gloves
you're likely in an environment where you won't want to be using a
mobile phone. and faceid will *not* work with rain-covered glasses (I
know from personal experience), when a hat is down too low or with
*any* protective facial equipment.

[Chris]

...and completely out of context. Thereby making exactly the *wrong* point.

[nospam]

In article <ra3nkv$f28$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>

wrote:

> >>>> BTW TouchID still works with thin, surgical gloves.
> >>>
> >>> sometimes, but definitely not reliably.
> >>
> >> Yet definitely better than Faceid with a mask...
> >
> > except that most people do *not* wear thin surgical gloves, even during
> > the pandemic.
>
> You're now making my argument for me.

the point is that they're wearing other types of gloves, which *won't*
work with touch it.

> During the pandemic people *are*
> wearing masks which favours touchid over faceid. Faceid encourages
> people to touch their mask which is the *biggest* mistake anyone can
> make when wearing a protective mask.

face id was not designed for a global pandemic. how could it be? nobody
expected this, and at some point, hopefully sooner than later, it will
be mostly gone and mask wearing will be rare, as it was prior to this.

> > restaurant and grocery store workers might, but they're not going to be
> > using their phone while on duty.
>
> Correct. Rendering the point irrelevant.
>
> >
> > touch id will *not* work with the usual gloves, such as winter gloves,
> > protective gloves, etc.
>
> Correct. In cold climates people are accustomed to taking their gloves
> off when necessary. Not a big deal. If you're wearing protective gloves
> you're likely in an environment where you won't want to be using a
> mobile phone. and faceid will *not* work with rain-covered glasses (I
> know from personal experience), when a hat is down too low or with
> *any* protective facial equipment.

there are edge cases for both, however, touch id has *far* more of them
and more common ones than face id, making face id more useful most of
the time.

it's cold enough for gloves roughly six months of the year, which means
people can't use their phones while outside, including waiting for
public transportation, uber or just walking.

meanwhile, face id works without issue.

use conductive gloves, which are widely sold, and there are no issues
with interacting with the phone.

[sms]

On 5/20/2020 3:23 AM, Chris wrote:
> sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/19/2020 8:22 AM, Chris wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> The main reason people leave the house is to buy food. Where upon
>>> selecting the items, they need to be paid for and what is the most
>>> contact-free way of doing that? Apple Pay! Except you can't with FaceID
>>> and a mask, which means you have to drop down to the inherently insecure
>>> PIN at exactly the place you don't want "shoulder" surfers. The nice big
>>> screens making viewing your PIN easy from 2m metres away.
>>
>> A contactless credit card is just as contact free, with no phone,
>> unlocking, and at least in the U.S. there is no need to enter a PIN with
>> a credit card. Most U.S. credit cards are finally contactless. But in
>> Chip & PIN countries things are not so easy.
>
> Contactless Chip and PIN is just as easy except there's a limit: £45 in the
> UK. Above that you have to enter the pin.

The issue is touching the terminal to enter the PIN. Those touch screens
are hotbeds when it comes to spreading viruses. With mobile wallet
payments there is usually no reason to have to touch the screen (though
in some cases, in self-checkout lines, there are times when it's necessary).

> That's the advantage of Apple Pay, there's no limit apart from at (stupid)
> retailers that implement the same contactless limit as the physical card.
> Yes, Tesco, I'm looking at you!

Perhaps that's the case in the UK, but in other countries it's often the
issuing bank, not the merchant, that sets the mobile wallet amount limit.

I've never run into a limit in the U.S., probably the most I've charged
in a single in-person mobile-wallet transaction is $900.

>> Or buy an old iPhone 6s for the duration of the pandemic if you need to
>> use Apple Pay while wearing a mask and don't want to enter a PIN. For me
>> there's a financial benefit to using Apple Pay, Google Pay, or Samsung
>> Pay, since one credit card I have gives 50% more cash back for mobile
>> payments than I can get with another card (3% versus 2%).
>
> Cashback is not really a thing here, because of the limit CCs can charge
> retailers.

Yes, and personally I think that it's a better idea to limit those fees
even though if such a law was in place in the U.S. I'd lose about $1800
per year in "free" money. But since the cost of credit card fees is
built into the whole pricing structure for goods and services, it would
be foolish to not take advantage of it.

What I find amusing is people that have a large number of credit cards,
which give varying percentages for different categories, and they have
to always decide which one to use for which kind of purchase. This might
gain them an extra $100 or so per year, but what a hassle.

[sms]

On 5/20/2020 3:16 AM, Chris wrote:

<snip>

> Which is ridiculous. Chefs and cooks don't wear gloves, so there's no need
> to for good hygiene.

A chef or cook working in the kitchen, probably is not wearing gloves,
but I was talking about a deli-counter employee touching food, much of
which is served uncooked, and who is also taking orders and accepting
payment. Every time they have to switch between taking money and
touching food they have to re-glove.

I think this was a big impetus for what Costco did at their food court
by switching to mainly touch-screen kiosk ordering. They still have one
line for cash, but it's not widely used. Prior to this, they'd often
have one employee per line who took orders, took money, and retrieved
your order. You could see the constant glove changes. Now they only need
one employee to service the few members that don't want to use the
kiosk, or want to pay cash.

[nospam]

In article <ra3ps6$u0v$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> What I find amusing is people that have a large number of credit cards,
> which give varying percentages for different categories, and they have
> to always decide which one to use for which kind of purchase. This might
> gain them an extra $100 or so per year, but what a hassle.

most people have 2-3 credit cards and don't bother, however, those who
do play the game are well rewarded, *far* more than $100, and with
minimal hassle.

[JF Mezei]

On 2020-05-20 09:24, Lewis wrote:

>> Please explain the mechanism by which normal citizens get protection by
>> wearing rubber gloves.
>
> Are you serious?
>
> Wait, yes, you probably are.

Yes, I am serious.


Virus does not penetrate your body via hands. So the glove does not
protect you from catching it.

If you work at Subway, and change the basic glove every time you start a
new sandwich, then it prevents viruses on your fingers from touching
cash register from going into customer's food. But this assumes you
change gloves for each sandwich (or in case of hospitals, change gloves
between patients).

A citizen wearing same pair of gloves betwene multiple different
contacts offers no protection for himself or people he/she contacts.

[sms]

On 5/20/2020 10:56 AM, JF Mezei wrote:

<snip>

> A citizen wearing same pair of gloves betwene multiple different
> contacts offers no protection for himself or people he/she contacts.

The whole concept of disposable gloves is not wear them for multiple
contacts, and to not have to wash your hands when it's not possible to
do so. When you're using a gas pump and touching all the buttons and the
screen, and holding the nozzle, it's probably a good idea to use gloves
since you probably won't be able to wash your hands right away
afterward. Hand sanitizer is second best.

[sms]

On 5/20/2020 10:56 AM, JF Mezei wrote:

<snip>

> If you work at Subway, and change the basic glove every time you start a
> new sandwich, then it prevents viruses on your fingers from touching
> cash register from going into customer's food. But this assumes you
> change gloves for each sandwich (or in case of hospitals, change gloves
> between patients).

And this is exactly what happens, both at Subway and at hospitals.

When we watched the sandwich maker at Safeway making two sandwiches, and
using four pairs of gloves in the process, it was impressive to my wife,
an RN, who has to impress upon her staff the importance of proper
"Standard Precautions."

I think that the Safeway employee had been trained to use different
gloves for every sandwich, even if she was not touching anything else
between sandwiches. While the food items she touched were not the reason
for so many glove changes, it may have been that she was also touching
the controls of the oven between sandwiches, and those controls could
have been touched by someone else.

[Arlen Holder]

On Mon, 18 May 2020 10:16:21 -0400, nospam wrote:

>> Of course there is. The masks are not protection for YOU, they are
>> protection for everyone else.
>
> it's both.

See also:
o What are the best materials for making a DIY ~0.3 micron mask
at home to filter in the coronavirus?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.home.repair/Mz_aRrYW_Ow/OxmW-4yCBAAJ>

[Chris]

On 2020-05-20 17:46:41 +0000, sms said:

> On 5/20/2020 3:16 AM, Chris wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Which is ridiculous. Chefs and cooks don't wear gloves, so there's no need
>> to for good hygiene.
>
> A chef or cook working in the kitchen, probably is not wearing gloves,
> but I was talking about a deli-counter employee touching food, much of
> which is served uncooked, and who is also taking orders and accepting
> payment. Every time they have to switch between taking money and
> touching food they have to re-glove.

Or they could just wash their hands. Where I used to live there was a
fantastic butcher (won many awards) and none of the staff wore gloves.
They simply washed their hands before/after handling money or moving
between the cooked and raw sections. I still miss their sausages.

I've seen many a deli-counter operative wearing gloves which, by the
level of sweatiness inside, hadn't been changed in hours :-o

[Chris]

On 2020-05-20 17:24:10 +0000, nospam said:

> In article <ra3nkv$f28$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>>>> BTW TouchID still works with thin, surgical gloves.
>>>>>
>>>>> sometimes, but definitely not reliably.
>>>>
>>>> Yet definitely better than Faceid with a mask...
>>>
>>> except that most people do *not* wear thin surgical gloves, even during
>>> the pandemic.
>>
>> You're now making my argument for me.
>
> the point is that they're wearing other types of gloves, which *won't*
> work with touch it.
>
>> During the pandemic people *are*
>> wearing masks which favours touchid over faceid. Faceid encourages
>> people to touch their mask which is the *biggest* mistake anyone can
>> make when wearing a protective mask.
>
> face id was not designed for a global pandemic. how could it be? nobody
> expected this, and at some point, hopefully sooner than later, it will
> be mostly gone and mask wearing will be rare, as it was prior to this.

There are many countries where face masks have been common for over a
decade. Plus, many cultures have face coverings as a rule (e.g. the
middle east and north africa).

If there is no vaccine for COVID-19 face masks will be the norm globally.

>
>>> restaurant and grocery store workers might, but they're not going to be
>>> using their phone while on duty.
>>
>> Correct. Rendering the point irrelevant.
>>
>>>
>>> touch id will *not* work with the usual gloves, such as winter gloves,
>>> protective gloves, etc.
>>
>> Correct. In cold climates people are accustomed to taking their gloves
>> off when necessary. Not a big deal. If you're wearing protective gloves
>> you're likely in an environment where you won't want to be using a
>> mobile phone. and faceid will *not* work with rain-covered glasses (I
>> know from personal experience), when a hat is down too low or with
>> *any* protective facial equipment.
>
> there are edge cases for both, however, touch id has *far* more of them
> and more common ones than face id, making face id more useful most of
> the time.

Disagree. Every day I have problems with face ID. It's either not
pointing at my face quite right (usually because it's lying flat on a
table), or I happen to look away at the wrong time, or I'm scratching
my nose or I'm squinting in the sun or I'm drinking or the top of the
phone is (slightly) obscured or I'm lying on my side in bed or ... the
list goes on. Frankly faceid is fragile.

None of the above would effect touchid.

>
> it's cold enough for gloves roughly six months of the year,

Where? Siberia? Most people live outside of the Arctic Circle.

[nospam]

In article <ra5hus$fh4$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> >> During the pandemic people *are*
> >> wearing masks which favours touchid over faceid. Faceid encourages
> >> people to touch their mask which is the *biggest* mistake anyone can
> >> make when wearing a protective mask.
> >
> > face id was not designed for a global pandemic. how could it be? nobody
> > expected this, and at some point, hopefully sooner than later, it will
> > be mostly gone and mask wearing will be rare, as it was prior to this.
>
> There are many countries where face masks have been common for over a
> decade. Plus, many cultures have face coverings as a rule (e.g. the
> middle east and north africa).

the number of people who wear masks or face coverings pre-covid is very
small.

in fact, the number is so small that it did not have any adverse effect
on the sales of iphones with face id.

the iphone x became the best selling iphone when it was released, only
to be surpassed by the xr and now the 11, all of which have face id.

> If there is no vaccine for COVID-19 face masks will be the norm globally.

there is zero evidence that will be the norm.

in fact, there is ample evidence it will not be.

what will be common is people washing their hands far more frequently,
which means wet hands and the inability to use touch id.

people will also be washing their hands inside their own home, where no
masks would be worn, and where face id will work with wet hands without
any issue.

> >
> > there are edge cases for both, however, touch id has *far* more of them
> > and more common ones than face id, making face id more useful most of
> > the time.
>
> Disagree. Every day I have problems with face ID. It's either not
> pointing at my face quite right (usually because it's lying flat on a
> table), or I happen to look away at the wrong time, or I'm scratching
> my nose or I'm squinting in the sun or I'm drinking or the top of the
> phone is (slightly) obscured or I'm lying on my side in bed or ... the
> list goes on. Frankly faceid is fragile.

that's not the usual experience, plus the acceptance angle is wider now.

the reality is that face id works much better than touch id and in more
situations, plus it is also significantly more secure.

however, nothing is perfect and there will be edge cases on both.

> None of the above would effect touchid.

meanwhile, those who wear gloves in the winter or for protection from
chemicals or other dangers can't use touch id, nor can those with wet
or dirty hands, unreadable fingerprints or motor skill impairments
where they can't easily touch a sensor.

a *lot* more people have problems and in a lot more situations with
touch id than face id.

> > it's cold enough for gloves roughly six months of the year,
>
> Where? Siberia? Most people live outside of the Arctic Circle.

anywhere outside of the tropics.

chicago had snow a month ago, in the middle of april:
<https://chicago.suntimes.com/2020/4/17/21225045/chicago-snow-april-weat
her-totals>

it also snowed in new york, at the end of april:
<https://www.newyorkupstate.com/weather/2020/04/yes-over-a-foot-of-snow-
fell-in-upstate-ny-in-late-april.html>

[Alan Browne]

On 2020-05-19 18:30, nospam wrote:
> In article <eJqdnTdwMvMVyFnD...@giganews.com>, Alan Browne

> <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> touch id does not work with gloves, which most people are also wearing.
>>>>
>>>> Which is a terrible idea for most people since the gloves pickup stuff
>>>> and people then spread it to their steering wheels, shift lever, phones,
>>>> etc. ... or of course, touch their face.
>>>
>>> rem...
>>
>> It's a terrible idea because most people don't have the discipline to
>> use them properly.
>

> most people don't know how to properly use masks either

Much easier (with correct technique) since one doesn't touch objects and
surfaces with their faces. Just need the discipline around the mask.