On Friday 25 November 2011 22:38:12 Rony wrote: > On 11/25/2011 08:39 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > On Friday 25 November 2011 18:40:32 Shamit Verma wrote: > >>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:30 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> As an interesting aside: > >>> The UIDAI specified error margins and duplicate verification system is > >>> such a hoot, that they cant even verify themselves how many false > >>> rejects or accepts are there. As per their specifications there will be > >>> well above 200 million duplicates or rejects, which translates to 200 > >>> million fakes - you dont know wether the Fprint is fake or the data is > >>> fake. > >> > >> It is a start. Like any system, there would be technical failures > >> which will have to be corrected. > > > > Yes. Do it with your money, not with public money. And dont make utterly > > nonsensical claims. If you were a company (Read Infosys), making such > > claims, you would get sued proper. Infosys was sued by the S'pore > > government when they did this. Ofcourse such niceties skips the brainless > > UIDAI and their supporters. > > The bad implementation of a good idea does not make the idea bad.
So what was wrong with the old system that this one corrects? -- http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
