Though I agree with the rest of your post, I feel the need to reiterate that your fingerprint is much easier to be stolen than a password. Seriously, if I were to break into your home to get to your computer, I am going to find your fingerprint literally a thousand times, readily available to be copied.
Okaaay. And just how much of these are recoverable to anyone without very specialized expertise? Such as police forensics squad? There is a reason you need a team of trained agents to gather even a smidgen of proof on crime scene, you know.
Cute. For the sake of the argument I'm going to ignore the obvious answer, i.e. the probable attacker being prepared and equiped to do the job, due to being either a) being paid to do (industrial) espionage or b) a member of a government agency. Forensics squads take much more from a crime scene than finger prints. They also know how to take evidence in a way that makes it usable in court and that doesn't contaminate the crime scene. The attacker only needs to obtain the finger print and use it. It's icredibly easy to do. There are tutorial videos on youtube, as you would have known, had you not just talked out of your ass without doing any research at all.
I have reasonable experience in 'unlocking' computers for relatives who didn't knew what they were doing and forgot password, I have exactly zero expectation of being able to spoof fingerprint reader unless you were nice enough to put clear prints inked on white paper or something like that.
How nice for you. What kind of argument are you making here? "I can't do it, so nobody can"? Anyways, what this shows is your lazyness and willful ignorance, since one simple google search would have told you everything you needed to know.
Uh-huh... how are you going to distinguish my fingerprints from those of everyone else living in my home?
Nope. Why would I even need to? How many people live in your home? How many people touch e.g. your diary?
Also, I think you vastly overestimate how easy it is to recover a good print from most surfaces.
Nope. That you belive that shows that you haven't done your research.
Your best bet would probably be a fingerprint off a water glass or ceramic plate, not so much from my couch.
That's a black and white fallacy. I never claimed I could take fingerprints of a couch, I wouldn't even need to, as you point out yourself.
Most of those "thousands" of copies will not be useful for your purpose.
That's a black and white fallacy, too. Even if it were true, I still only need at most ten usable finger prints per inhabitant, nobody cares about the thousands of unusable prints.
Seriously, if I were to break into your home to get to your computer, I am going to find your fingerprint literally a thousand times, readily available to be copied.
True (to the extent that others have pointd out), however you will have to KNOW that I use fingerprint security
Nope. I just have to credibly suspect that you do. Though I wonder if a "move finger over scanner" message at startup wouldn't give me a clue.
AND know which finger I use.
Nope. I just use every print I find. It's not like trying ten times at the most is going to kill me.
I have a couple of youtube videos open in other tabs that were the very first results of the one search I made. I am not going to post them, though, because it literally took just ten seconds. Anyone who claims that fingerprints can't be taken by amateurs with household items was to lazy to make that ten second effort. Seriously, it's like you guys were claimed the sky is red. Take a fucking moment to look; no, it's clearly not. We shouldn't even BE on this tangent.
Economic Left/Right: -7.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.74 This is pre-WWII. You can sort of tell from the sketch style, from thee way it refers to Japan (Japan in the 1950s was still rebuilding from WWII), the spelling of Tokyo, lots of details. Nothing obvious... except that the upper right hand corner of the page reads "November 1931."