Talk:Retinal scan
| WikiProject Technology | (Rated Start-class) | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||
 |
It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
 |
(untitled)
Retinal Scan and Iris Recog are two completely different technologies. This is similar to suggesting that fingerprint scanning and signature reading be merged to one page.
Agree 100%, which is probably not necessary as it's pure logic. People should get some info before having the freedom to propose merges. I have now removed the flag proposing the merge. --nicowalker 22:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Photo
I photo of the machine would be great. I'd love to see what it looks like. 161.130.178.151 (talk) 15:30, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
What company?
What company has used retina-scan devices with its ATM machines? Thanks very much for any help you can give, Pat Pcrepeau (talk) 07:48, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Broken Link
"Iris/Retinal Identification. Wcu.Edu. Retrieved on 2007-04-02."
This source is no longer working, and it redirects away from the original site of the references and to another page on Wcu.Edu. Can anyone reach the page/change the link? I need as many websites as possible for my retinal scan research Vincent2128 (talk) 06:16, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- The wcu.edu link is gone, but I'm suspicious of the sentence using that source: "Retinal scanning has been used in prisons, for ATM identity verification and the prevention of welfare fraud.[6]" I find uses of iris scans in prisons (e.g. http://phys.org/news186501730.html), ATMs (e.g. This 1999 Slashdot thread used the terms "retina scan" for an ATM but the commenters note that it was actually an iris scan). A 2002 book on biometrics says Illinois experimented with retina scans to track welfare recipients in the 1990s but then dropped the program because the scans are too cumbersome. I suggest the sentence simply be dropped unless someone provides better references. Andrew Kuchling (talk) 11:40, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
