Your opinions are based on exceedingly bad and outdated security practices, and you seem proud of this for some reason.
I'm wondering what you might say if you were living in the time when cars began to replace horses. Would you have said cars were a terrible mode of transportation because they won't defend themselves against a thief and don't consume hay?
Yes, your argument is based on the idea that fingerprints can't be leaked in practice, which is false.
It's worked for years against a variety of scanners, and is likely always going to be viable because of how scanners work -- a thin overlay can be made of things that are indistinguishable from a finger surface to the scanner, but which triggers the critical points.
If you think that's changed in the past few years (which you seem to), I would appreciate something a little more substantive than your random comment on HN.
I'm wondering what you might say if you were living in the time when cars began to replace horses. Would you have said cars were a terrible mode of transportation because they won't defend themselves against a thief and don't consume hay?