> I could see some value, perhaps, in a tablet that I share with my wife, where each of us have our own accounts, with independent configurations, apps, and settings. We could each conveniently identify ourselves by our fingerprint. But biometrics cannot, and absolutely must not, be used to authenticate an identity.
I am not seeing the distinction. What exactly is the difference between an "identification" and an "authenticated identification"? With the family tablet, the fingerprint is still acting exactly like a password, and the reason the author is okay with it is because it's a password that's not protecting anything terribly important. Why not just have profiles that are selectable without any authentication? That would probably also work for a family tablet, but the fingerprint might be preferable to protect some info from your family members (even completely innocent things like shopping for gifts). Of course your family members could easily lift your fingerprint and bypass the biometrics, but it doesn't matter.
I am not seeing the distinction. What exactly is the difference between an "identification" and an "authenticated identification"? With the family tablet, the fingerprint is still acting exactly like a password, and the reason the author is okay with it is because it's a password that's not protecting anything terribly important. Why not just have profiles that are selectable without any authentication? That would probably also work for a family tablet, but the fingerprint might be preferable to protect some info from your family members (even completely innocent things like shopping for gifts). Of course your family members could easily lift your fingerprint and bypass the biometrics, but it doesn't matter.