Except that it's less about keeping the wrong people out and more about making it easier for the right people to get in. The masses don't like multi-factor authentication because, frankly, it's way more of a pain than just typing in a password. This sort of technology encourages adoption of more secure methods because, assuming it works well, Mr. Bank get more security, and, because it is much more user friendly, they won't get a ton of calls from their users bitching about how much of a pain it is to log into their online banking site.
I posted this before, but I'll summarize here:
If this matches, it's likely that you are who you say you are. If this doesn't match, it just asks for additional factors of authentication (security questions, smartcards, etc). It is not a replacement for any other form of authentication.
This is not so much an authentication method as a heuristic used to decide whether or not to ask for additional credentials. It's exactly analogous to the way security questions work for online banking. If it recognizes you, there's a good chance you are who you say you are and your password is considered sufficient. But, if it doesn't recognize you, that isn't necessarily indicative of an impostor, just that it needs to ask for more information (in the form of a token, smartcard, security question, etc) before it can be confident you are who you say you are.
A "yes' from this this is acceptance, but a "no" is not a complete rejection. It just makes you jump through an extra hoop or two.
You've got to be careful with the term "average". In the text you quoted, it says that the *median* is defined as 100 IQ points, but that doesn't mean the *mean* isn't increasing. If the bottom half of the population is not getting dumber but the top half is getting smarter, you could have a situation where the median is still 100 but the mean is going up.
According to the WSJ, Astronomy and Astrophysics had a 0% unemployment rate as of the 2010 census.
Not "should", but "could"... except that doing so was explicitly made illegal, so that's not a fair analogy.
I've got a new puppy waking me up...
The difference is that you're being woken up forcefully, and not waking up naturally. If you wake up during the wrong part of sleep, you often feel worse off than you were when you went to bed.
.. (and the two sets are not even disjoint).
We call that BI-PARTISANSHIP.
The article mentions wearing it in your sleep, but is that really necessary?
Wearing the suit to sleep is solely to curb the opportunity for adolescent pranks like swapping the Captain's suit to one with a higher elastic coefficient and watching his limbs collapse like a dead bug.
someone want to comment on the effectiveness of GPS jammers?
Most likely prohibited by the FCC.
These are definitely prohibited by the FCC / FAA. Even a GPS re-radiation system (for bringing GPS indoors) must be registered with the authorities. I have personally been witness to this situation when a company that makes re-rad devices was not checking that its customers were authorized to use the equipment. The FCC / FAA tracked them down and made them contact all their customers to register their equipment.
Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must be first overcome. -- Dr. Johnson