The title is a bit weird. On my first reading it makes it sound like two different people can have indistinguishable fingerprints. But after reading/skimming the article+paper, it seems like what they’ve actually done is been able to correlate fingerprints from different fingers on the same person.

So the title makes it sound like they’ve weakened the basis of fingerprinting as forensic evidence, when in fact they’ve developed a way to link the different fingerprints from the same criminal so that additional cases could be solved.

e.g. if a criminal only left a thumb print at one crime scene and an index finger print at another, this posed a problem for investigators because they couldn’t link them to the same person, but this “AI” approach can link those two different prints to the same person.

+1

I don’t think it shows any ads.

So are Flamin’ Hot Cheetos.

So are normal Cheetos, for that matter.

This phrasing

offsetting everything else your kidneys are filtering

sounds like a negative thing, at least how I’m reading it.

I know drinking too much water is bad, but was under the impression that drinking a lot of water is generally better for you.

deleted by creator

I saved this recent comment, maybe it was somewhere in this thread?

https://lemmy.world/comment/5721150

For the unaware:

First posted in 2013, I believe…

deleted by creator

deleted by creator