Why Sydney Morning Herald and the New York Times got it wrong about passwords

Recently a well thought out and comprehensive evaluation of the state of user identification and authentication was presented by the New York Times and reprinted by the Sydney Morning Herald. The article can be seen here: http://www.smh.com.au/business/innovation/goodbye-password-banks-opt-to-scan-fingers-and-faces-instead-20160622-gpov42

I have paraphrased it in part to help anyone who is more than a bit interested in this subject to see why the article is well meaning but misguided:

1. It fails to properly segregate the real issues involved with uniquely and securely identifying a person and;
2. Helps promote a solution that in the end is very dangerous, namely Biometrics. You cant replace your thumb when its ID is hacked. You cant replace your Iris when its hacked.

The enclosed PDF is a copy of the article with my comments in the margin. If you are interested in this subject it may be worth your investment of time to consider the points I make.