Again, I don't really want to speak to biometrics because it's not my area of expertise. I'll say a couple of things, though, because I've been asked a question twice now, so I understand from the committee that there is interest in this issue.
The first thing I'll say is that I think courts and lawyers are and should always be somewhat skeptical of new scientific approaches that are presented as being utterly infallible, because if we've learned anything, it's that very little in this world is infallible. If we could be 100% sure that x would provide y, then it's all very simple. The problem is you can rarely do that. I'll leave my comments in that respect at that.
I'm sorry, did you want to say something?