The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother • Hacker News Board

Re: The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother

#101

Post by houseabsolute » Sat, Jan 02, 2010, 1:25 AM UTC

dstorrs wrote: post #78

Here's a question: how many terrorism attempts have there been against US airlines since 9/11? For that matter, what is the total number of US flights that have EVER been attacked by terrorists? I'm including both successful attacks and ones where the attack was foiled. This is a serious question--perhaps this is a much bigger threat than I'm aware. But according to my risk assessment, airline terrorism is such a low…

> But according to my risk assessment, airline terrorism is such a low-order threat that it's just not worth getting exercised about.

Let me introduce you to a pair of concepts I like to call "symbolism" and "morale." Americans like to feel safe, and up until about 2001 they felt pretty safe flying in a plane. Then in a vast, symbolic gesture, terrorists flew the planes into buildings. The American people's morale was so damaged by this gesture that we subsequently allowed our government to drag us into two wars that will do us no good and only harm in the long run. It will be exciting to find out what we allow or even demand it to do next time.

So yes, it is a much bigger threat than you're apparently aware. Or are you asking if the percentage chances of you being harmed are high? Probably not. In fact, even if there were no security you'd probably still be safer than you are driving along America's roads. But that's not all you have to worry about.

Re: The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother

#102

Post by kelnos » Sat, Jan 02, 2010, 1:51 PM UTC

ghshephard wrote: post #66

kareemm wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

while Israel's airport security method is second to none, it is not scalable, and therefore not applicable to the US (or many other countries), at least not without major restructuring. The restructuring in the article didn't sound massive. The Israeli methods focus on identifying terrorists by their behavior rather than their methods (box cutters, PETN, etc). The biggest cost thus seems to be training staff to ident…

El Al Spends $100M securing 37 Aircraft. Scale that to the 8,225 Aircraft ( http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_stat... ) and you'd need a budget of $20 Billion+ without even taking into account that you have a heterogeneous population that doesn't lend itself to easy profiling (unlike israel). The major vulnerability of the El Al security system is that anybody that isn't considered part of the "…

> the net result of this "Chaos" - my normally 20 minute wait took 90 minutes.

And you think that's acceptable? I don't.

Re: The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother

#103

Post by kelnos » Sat, Jan 02, 2010, 2:02 PM UTC

kareemm wrote: post #73

ghshephard wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

El Al Spends $100M securing 37 Aircraft. Scale that to the 8,225 Aircraft ( http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_stat... ) and you'd need a budget of $20 Billion+ without even taking into account that you have a heterogeneous population that doesn't lend itself to easy profiling (unlike israel). The major vulnerability of the El Al security system is that anybody that isn't considered part of the "…

El Al Spends $100M securing 37 Aircraft That assumes costs scale linearly with aircraft. Do they? The major vulnerability of the El Al security system is that anybody that isn't considered part of the "Risk Profile" (I.E. Muslim) - can walk right through the security system. I doubt this. Muslims are probably subject to higher scrutiny, but that doesn't preclude others from being subject to the same, Jews included. H…

> I'm happy to wait 90m to get on a flight and feel like it's safe.

Perhaps you are, but I don't think everyone is. I'm certainly not. I get the the airport 60 minutes before takeoff for a domestic flight, 90 minutes for international (when in another country; it's hard to tell how long it'll take to clear passport control). Traveling is difficult and stressful enough as it is; I prefer not to add to that with an unreasonable wait either standing in line or sitting in an uncomfortable chair.

I feel safe (enough) as-is. I'd feel just as safe if the liquid restrictions and requirements to take off shoes and remove laptops from bags were eliminated from the screening process.

I'm well aware that I'm more likely to die every time I get behind the wheel of my car, than in airplane-related terrorism. Doesn't stop me from driving, though.

And that's really the thing. People absolutely suck at risk assessment.

Re: The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother

#104

Post by StrawberryFrog » Sat, Jan 02, 2010, 11:15 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #97

StrawberryFrog wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it probably works 99.9% of the time. So all you need to do is throw enough people at that crack to become successful. That approach doesn't scale. Imaging the organisation needed for sending 1000 suicide bombers. Now imagine keeping it functioning, and avoiding consequences catching up with it as it sends in the first ten or so.

Not for one thing or another, but the 99.9% I quoted is probably a little high. Even after 9/11 there have been at least two that we are all aware made it past security, we're not hearing about those that didn't unless there is no way around it. So you probably don't need thousands, you probably need on the order of several 10's or so to get through once. Keep in mind that there is a reservoir of 1000's if not 10's o…

So you probably don't need thousands, you probably need on the order of several 10's or so to get through once.

And the underbomber's gang will get, supposing that they can try repeatedly - what? - Three goes tops before the hammer comes down on them.

Re: The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother

#105

Post by delackner » Sun, Jan 03, 2010, 3:15 AM UTC

waterlesscloud wrote: post #89

jacquesm wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is not that it wasn't in place and didn't work, it probably works 99.9% of the time. So all you need to do is throw enough people at that crack to become successful. Airport security is after the fact, you need to work to create a world in which would-be-suicide bombers have too much to lose, and are too smart to be brain washed. In the end that's probably cheaper too.

A world in which would be bombers instead come from wealthy families and are smart enough to be engineering students, You know, like the last would be bomber. Can we put to rest the myth that it's lack of opportunity and education that creates terrorists? It's blatantly not true.

Though I suspect you are trolling, I bite. Do you really think there would be terrorists in this world if everyone had enough food to eat, medical care, and lived in a free society?

Re: The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother

#106

Post by ebrenes » Mon, Jan 04, 2010, 4:41 PM UTC

delackner wrote: post #105

waterlesscloud wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A world in which would be bombers instead come from wealthy families and are smart enough to be engineering students, You know, like the last would be bomber. Can we put to rest the myth that it's lack of opportunity and education that creates terrorists? It's blatantly not true.

Though I suspect you are trolling, I bite. Do you really think there would be terrorists in this world if everyone had enough food to eat, medical care, and lived in a free society?

In my own opinion, I do really think there would still be terrorists in this world, even if everyone had enough food to eat, medical care and lived in a free society.

A significant part of terrorism is based on an imbalance of power, where one group exploits another or merely when one group feels significantly slighted or oppressed by another group.

That is why, I believe, that these educated people become radicals after their western education. They see a huge power imbalance that marginalizes them and their culture. They see a culture and history that conspires against their way of life, where the entrenched powers exploit every possible avenue to stay on top, some times at the cost of other players

Theses terrorists strike out not because they lack for food, medical care or freedom, but because they identify with a group that has been oppressed or subjected to the whims of another power to which they don't identify or resent. It is especially effective if that other power conceptually conspires against their preferred way of life.

In other words, your measures would merely raise the standard of living, but would not eradicate the power differences that give rise to the fundamental fuel of terrorism. I would agree that it would reduce the incidence of terrorism overall, as it would become harder to find martyrs, but it would not eradicate the phenomena.

Re: The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother

#107

Post by delackner » Fri, Jan 08, 2010, 6:50 AM UTC

ebrenes wrote: post #106

delackner wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Though I suspect you are trolling, I bite. Do you really think there would be terrorists in this world if everyone had enough food to eat, medical care, and lived in a free society?

In my own opinion, I do really think there would still be terrorists in this world, even if everyone had enough food to eat, medical care and lived in a free society. A significant part of terrorism is based on an imbalance of power, where one group exploits another or merely when one group feels significantly slighted or oppressed by another group. That is why, I believe, that these educated people become radicals a…

In your response you say that people who are well educated often sympathize with people who are oppressed or powerless. Who are they going to sympathize with in a society where everyone is protected and living free? The horrible plight of people with boring jobs? The evils of waiting in line for free medical care? The injustice of not having enough french cheese to go around?