Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 267 posts

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#71

Post by forgottenpass »

acconrad wrote: post #61
mdorazio wrote: post #21

In my opinion, the TSA is basically a very expensive jobs program rather than an actual security organization. This is a big part of why it's going to be hard to get rid of now. According to Wikipedia, the TSA employs over 55,000 people, many of whom would probably have difficulty getting a similar level job if we reverted to a more sane security screening program. Anything that kills thousands of government jobs is…

So is HN turning into a copy/paste of Reddit comment threads now? https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueReddit/comments/4jr1td/the_tsa_...

So we're judging ideas on their novelty rather than applicability now? Something that appears on reedit can't be good enough for HN?

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#72

Post by mjevans »

capote wrote: post #35
ndirish1842 wrote: post #7

I wonder how autonomous driving will affect shorter flight commutes. I'll probably never take a car from Philadelphia to LA, but I might prefer to travel by car from Philadelphia to Chicago if I know that I can sleep throughout the car ride (as well as leave whenever is most convenient). When you take into account driving to the airport, checking bags, security, flight delays, baggage claim, and rental cars/driving t…

I wonder why so many people immediately jump to thinking about a car as an alternative to short distance air travel. Would people in the US never even consider a fast train system as a good option between Philadelphia and Chicago? (If it were built, of course. But self-driving cars need to be built too. But I guess they're easier; I'm just dreaming)

Likely because the TSA issue is something they expect to see infecting the train transport system if it existed and that the car is figuratively and literally a symbol of freedom and the ability to escape the rules of others in the American culture. (Source: I live here.)

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#73

Post by lisper »

mikeash wrote: post #42
lisper wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's hard to propose a workable alternative No, actually, it's really easy. > You need some security. That was clear before 9-11. No, it was not clear then, and it is not clear now. There are two salient facts: 1. When tested, the TSA misses 90% or so of the weapons people try to smuggle past them 2. Notwithstanding #1, there have been zero successful terrorist attack on aircraft in the U.S. since 9-11. So it is fa…

Back when there was little to no airport security at all, hijackings were far more common than they are now. In the late 60s and early 70s, hijackings ran in the dozens per year. I see no evidence that TSA-style pat-downs and shoe removal and liquid bans are necessary, but it does appear to be useful to have some minimal level of screening so that a crazy person doesn't just toss an AK-47 in his bag and take it on th…

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11723190

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#74

Post by mikeash »

ssmoot wrote: post #56
pc86 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that it's not "at your own risk," it's "at your own risk and the risk of anything that might happen to be underneath you at any point on the journey, or within range of your fuel tanks." Not that I'm a fan of the TSA by any stretch, but that's a pretty grievous misunderstanding of the root issue.

My wife drove up to a private jet this morning. Got on. Took off. No TSA. Holding the "pleebs" to a higher standard than the rich is unconscionable IMO.

Private jets are typically much smaller and have a correspondingly lower potential for mayhem. Yes, there's overlap, there are small airliners and some big private jets, but overall the risk is different, so there's no reason to expect the security measures to be the same.

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#75

Post by rhino369 »

two2two wrote: post #29

TSA is the number one reason why I don't fly and drive instead. From my POV most of the world's industries have progressed positively, but not air travel. I took a train a couple of years ago and it was a beautiful example of old merging with new. Walking through an antique of a train station, iPhone in hand, with my digital ticket ready to board; so easy and pleasant. At that point I realized that air travel is by f…

We have "at your own risk" airtravel in the form of private and chartered flights.

There aren't enough people ready and willing to take that risk to make it a competitive business model for airlines. They are a business that only works at massive scale due to extreme competition on price.

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#76

Post by lisper »

Zelphyr wrote: post #62
bluetidepro wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with the "there have been zero successful terrorist attack on aircraft in the U.S. since 9-11." statement is they use that for their advantage. They say that because of them this is a fact. Ugh.

Except, as Bruce Schneier notes, there were zero 9-11 level attacks on the US prior to 9-11 as well. 9-11 was a statistical fluke.

Not quite a statistical fluke. The 9-11 hijackers took advantage of the fact that they could count on the passengers and crew to cooperate because they would assume that this hijacking was like all the others before and cooperation provided the best odds of survival. But the 9-11 hijackers defected (in the sense of the prisoner's dilemma). As a result, no one will ever cooperate with a hijacker again, and as a result of that, no remotely sane person will ever attempt to hijack an airplane again.

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#77

Post by ArkyBeagle »

two2two wrote: post #29

TSA is the number one reason why I don't fly and drive instead. From my POV most of the world's industries have progressed positively, but not air travel. I took a train a couple of years ago and it was a beautiful example of old merging with new. Walking through an antique of a train station, iPhone in hand, with my digital ticket ready to board; so easy and pleasant. At that point I realized that air travel is by f…

Independent of the security theater problem, we (collectively) beat the air travel system like a rented mule.

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#78

Post by maxerickson »

lisper wrote: post #58
rhino369 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be interested to see how they got the 95% failure rate. If the TSA was sneaking in actual bombs that could bring down airplanes, that is a horrific. But if they were testing someone bringing in a nail clipper with a 1 inch blade tucked into it, a plastic gun, a disassembled "bomb" with no explosive residue, etc, then it's not that bad. The fact that there have been attempts to blow up airplanes, and they all invo…

> If you could just walk onto a plane with a gun, people would do it again. No, they wouldn't. In the 70's the unwritten rule was: you hijack the plane, land it, make your demands, get your TV time, and then you surrender (or get away) but no one gets hurt. It is only because of that unwritten rule that you could get away with it because everyone assumed that the best route to survival was to cooperate with the hijac…

We're 2 steps further along than the passengers and crew resisting. Cockpit doors are reinforced and locked and wider adoption of a 2 person rule for the cockpit.

(Apparently the FAA adopted the 2 person rule along with locking the door. Germanwings Flight 4U 9525 made it clear to other jurisdictions that it was a good idea)

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#79

Post by cloudjacker »

two2two wrote: post #29

TSA is the number one reason why I don't fly and drive instead. From my POV most of the world's industries have progressed positively, but not air travel. I took a train a couple of years ago and it was a beautiful example of old merging with new. Walking through an antique of a train station, iPhone in hand, with my digital ticket ready to board; so easy and pleasant. At that point I realized that air travel is by f…

I arrive at the airport in a Lyft.

I walk up to the security checkpoint checkpoint, where I show the agent my phone. They see my boarding pass with the green checkmark and send me to the empty TSA Pre line.

I walk through the metal detector with no adjustments to my attire.

I am at the gate in 5 minutes.

I like how trains basically let you show up last minute, and a 3 hour train ride actually means a 3 hour train ride, compared to airport, checkpoints and boarding time, possibly waiting on the runway, and air time.

But you really just need to upgrade your travel accommodations to make your airport experience more seamless.

Re: The TSA is a waste of money that doesn't save lives and might actually cost them

#80

Post by ArkyBeagle »

rhino369 wrote: post #75
two2two wrote: post #29

TSA is the number one reason why I don't fly and drive instead. From my POV most of the world's industries have progressed positively, but not air travel. I took a train a couple of years ago and it was a beautiful example of old merging with new. Walking through an antique of a train station, iPhone in hand, with my digital ticket ready to board; so easy and pleasant. At that point I realized that air travel is by f…

We have "at your own risk" airtravel in the form of private and chartered flights. There aren't enough people ready and willing to take that risk to make it a competitive business model for airlines. They are a business that only works at massive scale due to extreme competition on price.

Some of it isn't pure price competition; it's also actual economy of scale, especially with respect to financing of fleets.
Post reply on HN