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

Most Electronics Being Banned on Certain US-Bound Flights

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 488 posts

Re: Most Electronics Being Banned on Certain US-Bound Flights

#281

Post by DarkCow »

sjf wrote: post #235
gervase wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can say that I was required to use one to get back into the U.S. while transiting through Schiphol back in October 2013. No opt out, just the scanner and "I'm not forcing you to fly today - you can stay here." Pretty rude, too. Since then, I always transit through Heathrow. It's a logistical nightmare with all those buses, but they've never coerced me to go through a scanner. Those biometric checkpoints, on the oth…

I don't know why you say that, while there are not scanners on every security lane at Heathrow they _cannot_ be refused, there is no pat-down alternative like in the US. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jan/26/new-body-scanners...

I believe this was previously the case, but it is now possible to opt out. I flew from Heathrow (Terminal 2) on Friday, refused the mm-wave scanner and had a pat-down in a private room instead.

From Heathrow's security FAQ page (http://www.heathrow.com/more/help-with-this-website/faqs/sec...):

The only alternative that can be offered to a scanner is a private search which allows for a more extensive hand-search than usual. Passengers will be escorted to a different location in the airport from the main search area (eg a private search room). The private search may involve the loosening and/or removal of clothing. A person undergoing a private search may ask to be accompanied by a witness.

This alternative screening method will take significantly more time than passing through a security scanner.

Re: Most Electronics Being Banned on Certain US-Bound Flights

#283

Post by _0w8t »

What is remarkable is that the order bans electronics on flights from Saudi Arabia. I thought Saudi Arabia was still untouchable especially after the travel buns that excluded the country where terrorists harmed US most originated or got financial support. So however weak, it does add a credibility that the ban is based on some intelligence.

Re: Most Electronics Being Banned on Certain US-Bound Flights

#284

Post by [deleted] »

kw71 wrote: post #258
joshontheweb wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll never fly United again. I had a similar experience for 14 hours. It isn't just the in flight entertainment. In my experience their staff are rude and borderline incompetent. There must be a poor culture in the company as a whole. My wife just flew with them and went nearly 10 hours without a meal while she was flying with our two year old. Edit: spelling

Yeah! I have been flying for decades. Delta seems to have a cycle of climbing to excellence and falling. United Air Lines has always made me miserable reliably.

[deleted]

Re: Most Electronics Being Banned on Certain US-Bound Flights

#285

Post by atomwaffel »

sjf wrote: post #235
gervase wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can say that I was required to use one to get back into the U.S. while transiting through Schiphol back in October 2013. No opt out, just the scanner and "I'm not forcing you to fly today - you can stay here." Pretty rude, too. Since then, I always transit through Heathrow. It's a logistical nightmare with all those buses, but they've never coerced me to go through a scanner. Those biometric checkpoints, on the oth…

I don't know why you say that, while there are not scanners on every security lane at Heathrow they _cannot_ be refused, there is no pat-down alternative like in the US. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jan/26/new-body-scanners...

Yes, they can be refused at Heathrow. I did so just a few weeks ago. The alternative process wasn't unpleasant but did feel deliberately inefficient.

Re: Most Electronics Being Banned on Certain US-Bound Flights

#286

Post by suneilp »

maxxxxx wrote: post #25

When I came to the US in 2000 it was a fairly optimistic and happy place. Now when I read stuff like this I always get reminded how this country went from pretty open to being scared, irrational and mean in the last 15 or so years.

This started before 2000. I'd say we were going in a good directios .

Then someone had the idea to treat corporations as people and legalize bribery. Leadership sets the tone as they say in corporations, so what kind of tone do greedy politicians set?

Our upward progress was doomed to stall bigly thanks to that decision.

Re: Most Electronics Being Banned on Certain US-Bound Flights

#287

Post by taejo »

pfarnsworth wrote: post #232
maxxxxx wrote: post #25

When I came to the US in 2000 it was a fairly optimistic and happy place. Now when I read stuff like this I always get reminded how this country went from pretty open to being scared, irrational and mean in the last 15 or so years.

Let's be honest here. Osama Bin Laden won. The US as we knew it pre-911 doesn't exist anymore. He caused it, but the worst thing about it is that we did it to ourselves. First Bush, then Obama and now Trump is putting the nail in the coffin.

The US lost, but the US still supports Israel, still has troops in Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Middle East, and still supports various anti-Islamist fighters around the world, so no, Osama bin Laden did not achieve his goals.

Re: Most Electronics Being Banned on Certain US-Bound Flights

#288

Post by belorn »

robotresearcher wrote: post #110
belorn wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recall reading that TSA has never actually stopped a real threat to a airplane. The screening is one of the least cost-effective security mechanism in use, so are we suggestion that doubling it and the costs is a reasonable way to improve detections? A reasonable way to detect threats would be to hire more investigators and bomb dogs patrols. Both has shown to be cost-effective and to produce results, in direct con…

I'm not a fan of security theatre. But the TSA does not have to catch anyone to be very effective. In fact it its intended deterrence effect was effective it would never catch anyone at all.

So does the deterrence effect increase by the number of screenings? The physiological effect is not measurable in this case, and if we compare it to the placebo effect which is measurable, there is little proof that eating two fake pills has any benefit over eating one.

How big portion of terrorists is likely to completely ignore the fact of one screening but be deterred by the existence of a second one?

Re: Most Electronics Being Banned on Certain US-Bound Flights

#289

Post by belorn »

waqf wrote: post #137
kgwgk wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The security check to get into the airport makes sense if you want to avoid terrorist attacks at the airport.

Istanbul Atatürk has a security check to get into the airport. Guess what, the terrorists simply attacked the people in line at the first security check!

The third screening should naturally be moved to the train station before the airport. That will solve it.
Post reply on HN