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

Opt Out of a Body Scan? Then Brace Yourself

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 123 posts

Re: Opt Out of a Body Scan? Then Brace Yourself

#81

Post by CWuestefeld »

CapitalistCartr wrote: post #72
tomjen3 wrote: post #58

It seems that the best way to get around this would be to make life unbearable for the TSA agents. The politicians can't be reached. While physically assaulting them would be very satisfying, simply freezing them out socially would properly be a better tactic, since it is impossible to arrest people for.

"The politicians can't be reached." Of course they can! Mail, email, they can certainly be reached, and right now they're extra sensitive to issues that upset their constituents.

right now they're extra sensitive to issues that upset their constituents

Quite the opposite. Right now is the maximum time before the next election. That means they've got the longest time possible for you to forget. Any shenanigans they'd like to engage in would be safest now.

Re: Opt Out of a Body Scan? Then Brace Yourself

#83

Post by roc »

jules wrote: post #42
roc wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole invasive pat-down is just a way to intimidate and humiliate people away from that choice. This is the last straw for me, personally. I'll just be vacationing closer to home now or working old-school road trips into my plans. Maybe if the outraged take a few less flights a year, the vacation, airline and union lobbies will take up the cause.

For whom on HN are pat downs intimidating and/or humiliating? I personally don't mind it at all, but I can understand that they could be a problem for somebody. I'm much more worried about CCTV's everywhere, cell phone tracking, internet usage tracking, tracking cars with cameras on highways that read number plates, etc. All these tools are extremely well suited for keeping a dictator in place. I'm afraid that if we…

So you haven't seen or had the new pat-downs then? They're tantamount to a strip search. They lift, they separate.

The choice for airline passengers in the US is now: be photographed nude, or have the TSA jostle your luggage. Reasonableness has been left at the door.

Raising data tracking concerns is a false dichotomy; I can hate and distrust the expansion of both.

Re: Opt Out of a Body Scan? Then Brace Yourself

#84

Post by bartman »

I've been through Cleveland Hopkins Intl' and San Jose Intl' in the last days and there were "opt-out lanes" in which no body scanners were used and you went through the normal metal detectors. No pat down either. Nobody told you into which lane you have to go, so there was absolutely no pressure.

Re: Opt Out of a Body Scan? Then Brace Yourself

#85

Post by vladk »

jonnathanson wrote: post #19

I went through O'Hare recently, where they've installed a battery of these devices. The way they had it set up, it was used as the secondary screener for people who got called out for random searches. Guess who got called for "random" searches in the machine? Pretty much every hot chick in line. Now, this observation was purely anecdotal, so take it for what it is. But the coincidence was not lost on me, or on anyone…

I was at O'Hare this summer and noticed the exact same thing. All the dudes ended up going through the metal detector, and most of the girls went through the full body scanner.

Then I got really upset when I saw them selecting a young teenage girl to go through the scanner as well - perverts.

Re: Opt Out of a Body Scan? Then Brace Yourself

#86

Post by roc »

jamii wrote: post #38
ceejayoz wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always been baffled by the lack of those sorts of attacks. One can imagine the economic damage if everyone was terrified to go to malls, grocery stores, schools, etc. Amazon.com would be about the only company to come out okay.

I hate to keep making a point of this, but it has happened in the past and the solution wasn't pretty. Wikipedia says: The Troubles' impact on the ordinary people of Northern Ireland produced such psychological trauma that the city of Belfast had been compared to London during the Blitz. [104] The stress resulting from bomb attacks, street disturbances, security checkpoints, and the constant military presence had the…

The IRA was a completely different case.

They weren't asking agents to directly murder random individuals or property. They had the tacit support of (or were at least politely ignored by) much of the surrounding populace and social institutions. They didn't stick out in a crowd. They were born and raised there, had history, jobs, families.

Al Qaeda enjoys none of those advantages for planning attacks in the US. Until and unless they can successfully recruit within the US and garner support within the US, an IRA-style campaign is implausible.

That Al Qaeda has to rely on people who consistently can't light a fuse under stress, or keep a bomb-factory under wraps highlights how much harder it is to find people to perform wanton murder, even as compared to finding people willing to destroy property or carry out targeted murders.

Re: Opt Out of a Body Scan? Then Brace Yourself

#87

Post by steveklabnik »

jonnathanson wrote: post #63
biafra wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they save the pictures and share later?

Supposedly they're not capable of saving or transmitting the pictures. I mean, obviously the machines are capable. But they're nerfed for TSA use. Supposedly.

Supposedly, but they've already admitted it's not true: http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20012583-281.html

Re: Opt Out of a Body Scan? Then Brace Yourself

#88

Post by tomjen3 »

jamii wrote: post #70
tomjen3 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats the part I never got either - I remember after 11/9 that I had wished America was British, because you guys reacted so sensible and wouldn't have gone so crazy. A country that can survive the Blitz isn't going to care about a couple of buildings.

Britain didn't react any more sensibly though. We had arguably even more erosion of civil liberties as a result eg http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/8...

Yaeh - but to a 7th grader that wasn't apparent 2 days later.

I still hope that with enough tea and scones one can get some sensibility back into that country.

Re: Opt Out of a Body Scan? Then Brace Yourself

#89

Post by steveklabnik »

yequalsx wrote: post #25
percept wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just view it as a sort of standard disclaimer to preempt the usual criticism that dissenters are somehow ignorant, unreasonable, or un-American. Basically: "I'm an otherwise reasonable person in full possession of my faculties."

That's possible but the impression that I have is that by always including such remarks it has the effect of making people who disagree with security measures as wanting something bad to happen. It's sort like the question, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" Instead of focusing on whether or not the measures are appropriate the debate is about whether or not you want to be safe. I think it makes dissenters loo…

Yep, this is an old PR trick. It's why you'll see organizations that are preparing to be involved in a political demonstration agree to a 'points of unity' that always have a clause about 'respecting a diversity of tactics.'

If you start asking one group, "What do you think of those guys smashing windows?", it changes the dialogue from "What's your message," to "Aren't those guys bad?" And it's not like you're able to properly discuss such a subtle point as "this is a false dichotomy," when talking to news outlets.

Re: Opt Out of a Body Scan? Then Brace Yourself

#90

Post by teilo »

corin_ wrote: post #34
daten wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your idea reminds me of this story from 2006. Milwaukee resident Ryan Bird wrote "Kip Hawley is an Idiot" on a plastic bag given to passengers by airport security. As a result he claims he was detained and told that the First Amendment did not apply to security checkpoints. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/606142... Kip Hawley was the head of TSA at the time.

All it reminds me of is the person who actually had that idea, on this site, five days ago. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1849311

It is a rather obvious hack, isn't it?
Post reply on HN