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

The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them

brasschecktv.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 46 posts

Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them

#11

Post by jdp23 »

grandalf wrote: post #8
jpwagner wrote: post #2

The issue is one of privacy. These corruption accusations detract from the heart of the matter. Would it be a "win" if the scanners were all removed because of corruption? No, the point is the acknowledgement of the rights of the individual to a certain level of privacy. By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to a company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects.

It's true that it's very common and there is often nothing untoward about it. The issue that I think is most relevant is that there has been virtually no transparency about the machines, the health and privacy risks they pose, etc. It's as if these contractors with high level government connections made a big sale to the US Government and the public had no choice about whether to pay for it or whether to consent to t…

Well said. There's more on the lack of transparency, and GAO's criticisms of TSAs testing, at http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20023079-10391695.html

Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them

#13

Post by epo »

jpwagner wrote: post #7
DanI-S wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that our privacy is being violated not just for vague promises of 'national security' but for his personal gain.

The debate should be about the ethics of privacy and HOW it is being violated, not WHY. Suppose it was proven to help national security, suppose it was scientifically proven safe, would its use be palatable? There is a question over what privacy needs to be protected. If this issue gets too into WHY these devices were purchased, we may lose the next privacy debate.

The issues are separate, privacy invasion is wrong and should be stopped. Corrupt procurement is a crime and should be prosecuted.

I would expect a corrupt individual to try and deflect attention by saying things like, "never mind how they were bought, look at how secure our airports are".

EDIT there are two issues I don't see that one has priority over the other. I agree, reluctantly, that to avoid confusing the public it might help to focus on one issue but possible corruption needs to be addressed eventually.

Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them

#14

Post by motvbi »

jockc wrote: post #9
motvbi wrote: post #3

He doesn't actually work for the company. Rapiscan Systems is a client of his security firm Chertoff Group. Here is a more detailed article http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/0...

Not much different. He generates sales for Rapidscan, in return they buy consulting service from his company.

I most certainly didn't mean to say he was innocent, I am sorry if it was understood as that.

Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them

#15

Post by pavs »

jpwagner wrote: post #2

The issue is one of privacy. These corruption accusations detract from the heart of the matter. Would it be a "win" if the scanners were all removed because of corruption? No, the point is the acknowledgement of the rights of the individual to a certain level of privacy. By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to a company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects.

> By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects.

I think its troubling that you don't see anything wrong with this.

Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them

#16

Post by jpwagner »

jdp23 wrote: post #10
jpwagner wrote: post #2

The issue is one of privacy. These corruption accusations detract from the heart of the matter. Would it be a "win" if the scanners were all removed because of corruption? No, the point is the acknowledgement of the rights of the individual to a certain level of privacy. By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to a company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects.

It would be a huge win if the scanners were removed because of corruption. It would be an even bigger win if people went to jail because of it, but I'm not holding my breath. "The heart of the matter" is restoring our rights at the airport. Exposing the corruption that's part of the surveillance-industrial complex can play a big role in this. Privacy, effectivness, civil liberties, impact on business, and kids rights…

How short-sighted. If they were removed because someone wrote a bad check would that be acceptable to you as well.

The devices are an invasion of privacy and that should be confronted head-on, otherwise, there will just be the next invasive device to deal with.

Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them

#17

Post by rhizome »

jpwagner wrote: post #7
DanI-S wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that our privacy is being violated not just for vague promises of 'national security' but for his personal gain.

The debate should be about the ethics of privacy and HOW it is being violated, not WHY. Suppose it was proven to help national security, suppose it was scientifically proven safe, would its use be palatable? There is a question over what privacy needs to be protected. If this issue gets too into WHY these devices were purchased, we may lose the next privacy debate.

All of these things should contribute to a debate that should not be artifically limited by the values of any participant or for simplicity's sake. Privacy and health are more aspects of a complicated situation that should not just be imposed on the population like this one is. I mean, I hope its not controversial to assert that the scanners are being imposed.

And for the record, it hasn't been proven to help national security. It also doesn't make ice cream, but what if it did? Is the best idea we can come up with the one that coincidentally is being cheerled by Michael Chertoff?

Among many other misgivings, this is not the right place for the revolving door of politics, opportunism and business. US tax dollars are paying for all of this, after all.

Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them

#18

Post by potatolicious »

jpwagner wrote: post #16
jdp23 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be a huge win if the scanners were removed because of corruption. It would be an even bigger win if people went to jail because of it, but I'm not holding my breath. "The heart of the matter" is restoring our rights at the airport. Exposing the corruption that's part of the surveillance-industrial complex can play a big role in this. Privacy, effectivness, civil liberties, impact on business, and kids rights…

How short-sighted. If they were removed because someone wrote a bad check would that be acceptable to you as well. The devices are an invasion of privacy and that should be confronted head-on, otherwise, there will just be the next invasive device to deal with.

But how did they get there?

The entire security theater industry, along with the defense industry, is built on top of an untold number of conflicts of interest and perverse incentives.

Did the scanners cause controversy before they were installed? Sure, and under any sane system of governance they would have never progressed beyond that point. The problem was that, at every point that mattered, our officials were incentivized to invade our privacy (e.g., campaign contributions, direct profit from sale of devices, etc).

It seems to me far more productive, and far more likely to succeed to attack corruption and realign incentives than it is to make a moralistic case in front of a bunch of amoral thugs.

Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them

#19

Post by BrandonM »

This is one of the first times I've ever flagged an article. This is definitely NOT hacker news:

Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon.

http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them

#20

Post by [deleted] »

pavs wrote: post #15
jpwagner wrote: post #2

The issue is one of privacy. These corruption accusations detract from the heart of the matter. Would it be a "win" if the scanners were all removed because of corruption? No, the point is the acknowledgement of the rights of the individual to a certain level of privacy. By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to a company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects.

> By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects. I think its troubling that you don't see anything wrong with this.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN