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

Viral Video About Body Scanners

blog.tsa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 204 posts

Re: Viral Video About Body Scanners

#141

Post by betterth »

shin_lao wrote: post #79
pg wrote: post #8

There is something chillingly unconvincing about their attempts at informality. Big Brother jokey is a lot more frightening than Big Brother bureaucratic or Big Brother bombastic. Too bad this insight wasn't available to Orwell or he could have made 1984 even scarier.

I don't think there is any attempt at anything. It's just written by someone not very intelligent supervised by someone of similar intelligence swimming in a sea of mediocrity.

Exactly. Someone got assigned to "blog duty" at the TSA, of which TSA management has no idea what a blog is, or why it is important, but there is a regulation somewhere, or a rule, that says the TSA must maintain a blog. So someone maintains a blog.

This is my estimation of the situation.

A Hanlon's Razor moment: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Re: Viral Video About Body Scanners

#142

Post by xster »

I have a feeling this response is doing them far more harm than good. It's just a simple admission that everything stated was true and I'm going to make it into a high school argument and call you some guy with some crude video that's irrelevant.

Re: Viral Video About Body Scanners

#145

Post by tomkin »

pg wrote: post #8

There is something chillingly unconvincing about their attempts at informality. Big Brother jokey is a lot more frightening than Big Brother bureaucratic or Big Brother bombastic. Too bad this insight wasn't available to Orwell or he could have made 1984 even scarier.

> It’s one of the best tools available to detect metallic and non-metallic items, such as… you know… things that go BOOM.

This is uncharacteristic - for a national security organization - even as a blog post. When people question authority, and the emperor has no clothes: resort to fear-mongering and keywords that incite panic? Check.

This blog post is going to be archived and referenced for the next decade. I'd say some restructuring is about to be pushed down TSA's throats. BOOM indeed.

Re: Viral Video About Body Scanners

#146

Post by biot »

famousactress wrote: post #4

Wow. This blog post makes me WAY more afraid of the TSA than the original video did. I can't wrap my head around the language used. "Things that go BOOM" ???!?!?! Are you fucking kidding me? These are the people that are supposedly acting in the interests of our safety? Disgusted. Whoever wrote or approved this post ought to be fired. Fast.

On the contrary, this individual should be promoted to the head of the TSA and be required to make weekly public TV appearances.

Re: Viral Video About Body Scanners

#147

Post by charlieok »

pg wrote: post #8

There is something chillingly unconvincing about their attempts at informality. Big Brother jokey is a lot more frightening than Big Brother bureaucratic or Big Brother bombastic. Too bad this insight wasn't available to Orwell or he could have made 1984 even scarier.

One of the best images I can recall that capture "big brother jokey"

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20091026215221/harrypo...

Re: Viral Video About Body Scanners

#148

Post by philwelch »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #10

> It is completely safe and the vast majority use a generic image that completely addresses privacy concerns. Well that makes me feel great. Guess they decided they been caught blatantly lying on that point before so they decided to reiterate it, just with sufficiently vague qualifiers.

"Vast majority", eh? Yeah, I guess the "vast majority" aren't the young, attractive women you always hear about them disproportionately scanning.

Re: Viral Video About Body Scanners

#149

Post by mikeash »

maqr wrote: post #86
corin_ wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thinking that you can judge someone's intelligence by their spelling and grammar is so incredibly wrong. And I don't mean wrong in a moral "don't be that guy" way (though that too), I mean wrong as in technically inaccurate.

"too" ;) I think there actually is something to be said for PR people having good spelling and grammar. The way this blog post is written might give the impression that the TSA is not a professional organization. It reflects poorly on the agency. It might lead one to the conclusion that if the public face of the TSA can't communicate effectively, the organization might have other problems as well. edit: I just looked…

PR people should have good spelling and grammar precisely because people will judge intelligence and competence by spelling and grammar. That doesn't mean that judgment is correct, but since it exists, you have to deal with it.

Re: Viral Video About Body Scanners

#150

Post by mikeash »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #137
dlss wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Grammatical deficiencies can be symptoms of conceptual deficiencies. They can also be symptomatic of getting overly excited, or of discussing very conceptually or emotionally difficult topics. They can be symptomatic of lying. They can also signify which social group you belong to, bro. To give a more specific critique: vocabulary tests are done in a controlled environment, and hence can not be used to judge the corr…

Your explanation would suggest that the writer's cognitive abilities (whatever they might be) don't carry over into chaotic or stressful situations (i.e., he falls apart under pressure). I would submit that this in itself ought to disqualify him from an important position in an agency as putatively critical as the TSA. People working there, especially those in positions of responsibility, ought to be able to work eff…

Why would a TSA blogger need to be able to work effectively under pressure?
Post reply on HN