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

When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.

blog.izs.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 193 posts

Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.

#131

Post by tibbon »

watchandwait wrote: post #99
Semiapies wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I have to stand in front of this thing all day!" You know, I never thought about that. Considering how x-ray technicians stand behind lead guards and aren't scanning people rapid-fire all day, I wonder what the dosage the TSA folks are getting.

TSA will not allow staff to wear film badge dosimeters, like those regularly worn by health care workers with potential radiation exposure, Everyone is also assuming that the TSA is properly configuring and maintaining this equipment, and that it is not malfunctioning and giving overdoses.

They actively disallow it? That is rather, umm, shocking? If anyone ever called out the "if you've got nothing to cover up..." line, then I'd say it fits here.

Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.

#132

Post by tibbon »

malyk wrote: post #92
j79 wrote: post #77

I opted out during my last flight. After everything I had read, I decided I needed to experience it first hand. I was expecting a huge scene, with the TSA agent screaming, "OPT OUT! We've got an opt out here!", and then being manhandled, groped, and basically demeaned in front of other passengers. After removing my shoes (the one part of airport security theatre I absolutely hate) and placing my belongings in those g…

Two things that strike me. First, what is the back of the hand thing all about? Is it less sensitive? Is it somehow less demeaning? It doesn't make sense to me. Second, if he "made contact" and then immediately retreated...what did he make contact with? Was it clearly your junk? Or could it have been anything? How is it at all effective to do the pat down if all they do is retreat when they feel a little resistance.…

I too have wondered- wouldn't you just hide something in your crotch then?

Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.

#133

Post by frossie »

I flew through three airports with backscatter machines last week. I had a small child with me. Each time i was directed to the regular metal detector - and in one case where my child walked ahead and was about to go through the backscatter machine, she got called back by the TSA person with some agitation and directed through the metal detector instead.

I don't have enough data points to know for sure, but I am wondering if they are purposefully not screening kids in these things and if so, are they doing so due to the radiation exposure concerns.

Like the OP, I never saw anybody opt out.

Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.

#134

Post by jergason »

bambax wrote: post #70
lylejohnson wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So would the President choose the radiation naked picture method or the deep groping method for his daughters? I'd seriously like that question asked at some point by the press. No one in the press has the guts to ask him this. But man, I'd love to see that too.

There is a meme growing on Twitter: http://twitter.com/#search?q=%40cnn Mr. President: Would you send Michelle/Sasha/Malia through TSA screening? Naked photos or invasive genital groping, you get to pick.

This appears to have started on Reddit:

http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/e6nmp/dear_mr_pres...

It will be interesting to be able to pinpoint where this started if it has any actual effect on the situation.

Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.

#135

Post by trunnell »

watchandwait wrote: post #99
Semiapies wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I have to stand in front of this thing all day!" You know, I never thought about that. Considering how x-ray technicians stand behind lead guards and aren't scanning people rapid-fire all day, I wonder what the dosage the TSA folks are getting.

TSA will not allow staff to wear film badge dosimeters, like those regularly worn by health care workers with potential radiation exposure, Everyone is also assuming that the TSA is properly configuring and maintaining this equipment, and that it is not malfunctioning and giving overdoses.

TSA will not allow staff to wear film badge dosimeters

Do you have a link for that?

Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.

#136

Post by ohyes »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #85
ohyes wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edit: s/mwbs/bs/g; per comment below Well, X-rays cause cancer. BS uses X-rays So it is a cancer risk. And it is a little more founded than someone randomly saying' this causes cancer'. In terms of risk... This says dental x-rays are about 2-3 mrem: http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/dental.htm This says BS is about .006-.009 mrem: http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/backscatter.htm Keep in mind that under cer…

(This doesn't take into account other real issues, like 'what if the machine breaks down and we start blasting people with focused beams of radiation'... What if my flashlight breaks down and I start blasting people with focused beams of laser light? What if my cell phone breaks down and the microwaves melt the brains of everyone within 6 feet of me? I don't know a great deal about the engineering of MWBS, but I see…

It is hard to think that a flashlight or cellphone would have a power supply strong enough to do that much damage. (Although actually, metal halide lamps can sometimes cause UV radiation burns if they are damaged... http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/158/4/372 ).

As long as the backscatter machine doesn't run on Double A's, my fears are actually more reasonable than yours.

The backscatter machine presumably uses some sort of electrical plug to connect to power. It isn't inconceivable that it could receive more power than intended and produce more x-rays, or that something could go wrong with the shielding allowing x-rays to leak, or that something could go wrong with the x-ray bulb and we could produce the wrong type of radiation.

And it doesn't have to be 'burning your head off' to be a problem, it could simple produce an order of magnitude or two more radiation than intended, and be a health risk.

Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.

#137

Post by ars »

jessriedel wrote: post #97
ars wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks. Just how shielded are those X-ray scanners? They look like just walking near them will expose you.

You could stand next to them all day and it would still be less than 1% of your daily radiation dose from cosmic rays. More importantly, for argument's sake, it would be much less than the amount of additional radiation you pick up on a standard flight.

I know, but I still don't want unnecessary radiation.

Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.

#138

Post by tibbon »

dkokelley wrote: post #81
CWuestefeld wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I enjoy picking apart irrational government actions, you're stretching it here. For example, (deceased) Senator Ted Kennedy claimed to have been on the list and detained at airports. See https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/No_Fly_List#F... : In August 2004, Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) told a Senate Judiciary Committee discussing the No Fly List that he had appeared on the list and had been repeat…

The fact that he was able to remove himself from the list seems to validate my argument. The senator was able to appeal directly to the Homeland Security Secretary. From the article: Recognizing that as a U.S. Senator he was in a privileged position of being able to contact Ridge, Kennedy said of "ordinary citizens": "How are they going to be able to get to be treated fairly and not have their rights abused?"

I'm still shocked over this incident overall. The fact that someone wouldn't be able to identify Teddy by sight, let alone his voice is shocking. Let alone, if you go to your supervisor they didn't know.

Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.

#139

Post by tzs »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #18

Just curious, does anyone have some hard evidence that the MWBS is a cancer risk? I ask this simply because anti-X activists have pushed junk science claims of the form "X causes CANCER" many times [1], so I'm a little dubious. I don't think fighting civil liberties violations with junk science is a useful tactic, if that is indeed what is happening here. [1] For example, feminists pushed the "silicone gel implants c…

> Just curious, does anyone have some hard evidence that the MWBS is a cancer risk?

The eventual outcome of a policy of assuming things are not cancer risks until proven otherwise is cancer. It is much more sensible to assume a cancer risk until proven otherwise.

Re: When we got to the scanner, I opted out. Then they opted out.

#140

Post by marchdown »

Semiapies wrote: post #84
j79 wrote: post #77

I opted out during my last flight. After everything I had read, I decided I needed to experience it first hand. I was expecting a huge scene, with the TSA agent screaming, "OPT OUT! We've got an opt out here!", and then being manhandled, groped, and basically demeaned in front of other passengers. After removing my shoes (the one part of airport security theatre I absolutely hate) and placing my belongings in those g…

"I have to stand in front of this thing all day!" You know, I never thought about that. Considering how x-ray technicians stand behind lead guards and aren't scanning people rapid-fire all day, I wonder what the dosage the TSA folks are getting.

Now, wouldn't it be interesting to show up at the airport with a couple of spare dosimeters and give them to the porn crew? It is doubtful that they are all instructed against them, or else they would have already considered radiation risks.
Post reply on HN