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

Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 839 posts

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#311

Post by burner420042 »

bruce511 wrote: post #140
unclad5968 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the US, the TSA is just a government jobs program for the lowly skilled or unskilled. It's all security theater. This matches my experience. I recently flew out of a small airport that flies 2 fairchild metro 23 turboprop planes up to 9 passengers. There were four TSA agents to check the 5 of us that were flying.

You gotta love the TSA. They serve no real purpose, but its a monster too big to kill, staffed by people who desperately cling to the notion they're doing something important. They don't stop hijackings (locking the cockpit door does that), they don't stop bombings (there are much better targets for that, which don't involve killing the bomber), they don't stop weapons (lots of airports outside the US have simple met…

When flying international in to the US, we literally all stand in long lines watching the TSA agents. TSA serves as the introduction to America... I can't think of another country where the personnel aren't groomed and 'height / weight proportionate'.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#312

Post by xxs »

CTDOCodebases wrote: post #146
jandrewrogers wrote: post #71

This just adds confusion as to the purpose of all this. The motivation behind the liquid limits is that there are extremely powerful explosives that are stable water-like liquids. Average people have never heard of them because they aren’t in popular lore. There has never been an industrial or military use, solids are simpler. Nonetheless, these explosives are easily accessible to a knowledgeable chemist like me. The…

The security theatre is there to make people feel safe. It's about emotion not logic.

...or be very anxious and resent air travel. I don't feel any safe through body searches, coupled with belt/coat removal, not wearing glasses and what not.

Personally, I don't know a single person who feels more secure due to the checks.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#313

Post by fc417fc802 »

koshergweilo wrote: post #279
throwaway290 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they don't stop weapons (lots of airports outside the US have simple metal detectors for that.) There are 3D printed guns.

Don't you still need metal bullets for the 3d printed gun?

Those don't generally have any ferrous components.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#314

Post by kakacik »

kstenerud wrote: post #148
jandrewrogers wrote: post #71

This just adds confusion as to the purpose of all this. The motivation behind the liquid limits is that there are extremely powerful explosives that are stable water-like liquids. Average people have never heard of them because they aren’t in popular lore. There has never been an industrial or military use, solids are simpler. Nonetheless, these explosives are easily accessible to a knowledgeable chemist like me. The…

It's about making people feel safe. We're not rational beings, so what do you do about an irrational fear? You invent a magical thing that protects from that irrational fear. You're orders of magnitude more likely to die in a road accident, but people don't fear that. They fear terrorist attacks far more. You can't protect against an opponent who's motivated to learn the inherent vulnerabilities of our systems, many…

I know literally nobody panicking from some idea of terrorist attack against airplane, this is not a thing in Europe. Neither my old parents, neither any of my colleagues etc. Its not 2001 anymore and even back then we were mostly chill.

But I can claim one thing for sure - people hate security checks with passion.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#315

Post by flakeoil »

michaelt wrote: post #271
kleiba wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never done that yet I've never had any trouble finding water past security or even on a plane?!

Airport prices in the UK for recreational travel work like so: Flight from London to Barcelona: £16 Bottle of water past security: £5 Train to airport: £26 Taxi enters drop-off area for 30 seconds: £7 A person who wants to get the advertised flight at the advertised price has to be very careful.

On the other hand, one can also question if the £16 cost for the flight makes any sense. A more correct price would be £500. It's about time that the airlines pay the same taxes for fuel as everyone else.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#316

Post by codethief »

littlecranky67 wrote: post #243
jandrewrogers wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither of those articles seem to support the idea that you can do molecular analysis with x-rays. They are all about elemental analysis, which is not useful for the purpose of detecting explosives.

Not sure if they use dual-energy x-ray as in [0], but you don't need to if you take x-ray shot from different angles. Modern 3D reconstruction algorithms you can detect shape and volume of an object and estimate the material density through its absorption rate. A 100ml liquid explosive in a container will be distinguishable from water (or pepsi) by material density, which can be estimate from volume and absorption ra…

See also beepblap's comments further below where they elaborate on this a bit (it's not just simple dual-energy xray apparently).

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#317

Post by misnome »

omnicognate wrote: post #209
jandrewrogers wrote: post #71

This just adds confusion as to the purpose of all this. The motivation behind the liquid limits is that there are extremely powerful explosives that are stable water-like liquids. Average people have never heard of them because they aren’t in popular lore. There has never been an industrial or military use, solids are simpler. Nonetheless, these explosives are easily accessible to a knowledgeable chemist like me. The…

> Average people have never heard of them because they aren’t in popular lore. Everything I know about liquid explosives I learned from Die Hard 3.

Funnily enough, that’s also all the people who made the rules in the first place knew

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#318

Post by codethief »

bleepblap wrote: post #108
HNisCIS wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dual energy x ray has been around forever though, like decades.

Certainly, but a) not at the prices people wanted to spend to get 25,000 of them b) not at the maintenance cost for 25,000 of them c) without the software to (by someone's metric) discriminate between shampoo and bomb with enough error

25,000? Interesting. Is there anywhere I can read up on this?

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#319

Post by xxs »

piokoch wrote: post #309
jandrewrogers wrote: post #71

This just adds confusion as to the purpose of all this. The motivation behind the liquid limits is that there are extremely powerful explosives that are stable water-like liquids. Average people have never heard of them because they aren’t in popular lore. There has never been an industrial or military use, solids are simpler. Nonetheless, these explosives are easily accessible to a knowledgeable chemist like me. The…

Well, I watched the video of some former Delta Force officer, who said that you can sharpen your credit card to make a deadly weapon out of it. Let's ban credit cards in the airplanes.

Backpack can have metal reinforcements that would make a proper weapon too, Same broken glass bottles and what not.

The entire point is futile and pointless.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#320

Post by tasuki »

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #303
fc417fc802 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting to contrast this with my experience flying out of China. I was taken to a private room and shown the digital colored X-ray of my bag on which a box had been drawn around an empty lighter, I was asked to remove it myself and hand it over, and I went on my way. All in under 5 minutes, no pat down, no fuss, and no one physically rifled through my belongings. (Granted I was a tourist so that might w…

Once at a security checkpoint to a museum in Shanghai, they saw my water bottle, and then told me to take it out and drink from it.

That is the way!
Post reply on HN