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

741–750 of 839 posts

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#741

Post by direwolf20 »

vidarh wrote: post #332
Fervicus wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've traveled all over Europe and North America and have taken a lot of trains. Not once did I have to remove my shoe, scan my baggage, or had any kind of liquid restrictions.

There are even restaurants in London you can't get to without going through a scanner. E.g. half the restaurants at The Shard. But to give an idea of how idiotic it is: Those are on the 32nd and 33rd floor. Next door is the Shangri La hotel of The Shard, where you can walk straight in and take the lift to the 31st (no scanners), and change to a lift for the 52nd floor (no scanners).

Wouldn't a terrorist want to bomb a building on the ground floor, anyway, so that all of it would fall down?

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#742

Post by direwolf20 »

runarberg wrote: post #657
justsomehnguy wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "less terrorism". Back in the day you needed to get onto TV and into newspaper headlines to get any attentions besides your neighbours. Today you can do that with a Facebook page and send your ideas worldwide. And that works the back way too: instead of the news of bombing in some remote country you can't even find on the map you can get a funny cat videos to fill in.

In the 1970s everyone and their grandma was a member of some left wing revolutionary group, and half of them were working on some terrorist plot, bombing an embassy here, taking hostages there, hijacking an airplane, etc. etc. And in the 1980s every right wing reactionary had joined a right wing counter-revolutionary group, and 99% of them were plotting terrorist attacks (most of them targeting minorities). Today the…

Minneapolis had a whole string of them just this month

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#743

Post by tastyfreeze »

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…

> It's about making people feel safe.

It doesn't make me feel safe. It makes me annoyed. Since TSA are government agents it also pokes a tyranny button for me. I despise TSA with a passion and there is not a damn thing I can do about it. They also have the gall to offer a paid service to get around the delays they cause with taxpayer money. If airport security checkpoints need to be done it shouldn't be government doing it.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#744

Post by direwolf20 »

bawolff wrote: post #231
darth_avocado wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3-1-1 is rarely enforced. I always got confused why the 100ml limit existed, since I could just take multiple bottles of 100ml of whatever I wanted and it was okay. Then I realized that technically I only could take 3 bottles but I’ve been getting away with more for decades.

Yeah, but arent you allowed to exit and re-enter security as many times as you like as long as you have a valid ticket?

They'd probably find it suspicious

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#745

Post by hex4def6 »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #681
labcomputer wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they’re playing the long game. It’s for if they need to deport (and/or jail) you later. Lying on a customs form is a valid reason to revoke a visa, and it’s an open and shut case.

Is traveling to the US for the purpose of engaging in espionage not also a valid reason to revoke a visa?

Yes. And murder is illegal. And yet, Al Capone was in Alcatraz on tax evasion charges.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#746

Post by ErroneousBosh »

5d41402abc4b wrote: post #257
bleepblap wrote: post #83

there is actually a science change that happened, and it's not (entirely) just politicians changing their mind. The big thing going from X-ray (2d) to CT (spin an X-ray machine around and take a ton of pictures to recreate a 3d image) did a lot to let security people see inside of a bag, but the hitch is that if you see a blob of gray is that water, shampoo or something else? The recent advance that is letting this h…

Can this X Ray bit flip memory or damage NAND?

It can erase EPROMs, so don't send your vintage computers through an X-ray machine.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#747

Post by Havoc »

lmm wrote: post #95
PcChip wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did they force you to do that?

Anything a border official says is implicitly backed with the threat of, at a minimum, detention without trial and without basic humane treatment like access to drinking water. Heathrow has well publicised cases (and is not unusual in this).

>Heathrow has well publicised cases

People attempting to enter illegally, not for failing to down drinks like it's a frat house...

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#748

Post by lacoolj »

I have yet to encounter a reason to take more than 3oz of liquid with me on a flight somewhere.

Once the restriction was added, it seemed like "oh no how dare you" but in reality, I'm never carrying enough toothpaste to make this a problem.

Are other people truly struggling with this limitation? Feels more like a perceived issue than a practical one.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#749

Post by pixl97 »

pousada wrote: post #735
pixl97 wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're making assumptions the thing they lied about and the thing they are being deported for are the same, and quite often the thing you're actually being deported for is not a reason to deport anyone at all. You come to the US and make a social media post saying Trump is a big fat dummy head. You get deported for lying about being in a terrorist organization.

Is that actually a realistic example? I’m having trouble following what’s happening in the US

100%.

This pattern of government behavior is everywhere. One common one is the yellow sheet (form 4473) for buying a firearm in the US.

Here is an example of a question

> “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”

No matter the state law, federal law says it's illegal.

So, what happens. At some point you buy a gun in Colorado. Then lets say you get on the news and talk about legalization, or you talk about anything that catches social media popularity and someone in the government doesn't approve of. Well, you better not have any record of a marijuana purchase anywhere, or pictures of you doing it because you've just committed a federal crime and the ATF/FBI can kick down your door as they please.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#750

Post by teachrdan »

lacoolj wrote: post #748

I have yet to encounter a reason to take more than 3oz of liquid with me on a flight somewhere. Once the restriction was added, it seemed like "oh no how dare you" but in reality, I'm never carrying enough toothpaste to make this a problem. Are other people truly struggling with this limitation? Feels more like a perceived issue than a practical one.

In the US at least, the limit applies to containers that hold more than 3oz. So I'm prohibited from bringing an 8oz toothpaste tube with an ounce or less left in it. This is an inconvenience if I want to fly for a multi-day trip without checking any baggage.
Post reply on HN