821–830 of 839 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't pay attention to the stuff that breeds on Reddit. So, no; I never saw that, and I don't care to. But I am pretty sure that punching down on people with GEDs is rather disingenuously classist, and that's no way behave. You can do better than that.
Such an astoundingly oblivious post I'm wondering if this is a ragebait troll account.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is true. In France, about two thirds out of the people dying in a car accident are the actual drivers responsible for the accident, according to the 2024 Road Safety Report. --- This is because a large number of accidents don't involve another car.
Your point?
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…
I was hoping nobody comes out with an explosive you can build with cotton (and a nuclear reactor, but that would be a detail for the "security compliance" people who will come up with new restrictions). We would need to fly naked and this would be annoying.
I sure like to fly a safe plane. The problem is that I am sure the people who actually want to do something bad will use, like you mentioned, alternative solutions - and I will not even have the nail file they took from me when trying to to defend the plane during the hijacking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the correct cost for a flight leaving in 3 hours with an empty seat? What is the correct cost for a scheduled flight leaving in 2 months with no seats sold yet? Tickets aren't the same price for everyone, and planes fill to variable levels. Plus there are addons like luggage fees and beverages that have a huge markup. What is the best way to solve for that? Besides, it averages something like 53L of fuel/pass…
You can do whatever calculations and speculations you want, but the fact is that airlines do not pay any tax on fuel and no VAT on fuel. Not sure why they should not. Another thing with flying is that it is so easy to go long distances as it takes limited time. A trip London-Barcelona is a 1.5-2 day trip one-way by car. You think twice before doing that. An intercontinental trip London-Bangkok is impossible by car, b…
What a weird rule. In the US they do.
Although some of that might go back to attempts made early in aviation to handle the import taxes of airplanes landing with a half full gas tank.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just imagine the same argument, but for bloodwork. You're literally saying: "We didn't have to deal with these pesky MRIs before, so go away". We will need some additional radiologist training, and the primary care doctors will need to learn when to escalate and/or require followup scans. But that's really about it. MRIs are _cheap_ these days. The true cost of a scan is around $1000, including the radiologist's read…
I can make the same argument. Functional “medicine” quacks order loads of unnecessary blood tests with no diagnostic power to sell you supplements. I actually know someone who was was injured by one of those “supplements” after such a blood test. No I’m saying for most people there’s more noise than signal and iatrogenesis is real. Pretending it’s not is foolish.
That's really the main concern. And we can fix that by doing a follow-up scan several months later to look for any changes. It also has a nice side-effect of reassuring hypochondriacs that they _don't_ have cancer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're in a commercial plane, the driver is acting immaculately, with a margin of error so small you'd never be able to notice any problems. So you'll never need to ask the driver to calm down or let you off. (But it's worth noting that all the control in the world won't keep you safe in a car. You can have/be an inhumanly perfect driver and it's still pretty dangerous to be on the roads.) And then every other com…
> The bouncing on tarmac is safe. It's not long ago that I saw a video of a plane landing in Canada, the right landing gear collapsed and the whole plane rolled around crushing the wings and creating a huge ball of fire. Miraculously everyone survived but passengers described being showered in jet fuel while a huge fireball was going off outside so they clearly weren't far off getting roasted. It obviously isn't safe…
And "if anything goes wrong" in that strong way almost never happens. It meets my standard for safe, and definitely meets car standards. I'm not sure what your definition is, but I hope it's not that safe=perfect because then nothing would be safe and the word would be useless.
More importantly, you're missing my main point about cars. There are risks you can control, and risks you can't control. Pretend we completely solve the first category, absolutely pristine driving, zero possible mistakes, you have the driver's seat and you're being amazing. The remaining risk from driving is still higher than the total risk from taking a flight.
So while it's rational to prefer being in control in like-for-like situations, the vehicle factor overshadows the control factor. A rational person looking for safety will prefer the combo of commercial flight and lack of control over the combo of car and full control, and feel less anxious on the plane than when driving on a good day. Even if they're a really good driver.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've flown with someone who simply said she has prescription medication with her. I mean it was the truth. It was legitimately prescription medication. In this case. But I can imagine someone could lie.
I can't speak to UK airports but TSA policy is that any medication needs to be in the original container, including prescription medication. So if you have any unmarked pills they'll toss them if they find them, same with multiple different pills in a prescription pill bottle or similar.
CBP might care.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, being a member of a “terrorist organization” and the government allows itself latitude in defining that. It’s much easier to associate someone with an organization than to show personal acts of terrorism.
Right but to demonstrate that you lied about X they have to demonstrate X. So by the time you're deporting someone for the lie you could just as easily have deported them for the thing itself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://archive.md/xInVy was the particular example I was mainly thinking of. Discussed here at the time with many more anecdotes in the comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11876453
As suspected, your claim is grossly exaggerated. You have one blog post from a decade ago (which I remember reading at the time since I met the author at a conference) which is about being denied entry as the grounds for travel were misdeclared, and not about oppressive security theatre at the passenger screening area.
Yes but not really. It's mainly about the kind of treatment you face when you get on the wrong side of the airport machine, and as such it's exactly what you're implicitly threatened with if you step out of line.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't pay attention to the stuff that breeds on Reddit. So, no; I never saw that, and I don't care to. But I am pretty sure that punching down on people with GEDs is rather disingenuously classist, and that's no way behave. You can do better than that.
Such an astoundingly oblivious post I'm wondering if this is a ragebait troll account.