Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: terminalcornucopia.com

Stories and comments across the archive that link to terminalcornucopia.com.

Comments · 6

  1. Re:Extension of an existing law by infolation · · Score: 1 · on UK Government Could Imprison People For Looking At Terrorist Content (betanews.com)
    Amber Rudd says she wants a law that allows people to visit a website once. The Guardian article says that the links would need to be clicked more than once for the offence to be committed. According to the Home Office:

    the updated offence will ensure that only those found to repeatedly view online terrorist material will be guilty of the offence, to safeguard those who click on a link by mistake or who could argue that they did so out of curiosity rather than with criminal intent.

    Here's a website that would be illegal to visit more than once under Amber Rudd's proposal. It shows how to make a Frag Grenade using materials from airport terminals.

    Here are some other links you might also want to click on.

    cat videos
    more cat videos
    cat videos yay!

    I am hoping Amber Rudd can explain the dilemma here.

  2. Re: Insurance by DarkOx · · Score: 1 · on TSA May Recommend Stowing Laptops In Cargo For US Domestic Flights (cbslocal.com)

    Right,

    We don't need the TSA. The trade off between their invasive nature, the economic costs imposed by what they do direct in terms of screening activities, and indirect in terms of missed flights and long waits at airports, isn't a good one. I'd say shit can the entire thing and go back to the basic screening we had before.

    However, the political will do that does not exist. Nobody (in power) will ever propose it because if it got done and than something happened they would be hounded from office. So given we are going to have to put up with this kind of BS, I actually would like to see some real security! Having already lost my freedom over my own vocal complaints and activity at the ballot box, now I say well at least give me the promised safety than.

    So I would like the see the TSA strictly limit what can be taken on commercial passenger aircraft and what materials are allowed inside the secure area of airports. The should watch: http://www.terminalcornucopia....

    and actually remove this stuff (well maybe not magazines and newspapers). No exceptions should not be made for liquids like baby milk etc without the passenger proving its save by consuming a portion. Various medical equipment that can be weaponized should be ban. If that means some people can't travel by commercial air, to frigging bad. They should have thought of that at the ballot box sooner.

    Maybe when mainstream life styles are effected, "what do you mean I can board with my smart phone" and "granny can't come visit this Christmas because her oxygen cylinder isnt allowed" people will finally say alright lets end the madness and go back to how things were. In the meantime we can at least have safer air travel.

  3. Re:When will they ban ceramic blades in planes by DarkOx · · Score: 1 · on US Bans Electronic Cigarettes From Checked Baggage Over Fire Risks (foxnews.com)

    http://www.terminalcornucopia....

  4. So DARPA basically wants to by Verdatum · · Score: 1 · on DARPA Wants Ideas On Weaponizing Off-the-Shelf Tech (ieee.org)

    Talk to the guy at http://terminalcornucopia.com/ he makes weapons out of stuff sold in airport shops located after the security checkpoint.

  5. Re:Detecting weapons is NOT the purpose of TSA... by ubrgeek · · Score: 4, Informative · on TSA Screeners Can't Detect Weapons (and They Never Could) (arstechnica.com)

    Yes you can.

  6. Re:interesting though stupid comment by sumdumass · · Score: 1 · on Disabled Woman Denied Entrance To US Due To Private Medical Records

    Yes, you can. By making it physically impossible to open the door at 30,000 feet which incidentally is already done. And if they start whacking on a window with a heavy item, there would be plenty of passengers to subdue the person.

    Yes, because you said so.. Sigh.. http://www.terminalcornucopia.com/

    And if they do open the door or break the window, it's not likely to kill many people. I think the risk is acceptable, especially given that people not diagnosed as mentally ill can do whatever a mentally ill person can do.

    I guess what you think doesn't matter because people with the power to had actually denied her the chance. They think the risk was unacceptable and denied it which is why we are bothering with it.