Slashdot Mirror


Airport Security vs. Cyborg Steve Mann

CompaniaHill writes: "The New York Times (free reg, etc.) has a story on University of Toronto engineering-professor-turned-cyborg Steve Mann's recent run-in with humorless airport security. Apparently his preplanning and documents were sufficient to get him through the Toronto airport security on his way to St. John's in Newfoundland, but not sufficient to get him through the St. John's airport security on his way home. Two days later, after strip-searches, forced removal of implants and x-raying and other ill-handling of delicate hardware, he returned home in a wheelchair. Mann's lawyer is attempting to recover the cost of the $56,800 in damaged hardware, while his doctors are studying his body's response to the removal of the implants, some of which he has had for over twenty years."

19 of 675 comments (clear)

  1. cyborg? bah! by cygnus · · Score: 5, Funny

    my god! what good are cyborgs if they can't even contend with simple airport security officers?

    darth vader would be ashamed!

    --
    Just raise the taxes on crack.
    1. Re:cyborg? bah! by bobdehnhardt · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ol' Darth could have used the Force to get by. But what about Colonel Steve Austin? No way he'd get through - even if Rudy figured out some way to pass the X-Ray machine, the slow-motion running and ch-ch-ch-ch-ch sound effects would have been a dead giveaway....

  2. Wages. by saintlupus · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wow, I can totally cripple someone far more learned than me _and_ make seven dollars an hour! Woo-hoo!

    Seriously, though, next time, take another route home. Zeppelin or something.

    --saint

  3. again airport security are idiots. by edrugtrader · · Score: 5, Interesting

    if anyone read my post a week ago, airport security is simply retarded. they decide they are going to nail someone and they do just that.

    me and my girlfriend had to wait for 2 minutes while they chemical tested all of luggage and carry ons, and shoes and purses for explosives. this was because her shoes (complete with metal shoe lace ends) set off the metal detector.

    later in the trip tourists are posing with the reserve offices for pictures... i saw this many times. tourists have their arms inches away from machine guns carried by 5 foot tall women and all the airport cares about are my stinky shoes.

    then the kicker is the woman on the airplane knitting with HUGE knitting needles.

    this guys sensor that opens doors is going to do about as much damage as my stinky shoe. yes, when i fly i want to be safe, and that is why i defend the 'fly naked' campaign.

    --
    MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
    1. Re:again airport security are idiots. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
      True. I flew last week and here are my observations:
      • JFK: NG troops have M-16s (or AR-15s) on their backs--they may as well be unarmed or wearing bullseyes. Two NGs at each entrance. My guess is safety off or round not chambered. Either way they would be fumbling for their weapons (ever tried to grab something that's hanging over your back, especially when someone is shooting at you???) if the shit went down in the terminal. They are easy targets, and a quick terrorist could get two free bullethoses off of two quick shots. Grade: F
      • Paris: CRS troops carrying subbies, finger on the trigger. Grade: A
      • Rome: Carabinieri troops w/ subbies & full-size bullethoses of various origin. Hand on the grip. Grade: A
      • Istanbul: Similar to Rome. Grade: A

      Conclusion: for the most part (except for the phish-head wannabe Richard Reid fiasco...), the European airports know what the fuck they are doing. They can kill a terrorist within seconds. The American airports are still run by a bunch of fucking amateurs.

    2. Re:again airport security are idiots. by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Insightful
      European airports know what the fuck they are doing. They can kill a terrorist within seconds
      That's great news. Anyone thinking of hijacking an airport terminal and flying it into a building is going to think twice now.

      Or would you hijack a terminal and fly it into a plane? I don't know...

      Personally I'm convinced this is the most absurd crap I've heard in a long time (not your comments, I mean the whole security-at-airports thing.) I went through Boston Logan a few weeks ago, which has taken the stunning step of outfitting its security people in militaristic uniforms as its first defense against evil terrorists. Right.

      And as I accidentally forgot to take my watch off before I went through the metal detector, I got subjected to the full search. Have the wand waved over you, take your shoes off, be patted down several times, shoes going through X-ray, etc. This pointless charade was made a little more bearable by the fact they were similarly tormenting some woman in her seventies next to me - they obviously were searching anyone.

      And I put my shoes on, wandered to the bar, got myself a pint of Sam Adams, served in a plastic glass because, well, those nasty terrorists could abuse cans... and pondered in how many ways I could have circumvented security right then.

      A shard of glass in my hair would have gone unnoticed. Probably would have in my luggage too. But the kicker I thought was the stuff that's clearly not a weapon that could have been in my bag ready to be turned into one. Have you ever taken an empty Cola can and ripped it in half? Makes a "box cutter" look like something you'd let a three year old play with doesn't it? Can you see Boston Logan security telling anyone to get rid of the can of cola in their luggage?

      The solution has been staring everyone in the face since 9/11, and nobody wants to do it because, geez, we'd have to add $10 to every airticket, and that's taxation, and everyone hates taxes right? It's the air marshall system - put an armed guard on every flight, well trained, no nonsense, plain clothed for what extra security that gives. And while you're at it, train the crews.

      But instead we go for crap like this - we search everyone, uselessly, pointlessly, invasively. Some go through saying that, gosh, they feel so darned safe now! And the rest of us go through counting the number of weapons we could have sneaked through. And the terrorists... well, if a complete idiot can see how to get semtex on board a plane, and by all accounts, the individual who did just that last Christmas was just that, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out what the future entails.

      The only reason we haven't had a hijacking since 9/11 is because the terrorists know that the passengers of any plane hijacked will gladly give their lives to get the plane out of the hands of the hijackers. They learnt that forty-five minutes into their first attempt, over Pennsylvania. No amount of extra scanning, body searches, and roughed up suspects, will make a difference when the terrorists strike next, only whether the terrorists believe they can get away with it.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  4. So... by leviramsey · · Score: 5, Funny
    forced removal of implants

    In a related story, Britney Spears announced that she would never perform in Canada again.

    1. Re:So... by Skyshadow · · Score: 5, Funny
      [Busts out "Federal Breast Inspector" card]

      Hot damn, I knew this thing would pay off someday! Airport security, here I come!

      --
      Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
  5. Okay, they shouldn't have fucked up his equipment. by sulli · · Score: 5, Insightful
    But really, I am surprised to see that, post-9/11 (an incident committed with box cutters) and post-shoe burning guy, people still think the guy should get carte blanche. Behind all those wires, or in the laptop he refused to have X-rayed (WHAT possible laptop can't handle an X-ray?!) could be explosives or other weapons.

    That they destroyed his equipment and pulled off is electrodes was wrong, and they should be held accountable for this. No airport security agent should ever be unprofessional like that (which is why I support the federalization program currently in progress in the US). But the guy had to be inspected.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
  6. Steve Mann, not "Dr." Warwick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is *not* Kevin Warwick, the British psuedoscience jackass who's been walking around for a few years with an RFID pet tag under his skin.

    It is Professor Steve Mann (http://eyetap.org/mann/), one of the first inventors of a *real* wearable, and a downright cool guy. I didn't know he had any implants- does anyone have any more information? I'd imagine his equipment would be a bit more advanced than the snake-oil Warwick's been showing around.

  7. Re:Oh please. There are limits... by optikSmoke · · Score: 5, Funny

    Jeeez........ do I have to spell it out?

    Darth: [waving his hand] I'm not the Sith Lord you're looking for.
    Guard 1: This isn't the Sith Lord we're looking for
    Guard 2: Move along.... move along......

  8. Not his first run-in there! by dazedNconfuzed · · Score: 5, Informative

    Two years ago Steve Mann had a very similar run-in with AirCanada, they being very hostile towards him bringing his equipment on-board, and damaging some of his equipment in the process.

    His detailed description with photos is at Air Canada Irresponsibility.

    --
    Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
  9. Sounds more than a little exaggerated to me. by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 5, Informative

    In one fell swoop they cut him off from his augmented memory and processing, and then threw his visual system for a loop, hence the need for a wheelchair.

    I'm a graduate student at the University of Toronto, and interact with Prof. Mann on an intermittent basis (did a project under him a few years back, meet him in the lab whenever I'm borrowing his soldering equipment).

    He can see fine without his HUD. It's not a complete visual transformation overlay - it's a wearable computer display, functionally equivalent to most of the other wearable displays you can buy. He's been working on information-overlay projects for years, many of them successful, but to say that he has "vital" vision-enhancement programs running at all times is a drastic overstatement.

    Likewise, "augmented memory" consists of him either teleconferencing with someone or doing a Google lookup. He's perfectly capable of finding his way through this university, or an airport, without augmentation.

    Use common sense, people. If he was disoriented, I'd suspect it to be the result of a many-hour delay with inadequate food/water or of an overly-zealous search as opposed to loss of any electronics.

  10. Re:maybe overstating the case a little by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Funny
    > The reason that he ended up in a wheelchair was that since he no longer had his cyborg navigation gear, he supposedly got confused while walking around the airport and hit his head on a pile of fire extinguishers. I don't even know where to start with that one.

    I do - if you've followed his research, you'd know that his glasses continually project data streams onto his eyes.

    (example - he walks up to a price display at a store twiddles with his fingers, and sees, projected into his vision, the price of the same object at the competing store.)

    If he's worn such glasses for a long period of time, and if he's doing some other sorts of tricks with prisms and mirrors to allow the merging of eyeball-data with bitstream-data before it hits his retina, the loss of the glasses could very well hamper his ability to navigate on foot.

    (I'm reminded of an old experiment in depth perception where they gave subjects glasses with prisms that shifted their "vision" 30 degrees to the right. The first day, everyone was bumping into the left-hand side of every door they tried to walk through, as you might expect. After a few weeks, their brains "retrained" themselves to see the world with the glasses on, and everything was fine. Then they took the glasses off and everyone was bumping into the right-hand side of things until their brains "unlearned" the glasses.)

    > In my opinion, the truly interesting part of this article is that once his technological aids were removed, this guy ceased to be able to complete basic tasks like walking. This has significant ramifications for wearable computing. Is it augmented reality? Or is it a crutch without which he can't function?

    "Yes and yes."

    And that's precisely the kind of stuff he's researching.

    (Once my snowshoes were removed, I ceased to be able to walk in 4-foot-deep snow. Are my snowshoes a mobility-augmentor or a crutch?)

  11. One Simple question... by rbeattie · · Score: 5, Funny


    Does this guy EVER take a SHOWER?!?!?!

    -Russ

    --
    Me
  12. No Implants... by outlier · · Score: 5, Informative
    didn't know he had any implants- does anyone have any more information?

    Despite the claims in the slashdot blurb, Mann does not have any implants. The NYTimes story mentions that electrodes were removed from his skin. These are the same as those sticky things they attach when someone gets an EKG or polygraph test, and are presumably used by Mann to measure physiological things like heart rate or skin conductance. Mann claims that when they were removed he bled -- kind of like ripping off a really sticky band-aid...

  13. Re:Big-o Deal-o. by funkapus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Any old damn thing in the name of security"?

    Let's think about this hypothetically. You're a security guard. Your job is to ensure that planes don't blow up. Six months ago thousands of people died because security failed, so there's pressure on you to be extremely careful.

    So this guy shows up at your post and the metal detector goes off. The guy says he can explain, and pulls up his shirt to reveal wires all over his undershirt leading into a couple of boxes, also concealed underneath his clothing. He then helpfully informs you that he's a cyborg, and that he has a letter from his doctor.

    Personally, if I was in this situation, I'd have two concerns. First, this guy's telling me he's a cyborg, which frankly gives me doubts about his mental stability. Second, he's got wires and batteries and all kinds of crap concealed under his clothing. Sure, he's telling me that it's a computer, but it looks like a bomb to me. The boxes are screwed shut, so I can't see what's inside them, and he won't let me run it through the X-ray. These are also custom boxes that look like no computer I've ever seen.

    Now, how're you going to determine the truth of the matter? I seriously doubt a security guard is keeping up on the state of wearable computing, so you're not going to recognize Steve Mann. Mann's got a note from his doctor and other documentation about this equipment, but you have no reason to think that these documents are credible. Maybe you call your boss to see if he knows anything about this, and more likely than not your boss hasn't been informed, because the message has been lost in the corporate fog. Or maybe he has been informed, but he's in the bathroom and you can't get him on the phone.

    So you're standing there at the checkpoint, with a man in front of you whom you have many reasons to believe might be wearing a bomb, and you have only his word that it's a computer.

    I don't think anyone in this situation would just let him hop on the plane. Maybe you disagree, and that's fine. But in that case I sure hope you aren't working in airport security.

  14. Mann is a jackass by jon_c · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just saw a 90 minute film on Steve Mann called Cyberman at SXSW in Austin, basically he has for about 20 years now hooked up a camera and video screen to his glasses. I believe his setup can now zoom, playback and bring up a crude command line prompt, he also has a single hand keyboard for input, and yes he walks around with this all the time. He also has renegade antennas setup around his city to stream video from his head to the web.

    However a few times they showed him going into retailers like walmart and gap with a consumer video camera (just to start shit). When an employee asks him to not bring the video camera in, he starts being a little smart ass about it. like "Well don't you have video cameras in here, why can you video tape me and I can't video tape you", "What if I told you that my glasses we're a video camera, would that be ok?". generally not agreeing with the store and making a jackass out of himself.

    I also saw him take off his glasses constantly, he would slip them off to do something, then put them back to walk around (then look around like a space cadet ), but it did not seem that he was in any way disoriented without his gear. So I don't buy that all of a sudden once his stuff was busted up by the security guards (which we're just trying to do there freakin job) that he started bumping into things, or at least not more then normally.

    I think what happened at the airport is that for "I'm cyberman" reasons he opted to keep his gear on, got shit from the security guards, proceeded to be a complete smartass while thinking, "if they fuck with me, I have it all on film", but when they broke his gear and is alibi that's when he really god pissed. I'm sure he was already expecting shit, but maybe hoping he could have covert footage of it to show the 8 o-clock news as well.

    -Jon

    --
    this is my sig.
  15. I'm not impressed by ckedge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Letters from doctors and airlines mean nothing. Their pieces of paper that are easily forged.

    No rational security guard or "manager" doing their jobs would have the knowledge or authority to make the kind of exceptions to security procedures that this guy expected.

    I am highly concerned he was let through Pearson security so easily. Ripped from his skin? Disoriented and couldn't walk straight? Half a million dollars of equipment? Whatever. Cyborg? If it is that bad, he should not have been flying, not without a Transport Canada ruling, like are needed for other highly exceptional circumstances.

    Give me a break. The "article" as well as the Slashdot lead in all sound *HIGHLY* one sided.

    I give this side of the story a credibility rating of 2 out of 10, and the possibility that Professor Steve Mann is a pompous jackass a 7 out of 10. That the people in St. Johns did their job as we've requested them to do? 8 out of 10, losing points for putting his video glasses in with the baggage and not keeping track of his possessions.