Blue Crab Nanosensor to Fight Terrorism

Roland Piquepaille writes "A substance found in crab shells called chitosan has very useful properties. For example, it has been used in bandages to stop bleeding. But now, researchers at the University of Maryland have used the chitosan from blue crabs living in Chesapeake Bay as a component of a nanoscale sensor system which could save many lives in the future. These blue crab nanosensors will be used to improve security in airports, hospitals and other public locations by detecting tiny amounts of explosives or chemicals in air and water. Read on for additional references and pictures of these blue crab nanosensors."

Comments

Fights Terrorists, Not Terrorism

[Doc Ruby]

Oh, good, we've got nanosensors. Now we can stop overreacting maniacally to attacks, the wildfire of uncontrolled fear that destroys our freedom more than any bomb ever could. I can't wait to see our leaders appear on TV to tell us we can calm down.

Re:Fights Terrorists, Not Terrorism

[kfg]

Hey, those nano bombs can sting!

What do you bet the end result of this is going to be nothing more than a shitload of innocent people getting put on "The List" because of false positives?

There's such a thing as over measurement.

KFG

Re:Fights Terrorists, Not Terrorism

[QuantumFTL]

While I do agree that we, as a nation, have overreacted quite a bit to terrorist actions, that doesn't mean we shouldn't work on security precautions. Prevention and mitigation are two of our strongest weapons that can help people avoid the need to worry.

On the other hand, I'm not all that convinced that these new security measures are really doing that much to make things like air travel safer. I know someone who accidentally took firecrackers in his pocket on an flight across the US once (after 9/11). The security people x-rayed and felt through all of his on-person possessions, but so much junk had accumulated in his pockets that they did not notice the presence of explosives.

Re:Fights Terrorists, Not Terrorism

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"Cars kill more people than bombs do but a sensor to detect bombs is a good thing but speed cameras are evil. Guess which potentially saves more lives?"

Ever wonder why they call it terrorism instead of mass-murder? 9-11 did a lot more damage than car crashes. The gubment's handling of terrorism is questionable, but the prioritization of it over car crashes is not nearly as black and white. Anti-terrorism (The intent, I mean, not 'The War Against Terror'...) is about more than just the saving of lives. Think about what the first week after 9-11 was like, then think about the year that followed. The fear, paranoia, and hardships that followed were incalcuable. There's a reason it's not swept under the rug until car crashes are dealt with. Think about it.

No Pinch

[DigiShaman]

Speaking of Crabs, I'm reminded of this video.

but...

[howhardcanitbetocrea]

they wouldn't be allowed in airports with those sharp claws would they?

Sure, we're safe...

[ShadowSonic]

...until the terrorists learn to attack their weak points for MASSIVE DAMAGE.

necessity is the mother of invention?

[SuperBanana]

These blue crab nanosensors will be used to improve security in airports, hospitals and other public locations by detecting tiny amounts of explosives or chemicals in air and water.

Because after all, we've had such a huge problem with explosives and "chemicals" in airports, hospitals, and "other public locations"...

Funny Story

[aXis100]

No matter how good the sensor technology is, you still have humans driving the system.

A funny example is an industrial town I fly to on a regular basis. Most of the people work in the mines, where explosives can be a common part of many poeples jobs. When explosives traces are regularly detected at the airport explosives scan, their first question is "Have you been on a mine site recently?" Obviously 99% of people say yes, and are let through without question.

What is the point? We're running around banning knitting needles and letter openers and it makes no fucking difference.

TSA is a mindset we don't want

[ianscot]

I used to take my dog -- a Newfoundland -- in to the airport to pick people up. The baggage claim at our local airport basically lets people get dogs off their leashes after a flight, and according to the local cops it was okay. Never had a cross word from anyone; I wasn't inflicting too many more allergens on anyone, I hoped, and mostly we got a lot of good socialization when she was a puppy. At least some people seemed to get a wake-up in the middle of their exhausting travel day.

One day a TSA employee caught sight of us. A squad of four of them surrounded me, quietly preventing me from moving away as one lectured me on all the potential dreadful consequences should they decide to enforce their vaguely-defined regulations. I tried to ask after the specific laws or airport restrictions involved. There probably were some -- I'd always assumed the cops were just being smart about what to enforce and what not to -- but it was clear that the TSA guys were entirely motivated by that obnoxious self-righteousness I recognize from birding near power plants. You know, the one that comes with private security agencies taking themselves too seriously and not having clear "boundaries," so that they end up thinking their job is to harass people. Said people are to be presumed guilty, of course.

End result was me feeling intimidated, which seemed to be the goal. Those guys were a hybrid between hallway monitors and the bullies from your middle school.

Somehow the local cops had always managed to keep me in line, and to prevent potential terrorist attacks by Newfoundland drool and shedding, without any ill will. If one of them had brought this up with me I'd have taken it a lot differently...