Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Do Not Flush Your iPod

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the ipods-on-the-mother-fing-plane dept.

realjordanna writes "Clearly the bar for what is deemed as a security threat has had to be lowered — but should it be this low? When a rather embarrassed passenger loses his iPod in the lavatory — even admits to the crew his mistake, the plane is diverted to Ottawa and a bomb squad is brought in to investigate. Read the iPod owner's story and take one lesson from this kid's plight — clearly the iPod is not flushable."

113 of 510 comments (clear)

  1. Watch what you drop in the toilet by suso · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wow! I'd hate to think of what would have happened to him if he had dropped something more obscure like a GPS device into the toilet. Fortunately iPods are commonplace.

    1. Re:Watch what you drop in the toilet by skoaldipper · · Score: 5, Funny

      iPods use Sony lithium ion batteries. For fear of an explosion in the plane shitter, I'd say the FAA was quite prudent in this decision.

      --
      I hope, when they die, cartoon characters have to answer for their sins.
    2. Re:Watch what you drop in the toilet by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Funny

      Your right, if it had exploded the shit would have hit the fan.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    3. Re:Watch what you drop in the toilet by notque · · Score: 3, Funny

      TLDR

      --
      http://use.perl.org
    4. Re:Watch what you drop in the toilet by Xanthis · · Score: 3, Funny

      What are we coming to? Having to confess that iPood in the toilet? What? Oh... iPod. Nevermind.

    5. Re:Watch what you drop in the toilet by ultranova · · Score: 2, Funny

      Your right, if it had exploded the shit would have hit the fan.

      Turbine. Fans are soooo yesterday tech.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    6. Re:Watch what you drop in the toilet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, this guy dropped it in the toilet by accident.

      OK, we all agree on this point.

      No, that doesn't absolve him of having committed that blunder.

      What punishment do you think he deserves for making a mistake? In addition to losing the iPod itself, of course. As a member of the flying public, I think there are more than enough gotchas in the system for passengers that make minor mistakes. (And yes, I consider this a minor mistake.)

      By the way he talks and acts on online fora, you'd think he was a bloody hero.

      I didn't get the impression he thought he was a hero. Would you mind quoting the portion of the story that gives you that impression?

      Fact is, because of his blunder, other people suffered.

      Yes, because of his blunder and the over-reaction by the authorities.

      Is this braggart going to compensate these people for his blunder?

      How do you classify him as a braggart? What compensation would you think would be adequate?

      Instead he keeps on bragging, and from what I can tell, even tried to sell his story.

      What is wrong with selling his story? Did he forget to get his writing license from you? I think it took a lot of courage to tell his side of the story instead of hiding in the shadows. If nothing else, his story serves as a reminder that passengers must be careful -- perhaps that will keep a couple of other flights on schedule.

      It's not that he through stupidity had an accident and made an error, but his failing completely to take responsibility for it, and even bragging about it with total unconcern for how his actions hurt others.

      Geez, his iPod came unclipped in a tiny washroom. It is pretty easy for a mishap like that to occur. He did take responsibility for his action as soon as he understood what happened - he spoke up and explained the situation to the flight attendents. Again, I don't get where he was bragging, nor do I get the impression that he was unconcerned with the impact on the other passengers.

      What an utter piece of shit. And you apparently brighten everyone's day. By leaving the room.

    7. Re:Watch what you drop in the toilet by ObiWanKenblowme · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe calling it trolling was a bit too harsh. You can't expect this kid to compensate everyone for anything just because he made a simple mistake that got out of hand. Besides, you could just as easily hold the flight attendants responsible, or the captain, or the ground crew, or anyone else responsible for escalating the situation. What it all really boils down to is: life just isn't fair. There's no good way around it, and sometimes shit just happens. Where would you draw the line at compensation? What if someone drove too slowly in front of me and made me late for work? What if someone ahead of me at the grocery store bought the last bottle of Pepsi? Should I be able to demand to be compensated for my inconvenience?

      --
      Obvious exits are NORTH, SOUTH, and DENNIS.
  2. High Alert by charliebear · · Score: 2, Interesting

    After the fact it may seem silly, but after the recent arrests in London, I sure would want the flight crew/law enforcement to fully investigate an electronic device in a toilet. After all, the alleged plot involved liquid explosives that were to be detonated in the bathroom, *using an electronic device or camera*

    1. Re:High Alert by Sqwubbsy · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm kind of split on this. Safety where electronics is concerned is important to me - especially when I'm on the plane.

      But the person was up front about what happened. And you have to admit, being forced to Ottawa should be punishment enough.

      --
      $30 Off All Plans: Use code TRIPLESAWBUCK
    2. Re:High Alert by badfish99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If they have to go to these lengths to investigate an ipod device in a toilet (where, after all, it is likely to be wet and no longer functioning) then what should they do in order to investigate all the hundreds of ipods and telephones and laptops that are taken on every airline flight?

      If it's really impossibly to be reasonably certain that something is harmless without all this performance, then we should shut down the entire commercial airline industry at once, and for ever, because it is clearly impossible to make it safe.

      On the other hand, if it is possible to discover that this ipod is safe just by passing it through an xray machine and giving it a cursory examination (as is done with every other ipod taken on a plane), then all this theatrical performance of questioning the passengers has got to have nothing to do with security: it is just the police and customs having a power trip.

    3. Re:High Alert by shreevatsa · · Score: 4, Interesting
      These excerpts might be interesting:
      Now the questions became really pointed. What do you think about 9/11? What are your views on the Iran issue? Do you think government is too big, too powerful? Would you ever "make a point?"
      and
      He then asked me to turn on my laptop. I did, and he began using it. I saw him open Spotlight and begin searching.

      "Do you connect to the Internet on this laptop?"
      "Yes."
      "Have you downloaded and images?"
      "Huh? What do you mean?"
      "Do you have any pornography?"
      "No."
      This guy is obviously lying, isn't he? :) But let's go on:
      I waited in total silence for about 10 minutes as he kept searching and searching, until I finally asked him, "What are you looking for?"

      "Contraband," he said without looking up at me.
      "Such as?"
      "Child pornography, hate propaganda."
      "Child porn I can understand, that's illegal. But hate propaganda is protected speech."
      Now he looked up. "What country do you think you're in?"
      "Oh, it's illegal in Canada?"
      "I honestly don't know. But that doesn't matter. I get to decide what goes in this country. Do you have a problem with that?"
      I paused for a long time while I thought about what I should say to this. "Yes."
      "Yes, you do have a problem?"
      "Yes, I do. If it's illegal in Canada I'll understand, but saying 'I don't want it in my country' isn't good enough when you're a government official."

      Now he was pissed. "Don't fool around with me. I'm sure you want this to end as much as I do. So I will ask you questions, and you will answer. Do you understand?"

      Another long pause while I thought. "Yes, I do."
    4. Re:High Alert by Hope+Thelps · · Score: 5, Insightful
      If they have to go to these lengths to investigate an ipod device in a toilet (where, after all, it is likely to be wet and no longer functioning) then what should they do in order to investigate all the hundreds of ipods and telephones and laptops that are taken on every airline flight?

      If he'd noticed at the time that he dropped it in the toilet and reported it straight away then sure, it seems obvious that little investigation is required. But what he reports is very different to that. He didn't realise that he'd lost it until after he'd watched them having whispered conversation and examining the toilet. Then he approaches them and says not to bother calling anyone about it because he's just realised he lost his ipod.

      From their perspective, they started investigating and then someone who'd seen they were aware of something wrong approached them with a story to allay suspcicions. They pretty much had to investigate further. Some of the stuff on the ground, especially with the customs guy after the ipod had been removed is another matter.
      --
      To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem. ~ h2g2
    5. Re:High Alert by Alef · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I once sat down and calculated an estimate how much my life expectancy is shortened because of terrorist bombings. I don't remember what exact value I came up with, but I remember that I concluded I had just wasted more time doing the calculation.

      Why not just let them blow up a plane once in a while, I say, and perhaps we can get rid of some of these increasingly absurd security procedures.

    6. Re:High Alert by Millenniumman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He can't be accused of a crime for hate propaganda, but it would be a tip for the security official to be more suspicious.

      --
      Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
    7. Re:High Alert by Hope+Thelps · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Why not just let them blow up a plane once in a while, I say, and perhaps we can get rid of some of these increasingly absurd security procedures.

      It's hard to imagine why they should pick on planes in particular apart from the challenge of beating the security anyway. A train or a supermarket or a road junction or the airport checkin area would be as good a target for just killing people. Presumably some other motive is involved. Beating the security seems like the obvious one.
      --
      To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem. ~ h2g2
    8. Re:High Alert by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's hard to imagine why they should pick on planes in particular apart from the challenge of beating the security anyway.

      Shock value. Drop an aircraft or two in the ocean, and you screw up air traffic worldwide. Plus, some people are just naturally scared of flying anyway. This plays on those fears.
      And then we have the talking heads on TV, who cream their shorts every time there is a crash. Like this morning.

    9. Re:High Alert by Poltras · · Score: 5, Insightful
      But as soon as they knew it was an iPod, why did they continue the interrogation and worse, having a power trip to search for stuff on his computer that was legal and trying to trick him into admitting he did this on purpose is totally over-reaction.

      What part of this whole story is actually security measures and what part is just annoyment...?

      I've said it before and will say it again; being plain paranoiac just made things worst. There is no security justification over such acts. Even the whole interrogation should have stopped when (or waited until) they found the object and made sure it was harmless (or not).

      --
      Of Code And Men
    10. Re:High Alert by kwandar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As a Canadian I was ABSOLUTELY APALLED by the manner in which he was treated. After politely explaining the situation as he did, I'd have told them all to fuck off in no uncertain terms long before I got to this cutoms jerk. The routine should be ... amd I under arrest .. what is the charge .. get me a lawyer ... or go screw yourselves.

      The questions were completely irrelevant, uncalled for, and he was under no obligation to answer such crap. I'm terribly upset at the pompous security asses and my government ... god help them if its ever me ... I've told customs to go take a hike before, and wouldn't hesitate to do it again.

      Grrrrr.

    11. Re:High Alert by bitslinger_42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You've got to be kidding! In theory, the readers, and by extension the posters, of /. are better educated than the run-of-the-mill sheep in this country, but I really doubt that now. Does anyone actually read stories like this, this, or this.

      People, let's start using that grey matter for once. Yes, there are definitely people who would want to blow up planes, and yes, there are ways that it could be done. The War on Moisture isn't going to make anyone safer. Beyond the huge inconvenience and expense factor (read Schneier's Wired essay (I posted the link to his blog rather than the Wired article due to updates), a simple question of proportion should come in here. According to the US government's own statistics, fewer than 2,000 people were killed WORLDWIDE in 2004 by terrorists. Even if you add in the thousands of people killed on 9/11, you're still talking about 10,000 people, tops. Compare that to the number of people killed each year in car crashes (38,000 US fatalities in 2004), malaria (1,000,000 to 3,000,000 per year worldwide, mostly in Africa), or heart disease (276 out of ever 100,000 people in the US in 1996, or 22,800 in New York City alone). In fact, if the statistics are right, more people are hit by lightning each year (1 person out of every 600,000 per year, or 10,000 worldwide) than are killed by terrorists.

      So, are you going to stop driving your car? Stop smoking/drinking? Stop taking romantic walks in the rain? (ok, so maybe not a good one on /.) Think of all the lives that would be saved if the billions of dollars that are being spent protecting us from push-up bras and shampoo were spent on finding a cure for malaria, or tuburculosis, or lung cancer, or AIDS.

      Bah, the world is filled with nothing but sheep.

    12. Re:High Alert by mdwh2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A train or a supermarket or a road junction or the airport checkin area would be as good a target for just killing people.

      In particular, in an airport right by those long queues of people waiting to go through the extensive security checks...

    13. Re:High Alert by pkiff · · Score: 5, Interesting
      RE:
      "Child porn I can understand, that's illegal. But hate propaganda is protected speech."
      Now he looked up. "What country do you think you're in?"
      "Oh, it's illegal in Canada?"
      "I honestly don't know. But that doesn't matter. I get to decide what goes in this country. Do you have a problem with that?"
      I paused for a long time while I thought about what I should say to this. "Yes."
      "Yes, you do have a problem?"
      "Yes, I do. If it's illegal in Canada I'll understand, but saying 'I don't want it in my country' isn't good enough when you're a government official."

      Two points about this.

      First, just FYI, hate propaganda is not "protected speech" in Canada. Indeed, the concept of "protected speech" is not part of Canadian constitutional or rights laws; "protected speech" is a concept that comes from American court cases related to free speech laws and the First Amendment. In Canada, there is a Charter of Rights and Freedoms that protects one's "freedom of expression", but that same document also protects people from discrimination based on race, gender, religion, etc. Generally, freedom of expression is protected in Canada only within such reasonable limits as can be justified in a free and democratic society. Within this framework, the Canadian Criminal Code has laws against "hate" crimes -- primarily in cases where one's activities can be described as an "incitement to violence". In Canadian law, therefore, the individual right to free expression does not trump the group right of protection from hate speech. Both are present and both may apply to the same speech at the same time, so the question of whether "hate speech" is illegal or not depends upon the specific circumstances of the communication and on a localized intrepretation of events connected to the use of those words.

      Second, if I'm not mistaken, border guards from both Canada and the U.S. are indeed empowered to make decisions on the spot about what or who can come into either country. There is little difference between Canada and the U.S. about this. In both cases, customs officials are given sweeping powers that allow them to make choices without having to justify those choices to a court. There is a long history of abuse of this power on both sides of the border that has led to the improper seizure of literature associated with radical, leftist, or communist causes (as well as fascist hate propaganda) and of pornographic material associated with gay, lesbian, or BSMD lifestyles (as well as child porn or other clearly objectionable materials). Lots of brown-skinned muslims travelling these days will be quick to confirm from experience that when you are at the border, you really don't have any rights at all, and you have very little recourse if you are mistreated. It's only people who have never run into problems at the border who live under the illusion that their "rights" are robust and in full force at the border. This does not mean one should not object to mistreatment, but border guards really are empowered to make decisions about what comes into your country, and if you are going to dispute their choices, you had better be ready for a long, miserable experience...and you had better be sure that you know the law of the particular country you intend to object to!

      Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:
      http://lois.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/

      Summary of Hate Crime Legislation
      http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/hatecrimes/

    14. Re:High Alert by badfish99 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course it could have been any one of hundreds of things. But, given that it looked like an ipod, and that a passenger claimed that it was his ipod, there was no reason to think that it's anything else.

      If you've just planted a cunningly-disguised bomb, and someone finds it, you don't jump up and say "it's mine".

      Of course, the police had their own reasons to behave as though they did not believe it was an ipod. If you've been stuck in a boring job like that all your life, suddenly being given the excuse to interrogate a whole planeload of "suspected terrorists" without any fear of comeback from higher authority must make them feel like they've died and gone to heaven.

    15. Re:High Alert by badfish99 · · Score: 2

      Given that incidents like this have started to happen, screwing up air traffic worldwide has become much easier. You don't need bombs any more. Just put some ipods in a few toilets, or scribble something in Arabic on some sickbags, and then sit back and let the security industry do the screwing-up for you.

    16. Re:High Alert by MadEE · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Does it count has hate speech even when you aren't publishing it to anyone? I can't see it's what people would think of as "hate speech" when you only find it by violating someone's privacy. What if it's encrypted, and hence not even readable?
      What if I dissolve (without a prescription) methadone tablets in my water bottle prior to crossing the border in order fool the border guards? You know your bags may be checked. You know you will be asked questions when crossing the border. How are the contents of one's laptop any more private then one's luggage? Myself I don't bring anything that may be illegal in the country I am traveling to and if I am unsure I check.

      Anyway, whether or not certain things are illegal though - should security measures brought in supposedly to combat terrorism (e.g., making sure it's a working laptop, not a bomb) be used to search people for every other possible violation (e.g., they have a picture of their girlfriend in some kinky situation which happens to be illegal under the country's authoritarian laws, even though that person never intended to distribute the image to anyone)?
      I think you are misunderstanding what went on. He was no longer investigated for planting a bomb the agent who searched his stuff was doing so to grant him access to the country. Sure he got the full treatment but he got nothing that someone who an agent had a feeling about might get. The same things (personal use) can be said about drugs unless it's a large quantity it's likely for personal use but the question becomes do we really want people don't make an effort to follow the law in the country.

      I mean, if the Government decided that everybody's houses had to be searched, and everyone's computers searched, I'd imagine many would oppose it, whether or not they were only after the technically illegal material.
      There is a big difference between being search on the border and choosing to take that risk anyway and being forced to a search with no aspect of choice. There is a world of difference between the two.

      Maybe if security kept to security rather than harrassing and locking people up for naughty images of consensual sex, or having speech the Government disapproves of, maybe we'd actually have a chance of safer flying?
      The problem is a customs agent has nothing to do with flying planes or even largely secuirty their job is to allow or deny people into the country. The job of security falls to border guards not customs agents.
    17. Re:High Alert by tverbeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is that our governmnets are responding to terrorism by promoting hysteria instead. It sounds like every airline and government employee in this incident shut off their common sense and overreacted, responding not to the actual situation (some online gamer loses his iPod in the toilet), but to an imagined worst-case scenario (a baby-raping racist cyberterrorist has rigged a bomb to explode in an airplane lavatory). If an individual behaved in this manner, he'd be diagnosed as psychotic; why do we excuse it when a government does?

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    18. Re:High Alert by cvas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      but iPods can actually boot after absorbing a large amount of water.

      He dropped it in the toilet. He wishes he just had to worry about water.

    19. Re:High Alert by TuomasK · · Score: 2, Funny
      I waited in total silence for about 10 minutes as he kept searching and searching, until I finally asked him, "What are you looking for?" "Contraband," he said without looking up at me. "Such as?" "Child pornography, hate propaganda."
      What he should have replied next is "Why, are you somekind of pervert?"
      --
      The truth or interpretation..
    20. Re:High Alert by istartedi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      you just got yourself a nice device to pressure the pilot to give you his seat.

      No. The rules changed starting with flight 93 and the will probably stay changed. If they tell the pilot to fly someplace, the passengers *might* cooperate, but if they try to take the cockpit the passengers and crew will assume that they are a missile and are dead anyway. If you're dead anyway, you're not going to let them pick their target; at least I wouldn't.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    21. Re:High Alert by necro81 · · Score: 3, Informative
      Lots of brown-skinned muslims travelling these days will be quick to confirm from experience that when you are at the border, you really don't have any rights at all, and you have very little recourse if you are mistreated.
      That could be because, when you are at or in the border, or within customs area at an airport, you aren't exactly in any country. You certainly aren't in the country that the customs area happens to be located in. Consider, for example, London Heathrow or New York's JFK: until you clear customs, you aren't officially in England or the United States. As such, what laws (and rights) apply while in this weird space aren't always clear.
    22. Re:High Alert by JD-1027 · · Score: 2, Funny
      Bah, the world is filled with nothing but sheep.
      Too good to pass up.
    23. Re:High Alert by oohshiny · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why not just let them blow up a plane once in a while, I say, and perhaps we can get rid of some of these increasingly absurd security procedures.

      Because then various politicians couldn't justify wasting billions of taxpayer dollars on ridiculous and overpriced security services provided by their buddies in industry.

      Terrorism is a symbiotic relationship between the people blowing up planes and the politicians claiming to stop them: the former get more attention than they otherwise would, and the latter basically get a political carte blanche.

      Imagine where GWB would be today if 9/11 hadn't happened: his administration was already failing, his programs were going nowhere, and the nation was starting to realize what a dope they had elected.

    24. Re:High Alert by dogod · · Score: 2, Insightful

      i guess it's time to arrest americas founding fathers.

      maybe we should start calling them americas founding terrorists.

    25. Re:High Alert by darkonc · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You're still far more likely to die because of an unexpected buildup of ice on the wings. Given that they've already identified the impugned item, this is just a waste of resources better used to a more productive end.

      Terrorists have killed about 6000 westerners in the last decade (including about 2500 soldiers on active duty in the Middle East, which are arguably just military deaths, not terrorist). Thats about how many people drunk drivers kill in 2 months. It's also the number of people that the Tobacco industry kills in about 2 weeks.

      What we've got here is the sociological equivalent to an anaphylactic alergic reaction.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    26. Re:High Alert by TheSpoom · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ah, but you forget: He's not a Canadian citizen. He's an alien looking to visit Canada.

      The rules change quite a lot in this situation. He could do what you said, but I guarantee you he'd be instantly thrown out of the country and would likely be looked on with extreme suspicion if he tried to get in again (read: he wouldn't).

      Customs officers effectively have complete authority when they're dealing with non-citizens.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    27. Re:High Alert by NMerriam · · Score: 2, Funny

      or BSMD lifestyles

      BSMD -- is that where people get sexually excited by listening to doctors talk authoritatively about things they don't know? :P

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    28. Re:High Alert by tverbeek · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The terrorist attacks worked. We're terrorized. We don't want to die. We don't want others to die. Now we're being overly vigilant. It sucks. What can we do?
      Get over it. Instead of quivering like a 7-year-old because some national father figure says that we all need to be afraid of everything now, evaluate the situation for yourself and assess just how "terrorized" you really need to be. On a long soul-searching walk on September 12, I decided that I wasn't going to be afraid. Not of flying. Not of Arabs. Not of Muslims. Not of tall buildings. Not of anything that I wasn't afraid of on September 10. I wrote an essay that went into a little more depth about it (published by the local metro newspaper the following week), but the basic point was: I don't want to live in fear, and I won't. Granted, I do still struggle with certain fears... of being hit by a car on my bike, of my mom having a cancer relapse, of global warming, of losing my job... of things that have some statistically signficant chance of happening. But I won't let fear lead me to restrict my own freedom, and I don't think we as a society should allow it to restrict our collective freedom to the point that crap like this happens.
      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    29. Re:High Alert by geminidomino · · Score: 2, Interesting

      why Taco let it pass

      He stole some of the exlax-laced brownies from the other story, and couldn't help letting it pass.

    30. Re:High Alert by thegrassyknowl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Inciting hysteria allows the governments to reduce our freedoms without hearing the complaints from the "common" man. Commonman doesn't want to get blown up by terrorists. He's never seen the "crazy arab terrorist" that the government tells him is hiding everywhere and wants him dead. Commonman doesn't realise that the term "crazy arab" is not apt.

      When the government says "we are going to give the police power to buttfuck anyone they suspect they might one day think could possibly want to maybe consider walking past a terrorist in the street" then commonman says "that sounds good, do that and protect me from these crazy people".

      The events of Sept 11 gave the Bush administration the mass public hysteria to play on and do this in the US. Prior to that the "it won't happen to us" mentality prevailed and people were more happy to complain when the government wanted to trounce their freedoms.

      Back to the iPod in the loo.. I can understand them landing the plane on account of that. Aircraft cans contain some nasty chemicals. I wouldn't be putting my hand in there to get my ipod out. iPods contain all sorts of nasty chemicals (batteries). The reaction of the loo chemicals and the chemicals in said iPod may or may not have been able to produce some kind of toxic chemical that may or may not have been able to make people sick or dead.

      Interrogating them vigourously for it. I can't support that.

      --
      I drink to make other people interesting!
    31. Re:High Alert by hazem · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, you can be "safe" to a stupid degree.

      Is a would-be terrorist going to tell the flight-crew that the dropped his bomb-laden i-pod in the toilet?

      "Pardon me, ma'am, I dropped my i-bomb in the toilet. Can someone help me retrieve it so I can put it where I really wanted it?"

      We could all go around with giant styrofoam bubble-suits to keep us from getting hurt when we fall down and sure, it would be "safer"... but I think most of us would agree that it would be "too safe", and rather ludicrous.

      When security people don't use common sense when it comes to security then the populace ends up with a general disregard and disrespect for what security people are doing.

  3. I flushed my Zune the other day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    But it wasn't an accident.

  4. bigger story by legoburner · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think the bigger story is that a WoW player actually left the house and went far enough away from their computer that they needed a flight!

    --
    Warhammer forums
  5. the iPod by macadamia_harold · · Score: 5, Funny

    No wireless. Less space than a nomad. not flushable. Lame.

    --
    Push Button, Receive Bacon
  6. Not security, but MORONDOM by unity100 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is what it is. Even schizophrenia. This is what it is.

    Americans especially, and some other westerners are WAY too much indulged in their own well being that, EVERYTHING is taken as a disaster when the unbelievably minimal, almost non-existent threat to life occurs. (as if a flushed ipod by a kid can EVER be, and as terrorists DO tell that they flushed a bomb disguised as an ipod)

    Also there's the morondom dominance question of the plane crew, unable to deduce that if the kid have been a terrorist, s/he wouldnt inform them of the action.

    --
    Read radical news here
    1. Re:Not security, but MORONDOM by pimpimpim · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't know about you, but a toilet that's stuck on a long distance flight sounds like a good reason to stop and repair that essential part immediately! Or maybe you don't give a crap.

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
    2. Re:Not security, but MORONDOM by venicebeach · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think of it in signal detection theory terms.

      This is a time when bias is turned up so that we have fewer misses but more false alarms. This is what tends to happen when a miss is very expensive, which it is in the case of airplane security. The price of having fewer false alarms is greater potential for a miss. We are not as concerned with our accuracy in finding a terrorist as we are in making sure we don't miss one.

    3. Re:Not security, but MORONDOM by madcow_bg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, you have a point.
      But are misses so expensive? These days we hear a plane crash almost every day. Which, by the way is still the safest way to travel.
      For example, if I was the "decider" I would lock the cocpit so nobody could enter (without electronic keys obtainable from the air control tower, in case the pilots die from something, dunno.
      If a terrorist blows a plane, just cover everything (dispose of the black box) and voila:
      1. No hysteria, cuz noone knows.
      2. Dead people don't mind that. The worst for them has happened.
      3. No success for terrorists, because they want the act to be known.

  7. When is an Overreaction OK? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We've seen this kind of thing over and over and over (and over) the past several weeks.
    At some point, YES, it is OK to overreact for everyone's safety "just in case"

    But are ALL overreactions OK?
    Does EVERY discovery of "powder" coming out of a parcel necessitate a two block evacuation and the hazmat team called out?
    Does EVERY electronic device accidentally left somewhere necessitate the bomb squad being called out?
    Does EVERY suspicious group of "arab-looking" people speaking their native tounge necessitate the police/FBI/air-marshals being called out?

    C'mon...let's step back and accept some risks in our lives.
    And don't use that old canard of "well, you wouldn't be saying that if it was your daughter on the plane"
    YES, I would.

    We ARE OVERREACTING. I'm sure I'll be modded down as a troll, but I am serious and I'm really getting ticked-off

    1. Re:When is an Overreaction OK? by Quince+alPillan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People who are afraid, overreact.

      Yes, the terrorists have won in this regard.

    2. Re:When is an Overreaction OK? by 15Bit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yup i agree. And every time they confiscate a fork from my lunchbox at heathrow i get a little bit more pissed off, cos i know that i'd be damn site more successful hijacking a plane with a broken glass bottle i bought in the duty free, than i'd ever be with a sodding fork. And why was it they never stopped selling stuff at duty free, even at the time they were confiscating knitting needles from old ladies?

    3. Re:When is an Overreaction OK? by bit01 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Insisting on absolute safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world.

      -- Mary Shafer, risks researcher, NASA

    4. Re:When is an Overreaction OK? by kestasjk · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's a bad time for an arab couple to join the mile high club, that's for sure..

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    5. Re:When is an Overreaction OK? by hemp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But are ALL overreactions OK?
      Does EVERY discovery of "powder" coming out of a parcel necessitate a two block evacuation and the hazmat team called out?
      Does EVERY electronic device accidentally left somewhere necessitate the bomb squad being called out?
      Does EVERY suspicious group of "arab-looking" people speaking their native tounge necessitate the police/FBI/air-marshals being called ou

      Well, it is an election year.

      --
      Skip ------ See the latest from http://www.anArchyFortWorth.com
    6. Re:When is an Overreaction OK? by capologist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think this was just a fear-induced overreaction. When a kid dropping his iPod in a toilet leads to him being interrogated by law enforcement about his sexual desires, I think we can state with confidence that at least some of these officials were not performing their duties in good faith.

      I don't know what motivated this whole fiasco, but it doesn't seem that it can all be explained as a legitimate effort to protect public safety, or even slavish following of regulations.

    7. Re:When is an Overreaction OK? by vistic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you read the message board post the guy made... this isn't just about over-reaction... it's about government officials being power hungry and being real jerks to ordinary people.

      Some of the questions they asked were invasive and inappropriate... and the customs guy seemed to think it was up to him personally to decide what's legal and what isn't.

  8. Lessons learned... by AtariDatacenter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1] People involved in security love to over-react to security issues. Take those Arabs in Michigan buying cell phones. My God, was there rampant paranoid speculation about what they were doing. (RECAP: "Make meth out of cell phone batteries", "Provide cell phones for anonymous terrorist organizing", "Provide cell phones to make bomb detonators", "Going to blow up our bridge", and best of all, even if they were telling the truth, they could be selling the phones to "Raise money for terrorist activities". I mean... WTF?)

    2] If you end up doing something that a remotely paranoid security type would find suspicious, even by accident, do yourself a favor and DON'T tell anyone. No, really. They're just better off not knowing, and you'll be no worse off than if they discover something on their own later and have a paranoid fit.

  9. It's not funny, don't laugh... by EvilCabbage · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... read the WoW forums and see what this kid went through.

    Insane, paranoid shit like this is exactly why the fuck I won't be visiting the US-of-A or Canada in a hurry.

    Kid admits to losing his toy in the toilet, bomb squad comes in and they interrogate him in that fashion? Fuck that for a game of soldiers...

    1. Re:It's not funny, don't laugh... by NoTheory · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree to a point. I totally sympathize with this guy, particularly since i have to run the US/Canadian customs gauntlet semi-regularly (often enough for it to be annoying, but not so often that it's worth it for me to get a commuter pass). They can be, and often are, assholes for no particular reason. In this particular case, i think the bomb squad's actions were justified. They were called in in response to a supposed terrorist threat. Now, assuredly the classification of this event perhaps could have been handled better, but on the off chance this was a bomb, the bomb squad interrogator was right, he had 5 guys on that plane that could die.

      --
      There are lives at stake here!
    2. Re:It's not funny, don't laugh... by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 2, Funny

      I wonder what would have happened if wow was also the name of a terrorist group?

    3. Re:It's not funny, don't laugh... by sparks · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Everyone seems to think that was a particularly creepy question to ask him; but they're trying to form a profile of his mood and character. They were asking him that question to help him, not embarass him. Someone who is looking forward to meeting a girl and hoping to get lucky with them is a highly unlikely plane bomber.

    4. Re:It's not funny, don't laugh... by The+Cydonian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ... and down in Amsterdam, Netherlands (clearly, the most conservative city in Europe), they jail a bunch of travellers coz they were showing off their mobile phones to each other. That, apparently, seemed suspicious enough to warrant an F16 escort back to Schipol, and overnight stay in jail for those poor shmucks.

      If you think paranoia is limited to North America, you're badly mistaken.

      --
      More than mere navel gazing.
    5. Re:It's not funny, don't laugh... by supersocialist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Any time you can say that sort of invasion of privacy was "for his own good," things have gone too far.

      Not that I'd "make a point" of it.

    6. Re:It's not funny, don't laugh... by ruisantos · · Score: 4, Informative

      Let me remind you that this was an American Plane, from an American airline and the security alert was made by it's american crew.

  10. Fast foward the history tape... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Funny

    Imagine if this had happened yesterday: http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/col/smith/2002/10/ 03/askthepilot13/index.html

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  11. Won't be long... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Before they ban using the restroom at all. After all, it only takes a trip to Taco Bell before the flight to bring a toxic goo that could jeopardize the entire plane.

  12. Re:passing mobiles can have the same effect by TFGeditor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Fear is more debilitating than terrorism."

    Uhm, I thought inciting fear was the whole point of terrorism.

    --
    Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
  13. It had a timer display and a lithium ion battery?! by D4C5CE · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Oh well, in this case...

  14. Recalls still allowed? by Plocmstart · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm suprised they haven't yet done something crazy like requiring you to prove your laptop battery isn't currently recalled given the random Dell balls of fire.

    1. Re:Recalls still allowed? by jonwil · · Score: 3, Interesting

      At least one airline, QANTAS, has banned using dell laptops on battery power in flight for this very reason.

  15. oh dear god the horror!!! by gsn · · Score: 5, Funny

    My housemate had BBQ yesterday - I went in to the toilet this morning after him and I was sure he was launching chemical warfare against me! And he'd blocked it up! WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION! Much worse than any iPod! ITS ILLEGAL IN CANADA! People if you ever get on the plane with David Fowler inform the authorities! Even if only the name matches because thats good enough for Western Union and eBay! Hes white - you may not even suspect him of being such a vile and noxious agent of destruction! Tell the TSA! Think about the children!

    --
    Reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
  16. Actual quotes by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Some eye opening quotes...

    Now the questions became really pointed. What do you think about 9/11? What are your views on the Iran issue? Do you think government is too big, too powerful? Would you ever "make a point?"

    "Child porn I can understand, that's illegal. But hate propaganda is protected speech."
    Now he looked up. "What country do you think you're in?"
    "Oh, it's illegal in Canada?"
    "I honestly don't know. But that doesn't matter. I get to decide what goes in this country. Do you have a problem with that?"

    All this for something that can easily be identified as an iPod? :-/
    And how was the child porn and hate propaganda suspicions tied to an iPod in the toilet, exactly?
    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    1. Re:Actual quotes by Jugalator · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Besides, and this is on a different note, if I'd be honest, I'd answer "it's sad, but it didn't affect my life as a foreigner much" to "What do you think about 9/11?", "yes" to "Do you think government is too big, too powerful?", and perhaps even "maybe by demonstrating sometime" to "Would you ever "make a point?"".

      What I wonder is what they would do if I did tell them that?
      It would be interesting to see the response if he had done so.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    2. Re:Actual quotes by awehttam · · Score: 2, Insightful
      And how was the child porn and hate propaganda suspicions tied to an iPod in the toilet, exactly?

      No doubt to justify further surveillence of people's communications, but not just for public security, now for public safety.

      Gotta love the spin.

    3. Re:Actual quotes by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 2, Insightful
      And how was the child porn and hate propaganda suspicions tied to an iPod in the toilet, exactly?

      That little bit irritated me as well, but I believe at border crossings you sacrifice most of your rights to privacy and freedom from search. If you don't want to be subject to arbitrary searches, the answer is "don't enter our country." The people policing the border have a fair amount of freedom to say, "No, I don't want you in our country." While it may be misapplied (as it was in this case), ultimately you're a visitor to their country and you have no fundamental right to be admitted.

      However, this does reinforce my belief that airline security is wasting a hell of a lot of money on useless things. Trolling random people's computers for porn isn't a good use of their time.

      --
      Search 2010 Gen Con events
    4. Re:Actual quotes by greg_barton · · Score: 4, Insightful
      And how was the child porn and hate propaganda suspicions tied to an iPod in the toilet, exactly?

      The same way Iraq was tied to 9/11, obviously.
  17. Overreacting? Perhaps, but... by Krokus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...bear in mind the following things:

    - An iPod stuck at the bottom of an opaque blue liquid is not readily identifiable.
    - The crew were just following procedures.
    - The guy played dumb about it for a while and didn't say anything.
    - When he finally did tell the crew, they had already called the incident in, at which point the wheels were already in motion.

    Had he spoken up as soon as he'd discovered hi iPod missing and the suddenly strange behaviour of the flight attendants, they might have brushed off the incident.

    I agree the the behaviour of most law enforcement people on the ground was way over the top (especially for Canada), I don't believe the airline can be blamed for the actions of its crew. As a co-worker of mine put it: "Landing the plane because of a potential threat inconveniences 200 people, but it's not any worse than thunderstorms and warning lights. From a corporate standpoint (the airline) you'd rather risk being dumb than wrong. Wrong could sink your entire company."

    1. Re:Overreacting? Perhaps, but... by TheOtherChimeraTwin · · Score: 3, Informative

      Had he spoken up as soon as he'd discovered hi iPod missing and the suddenly strange behaviour of the flight attendants, they might have brushed off the incident.

      He did. The problem was the flight attendants found the iPod before he discovered it was missing.

      It all started when I got out of my seat to go to the bathroom. I went to the bathroom, washed my hands, and returned to my seat. A little while later the two stewardesses on the flight crossed each other in the aisle. They had a quick conversation that I was in earshot of.

      "I locked off the front lav. There's something in the toilet that's preventing it from flushing. Run some water and see if you can clear it." My face immediately turned red. The seat cover! I thought. It must have been too big to flush! I should have thrown it out!

      I was so embarrassed. I tried to act normal ... I took a sudden interest in the contents of the seat pocket in front of me, acted nonchalant and all. I watched as the stewardess got on her hands and knees in the lavatory and did unfathomable dirty work.

      Sometime later, I decided it would be best if I forgot the whole thing happened, so I went to put on my headphones and drown myself in iPod music. But ... no iPod. I panicked, checked my other pockets. Where was it? Not under the seat, not in the pockets, not ... anywhere. I looked up to the stewardesses. One of them had run past me in a decent clip. She was carrying a green handbook. She brought it to the other stewardess. They flipped through the handbook, read a page, then made a call. The other stewardess had retrieved a blue metal box and was removing some equipment from it.

      I put two and two together. I knew what had happened.

      So I walked up to the stewardesses, both clamoring over the handbook, and tapped one on the shoulder.

      "So, I had an iPod before I went to the bathroom, and now I don't. I think I know what's in the toilet."
  18. Re:Why bring an iPod into the lavatory?!??!?? by (H)elix1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You risk losing you ipod if you hit the bathroom for five minutes and leave nice small equipment sitting on your chair. I've seen it happen. Someone gets up on a trans continent flight while most folks are sleeping, comes back, and are scrambling to find the ipod that walked off.

    I'll also add that I did some 'blue juice' aviation engineering while putting myself through university. There were several occasions that someone would ask if there was any way to retrieve a watch, wallets, or bracelet from the tank. (the answer was no in my case) It does happen. Most folks on the larger jets just write the stuff off as lost. The guy is lucky to get the ipod back!

    --
    +++ UGUCAUCGUAUUUCU
  19. Sir, please turn on your laptop... by 1053r · · Score: 5, Funny

    "It was me and a gruff, humorless customs official. He unpacked my luggage entirely, ran the contents of my wallet through a bomb sweep, and carefully examined all of my belongings. He then asked me to turn on my laptop. I did, and he began using it. I saw him open Spotlight and begin searching."

    Luckily for me, if he'd turned on my laptop all he'd of gotten would be a $ prompt:

    Official: Umm... What's this $ mean? And why is it all text? Is this dos or something?
    Me: Oh, that's just the bash shell, it means you're logged on as a user in a Unix system.
    Official: And what exactly is unix? is it some sort of anarchist tyranny virus?
    Me: Umm... No, it's just an operating system. Like Windows.
    Official: I see, and where did you buy this "unix"?
    Me: Well, actually it's called Ubuntu Linux, and I downloaded it off a torrent.
    Official: (Into his radio) I think we have a software pirate here....
    Me: Actually, it's free. Canonical will ship you free CDs.
    Official: And who exactly is canonical? Are they some muslim extremist group trying to destroy the United States with computer viruses?
    Me: Umm... No... Actually they're --
    Official: Shut up! We're taking you into custody!

  20. Omg by Fred+Porry · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Im very, very, very glad that Im not living in the U.S. or Canada...Geeez!

    1. Re:Omg by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, I do live in the U.S. and while life here is hardly as black as it's portrayed here on Slashdot (although, if you actually open your eyes and peer through the shiny film of complacency we all seem to have, an encroaching police state is evident) I'm very glad that I don't have a valid passport at the moment and my company can't send me anywhere overseas. Really, my desire to travel has been pretty much eliminated by all this post 9/11 homeland insecurity stuff. I know some people that regularly travel on business and, depending upon where you go (and where you happen to come back) it can get pretty darned unpleasant. No thanks.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  21. " They " won by hebertrich · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Terrorism is exactly that ..
    By making people behave like this .. they won.
    Everytime an airplane is diverted for an ipod .. they won.
    Everytime in your minds , a trace of powder on the pavement
    is anthrax : they won.
    Everytime a bag of groceries left in the tram or subway becomes
    in the mind of someone a bomb that will " Kill us all " they won.

    America .. whatever way you look at it .. they won.
    They now control you.They have changed your ways your ideas
    your thinking .. they won.

    Terror owns you and that's what they wanted to do.
    Time to bi*** slap yourself and start thinking clearly ?
    I'd say .

    1. Re:" They " won by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Oh, go tell that to any to any Isreali -

      They will just look at you funny.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:" They " won by Carlbunn · · Score: 3, Funny

      Of course, they don't speak english.

    3. Re:" They " won by kpang · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exactly. The amount of physical damage terrorists can do to us is very limited. It's our reaction to their damage that will hurt us. 9/11 killed ~3,000 people. The war in Iraq that resulted has killed ~50,000. Reminds me of World War I where one act of terrorism that killed 1 man (Franz Ferdinand) led to the deaths of millions and the destruction of several nations.

    4. Re:" They " won by TheoMurpse · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Oh, go tell that to any to any Isreali -
      You mean the Israelis who GO ON ABOUT THEIR FUCKING LIVES ALL THE TIME?!?! The fact is, Israeli citizens DON'T freak out whenever they go shopping. Hell, after 9/11 Americans in my hometown wouldn't go to a mall for a week or so!
    5. Re:" They " won by Changa_MC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Which just means the terrorist won in Israel a long time ago.

      --
      Changa hates change.
    6. Re:" They " won by klang · · Score: 2, Informative

      schools in England: pork and ham is not on the menu.
      schools in England: the three little piglets is not a legal book to read
      banks in Englsnd: piggy banks are banned

      England is changing.

  22. Should I be scared? by ENIGMAwastaken · · Score: 4, Funny

    The bottom of my Slashdot page says "This page will self-destruct."

    Should I be scared?

  23. Re:Why bring an iPod into the lavatory?!??!?? by 1u3hr · · Score: 3, Insightful
    That's the dumbest thing about this. The kid is going to hog one of the few lavatories on the airplane so he can sit and jam out on his iPod? He couldn't just leave it for a few minutes, if his visit was intended for a shorter duration?

    Obviously not. He just had it clipped to his belt. If he'd been listening to it, he would have noticed when it went down the tube and yanked his earbuds out.

  24. Re:No verification by Reese268 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I hardly see why the fact that there is no absolute proof that he was the one involved means that it shouldn't be posted here. No, it wasn't on a news site, but he does go into a lot of detail involving the story. Enough so that I have no reason to doubt him. Besides, he would have to be very desperate for attention to make up such a story, and if he did, he really should consider a career in writing, because it was quite enjoyable to read. It's a story that is of interest, and hence is perfectly worthy of a post on slashdot.

  25. Re:reactionary sheep-low IQ as well by fastgood · · Score: 2, Funny
    It's come out that that liquid attack was almost total crap

    So was the iPod. But would Apple allow us to call it an iPod if it is no longer white? And would it have been an acceptable lavatory item had the passenger accidentally swallowed the device a few hours earlier, and then deposited the excess cargo through conventional methods?

  26. Re:Why bring an iPod into the lavatory?!??!?? by cmdrfunk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're just like the passengers the guy was talking about in the article who were blaming him. Why do you expect him to do everything perfect? Yeah, this is all his fault; he should have had an internal debate for 20 minutes before deciding it if was okay to keep his ipod on his clip while he poopied.

    At the rate those things are stolen, I'm not leaving mine behind either, by the way. If you had "attentitive" behavior in 5th grade spelling class you'd be able to spell it. Back off the guy.

  27. Hate propaganda is illegal in Canada by hayne · · Score: 2, Informative

    Unlike in the US, in Canada it actually is illegal to incite hatred against any identifiable group.
    See, for example: http://lois.justice.gc.ca/en/C-46/41491.html
    So the only surprising thing is that the customs official didn't know this.

  28. Over-reaction happened to me too. by cdn-programmer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't own an iPod but if I did and it fell in the toilet I don't think I'd admit ownership.

    I've also discovered the joys of over-reaction. Read here: http://onon.org/asm/powder.html

    This happened in 1996 - years before 911. The "white powder" was flour and I made pancakes for my kids with some of it for breakfast. I bought it at Safeway.

    I got a call from a friend advising me of the issue. I was asked to drive to the fire station - which I did even though it meant I had to leave the kids unsupervised. I'm a single parent - my wife died.

    I suppose there was a chance I could have been arrested.

    When I drove to the fire station I pulled into the driveway and immediately two (2) firetrucks which were parked on the side of the road moved together to block off the driveway. So clearly they were waiting for me.

    What happened is that I used the flour to mark the run. On part of the run I tossed a glob of flour on some old telephone poles...

    The idjots swept up the flour from the telephone poles and tested it and found the creosote they also swept up was toxic. They were not smart enough to test another sample not on a telephone pole.

    Next - some of the fire department personel run with us pretty much every Monday. In addition we have police officers who run with us. This was aired on the news. The person who reads the sports at the time has also run with us. All of our runs are published on the website. We have 1000's of pictures from former runs. We've been written up in several magazines. We're the largest running club in the WORLD and we have been doing this for over 60 years.

    Yet - in spite of all of this - it happened again last year... another trail partly swept up by the same folks who tried to sweep up my trail in 1996 (and they missed most of it - it was a well marked trail and they were not able to follow it).

    This has also happned in a number of other cities.

    I do not know what we can do - I would think publishing what we are doing should be sufficient but it doesn't seem to be.

  29. Questions by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I'm really hoping this guy gets in the press as much as possible about the sorts of questions he was asked. He is ABSOLUTELY correct that he is entitled to dislike big government, think Iraq was wrong, think we should not go into Iran etc. And it is quite disturbing to see the goverment try to turn that against him. And if he had answered incorrectly to those questions and been shipped off somewhere secret, what recourse would he have? None. Well, maybe his guild would organize a raid to free him, but still...we need to let government officials know that it is NOT acceptable for them to dish out their own interpretation of the law, or suddenly anything we can can and will be used against us in the court of law.

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  30. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  31. Re:iPod = WMD by 787style · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's iWMD to you, mister.

  32. Re:Why bring an iPod into the lavatory?!??!?? by The+Cydonian · · Score: 4, Funny
    He's not the brightest person in the world, is he?

    I particularly like the way you've deduced the kid's intelligence levels based on where he takes his ipod with him. A very succicent, rational and thought-provoking analysis; Sherlock Holmes would be proud.

    --
    More than mere navel gazing.
  33. I talked to a Bush supporter yesterday by chocolatetrumpet · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yesterday I had someone look me in the eyes, tell me they are proud they voted for Bush, and would vote for him again. He lives in fear of a nuclear attack by islamist extremists.

    I just don't know how to deal with that. Remember those "weapons of mass destruction" supposedly located in Iraq? They never existed. And this guy is worried about a nuclear attack against the US? Delivered how, exactly?

    In my thinking, if you want to go after terrorists, you investigate them, infiltrate them, and prosecute them. It's a job for investigators and police. A dangerous job, but a job none the less.

    If, however, you want to make billions of dollars in defense contracts, control all of the oil in the world, gain fascist powers, and offer people "protection," then by all means, go to war against an entire country. But don't take my word for it; I'm "misguided."*

    * according to said Bush supporter

    --
    Spoon not. Fork, or fork not. There is no spoon.
  34. Poster Has Basis for a Lawsuit here by shaneFalco · · Score: 5, Interesting

    IANAL- but I am a Constitutional Law scholar and I think poster may have a case for his rights being violated, namely with the laptop. Assuming of course this flight was aboard an American carrier and that customs official digging through his laptop was also an American. Poster was informed he would be released before the customs official went through his laptop looking for contraband. It is somewhat hazy but generally computers fall under the 4th Amendment's guarantee against undue search and seizure. If the guy wants to look- he damn well better have a search warrant from a judge. Seeing as he is to be released for lack of evidence- there is no basis for the search.

    Now, if the customs official was Canadian, or an agent of the Canadian government it gets a lot more murky. True- what I am assuming are American and Canadian authorities have decided to let him go, but poster is passing through the customs of another country. However, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms also guarantees against undue search (Article 8) and puts forth the right to consul (U.S. Escobedo and Miranda) (Canada: CoRaF Article 10). Poster was clearly not given those.

    Surely, the argument I have just made can be reconstructed by the other side of the argument- in the name of national security or some other erosion of rights. Allow me to quote Ben Franklin, "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety". On that note- I encourage poster to contact the ACLU or its Canadian equivalent and bring suit (the ACLU will do all the work for you on a pro bono basis). Such a case has the possibility to clarify rights in the paranoid stripping of rights that is the War on Terror.

  35. Today electronics; tomorrow ??? by skylerweaver · · Score: 4, Funny

    Banning all liquids was a good idea because of the given threat.

    Soon *the terrorists* my find a way to detonate their clothing and all clothing will be banned in the cabin. This sounds pretty cool at first, but keep in mind how often is the random person sitting next to you a slammin' hottie?

    After that *the terrorists* will find a brilliant plot to set themselves on fire by rubbing their arms together REALLY FAST. Once this happpens, all PASSENGERS will be banned from being in the cabin. Very smart.

    Terrorists win.

    1. Re:Today electronics; tomorrow ??? by guzugi · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can't wait till they uncover some "mastermind plot" to take down planes with screaming babies.

  36. iPod Killer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    So did the iPod still function after being fished out of the toilet system, or have we finally discovered an iPod killer?

  37. I'm the guy by riscfuture · · Score: 5, Informative

    My name is Tim Morgan, and I'm both the author of the WoW post (Stupid), and the person mentioned in the news articles. Unfortunately, it seems a lot of you are suspicious that I am one and the same person, and rightly so. I reckon I have no real way to prove it. So ... for those willing to take it on faith (my WoW sig notwithstanding), feel free to ask me questions.

    Also, I'm noticing I'm not coming off very highly in some of your comments. Oh well ... 'tis to be expected when you run the gauntlet of /.ers. :P

    1. Re:I'm the guy by TheOtherChimeraTwin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So how did it work out with Cara?

    2. Re:I'm the guy by mabu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I got a question for you... you have a degree in Physics and you've been unemployed for four months. So you sit on your ass and play WOW?

      Don't you have anything better to do? With your science knowledge did it ever occur to you to try to use those skills to do something more productive than lose yourself in endless hours of fantasy roleplaying? (I know what it's like; I used to do it and I wish I could take back all the time I pissed away playing Everquest). So can you do us a favor and maybe spend some time coming up with clean energy sources and stuff like that? After we reduce our dependency on foreign oil, chances are you'll have more time to play computer games... it's just a thought. What do you think?

  38. MANPADS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...are available on the white, black and gray market all over the world. Your average civilian passenger flight has zero defenses. Why are those people flying when there's an obvious threat potential there? Why aren't the airlines just grounded? Aren't the flight captains concerned, I mean, have they searched every square foot for the surrounding 5 miles around the airport before every plane is allowed to take off and land?

    Airport security, along with random "courtesy" roadblocks, making school kids thumbprint to get lunch, pushing for RFID verichip implants, free speech "zones", millions of surveillence cameras, full complete wiretapping by the pigs, etc, etc, huge list, etc; are all designed for one purpose only: as conditioning exercises to get you used to armed swat swine on every corner, instantly obeying every command given to you by anyone even remotely considered "authority" and keeping you with you head bowed and eyes averted from your "betters".

    It's working well, too. No one's rebelling, and to even speak against it means you are "with the terrorists".

    It's fascist population conditioning, that's it. Feudalism never went completely away and it is enjoying a remarkable and stronger than ever comeback.

  39. Based on a true story by SmlFreshwaterBuffalo · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can see it now: "Ipods on a Plane"!

  40. Only Thing Missing Was A Cavity Search by queenb**ch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Poor kid! Why didn't the stewardesses call them back and tell them it was an iPod and that a passenger had just reported it missing?

    Seems to be that they need to look at their mechanisms again. I can see landing the plane and evacuating it while the item is retreived and verified to be an iPod, but it shouldn't be any more than that.

    The hostile treatment...what ever happened to innocent until presumed guilty?

    This is what crap like the Patriot Act gets us!

    "Government, like fire, is a fearsome servant and a terrible master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." - George Washington

    Harassing some poor kid who dropped his iPod in the toilet is pretty irresponsible. How many of you have doused cell phones, pagers, PDA's, or other more esoteric devices in a similar manner? Sheehs, if they're going to call the bomb squad out for that every time....

    Let's just say that isn't the best use of my tax dollars.

    2 cents,

    QueeB

    --
    HDGary secures my bank :/
    1. Re:Only Thing Missing Was A Cavity Search by tylernt · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The hostile treatment...
      At least they didn't tackle him and pump seven bullets into his brain.
      --
      DRM 'manages access' in the same way that a prison 'manages freedom'
    2. Re:Only Thing Missing Was A Cavity Search by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is what crap like the Patriot Act gets us!


      Except this was Canada.....
      --

      Gorkman

  41. Management of the entire incident was poor by uksv29 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Consider:

    1. If the person in charge of the incident considered the 'object' a security risk why did they wait almost an hour before getting everyone off the plane after it landed? A fire in that environment would almost certainly resulted in people being killed or injured. Thats what the emergency exits are for.

    2. If the person in charge of the incident considered the 'object' to be of no risk then they should have parked at a normal gate and deplaned as normal. The possible charge of vandalism (blocking the toilet with an iPod) does not even remotely justify the impact on the other passengers.

    There is no middle ground in this decision process.

    What I suspect happened is that the pilot decided that there was no risk to the passengers once he landed as he had been satisfied as to the object in the toilet at this point. Unfortunately the ground commander didn't want to accept the pilots asscessment and decided to continue as 'planned'. This does raise the question as to who was in charge.

    All in all a complete fsck up and farce.