$500,000 Prize for Faster Airport Security Checks
coondoggie writes "A security company is willing to fork over $500,000 in prize money to the person or company that comes up with an innovative
technology to speed airport security lines. The company making the offer, Clear, says the winning technology must meet a number of criteria including TSA approval and it must reduce inconvenience by, for example, allowing for no divesting of shoes or outer garments."
I suggest...
Do Nothing.
It will be just as effective, and much cheaper.
When do I get my money?
Stop taking token (and largely meaningless) security actions as a way to both justify jobs at the TSA and to keep the American people in fear.
There ya go, no need to take shoes off or all that other ridiculousness.
Not treating paying customers like criminals and removing the reasons the American government gives other peoples to hate us? Nobody's going to attack you if they like you, right?
I used to carry a bottle of whiskey for snake bite. And two snakes. -Nefarious Wheel
Drop the current checks. No more stupid liquid rules, no shoe removals, no taking the laptop out of the bag. Go back to metal detector and X-ray machines if you like, but acknowledge that you cannot protect against EVERY POSSIBLE THREAT and focus on the most likely.
Over 50,000 die each year in the US on the highways. If the same "zero tolerance" rule was applied to cars, then all cars would be required by law to remain at speeds below 15mph, would be covered in big foam bumpers, and would require five point safety harnesses and helmets. To maintain the effectiveness of automobiles, we don't do this. As part of acknowledging that risk exists and that we're responsible for our lives, we make tradeoffs.
Absolute security is impossible. It also makes people complacent.
Nobody will ever succesfully hijack a plane the way those were in 2001, because we've all seen a possible outcome. The TSA is the embodiment of the old saying that generals always "plan for previous war".
Where do I collect my check? Or is the painfully obvious exempt?
Easy. Nationwide concealed carry licenses with no restrictions on where to carry. Background check thru NCIC, then fingerprint check as well. People who have carry permits already (38 states have some provision IIRC) are involved in less crimes by percent than sworn police officers...
:)
In fact, I think I'll use my Florida permit next time I fly as my "state issued picture ID".
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
I have this new invention called freedom and peace of mind. It allows people to travel without being paranoid or fascist. It's amazing. It's costs nothing to implement and only requires everyone to pull that giant corncob out of their asses.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
I mean, they are paying for someone's idea or someone's implementation (equipment design and the like)? If the former, $500K sounds good; if the latter, $500K is pocket change: research ain't cheap.
Anyway, I have one idea: how about reverting back to the pre 9/11 era modus operandi? I mean, c'mon, it is not like a "hijack-and-ram-into-building" stunt is going to work again anyway... The only real worries should be bombs and guns on board, which we managed in an acceptable way back in the 90's.
Another idea is to stop messing with the political affairs in other countries. But that doesn't sound appealing to their prospective neocon customers, does it?
fp?
How about we end the Security Theater?
If containers of fluids are dangerous, why are they just thrown away next to the security lines? When the hell is a knife going to help you against a group of 50 angry people in a small enclosed space?
If you search the people getting on the plane, what about the luggage? If luggage handlers can steal stuff from luggage and sneak it out of the airport, what is to prevent that same person from sneaking a bomb into the plane, in place of the stuff they stole? If we are going to search the pilot, why not search the mechanic, and make sure he didn't sabotage the plane?
If you have a security check, then the line to get thorough the check becomes a target. It doesn't matter where you move that check, since it takes time to go through, you have a bunch of people there, and thus a suicide bomber would just blow themselves up there.
Why do Americans not care about their 4th amendment rights to not be searched, and why is simply wanting transportation sufficient cause or not unreasonable?
If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
1. Replace TSA administration wit people who will approve step 2
2. Eliminate the facade that is security the check.
Thomas Galvin
I say we skip the current terrorist threat and jump straight to the next one. Christians are obviously going to be the next problem (look at them, how they congregate every Sunday, beady shifting eyes, you KNOW they're up to SOMETHING).
UP AGAINST THE WALL TERRORIST! NOW!
Or maybe let's celebrate our diversity and not use knee-jerk reactions as policy, eh?
- Tell TSA whiteshirts to "work faster"
- Add more lanes
- Actually use all the lanes you already have
Boom. Where's my $500,000 ?a) We take this seriously.
b) The terrorists are nasty people and they're doing this to you, not us.
c)Keep the whole War On Terror in your face. A scared citizen is a controllable citizen.
If they had the space and could get away with it, they would make everyone strip and get the Rubber Glove.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Don't make me chug my coffee in the line waiting to go through the metal detector, thereby holding everyone else up.
Repeat after me:
My beverage is not a national security threat.
Lock the God-D@mn Cabin door, and shoot the first co-pilot stupid enough to open it.
please send check to AIK
1. Take all the money spent buying security theatre (TSA salaries, machinery, Airport reconstruction) and place it into a fund. There's $5,000,000,000 to start with each and every year. 2. Use minimally invasive metal and bomb detectors to deter the obvious threats. 2. Should an aircraft go down as the result of Terrorist actions, pay everyone on board $1,000,000 from the fund. From just the TSA's budget, we could handle 5,000 deaths a year from terrorist actions on airplanes. How much are we willing to pay for each life saved? Ask an inner-city hospital. /frank
And the worms ate into his brain.
Use the knowledge you already have. It's not that tricky.
OCO is Loco
"This one goes in your mouth, this one goes in your ear, and this one goes in your butt."
Pause
"Oh wait, this one...no...uh...THIS one goes in your mouth."
- "Idiocracy"
"I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
The problem is not the speed, but the humiliation, lack of concern for privacy, and the sheer irrelevance of the checks.
Show me your papers, please!
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
As another poster mentioned the restrictions on hand luggage have recently been lifted (at all bar a few airports) but there are still restrictions on carrying liquids onto a plane. Even water. This is particularly ridiculous when you discover that only applies to flights leaving UK airports, but can take what you want on coming home.
It also applies to medicines:
My mum has multiple sclerosis and the Rebif medication she takes is temperature/pressure sensitive meaning it must be taken on board the plane along with ice packs to keep it cool. The whole thing comes in a pack with quite long needles.When traveling before the liquid restriction she was only required to take a letter from a doctor to confirm that it was essential to carry the medicines on board, although from experience nobody bothered to read it. After the restriction on liquids was put in place she was refused the right to take it on board unless she "tasted" the substance in the ice packs to prove it was not dangerous. Which it is, but only for consumption.
Tastability, to my knowledge, is not an established indicator of a substances ability to combust.
Thankfully, being aware that the substance was toxic, she point blank refused. Eventually they relented and let her through making the whole unpleasant experience rather pointless. I'd have to question the sense - and legality - of coercing people to consume toxic substances as a means of "security".
Python coder | PyQt Applications | Writer
So your point of view is that suicidal terrorists will somehow dislike the idea of getting into a pitched gunfight on a crowded airliner?
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Before anyone mentions it, some bullets do not pierce the fuselage of the plane. Let the company offer those to the passengers.
Now a bombing remains possible.
\u262D = \u5350
Exactly. What do you think a gunfight will do to an airplane?
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Modern trains are apparently quite fast, and they can't be flown into buildings.
Make it such that pilots: 1) are under orders not to open the door no matter who dies, 2) won't be held liable for following those orders, and 3) can't override the "We've been hijacked" button.
This way a hijacker that threatens to kill passengers can do so, but it would be futile. Sure there would be an outrage if the plane landed with 300 corpses, but then again if the hijacker took over and crashed the plane into an important building, there would be much worse damage. Once the plane is in the air, the key is to keep the hijacker from gaining any power over the plane.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
> Can you imagine the outrage that the public would have towards the government and the airline if the plane lands safely with 300 corpses?
Before 9/11, yes. Now ? Not so, I believe. And practically it'd be hard to kill 300 people by hand or gun of you're alone.
Oh, I can't help quoting you because everything that you said rings true
Simply put? Put security checks back where they were before 9/11. Everyone, not just Americans, but people everywhere, have learned from history in the most basic sense; that when someone whips out a knife or a gun, jump them and beat the shit out of them. Pilots, in the meanwhile, have sturdier doors, and at least in the US, Air Marshalls are flying on random flights (which isn't really much more than they did before). So in essense, we don't NEED those checks anymore.
Hell, someone could walk into the lobby area with a bomb vest and kill far more than could board a plane by simply being there, without aircraft ever being involved.
Or crap, just get everyone in the US hooked on PCP, that does away with natural senses of fear altogether, and when there's no fear, there's no terror, let alone terrorism.
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!