Slashdot Mirror
Checkpoint of the Future Coming Soon To Airports
cultiv8 writes with this excerpt from an AP story as carried by Yahoo: "Eye scanners and futuristic security tunnels may be standard in airports soon as the airline industry seeks to maintain safety while reducing the hassles of boarding a plane that deter some people from flying. The International Air Transport Association unveiled a mock-up Tuesday in Singapore of what it dubbed the 'Checkpoint of the Future,' where passengers separated by security risk would walk through one of three high-tech, 20-foot-long (6.1-meters-long) tunnels that can quickly scan shoes and carry-on luggage and check for liquids and explosives. ... In the IATA prototype, passengers would be categorized based on the results of a government risk assessment that is put into a chip in a passenger's passport or other identification. An eye scan would then match the passenger to the passport."
They got the idea from total recall then?
What's the cancer risk then? How much radiation do we need to absorb in the name of safety? Will people be restricted from flying too often to keep them safe from our invasive scans?
I'm one of the lucky ones: I don't have a job-related need to take an airplane, so I haven't flown for the last few years.
Seriously: the TSA has proven time and again that they can't be trusted with wiping their own ass, much less handling security, privacy, or customer relations.
I feel bad for the airlines, and I miss going places I can't drive, but I cannot stomach their security theatre, invasiveness, or sexual assaults.
New Hampshire was one of the first states to reject "Real-ID", and to hell with the (then-threatened) restrictions on air travel. I was one of the people that campaigned actively for this; one of my friends was a co-sponsor of the bill that did the opt-out, not only from Real-ID, but from "any national identification card system that may follow"
If that sounds good to you, you should check us out: http://freestateproject.org//intro/real-id
Part of the Second American Revolution!
From TFA:
"Airlines are seeking ways to win back passengers put off by long and irritating airport security measures who have opted to travel instead by train, boat or car. IATA said Monday it expects the industry's profit this year to plummet to $4 billion from $18 billion last year."
It sounds like people have quit flying in droves since TSA implemented scanners and patdowns last year. Are there any other stories that could confirm this conclusion?
Me, although not an 8 hour drive but an 8 hour train ride. I used to travel from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia a lot. The plane trip is ~30 minutes, while the train ride is about 6-7 hours. With all the BS in the terminal, and traffic at the airport, the plane ride turned into a ~4 hour affair. The seats are cramped, there were no outlets, not much of a view, especially sitting in the aisle.
On the train, the seats go almost all the way back, I can get up and walk around, there are outlets at every seat, there's a viewing car I can sit in and watch the countryside go by, a movie car, a dining car, and I can even get a private room with a fold out bed if I want. And hey, if you're a smoker you can light up a cigg at every stop! Sure it costs a little more but my god it's worth it, and this was before the days of full body scanners. Now... my god I'd never fly unless I was absolutely forced to.
Why on Earth would they try to blow up the plane if they have to go through such tight security? It's a lot easier to target the lines.
Excerpts from the last thoughts of Abdul Hassan Gamal ibn al Azad*: "I wait in line, my backpack concealing three kilograms of C4, surrounded by a layer of scrap metal and nails dipped in anti-coagulant rat poison. I wait for the line to get as long as possible to include the greatest number of people in the blast. I don't care if I die, 40 (or 42?) virgins will be my reward for fighting the Holy War in the name of the one god Allah. I trigger the detonator..."
Maybe less casualties than downing an Airbus, possibly more if the line is long and packed, and no need to risk going through security. The fact that the bomber dies first doesn't seem to be a problem when they're happy to die, and you can afford to use them like money ante poker chips, knowing you can always recruit five more for every one that's caught or killed. The checkpoints merely shifted the most vulnerable point from the air onto the ground, where the terrorists can do even more damage.
* Any semblance to living persons is purely coincidental.
Hyperbole: I use it liberally!
Because the military industrial complex saw the opportunity to sell expensive, unnecessary shit to an ignorant, fearful populace, and they're damn good at getting the government to give them money to waste. End result: The TSA, who has never once in its entire history prevented someone who tried to sneak a bomb on a plane from doing so. Exactly three people have tried to sneak bombs or bomb-making materials through the TSA's security since 9/11. All three have succeeded.
Unless you're only flying from tiny little airports, I'm surprised by that. Even a medium-sized airport is crazy.
Depending on how big your city is, getting to the airport is likely a 30 minute or so affair. They suggest you arrive at the airport at least 90 minutes before your flight ... that's two hours right there. then your 30 minute flight. Figure 20 minutes easily to get your bags, and then assume another 30 minutes to your destination.
I figure that's 3.5 hrs right there, give or take.
Hell, when I fly a longer haul flight ... the trip time to the airport, the recommended arrival time, and the time on the back end don't change. My usual flight is about 4h15 minutes ... and the trip takes me about 7.5 hrs door to door.
In all but the most tiny of regional airports, I can't see how you are getting away with only 2 hours including flight time. In my experience, there's pretty much 2 hrs minimum on the front end of the flight, and 1 hr on the backend ... regardless of the actual flight time.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
All you need to bypass such level of "security" is to find a willing participant with skin color which is not critical.
And you probably only need to do it once. Get all skin colors up to "critical level" and voila - everyone is a potential terrorist once more.
Or no one is, depending on your perspective.
Prioritizing according to clearly visible and easily circumventable markers is a poor security technique.
Might as well look only for people holding a stick of dynamite in one hand and a lit lighter in the other.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens