Amazon Denies Reports That Airport Scanners Ruin Kindle's e-Ink

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Denies Reports That Airport Scanners Ruin Kindle's e-Ink

Posted by samzenpus on Monday November 21, 2011 @05:12AM from the not-our-problem dept.

judgecorp writes "Amazon has poured cold water on the story, but reports insist that Kindles are sometimes rendered useless by airport baggage handling and security checks. Many people report no problems at all but if something is going wrong, the culprit may not be the X-ray scanner, but a static shock."

49 of 182 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Reminds me of when NY sprayed for mosquitos. by Kenja · 2011-11-21 05:15 · Score: 5, Funny

Everyone was told it was perfectly safe, but to cover their cars because it would strip the paint right off.

--

"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
why just the kindle? by skydyr · 2011-11-21 05:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

If this were a problem, wouldn't it also affect nooks and other readers that use e-Ink? The displays are all made by the same company, after all.
1. Re:why just the kindle? by Bobakitoo · 2011-11-21 05:23 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "Why just the iphone?"
  Because a well know gadget name in the headline get you more advertisement views.
2. Re:why just the kindle? by LordKronos · 2011-11-21 06:35 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  If this were a problem, wouldn't it also affect nooks and other readers that use e-Ink? The displays are all made by the same company, after all.
  Remember when Toyota was in the news for the unintended acceleration thing? Funny, because up until that point, all brands had similar numbers of sporadic cases of UA, but none of them made the news. Then suddenly Toyota makes the news, and out of nowhere, nearly all models of Toyota's began exhibiting the problem at the same time. And it didn't matter if it was a new car just off the lot or a vehicle that had been driven for several years. Suddenly they all started failing at once. Then just as quickly the problem disappeared. But surprisingly, none of the other non-Toyota brands made headlines for similar problems, even though they all experienced it.
  So, the answer may very well be that publicity has drawn people's attention to it. Did my nook fail? Well then I guess it was just a piece of crap. Did my kindle fail? Yeah, well then I guess it too was just a....wait a minute...did someone say something about airport scanners? I was at the airport recently. The airport scanners killed my kindle.
3. Re:why just the kindle? by gnasher719 · 2011-11-21 06:57 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Remember when Toyota was in the news for the unintended acceleration thing? Funny, because up until that point, all brands had similar numbers of sporadic cases of UA, but none of them made the news. Then suddenly Toyota makes the news, and out of nowhere, nearly all models of Toyota's began exhibiting the problem at the same time. And it didn't matter if it was a new car just off the lot or a vehicle that had been driven for several years. Suddenly they all started failing at once. Then just as quickly the problem disappeared. But surprisingly, none of the other non-Toyota brands made headlines for similar problems, even though they all experienced it.
  At the time a Mercedes engineer said that on every Mercedes, and in his opinion on every car sold, the brakes are about four times stronger than the engine. In other words, you can bring _any_ car with working brakes easily to a standstill by hitting the brakes hard until the car stands still, no matter what the engine tries. The essential bit is hitting the _brake pedal_ and not any other pedal. And actually stopping the car; if you drive at 70mph with your engine revving and hitting the brake pedal to stay at that speed, then eventually the brakes will overheat and fail.
4. Re:why just the kindle? by Obfuscant · 2011-11-21 07:21 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  So which is it? Are the brakes four times stronger than the engine, or can the engine overpower the brakes?
  Today's words are "chronic" and "acute".
  If you push on the brakes hard enough, they will stop the car. The acute usage of the brakes can overpower the engine.
  If you ride the brakes, thus both wearing them down and heating them up, the chronic application of braking will eventually cause them to fail and they will no longer overpower the engine.
  However, I don't believe that the appearance of ABS has been considered in this claim that they will overpower the car. If the ABS says "no", they will override the four-times-overpower and you'll have a lot less.
Nothing here by PCM2 · 2011-11-21 05:18 · Score: 5, Interesting

Boy, talk about a flimsy claim. It's as if eWeek couldn't resist running a juicy rumor, so when they couldn't find a single piece of evidence in support of the rumor, that became their headline (thus allowing them to run a story based on the rumor). They couldn't even find anyone to make the claim in a quote.
Let the anecdotal evidence begin. I've sent B&N Nooks (with e-ink displays) through airport security scanners at least a dozen times. No ill effects.

--
Breakfast served all day!
1. Re:Nothing here by Baldrake · 2011-11-21 05:37 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Ok, since you asked, here is my anecdotal evidence. I have owned my Kindle for about a year. With daily use, it was worked flawlessly for all of that year, with three exceptions. In each of these cases, the reader froze, and had to be hard-reset and recharged.
  All three happened while I was on trans-Atlantic flights.
  It's a bit of a coincidence. I personally would not outright dismiss the possibility that there is something going on.
2. Re:Nothing here by DocJohn · 2011-11-21 05:41 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  I've had both 1st and 2nd generation Kindles and have flown with them each dozens of times. Which means they've been each X-rayed dozens of times.
  They both work fine and have never had to be reset. With the 3G radio off, a single charge on either of them lasts weeks, even with daily use.
  Kindles are bullet-proof, hardy devices that you can read in direct sunlight. I've even dropped them both, with no damage to either.
  This is exactly what an e-reader should be.
  --
  Psych Central - get your psychology on
3. Re:Nothing here by SJHillman · 2011-11-21 06:04 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Stop taking flights over the Bermuda Triangle. Problem solved.
4. Re:Nothing here by Lehk228 · 2011-11-21 06:04 · Score: 2
  
  During flight? Sounds more like an issue of radiation or, depending on when and where, the mobile data uplink getting confused as it flies through far more cells and sees far more cells than it normally would.
  
  --
  Snowden and Manning are heroes.
5. Re:Nothing here by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-21 06:26 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Yeah, it is "radiation". Do people even stop and thing before they write something? You can get you Kindle through an x-ray scanner, and it is OK, but "radiation" on the flight will scramble it, not once, but 3 times!... yeah right. Do you people even have a clue about radiation flux in an x-ray machine (Ie. scanner, whatever), vs. real life???
  
  the mobile data uplink getting confused as it flies through far more cells and sees far more cells than it normally would.
  On a trans-Atlantic flight??
6. Re:Nothing here by chrismcb · 2011-11-21 06:37 · Score: 2
  
  Kindles are bullet-proof,
  
  I would not call the kindle "bullet-proof." I recently returned from a trip, and on the trip back my kindle started to get vertical and horizontal lines in the screen (either the line remained completely on or off) The Kindle was less than 6 months old and Amazon replaced it. But when I called Amazon about the problem they asked me if anything touched the screen. I mentioned that I kept it in my backpack, and they said that might be the problem.
7. Re:Nothing here by Zebedeu · 2011-11-21 06:57 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  You should've requested the captain to disable all of *his* electronic equipment.
  What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
8. Re:Nothing here by bmo · 2011-11-21 07:45 · Score: 2
  
  I nominate this for the "BOFH of the Year" answer.
  --
  BMO
The problems with the kindle by Oswald+McWeany · 2011-11-21 05:18 · Score: 5, Funny

The problems with the kindle only occur when the TSA give the kindle a cavity search.

--
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
1. Re:The problems with the kindle by Reverand+Dave · 2011-11-21 05:21 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Exactly, it's not so much that it doesn't work, more than it's scared and unwilling to carry on anymore.
  
  --
  I got here through a series of tubes
2. Re:The problems with the kindle by dstyle5 · 2011-11-21 06:18 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  "Oh, so your owner is reading Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451."
  
  "Sir, we need to get step into our Assessment Room for further questions."
3. Re:The problems with the kindle by Thumper_SVX · 2011-11-21 06:34 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  You laugh... but last year my girlfriend was caught up in a detailed customs search on returning to the USA from Ireland because she had quite a large number of books in her backpack. They seriously couldn't understand why she had so many large books with her at once in her carry-on. I can't even remember what the books were off the top of my head, but I think the most subversive thing she was carrying was probably the Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy.
  This year for our trip to Germany, she got a Kindle. :)
4. Re:The problems with the kindle by Svartalf · 2011-11-21 06:46 · Score: 2
  
  I would have a Kindle, Nook, or Kobo for this stuff. I'm still buying paper books, but for travel like that, there's few better answers and it's easier to get around with the device as long as you've a means to charge the device while out and about away from normal AC power.
  
  --
  I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Anecdote!=data by Zerth · 2011-11-21 05:19 · Score: 5, Interesting

That said, I've taken 3 different kindles(gen 2, gen 3, and the DX) through several airports in the US, plus taken the smaller ones through a few in Europe. Never had any problems after going through the xray.
Well, no problems with the kindles, anyway. Once I got extra screening because the chargers "looked suspicious".
IIRC, the 4th generation of kindles have exposed metal contacts on the back, so static from the rubber conveyor belt sounds much more probable.
1. Re:Anecdote!=data by Amouth · 2011-11-21 05:58 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  so they taught/calibrated a security device with a sample of unknown and questionable origin.. yeap.. sounds like security theater to me.
  
  --
  '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
2. Re:Anecdote!=data by tgd · 2011-11-21 06:51 · Score: 2
  
  I had my Kindle unknowingly spend several hours *underwater* without any bad effects other than the battery having been killed. A year later, its still fine.
  Is been through literally hundreds of XRays, including the "oh my god, I'm starting to glow" kind in third-world cesspool airports, and its never had a problem.
  And yes, I know one data point isn't all that interesting on its own.
3. Re:Anecdote!=data by Amouth · 2011-11-21 07:16 · Score: 2
  
  right - but this is supposed to be security, something that (if you believe the people pushing it) is preventing passengers from death.. is it really too much trouble to have an actual chain of custody for calibrating the one and only check point for it? we have more stringent requirements for day to day police evidence gathering.
  It's not so much that it happened once.. but that it happens at all. If the people of "Questionable Intent" know that this is policy - then they will just make a point of being one of the first ones at a major airport with a modified version of the new "thing to have" device - and make it look right.. then they will have zero trouble getting through.
  But again this is security theater so we know that really isn't a problem.. But really if your going to do security do it right..
  
  --
  '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
Don't think there is a problem by rickett81 · 2011-11-21 05:23 · Score: 3

My kindle has been on many flights. If only the flight attendants would let me read the stupid thing during take-off and landing.
1. Re:Don't think there is a problem by vlm · 2011-11-21 05:37 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  My kindle has been on many flights.
  If only the flight attendants would let me read the stupid thing during take-off and landing.
  We're getting close to the power levels where they'll let you.
  If a small battery can run the thing for a month, even if it channeled all that power into an intentionally interfering signal, it still wouldn't be a problem.
  The biggest problem, aside from tradition, is convincing passengers that a milliwatt class Kindle is "low enough" yet the 100 watt gamer laptop is "too high". I could see all the airlines and manufacturers conspiring into releasing devices with green cases, or maybe pink with glitter, if they're "aircraft rated" as being safe. Then they just have to tell stewardesses to look out for gamer laptops with obvious done-at-home spray paint jobs.
  
  --
  "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
2. Re:Don't think there is a problem by rtfa-troll · 2011-11-21 05:52 · Score: 2
  
  There is no way for them to tell that you are competent to turn off the WiFi etc. Nobody is willing to certify planes safe with electronic equipment running. The landing and take off actually does often rely on correct radio communication. It's only 10 minutes. There actually have been incidents where radio equipment has endangered landing or (see comp.risks archives, for example) caused real accidents.
  Please please just read the in flight magazine or stare at the air-host(esses - your choice) bum for a few minutes. Is this so much to ask.
  
  --
  =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
3. Re:Don't think there is a problem by Enderandrew · 2011-11-21 05:53 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  On charter flights, they don't force people to turn off electronics because they don't interfere with anything.
  Mythbusters also definitively busted the myth that signals from electronics would disrupt any system on the airplane. They ripped open the plane, removed the shielding and put electronic devices next to unshielded cables and still couldn't cause a problem.
  On top of that, many of these devices that we're forced to turn off either don't have wireless signals, or can be put into "Airplane mode" where are wireless signals are killed. The government has decided that stupid fear-mongering should overrule facts and reality.
  
  --
  http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
4. Re:Don't think there is a problem by rufty_tufty · 2011-11-21 05:57 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Announcement "Please turn off all electronic devices."
  Me "Erm my watch doesn't have an off button"
  Okay I've never done this but my inner idiot makes me want to.
  
  --
  "The weirdest thing about a mind, is that every answer that you find, is the basis of a brand new cliche" -
5. Re:Don't think there is a problem by Baloroth · 2011-11-21 06:08 · Score: 2
  
  Please please don't. Otherwise they might ask us to start taking out the battery next.
  
  --
  "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
6. Re:Don't think there is a problem by gumbi+west · 2011-11-21 06:09 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Theoretically, they make you put away magazines too, I don't see why the Kindle is any different.
7. Re:Don't think there is a problem by gumbi+west · 2011-11-21 06:12 · Score: 2
  
  The shielding may be the problem. The reason we turn off electronics is a single engine fighter jet crash caused by a system using the resonant frequency or the casing for the fire detection system in the engine that lead to a crash.
8. Re:Don't think there is a problem by Abstrackt · 2011-11-21 06:37 · Score: 2
  
  They'd probably just make you put it in your checked luggage. Problem solved!
  
  --
  They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
9. Re:Don't think there is a problem by owlstead · 2011-11-21 07:25 · Score: 2
  
  Anyone turning off his pacemaker, don't forget to register with the Darwin awards first (if applicable).
10. Re:Don't think there is a problem by caseih · 2011-11-21 07:26 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Normally what the Myth Busters do is at best anecdotal evidence. They certainly can't do enough testing to be statistically significant in this thing. So no. They have not definitively proven anything about electrical interference. Not even close. As they say, an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It's likely they are correct that very little interference would happen, but no one is willing to risk certifying that this is so. Nor should you or any other passenger.
11. Re:Don't think there is a problem by Enderandrew · 2011-11-21 07:39 · Score: 2
  
  Mythbusters did test with and without shielding.
  And if we're concerned about the possibility of crashing/shutting down an engine, then that should be enough of a concern not to allow wireless electronic devices, period. But as soon as you're up in the air, it is no longer a concern. I'm not doubting your claim, but I'm not aware of the incident you're referring to. And I believe Mythbusters said their research couldn't come up with a single incident of wireless electronic devices ever interfering with a plane.
  The FCC does extensive testing of communication devices before consumers get to touch them. If we need to add resonance frequency testing, so be it. But allowing one freak accident to forever inconvenience billions of air travelers is just plain stupid.
  
  --
  http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
12. Re:Don't think there is a problem by Enderandrew · 2011-11-21 07:52 · Score: 2
  
  Mythbusters did research trying to find one recorded incident of a single piece of wireless electronics causing an incident and couldn't find one.
  And they went out of their way to try and cause interference, going so far as to send signals at unshielded, exposed wires and couldn't get anything. And a Congressional study couldn't find a single verifiable claim of interference. Please tell me that you have verifiable evidence that it is occurring.
  http://travel.usatoday.com/experts/cox/story/2011-10-03/Ask-the-Captain-A-reader-challenges-in-flight-electronics-rules/50634340/1
  
  --
  http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
13. Re:Don't think there is a problem by Enderandrew · 2011-11-21 08:24 · Score: 2
  
  They mentioned that they couldn't find a single recorded verifiable claim of interference occurring. Zero examples in the history of recorded flight is pretty statistically significant.
  A Congressional study ended up with the same conclusion.
  The article I linked to above mentions that Boeing had one incident where flight equipment wasn't working. They suspected a laptop using wireless internet might have been related, so they purchased that laptop and tried to reproduce the condition but were unable to do so.
  It should be noted that GoGo in-flight wireless is broadcasting before, during and after take-off with zero problems. But the FAA won't let you use a Kindle in wireless mode, because it might crash the plane even though there is precisely zero evidence to suggest it can cause problems.
  
  --
  http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
14. Re:Don't think there is a problem by Enderandrew · 2011-11-21 12:25 · Score: 2
  
  God, I just read your article. I can't believe you offered that up.
  The article says there is no direct correlation between wireless devices and malfunctions. It said in mid-flight when there were malfunctions, people blamed wireless devices and had the crew tell people to turn them off. There are 75 incidents over the years that could be linked to wireless devices.
  But again, what you won't find is a single case where someone investigated it and found it to be reproducible.
  
  --
  http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
15. Re:Don't think there is a problem by Enderandrew · 2011-11-21 12:32 · Score: 2
  
  No, the article said there were 75 anecdotal claims over the years, and the report stated that there was no direct correlation between wireless devices and malfunctions. Did you opt not to read that part of the article?
  Did the choose to ignore the word anecdotal? Even better, one of the cited examples that happened between 2005 and 2009 was a phone and 3 iPods being used during a flight. An iPod pre-2009 was likely not to have a wireless connection at all. But since something malfunctioned on the plane, the first reaction was to tell people to shut off their iPods because people are want to repeat FUD rather than focus on facts. Stating facts might get you sued.
  And in your theory that 300 devices would cause problems, you forget that those 300 devices are active mid-flight. If they caused problems it would be documented.
  Anecdotal reports or Congressional study?
  
  --
  http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Physical damage by vlm · 2011-11-21 05:39 · Score: 2

Kindles are sometimes rendered useless by airport baggage handling and security checks. Many people report no problems at all but if something is going wrong, the culprit may not be the X-ray scanner, but a static shock.
Maybe, just maybe, its because they beat the heck out of it or dropped it and don't want to admit it and don't think anyone would guess what they did and would agree with a witchcraft-level explanation. Just maybe...

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
So why does Amazon bother denying anything? by hellfire · 2011-11-21 05:40 · Score: 5, Interesting

Okay this article is weird.
It starts with the conventional "idiots who don't understand science think x-rays damage their electronics". But it quickly switches to the "more likely a static shock" line which is much more feasible. But then why is this a story? Static shock affects all electronic devices, the Kindle is no different.
Then it goes into a "eWeek licks Amazon's balls happily" advertisement about how awesome the kindle is, which has no place in an article like this. Why the hell go this far? And then Amazon out and out denies the problem even exists. They don't say "it could be static shocks which no device is immune from." They use the "a bunch of other people don't have a problem" fallacy to deflect the issue. While it does nothing for me, that's kind of stupid because it will stir up the conspiracy theory wonks like a storm of bees.
Looks like this article was written for eWeek by an Amazon Marketroid, not by Steve McCaskil, which makes sense now that I think about it. Deflect and deny rather than address.

--
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Re:during take-off and landing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-11-21 06:02 · Score: 5, Insightful

The power levels have nothing to do with the safety risk of being smacked in the face by some wayward gadget during a rough landing.
Xrays CAN damage electronics, scrambled my PDA by neurocutie · 2011-11-21 06:17 · Score: 2

I've had first hand experience with airport Xrays damaging/corrupting my electronics, specifically a instant-on mini laptop that used SRAM as its memory. It happened not just once or twice but three times. I believe it would have to do with the strength of the Xrays and the depth of the charge wells or the size of current that would need to be opposed in order to flip bits. This happened a while ago (15 years) and hasn't happened recently, although I think I remember airport Xrays also scrambling one of my old Palm Pilots once, so let's hope the intensity of the Xrays used has gone down and the memories used are more hardened against Xrays (or cosmic rays, etc).
Re:during take-off and landing by tgd · 2011-11-21 06:52 · Score: 4, Insightful

I'd rather be hit by a 5oz Kindle than a 4lbs hardcover.
Re:Well, yeah. by hawguy · 2011-11-21 06:58 · Score: 2

rendered useless by airport baggage handling
I went to Disney a few years ago, and i had my bag searched.
I was just thrilled to get to my hotel and find out that my bag had been searched, as well as my camera. They took the damn thing apart, and so I have no pictures of that vacation
I'd imagine they do something stupidly similar with Kindles.
I'm assuming this was a film camera? Every quality film camera I've owned loads the film on the takeup spool upon loading, then as you take photos, it winds it back into the canister - so if someone opened the camera, I'd only lose a photo or two since the rest would be safely inside the canister.
But even if they did manage to expose the entire film that was in the camera - are you saying that you'd only taken 24 (or 36) photos on your whole Disney vacation? Every time I've been to Disney I shot that many pictures on the drive to the parking lot.
Mass hysteria again by kriston · 2011-11-21 08:49 · Score: 4, Informative

Toyota somewhat respectfully did release results from the so-called "sudden acceleration" problem. In one specific case, where the retired state trooper killed himself and his family in a Lexus, the in-car computer recorded several seconds of full application of the accelerator pedal before the data stopped recording. We're not talking about the throttle, we're talking about the user input device, the accelerator pedal, that was at full application. Of course, it was operator error, and everyone knew that from the beginning. It's sad.

"[T]he verdict is in," said Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. "There is no electronic-based cause for unintended high-speed acceleration in Toyotas." http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20031069-503544.html

So, yes, this is mass hysteria. Same thing happened to Audi/VW back in the early 1990s where claimants insisted their Audis' cruise control caused cars to plow into buildings when moving from a parking space. Audio/VW's solution was to prevent shifting without simultaneous application of the brake pedal. On newer Audis these instructions are on the display in big, bright letters.

--
Kriston
1. Re:Mass hysteria again by kriston · 2011-11-21 14:55 · Score: 2
  
  Would it help if I also point out that the brake pedal indicated zero application? In these cases surviving drivers always claim to be "standing" on the brakes but in reality the brake pedal and brake system instrumentation reflects *zero* application on both.
  Mass hysteria is usually real.
  Oh, to keep on topic, I own a Kindle and it goes through X-ray machines regularly and it's perfect. It's also got a non-lighted cover with painted metal clips and the battery never dies. *Shrug*
  
  --
  Kriston
Amazong customer service by chi_features · 2011-11-21 09:06 · Score: 2

I would just like to say that it was an absolutely superb customer service experience dealing with my broken Kindle when this flight-related problem happened to me. Seriously, this will keep me going back to Amazon-branded goods where beforehand I didn't really care. So while an article like this is important to highlight potentially unresolved widespread problems, it's also worth mentioning what the company does about it... and what they do about it to the 99% ;)