This is not a security flaw but rather makes for some interesting question re the "random selection" process. But this will probably be yet another "nothing to see here, move along" type revelation.
Indeed, I don't recall having anyone scan my BP until I go through the gate at boarding time. Unless I'm forgetting it, the TSA preprocessors look at it, and look at your passport through the little lens thingy, but don't use a scanner.
Indeed. It's pretty hard to say "random search" if the guy's badge code has a special section selecting him for "extra screening"
It could be determined randomly before people are able to print their boarding passes.
In fact that would probably be the best way to ensure a random search, since a person at the gate might be influenced by your appearance.
Plus, if you have legitimate reason to believe someone is higher than average risk, you could just specify what's needed on the boarding pass, and not have to rely on the staff to spot you based on a picture.
A kid is exactly the benchmark we should be using for this. After all, a 3 year old is exactly the target market: they are the people using computers all day long in banks, call centers, offices etc where you don't need to worry about getting the software to do what you want in the manner you need it to: i.e. make your job easier.
We'll just turn all that stuff over to the three year olds, and the rest of us can retire.
preserve the dream that anyone can come from the most humble of beginnings and succeed in this melting pot we call the United States of America.
Although being born with a platinum spoon in your mouth definitely helps. Where would Mittens be without daddy's connections and resources? Of course, the people who couldn't pull themselves up are part of that shiftless, mangy 47% who are just taking up space.
I've watched all the #debates so far and it's sad how little they say, tapdance around questions, avoid talking about the critical issues while spending lots of time on things that don't matter for shit.
Even outside of debates, the media has become *horrible* about not expecting their guests to actually answer questions. Even when they're playing softball, they usually let the guest cite some irrelevant talking points rather than actually answering the question.
I was thinking, after seeing clips from the previous debates, that the debate's host should include a real-time fact-checking panel of about six people seated behind the audience, with computers so they can contact their support staff and get quicker results. Then the debators could say "I'd like a fact check on that", and the audience (local and remote) would get a near-instant "vote" from the panel as to whether the purported fact is correct.
Well we have privatized prisons now so it's easier to compete with places like China. Lets toss them in there for a while and let them live off 10-15 cents an hour. Lovely incarceration rate we have in the USA by the way.
The only miracle is that we don't get robocalls from for-profit prisons, offering us a finder's fee if we turn someone in for a crime.
How about a simple small minimum charge per phonecall from the phone companies? They make more money, robocallers can't afford the premium on call-spamming, customers will hardly notice the difference, everybody wins.
Even at $5.00 per call, politicos could afford to call everyone in the country.
In the UK and we get them. I usually say two words and hang up. One of the Words begins with Fuck, the other one begins with Off.
I just hang up. No amount of wanting to piss off the robocallers would justify me spending a second longer than the absolute minimum on them, and I feel no need to be polite to a robot either.
Better yet, just put the phone down without hanging up. If they're going to waste your time, you should waste theirs.
If the FTC is looking for a magic bullet they are going to be sadly disappointed. Anything good enough to stop it would most likely have many unintended side effects (like limiting free speech).
Free speech isn't the guarantee of an audience. You should have the legal and/or technological ability to block any class of calls you don't want to bothered with.
Slashdot Mirror
This is not a security flaw but rather makes for some interesting question re the "random selection" process. But this will probably be yet another "nothing to see here, move along" type revelation.
Indeed, I don't recall having anyone scan my BP until I go through the gate at boarding time. Unless I'm forgetting it, the TSA preprocessors look at it, and look at your passport through the little lens thingy, but don't use a scanner.
Indeed. It's pretty hard to say "random search" if the guy's badge code has a special section selecting him for "extra screening"
It could be determined randomly before people are able to print their boarding passes.
In fact that would probably be the best way to ensure a random search, since a person at the gate might be influenced by your appearance.
Plus, if you have legitimate reason to believe someone is higher than average risk, you could just specify what's needed on the boarding pass, and not have to rely on the staff to spot you based on a picture.
Of course. We are all just prisoners here, of our own device.
Hotel California: what you get when you breed Stairway to Heaven and The Rocky Horror Picture Show.
Why is everyone clamoring for an opportunity to support The Beast?
If you hate the walled garden, don't ask to be let in.
A kid is exactly the benchmark we should be using for this. After all, a 3 year old is exactly the target market: they are the people using computers all day long in banks, call centers, offices etc where you don't need to worry about getting the software to do what you want in the manner you need it to: i.e. make your job easier.
We'll just turn all that stuff over to the three year olds, and the rest of us can retire.
No doubt anyone can learn it. Doesn't mean we want or need to.
Right. I learned to use xfig, but that doesn't mean its UI isn't crap.
There's a difference between "possible to learn" and "good".
Did the copyright finally expire?
Even better, with a buzzer that goes off whenever 4 out of 6 rate a statement at false. Not that's entertainment!
And shock them at the same time. It would be fun to watch them jump again and again as they go down their list of talking points.
"The 1980's are calling for their foreign policy back" -- Barack Obama :)
Have a look at Matthew Yglesias' map of the world for the policy debates.
That is about as likely to happen as a third party candidate being allowed to sit in the audience.
Better yet, have the TPCs pick the questions and serve as moderators.
Although being born with a platinum spoon in your mouth definitely helps. Where would Mittens be without daddy's connections and resources? Of course, the people who couldn't pull themselves up are part of that shiftless, mangy 47% who are just taking up space.
See the Daily Show / Leonard Nimoy take on that.
Our current president has an agenda to redistribute the wealth from the smart, capable, entrepeneurs to the fat, slobby, freeloading welfare moms.
His opponent has an agenda to redistribute wealth from the middle and working classes to the fat cats that already have more than their share.
the fat, slobby, freeloading welfare moms. [...] the bottom rungs of our society"
I'm guessing that you've never looked into the question of where most public aid actually goes.
His blatant attempt to inject government control into all facets of our lives
Yea, God intended that big corporations should do that. Usurper! Infidel!
I've watched all the #debates so far and it's sad how little they say, tapdance around questions, avoid talking about the critical issues while spending lots of time on things that don't matter for shit.
Even outside of debates, the media has become *horrible* about not expecting their guests to actually answer questions. Even when they're playing softball, they usually let the guest cite some irrelevant talking points rather than actually answering the question.
I was thinking, after seeing clips from the previous debates, that the debate's host should include a real-time fact-checking panel of about six people seated behind the audience, with computers so they can contact their support staff and get quicker results. Then the debators could say "I'd like a fact check on that", and the audience (local and remote) would get a near-instant "vote" from the panel as to whether the purported fact is correct.
Just barf on it, and they'll find someone else to rob.
Publish the home phone numbers of the people who run robocall businesses.
Better yet, just redirect all their calls back to themselves.
We need an electronic currency that enables fast micro-transactions
Bitcoin!
Now we don't need a story about it today.
Well we have privatized prisons now so it's easier to compete with places like China. Lets toss them in there for a while and let them live off 10-15 cents an hour. Lovely incarceration rate we have in the USA by the way.
The only miracle is that we don't get robocalls from for-profit prisons, offering us a finder's fee if we turn someone in for a crime.
How about a simple small minimum charge per phonecall from the phone companies? They make more money, robocallers can't afford the premium on call-spamming, customers will hardly notice the difference, everybody wins.
Even at $5.00 per call, politicos could afford to call everyone in the country.
In the UK and we get them. I usually say two words and hang up. One of the Words begins with Fuck, the other one begins with Off.
I just hang up. No amount of wanting to piss off the robocallers would justify me spending a second longer than the absolute minimum on them, and I feel no need to be polite to a robot either.
Better yet, just put the phone down without hanging up. If they're going to waste your time, you should waste theirs.
Political campaigns. These are very very common from June until early November in the USA
FTFY.
.
At least when corporations do it, it's illegal.
The same can't be said for those running for public office.
Well duh. Corporations are people, politicians aren't.
Not sure why this comment only rates a 3.
If the FTC is looking for a magic bullet they are going to be sadly disappointed. Anything good enough to stop it would most likely have many unintended side effects (like limiting free speech).
Free speech isn't the guarantee of an audience. You should have the legal and/or technological ability to block any class of calls you don't want to bothered with.
That's the most practical way.
I'd rather have the solicited technological solution. Then you wouldn't have to wait for law enforcement to act.
And of course, you could stop the political calls too, like the 3/day I've been getting from Crossroads GPS.
Death penalty. Probably a bit overkill
No pun intended...