Armed persons charged with defense of the airplane seem to be a good idea in this regard. Federal air marshals are one way to accomplish this; arming and training pilots is another; hiring security guards is another. There are other methods as well. Pick a few of them.
I agree travel is a complex subject that needs multi-layered security. It can't depend on one technique or technology. ID checks is one of many techiques. It should not be disregarded because it is possible to foil. We need to do more than arm people because even guns are not a perfect solution. The other guy can always get bigger guns and more people or use a remote control.
Had the NSA shared their watch list with the FAA, some of the 9/11 terrorists could have been flagged based on their ID. So it is important that those who check IDs have current feeds from the law enforcement and intellegence.
You suggest that only by knowing someone's intentions can airplane hijackings be stopped... Setting aside issues of privacy and probability (I know it's hard to do). If there was a technology that could scan minds for criminal intent with 100% accuracy. It would not prevent bombings like Lockerbie or SAM attacks. Again, we need multi-layered security. ID checks are one layer.
That being said, pilots are the last people you want to be armed. 1) The cockpit door is armored so the pilot would have to open the door to use the gun. The pilot is only protected while the door is closed. 2) Hijackers would see an armed pilot is a target that has to be neutralized, as in killed. So long as the pilots are alive, the passengers have the chance to retake the cockpit and put the pilot back in control. 3) Pilots already have a crash axe. One pilot has already shown that an axe and a closed armored door is effective.
Did anyone compare the alcohol consumption per capita with UFO sightings per capita? Perhaps someone should survey for pink elephant and leprechaun sightings too.
This is not common, but there is a problem with technical managers over non-technical PMs. At one of my former employers the DM would verbally give the PM design/architecture instructions to pass to the developers. Consistently there were missing details or glaring flaws. If the DM was available you might be able to discuss it with the two of them. (However, this negates the reason for delegation.) Usually the DM was not available. The initial project meetings were a waste of time because the PM would have to go back to the DM for another meeting or the PM would tell the developers to "just do it this way for now and fix it later."
The company I work for now is much better. It has professional PMs who only have management experience. We work together and show respect for each others' role and input to projects. Some times it requires negotiation, but that is the give and take between computer science and business in the corporate world.
We are talking about the PRC here. The people there do not expect a high level of privacy. The government has always emphasized what is best for the Party is what is best for the people. Right or wrong, I do not see this as a real change in their society. This is just a pilot project for the rest of China.
If they tatoo a number on their people or placed a chip in them, then I would be worried.
Sabre and other CRSs (aka GDSs) are pushing their processing out to the vendors (airlines, hotels, cruise lines, rental cars). My employer, a vendor, is implementing this new Seamless initiative. Requests from Sabre terminals for rates and reservations are redirected to vendor computer systems. Sabre requires subsecond response time for rates and 7 second response for reservations. Sabre only has to control the distributed transaction. Other CRSs have similar project too.
Re:Globalisation must be an effect, not a cause
on
Defining Globalism
·
· Score: 1
I studied in the China and the USSR in Spring of 1991, a year after the second Tian'anmen Square protests and one year before the 1992 Soviet breakup. At that time the USSR, had liberalized their society and their economy to a degree but had the same old Soviet gov't. China liberalized only their economy to a degree, society and gov't were left untouched. That is what was being protested in Tian'anmen Square. China has publicly promoted a policy that allows Western companies in but holds back Western ideas. They do this by letting Western companies operate in China as joint ventures with the gov't. The gov't always owns 51% of the venture. Their political/social elite gets rich off these deals. So China is hip to globalization as long as it is on their terms and to the elite's benefit.
Today there is a new ruling class (just like the old USSR), and a middle class that is not based on land ownership. The poor and working class are left out. There is no change in social infrastructure. So there can be globalization without democracy.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree travel is a complex subject that needs multi-layered security. It can't depend on one technique or technology. ID checks is one of many techiques. It should not be disregarded because it is possible to foil. We need to do more than arm people because even guns are not a perfect solution. The other guy can always get bigger guns and more people or use a remote control.
Had the NSA shared their watch list with the FAA, some of the 9/11 terrorists could have been flagged based on their ID. So it is important that those who check IDs have current feeds from the law enforcement and intellegence.
You suggest that only by knowing someone's intentions can airplane hijackings be stopped... Setting aside issues of privacy and probability (I know it's hard to do). If there was a technology that could scan minds for criminal intent with 100% accuracy. It would not prevent bombings like Lockerbie or SAM attacks. Again, we need multi-layered security. ID checks are one layer.
That being said, pilots are the last people you want to be armed. 1) The cockpit door is armored so the pilot would have to open the door to use the gun. The pilot is only protected while the door is closed. 2) Hijackers would see an armed pilot is a target that has to be neutralized, as in killed. So long as the pilots are alive, the passengers have the chance to retake the cockpit and put the pilot back in control. 3) Pilots already have a crash axe. One pilot has already shown that an axe and a closed armored door is effective.
Not only can these fish walk, you can clearly see from the pictures they can buy newspapers too. But do they taste better than American fish?
Did anyone compare the alcohol consumption per capita with UFO sightings per capita? Perhaps someone should survey for pink elephant and leprechaun sightings too.
This is not common, but there is a problem with technical managers over non-technical PMs. At one of my former employers the DM would verbally give the PM design/architecture instructions to pass to the developers. Consistently there were missing details or glaring flaws. If the DM was available you might be able to discuss it with the two of them. (However, this negates the reason for delegation.) Usually the DM was not available. The initial project meetings were a waste of time because the PM would have to go back to the DM for another meeting or the PM would tell the developers to "just do it this way for now and fix it later." The company I work for now is much better. It has professional PMs who only have management experience. We work together and show respect for each others' role and input to projects. Some times it requires negotiation, but that is the give and take between computer science and business in the corporate world.
We are talking about the PRC here. The people there do not expect a high level of privacy. The government has always emphasized what is best for the Party is what is best for the people. Right or wrong, I do not see this as a real change in their society. This is just a pilot project for the rest of China. If they tatoo a number on their people or placed a chip in them, then I would be worried.
Sabre and other CRSs (aka GDSs) are pushing their processing out to the vendors (airlines, hotels, cruise lines, rental cars). My employer, a vendor, is implementing this new Seamless initiative. Requests from Sabre terminals for rates and reservations are redirected to vendor computer systems. Sabre requires subsecond response time for rates and 7 second response for reservations. Sabre only has to control the distributed transaction. Other CRSs have similar project too.
Today there is a new ruling class (just like the old USSR), and a middle class that is not based on land ownership. The poor and working class are left out. There is no change in social infrastructure. So there can be globalization without democracy.