Wouldn't a potential bomber be able to smuggle explosive material in a Depends undergarment? From what I've seen of the pictures online, the explosive material might have shown up on a full body scan because the guy was wearing briefs, but it would have been totally missed inside an adult diaper. Considering all the extra security measures imposed (like staying in your seat for last hour of flight), a terrorist could even argue that the Depends undergarment was a preventive measure.
"And the ads. That was what really did it. He could have stood everything else -- but the ads, the whole long way from Ganymede to Earth... He was getting near Terra; the barrage was increasing... [time passes] Thank God, he was past it. The ad dimmed and receded behind, as his fast-moving ship hurtled forward."
-- from Sales Pitch by Philip K. Dick, first published 1954
In WWI a ship full of munitions blew up in Halifax harbour. To get an idea of what kind of damage might occur, have a look at: http://www.cbc.ca/halifaxexplosion/
Seriously. I know people (not terrorists) that have eye muscle problems, so their eyes cross, leading to only one eye actually being used by the brain. Wouldn't a surveillance system then only have a 50% chance of figuring out what a person was looking at?
This situation can be corrected by glasses in some cases, but then the algorithm determining the direction of view would be messed up since the glasses (with who knows what prescription) are bending the light on the way to the cornea.
In fact, wouldn't eyeglasses in general mess up the algorithm by obscuring the camera's view of the cornea?
Slashdot Mirror
Glad they integrated solar cell. That way after it's implanted in your eye you can always recharge it by staring at the sun.
Wouldn't a potential bomber be able to smuggle explosive material in a Depends undergarment? From what I've seen of the pictures online, the explosive material might have shown up on a full body scan because the guy was wearing briefs, but it would have been totally missed inside an adult diaper. Considering all the extra security measures imposed (like staying in your seat for last hour of flight), a terrorist could even argue that the Depends undergarment was a preventive measure.
"And the ads. That was what really did it. He could have stood everything else -- but the ads, the whole long way from Ganymede to Earth... He was getting near Terra; the barrage was increasing... [time passes] Thank God, he was past it. The ad dimmed and receded behind, as his fast-moving ship hurtled forward." -- from Sales Pitch by Philip K. Dick, first published 1954
How about PhoneGnome?
In WWI a ship full of munitions blew up in Halifax harbour. To get an idea of what kind of damage might occur, have a look at: http://www.cbc.ca/halifaxexplosion/
Seriously. I know people (not terrorists) that have eye muscle problems, so their eyes cross, leading to only one eye actually being used by the brain. Wouldn't a surveillance system then only have a 50% chance of figuring out what a person was looking at? This situation can be corrected by glasses in some cases, but then the algorithm determining the direction of view would be messed up since the glasses (with who knows what prescription) are bending the light on the way to the cornea. In fact, wouldn't eyeglasses in general mess up the algorithm by obscuring the camera's view of the cornea?
...Those four kids on Telletubbies seemed to adjust.