"I asked them to instruct people to remove the bad certificate from their own machines, but they claimed this was unnecessary due to the very high risk of legal action if all the parents found out."
We spend a fortune on "security" but still one of the best methods appears to be to rely on the bombers themselves to screw it up as best they can. Shame that they are not more reliable at this.
But then the customs agents wouldn't be able to search them all for porn, or confiscate them to play Tetris when they are bored.
Seriously though, I agree with your idea, there has to be some point where people come to their senses and decide that enough is enough. Unfortunatly that point is probably just after 'all passengers must fly naked' and just before 'full cavity searches for everyone'
The amount of explosives required to kill a secretary on the ground will kill everyone on board a plane at high altitude. So in fairness it's probably acceptable to have a slightly different response or attitude to the same hazard with different associated risks.
On the other hand, the TSA is the RIAA of travel. They will do anything to protect their business model. A single moments sanity by the security services could slash their budgets and put hundreds of thousands of security workers out of work. A risk they will not accept.
They will therefore ensure that the Hazard is broadcast as loud as possible, and use peoples poor understanding of risk to overstate the real threat.
What is truly surprising in this situation is that they managed to control their glee when they found a live one. Even with the almost hysterical media backing to their every pronouncement of doom they probably need a certain number of 'incidents' a year to keep the frenzy going, and this year was otherwise pretty quiet.
more important question is "which war are these going to be used in?".
I doubt Putin would have invaded South Ossetia with plastic tanks, or fought any of Russia's recent skirmishes with them.
This is just Russia fighting the last war but three.
I don't disagree with your point directly, and I see the post by JWSmythe about decoys being a valid tactic, but I am still left wondering how this can make sense from the perspective of the Russian army.
Maybe this would have been great in WW2, but now? Russia could conceivably be threatened by China, but pretty everyone else in the region is not a threat. Everything else is small skirmishes, usually with Russia as the agressor. So when in reality would these be rolled out? Maybe Russia really does think it needs to tool up for a major land based offensive (or they think someone is going to invade), but somehow I don't think so.
So I go back to the thought that it isn't very useful for them. An insurgent with a $800 RPG-7 would probably count this as a win, taking out a $23,000 decoy, plus some support staff. Since to the eye these actually look fairly easy to spot (even if they fool radar and satelite) I would be more worried that they would be counter-productive. An insurgent force could target decoys only. Would be pretty demorilising to be stationed with one if you knew.
if they cost 1% of the price of the real thing, they are in the same price range as the weapons aimed at them, plus they still need soldiers and support. So not ideal in a war of attition.
When do they roll out the inflatable MIRV?
Slashdot Mirror
Douglas Adams,49
David Gemmell, 57
Terry Pratchet, 66
I'm sure its a coincidence, not a thing, but too many great British Science Fiction and Fantasy authors gone too soon.
"I asked them to instruct people to remove the bad certificate from their own machines, but they claimed this was unnecessary due to the very high risk of legal action if all the parents found out."
Fixed it.
We spend a fortune on "security" but still one of the best methods appears to be to rely on the bombers themselves to screw it up as best they can. Shame that they are not more reliable at this.
How did Core fail to make the list?
But then the customs agents wouldn't be able to search them all for porn, or confiscate them to play Tetris when they are bored.
Seriously though, I agree with your idea, there has to be some point where people come to their senses and decide that enough is enough. Unfortunatly that point is probably just after 'all passengers must fly naked' and just before 'full cavity searches for everyone'
It's all about Hazard vs. risk.
The amount of explosives required to kill a secretary on the ground will kill everyone on board a plane at high altitude. So in fairness it's probably acceptable to have a slightly different response or attitude to the same hazard with different associated risks.
On the other hand, the TSA is the RIAA of travel. They will do anything to protect their business model. A single moments sanity by the security services could slash their budgets and put hundreds of thousands of security workers out of work. A risk they will not accept.
They will therefore ensure that the Hazard is broadcast as loud as possible, and use peoples poor understanding of risk to overstate the real threat.
What is truly surprising in this situation is that they managed to control their glee when they found a live one. Even with the almost hysterical media backing to their every pronouncement of doom they probably need a certain number of 'incidents' a year to keep the frenzy going, and this year was otherwise pretty quiet.
more important question is "which war are these going to be used in?". I doubt Putin would have invaded South Ossetia with plastic tanks, or fought any of Russia's recent skirmishes with them. This is just Russia fighting the last war but three.
I don't disagree with your point directly, and I see the post by JWSmythe about decoys being a valid tactic, but I am still left wondering how this can make sense from the perspective of the Russian army. Maybe this would have been great in WW2, but now? Russia could conceivably be threatened by China, but pretty everyone else in the region is not a threat. Everything else is small skirmishes, usually with Russia as the agressor. So when in reality would these be rolled out? Maybe Russia really does think it needs to tool up for a major land based offensive (or they think someone is going to invade), but somehow I don't think so. So I go back to the thought that it isn't very useful for them. An insurgent with a $800 RPG-7 would probably count this as a win, taking out a $23,000 decoy, plus some support staff. Since to the eye these actually look fairly easy to spot (even if they fool radar and satelite) I would be more worried that they would be counter-productive. An insurgent force could target decoys only. Would be pretty demorilising to be stationed with one if you knew.
if they cost 1% of the price of the real thing, they are in the same price range as the weapons aimed at them, plus they still need soldiers and support. So not ideal in a war of attition. When do they roll out the inflatable MIRV?
oh well. laggy map
Do you get special points if your first post is a first post?