Or, we could spend no time screening people, and let the bomb sniffing dogs and armed agents on the planes do their jobs. The TSA's procedures are only minimally effective; I understand that the most recent test showed that they missed large numbers of guns, knives, and even C4. The "dangerous people" are either going to attack the checkpoint itself, or find a way around the checkpoint.
The point of the TSA screenings is beginning to look pretty clear: they wanted to convince the American public to give up their personal information voluntarily, by giving them a choice between an X-ray/groping or voluntarily abandoning privacy rights.
Except that the measures which actually prevent terrorists from hijacking or bombing airplanes -- bomb sniffing dogs, locked cabin doors, armed agents on planes -- are not going away. This program is just a tactic of getting people to give up what the government wanted all along: personal information. The basic concept is this:
Grope people or force them to enter backscatter machines, giving them a choice between having an uncomfortable government-approved sexual assault or an uncomfortable and possibly dangerous exposure to radiation that results in a nude photograph.
Create a policy that requires TSA agents to "screen" kindergarden aged children and cancer patients, creating bad press about the screening process.
Announce that you are going balance security with the public demand to end the screening process, by allowing travellers who give up their privacy rights by volunteering information to the government to avoid the groping and X-ray process.
Note that people who opt for the "trusted traveller" program are going to be subject to exactly the same security measures that we had in airports immediately after the 2001 attacks. The only difference is that now the government gets to access personal details that they were prohibited from accessing before. The best way to avoid constitutional restrictions is to get people to voluntarily give up their rights.
Yeah, the full body scanners raised privacy concerns, so obviously the answer is to volunteer our personal information to government, in exchange for not go through the scanner.
We don't have a progressive party. We have two conservative parties, one of which is a bit more conservative than the other. In case you have not noticed, both parties generally support strengthening law enforcement, WTO programs and globalization, stronger copyright/patent/trademark laws, the existence of a standing army, etc. Both parties are generally friendly to certain corporations, with a bit of variation (e.g. oil versus the movie industry).
Sure, within each party there are some politicians who are the extreme end, but the agendas of the two parties are largely the same.
Bitcoin is not a way to avoid paying taxes, at least not in the United States. Here, you are obligated to pay taxes on barter (which is what a Bitcoin sale amounts to), and failing to do so would be considered tax evasion. Those taxes you are required to pay can only legally be paid in USD, so you can't really avoid anything -- even if you use Bitcoin for all your day-to-day expenses, you would still need to get dollars at some point, or face property seizure and imprisonment.
Yes, you could lie and pretend to have no used Bitcoin at all. People lie on their taxes all the time. People also get caught in audits, and if they lie on their taxes they get in a lot of trouble. Good luck convincing the IRS that you bought your house for $1.
Finally, a lot of businesses take out loans as part of their normal operation (small, medium, and large businesses all do this). Those businesses must repay their loans, and in the United States (and many other countries) that is generally going to require government issued currency. Although a bank could conceivably issue a Bitcoin loan, it would be a monumentally stupid thing to do (Bitcoin has high volatility and has undergone significant deflation, both of which make loans very risky), and the banks are not doing it. Consequently, those businesses must find government issued currency, and even if they accept Bitcoin as payment they will be forced to sell those Bitcoins for another currency, creating even more of an imbalance in demand.
I just don't see the big deal. Yes, it's invasive, and not quite constitutional.
That is what makes it a big deal. The constitution is the only thing that stands between America and outright tyranny. If you don't think your constitutional rights are a big deal, why don't you spend some time in a country where you don't get those rights?
But I prefer my plane to be bomb-free.
The TSA screenings have nothing to do with keeping you safe from bombs. The bomb sniffing dogs are what keep you safe from bombs.
That being said, it's time for the powers that be to come up with a new idea.
Believe it or not, the government already came up with methods of combating terrorism. The TSA's security theater is nothing but corruption, sweetheart deals, and a general attempt to make and end-run around the constitution by claiming that there is an imminent terrorist threat.
And I live four miles from NYC so don't go talking up the 9/11 bullshit.
What is this some kind of a contest? I was in a building on Chambers street on 9/11/01, so don't even try it.
I don't see it as a dollar not spent protecting Americans from terrorists, I see it as a dollar spent from protecting Americans from poverty and joblessness,
Then the money should be put toward something useful, something which actually increases the wealth of our nation rather than mindless security theater. Why not spend the money on expanding our high speed rail infrastructure? Why not spend the money on scientific research? Why not spend the money on schools? Every dollar paid to the TSA screeners is a dollar that could have been spent on any of the above.
The TSA is a money sink. People are being paid to accomplish nothing, undermine the rights of the citizens, and generally hassle people. It is a waste because that money, time, and effort could have been used for things that improve our country, rather than on security theater.
I signed up because I was under-employed and needed the work and money. It was only slightly better than working for Supershuttle.
Sounds like you had other options, so why would you say this:
can you honestly say if you had no better options that you would rather starve than serve as a TSA screener?
Let me guess: your other options were beneath you?
So long as people are allowed onto planes, security will always be compromised.
I don't doubt it. What I do doubt is that the TSA screening policy makes it any more difficult for people to attack a plane. The backscatter machines were installed as part of a sweetheart deal, and the screeners are being told to grope people to pressure the public into stepping into those machines and justifying more widespread deployment. The TSA gets away with this because air travel is something a number of people need to do -- travelling across oceans by boat is not really a possibility for the majority of people. People who work for the TSA are working to further that manipulative agenda, so why should I feel sorry for them?
And in the case of tax dollars, we are talking about how contributions of the people (certainly not so much "corporate entities") contribute to the government interests which are supposed to be in serving the people.
In this case, those tax dollars are not serving the people, they are being handed over to a corporation that is well connected in Washington, DC. The TSA employees who are paid to operate those machines are not keeping anyone safe. The TSA employees who are being paid to grope people are not only not keeping anyone safe, they are actively undermining the rights of travellers.
We know how to keep planes safe from hijackers: lock the cockpit doors, and put armed government agents on planes. Well organized attacks are not going to be thwarted by airport "security," they are thwarted by the efforts of the intelligence community. The CIA and the FBI are in a position to do far more to thwart terrorist attacks than the TSA has ever been.
So when I see "tax dollars wasted" to pay actual people, I can't see it as waste.
Every dollar spent on security theater is a dollar not being spent on actually protecting Americans from terrorists. If every TSA screener were fired, and those tax dollars were spent on intelligence analysts, there would be a net gain in terms of national security. Even if every TSA screener were fired and the tax dollars were used to pay off the national debt we would be better off. "Wasted tax dollars" refers to uses of tax money that does not help the people, and may even be detrimental to the people, which is the situation we face with the security screenings.
when I see "tax dollars wasted" on huge profit industries where only a few really get the benefits of the trillions spent each year, that's what I see as waste
So kind of like the way we spent all that money on the backscatter machines, as part of that sweetheart deal? Well I cannot disagree with you on that one.
Putting money in the pockets of lower wage earners is not waste and helps the economy and boosts social stability.
That depends on how the money got into their pockets, and where the money came from.
I am waiting for the person who freaks out right when the screener's hand is in their crotch, twists their body and breaks the screener's wrist. In all likelihood, that person will be arrested for assaulting a federal employee.
Former TSA screener here and I can say that I and many others do NOT enjoy screening people.
Yet you and every other TSA screener signed up for the job. At this point, there is no question about what the TSA does, so if you sign up to work for them you are signing up to grope people. Sorry, but none of you will get any sympathy from me, and my vote will only go for politicians who are working to cut the funding for TSA gropers and rid you of your job.
And you know, the backscatter imagers should not need to save or even display images of people unless the machine's AI detects something deemed suspicious or inconsistent with normal densities and patterns found
The backscatter machines do nothing to protect the public from terrorists (you know, the whole "I snuck razor blades onto an airplane" incident), and have only been installed because of a sweetheart deal. You won't find any support for those machines from me. Security theater is a pointless waste of tax dollars, and the people who had those machines installed should be brought up on corruption charges.
Either you screen everyone, or screening is pointless.
The screening is pointless anyway, if the goal is to prevent a terrorist attack. The airport screeners were found to routinely miss knives and even firearms during the screenings in the last test.
What I want to know is, what are these "repeated attempts to screen young children?" It sounds a lot like they are going to pressure parents into putting their children into the backscatter machines.
There already is: lock the door to the cockpit, and put an armed TSA officer on the plane. Everything else is just security theater and sweetheart deals with backscatter machine manufacturers.
When I was 5, my mother and I took a flight (this was long before 9/11/01). She set off the metal detector because of a pair of nail clippers, and the response was to take a stuffed animal I was carrying, and literally tear it apart.
Too bad Bitcoin will always have a demand imbalance compared to currencies that can be used to pay taxes. Over time, you should expect Bitcoin to be devalued as people are forced to sell Bitcoin to pay their taxes and settle other debts (whereas nobody is forced to buy Bitcoin).
We're all making jokes about it, because it is completely absurd. Zuckerberg is the guy who kept on telling people that there is no privacy anymore and that anyone who wants privacy must be up to no good.
now, how do we get the rest of the dumb-fucks who live in this country to see that?
Report child pornography possession en masse, in middle class communities. When the middle class sees its sons, fathers, uncles, and friends being thrown in prison and treated like the scum of the earth, things might change.
Disclaimer: The above suggestion may be illegal. Do not try this at home.
Slashdot Mirror
Or, we could spend no time screening people, and let the bomb sniffing dogs and armed agents on the planes do their jobs. The TSA's procedures are only minimally effective; I understand that the most recent test showed that they missed large numbers of guns, knives, and even C4. The "dangerous people" are either going to attack the checkpoint itself, or find a way around the checkpoint.
The point of the TSA screenings is beginning to look pretty clear: they wanted to convince the American public to give up their personal information voluntarily, by giving them a choice between an X-ray/groping or voluntarily abandoning privacy rights.
Note that people who opt for the "trusted traveller" program are going to be subject to exactly the same security measures that we had in airports immediately after the 2001 attacks. The only difference is that now the government gets to access personal details that they were prohibited from accessing before. The best way to avoid constitutional restrictions is to get people to voluntarily give up their rights.
Yeah, the full body scanners raised privacy concerns, so obviously the answer is to volunteer our personal information to government, in exchange for not go through the scanner.
And some people (like me) use mechanically actuated keyboards, which still click just like the ones from 30 years ago.
We don't have a progressive party. We have two conservative parties, one of which is a bit more conservative than the other. In case you have not noticed, both parties generally support strengthening law enforcement, WTO programs and globalization, stronger copyright/patent/trademark laws, the existence of a standing army, etc. Both parties are generally friendly to certain corporations, with a bit of variation (e.g. oil versus the movie industry).
Sure, within each party there are some politicians who are the extreme end, but the agendas of the two parties are largely the same.
In America, you have a choice between the party that works for one set of corporations, or the party that works for another set of corporations.
Bitcoin is not a way to avoid paying taxes, at least not in the United States. Here, you are obligated to pay taxes on barter (which is what a Bitcoin sale amounts to), and failing to do so would be considered tax evasion. Those taxes you are required to pay can only legally be paid in USD, so you can't really avoid anything -- even if you use Bitcoin for all your day-to-day expenses, you would still need to get dollars at some point, or face property seizure and imprisonment.
Yes, you could lie and pretend to have no used Bitcoin at all. People lie on their taxes all the time. People also get caught in audits, and if they lie on their taxes they get in a lot of trouble. Good luck convincing the IRS that you bought your house for $1.
Finally, a lot of businesses take out loans as part of their normal operation (small, medium, and large businesses all do this). Those businesses must repay their loans, and in the United States (and many other countries) that is generally going to require government issued currency. Although a bank could conceivably issue a Bitcoin loan, it would be a monumentally stupid thing to do (Bitcoin has high volatility and has undergone significant deflation, both of which make loans very risky), and the banks are not doing it. Consequently, those businesses must find government issued currency, and even if they accept Bitcoin as payment they will be forced to sell those Bitcoins for another currency, creating even more of an imbalance in demand.
I just don't see the big deal. Yes, it's invasive, and not quite constitutional.
That is what makes it a big deal. The constitution is the only thing that stands between America and outright tyranny. If you don't think your constitutional rights are a big deal, why don't you spend some time in a country where you don't get those rights?
But I prefer my plane to be bomb-free.
The TSA screenings have nothing to do with keeping you safe from bombs. The bomb sniffing dogs are what keep you safe from bombs.
That being said, it's time for the powers that be to come up with a new idea.
Believe it or not, the government already came up with methods of combating terrorism. The TSA's security theater is nothing but corruption, sweetheart deals, and a general attempt to make and end-run around the constitution by claiming that there is an imminent terrorist threat.
And I live four miles from NYC so don't go talking up the 9/11 bullshit.
What is this some kind of a contest? I was in a building on Chambers street on 9/11/01, so don't even try it.
I don't see it as a dollar not spent protecting Americans from terrorists, I see it as a dollar spent from protecting Americans from poverty and joblessness,
Then the money should be put toward something useful, something which actually increases the wealth of our nation rather than mindless security theater. Why not spend the money on expanding our high speed rail infrastructure? Why not spend the money on scientific research? Why not spend the money on schools? Every dollar paid to the TSA screeners is a dollar that could have been spent on any of the above.
The TSA is a money sink. People are being paid to accomplish nothing, undermine the rights of the citizens, and generally hassle people. It is a waste because that money, time, and effort could have been used for things that improve our country, rather than on security theater.
please tell me there is a better source for this story than boingboing?
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/11/tsa-investigating-passenger/
Pretty sure they would not have fined a calm lady with two kids who refused the pat-down and x-ray machine.
You give them more credit than I would.
I signed up because I was under-employed and needed the work and money. It was only slightly better than working for Supershuttle.
Sounds like you had other options, so why would you say this:
can you honestly say if you had no better options that you would rather starve than serve as a TSA screener?
Let me guess: your other options were beneath you?
So long as people are allowed onto planes, security will always be compromised.
I don't doubt it. What I do doubt is that the TSA screening policy makes it any more difficult for people to attack a plane. The backscatter machines were installed as part of a sweetheart deal, and the screeners are being told to grope people to pressure the public into stepping into those machines and justifying more widespread deployment. The TSA gets away with this because air travel is something a number of people need to do -- travelling across oceans by boat is not really a possibility for the majority of people. People who work for the TSA are working to further that manipulative agenda, so why should I feel sorry for them?
And in the case of tax dollars, we are talking about how contributions of the people (certainly not so much "corporate entities") contribute to the government interests which are supposed to be in serving the people.
In this case, those tax dollars are not serving the people, they are being handed over to a corporation that is well connected in Washington, DC. The TSA employees who are paid to operate those machines are not keeping anyone safe. The TSA employees who are being paid to grope people are not only not keeping anyone safe, they are actively undermining the rights of travellers.
We know how to keep planes safe from hijackers: lock the cockpit doors, and put armed government agents on planes. Well organized attacks are not going to be thwarted by airport "security," they are thwarted by the efforts of the intelligence community. The CIA and the FBI are in a position to do far more to thwart terrorist attacks than the TSA has ever been.
So when I see "tax dollars wasted" to pay actual people, I can't see it as waste.
Sounds like the broken window fallacy to me:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_window_fallacy
Every dollar spent on security theater is a dollar not being spent on actually protecting Americans from terrorists. If every TSA screener were fired, and those tax dollars were spent on intelligence analysts, there would be a net gain in terms of national security. Even if every TSA screener were fired and the tax dollars were used to pay off the national debt we would be better off. "Wasted tax dollars" refers to uses of tax money that does not help the people, and may even be detrimental to the people, which is the situation we face with the security screenings.
when I see "tax dollars wasted" on huge profit industries where only a few really get the benefits of the trillions spent each year, that's what I see as waste
So kind of like the way we spent all that money on the backscatter machines, as part of that sweetheart deal? Well I cannot disagree with you on that one.
Putting money in the pockets of lower wage earners is not waste and helps the economy and boosts social stability.
That depends on how the money got into their pockets, and where the money came from.
If she had calmly stood her ground the worst that would have happened would be refusal to board the plane. Instead, she went all trailer park on them.
http://boingboing.net/2010/11/13/man-at-san-diego-air.html
I am waiting for the person who freaks out right when the screener's hand is in their crotch, twists their body and breaks the screener's wrist. In all likelihood, that person will be arrested for assaulting a federal employee.
Former TSA screener here and I can say that I and many others do NOT enjoy screening people.
Yet you and every other TSA screener signed up for the job. At this point, there is no question about what the TSA does, so if you sign up to work for them you are signing up to grope people. Sorry, but none of you will get any sympathy from me, and my vote will only go for politicians who are working to cut the funding for TSA gropers and rid you of your job.
And you know, the backscatter imagers should not need to save or even display images of people unless the machine's AI detects something deemed suspicious or inconsistent with normal densities and patterns found
The backscatter machines do nothing to protect the public from terrorists (you know, the whole "I snuck razor blades onto an airplane" incident), and have only been installed because of a sweetheart deal. You won't find any support for those machines from me. Security theater is a pointless waste of tax dollars, and the people who had those machines installed should be brought up on corruption charges.
Either you screen everyone, or screening is pointless.
The screening is pointless anyway, if the goal is to prevent a terrorist attack. The airport screeners were found to routinely miss knives and even firearms during the screenings in the last test.
What I want to know is, what are these "repeated attempts to screen young children?" It sounds a lot like they are going to pressure parents into putting their children into the backscatter machines.
There has to be a better way of handling this.
There already is: lock the door to the cockpit, and put an armed TSA officer on the plane. Everything else is just security theater and sweetheart deals with backscatter machine manufacturers.
When I was 5, my mother and I took a flight (this was long before 9/11/01). She set off the metal detector because of a pair of nail clippers, and the response was to take a stuffed animal I was carrying, and literally tear it apart.
the currency should become more valuable as it goes on.
That is a bad thing. Deflation has very destructive effects on an economy.
Too bad Bitcoin will always have a demand imbalance compared to currencies that can be used to pay taxes. Over time, you should expect Bitcoin to be devalued as people are forced to sell Bitcoin to pay their taxes and settle other debts (whereas nobody is forced to buy Bitcoin).
Apple allows other app stores? The world really will end in October!
mandatory *Anonymous counseling
Except that the US government is prohibited from requiring any citizen, even a criminal, from engaging in religious activity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholics_Anonymous#United_States_Court_rulings
Not that it really matters, given the exceptionally poor success rate of 12 step programs.
We're all making jokes about it, because it is completely absurd. Zuckerberg is the guy who kept on telling people that there is no privacy anymore and that anyone who wants privacy must be up to no good.
now, how do we get the rest of the dumb-fucks who live in this country to see that?
Report child pornography possession en masse, in middle class communities. When the middle class sees its sons, fathers, uncles, and friends being thrown in prison and treated like the scum of the earth, things might change.
Disclaimer: The above suggestion may be illegal. Do not try this at home.
going after the collectors as well makes sense because a pedo in jail can't molest a kid.
Much like throwing a knife collector in jail, as a knife owner in jail cannot stab someone to death.