|
How well do the airport body scanners work?
Body scanners can store, send images, group says – amFIX - CNN.com Blogs
I am trying to figure this out. Is the TSA using software to cripple/change the image, or are the cameras themselves not good enough? (x-ray naked woman, possibly NSFW) Revealing Airport Security Scanner Coming [Pic] | I Am Bored Is this a fake, or can this be done in post processing? Or, is their claim correct and this is what the TSA actually sees, but are lying to the public showing off the blurry overexposed images? The truth about airport body scanners I know that the UK isn't allowing kids to be imaged, which makes sense if the images are really detailed. Or is one type more detailed than the other version? I know that 10 years ago, the Sony nightshot camera with a simple IR filter & light could see through clothes. With the advances in cameras and medical imaging, it seems possible. I'm not too concerned about getting scanned, but I think these will create more problems than they solve. Are you concerned, or would you not want to have your spouse or kids be imaged? |
The illusion of security paved the way for the illusion of being clothed. We live in a very funny world.
It's incredibly stupid, but I'll still fly. I dare them not to stare. |
Being all private is silly anyways. I welcome things like this. I'm not big on walking around naked, as that's just how I was raised, but intellectually I see the silliness in being like that. Hopefully technological necessities will bring us around, or help to start us off.
|
As much as I don't think the TSA is effective, I can't get in a tizzy about this. Will the security staff be ogling the pictures of naked people? No. They'll be desensitized by the constant stream of images in training sessions before they even start working on real people. "Pens, watch... next! Wallet, coins, belt... next!"
|
Quote:
IMO, explosive detecting dogs would be much cheaper and more effective. |
My plan for these scanners to watch a short porno on my laptop immediately prior to going through the scanner... if they want to see me naked, they might as well be impressed by a full size boner.
Mind you, they may object to the earplugs I'll need to avoid hearing the hoots of laughter & derision, but I'll deal with that if they complain about them. |
Quote:
Quote:
* - only thin clothes made of certain fabrics, in very specific lighting conditions, and almost any point&shoot digital camera can do this with a proper filter |
They work very well, and a simple photo shop will show your naked body in full color. My concerns with them are they produce a lot of radiation which could increase cancer risks and the inherent privacy violations.
Quote:
---------- Post added at 12:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:42 AM ---------- Quote:
For instance if there are 4 lines to walk through for metal detection and carry on screening there is one or 2 of these scanners. You go through the metal detector and then the TSA agent points for you to go get your belongings or walk through the additional full body scanner. |
The Shah Rukh story was very clearly a joke when he told it. Then a LaRouchite completely misinterpreted the joke. That website was then posted to reddit and more people failed to bother to watch the actual interview and realize it was a joke. Since real journalism doesn't exist anymore, some idiot read the story on reddit and wrote his own version for a newswire, and that brings us to where we are now.
I hate the idea of these body scanners, but the debate isn't helped by misinformation. |
Quote:
|
I don't really see what the problem is. So you're one of a hundred thousand naked people that a security monitor in an isolated room sees that day. You won't be remembered, and its not like the scan results are visible to anyone else.
|
Quote:
|
I don't see how it could be any more intrusive than being wanded while in a skirt and having them wand between your legs... I've had it done on more than one occiasion. While they don't touch, they are so close to your body that your personal space 'alarms' are going off. Passing through a scanner that doesn't show the color of your skin, or hair, or eyes is less personal. Also, I've taken the tests to work for the TSA and seen the kind of scanner pictures they see, there are so many going by so fast that they aren't even looking at the shape of the item being scanned, they're looking for items inside the shape. Half the time you couldn't remember what kind of bag or suitcase you were seeing but you could only tell what items were IN that case. I see the whole body scanners as less intrusive than other means of searches.
|
I think it's a violation of people's privacy. Not everyone wants to be shown naked. It's our right as humans to have a right to give permission on who sees our own bodies. If someone is going to harm, I can't see how this will help. Will all terrorism happening inside America, we have a more serious threat than this.
Why aren't there any security scanners (the traditional ones) in any malls, schools, etc? I've seen safer countries than ours have them in all public places. We have enough violence inside our country, and they should address those issues first. |
Quote:
|
If someone wants to look at my scrawny ass, they can damned well pay for the privilege. I think I'll walk...or drive...or ride a horse...or swim. If I have to fly internationally, I will walk/drive/ride/swim to an airport in a civilized country where they don't subsidize every paedophile and peeping-tom's favorite wet-dream, and I will land in a similar place. Whereupon I will take whatever transport will get me where I need to go.
TSA already has enough of a problem with its' screeners sexually assaulting and molesting people, and they -still- keep missing shoebox-sized machinepistols, blocks of explosives, knives, garrottes, etc...on their "inspections" every year. All this technology serves to do is reward their incompetence and perversity with free porn from the kind of frightened, cowed, violated victim that every rapist likes best. |
I want to start a porn business that gets airport footage of super hot barely legal women off to cancun or something for spring break, and then use youporn as an advertising medium.
OOH OOH!! SUper hot business woman! The type of chick you NEVER get to see naked! THANK YOU TSA, and Barry! |
Quote:
With ELF radiation, a lot depends on intensity and frequency. Unfortunately, one of the particularly frequencies that has been shown to be bio-active is around 60 Hz... the frequency of AC electricity in North America. A known effect of 60 Hz ELF radiation is an increase in vacuole occurrence in cells. While not carcinogenic, it is an effect. There may be others. Suspected links to Parkinson's disease and other degenerative neurological disorders have never been proven, nor conclusively dis-proven, which is of course much harder to do. With that in mind, airport scanners may (probably don't) have some as yet undocumented effects, which may result in problems later on. |
OK, I have to withdraw my previous statement of "the workers won't care".
Quote:
|
Sorry if I'm not surprised. I expect to see more stories like that as these scanners are more widely implement. Maybe in the US we can ensure these are always no more than an option, but in camera-obsessed Britain and other countries I don't expect them to go away. Anyone who thinks this is no worse than the standard pat-down has some terrific blinders on.
Rapiscan (pronounced like rapid, but I like to say rapey) is certainly one of the more unambiguous product names I've seen in recent years. |
Quote:
Now, I am wondering how likely this will be able to stop a person who knows what they are doing. Yet, it will make millions of people go through these things. Possibly even multiple times on a single flight (international terminals are often seperate from domestic). The big question is will the media actually monitor this situation and report on things truthfully? And I would think that the software could automatically black out the head unless there was something there. |
Quote:
|
For Airport Security, Size Matters - May 6, 2010
Quote:
|
yeah i read this article this morning and asked myself the same question. It was only a matter of time before this was abused.
One assaulted person is better than a downed plane...but what we need is checks on people doing the checking. i wonder how halx would react |
I think that celebrities are probably the most at risk for image retention. I agree that virtually everyone will go through it without a big deal. However, the first time Salma Hayek goes first class, I guarantee that one is getting copied to the thumb drive. That, and anyone who is statistically outside the norm.
All of this "security" is reactionary smoke and mirrors. It doesn't really address the issues, it's just there to make people feel okay about spending money on air travel. |
Well well well....turns out all those images -have- been going into some jackasses "spank bank" for some time now!
>>"Oh, there's nothing to worry about, these machines don't show any kind of deatils..."<< Except, of course, that they -do-. >>"Oh, there's nothing to worry about, nobody's gonna be storing these images, you're there and gone."<< Except, of course, that they -do- store those images. Feds admit storing checkpoint body scan images | Privacy Inc. - CNET News Quote:
|
...did you just refer to a federal law enforcement info mining op / database as a "spank bank?" I can dig it.
Quote:
One of my biggest issues with airline security is that it's high enough and already played out. The government is desperately clinging to it to have some type of perpetual success story ("Look! We foiled attacks!") while they turn a blind eye to where the next suckerpunch is coming from in the future. All this focus on airline security is a little like a gladiator ditching all his armor except for his fancy titanium elbow pads. Sorry for the masturbatory threadjack. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy ... |
I had to pass through a full body scanner on my way back to the US recently. Due to unusual circumstances I was able to sit around for a few minutes and look at the screen afterwards....I looked Dead Sexy. I know because not only could I see everything, my 'picture' stayed on the screen until the next person went through. I feel sorry for anyone who travels wearing Tighty Whities.
I don't think these scanners really add an element of security. Sure, you *may* catch a guy with a box cutter, but that isn't going to work again now that the passengers on the plane know what will happen if they don't fight. There are too many easier ways to conceal/obtain weapons on a plane for that sort of feel-good check to really make a difference. If you really wanted to take away any chance of having a plane blown up the solution is simple and cheap: Dogs. You have sniffy-dogs check every single person and every single piece of gear prior to it being loaded. If they don't have any explosives or any large metal objects (read guns) then no other security checks really matter. Osama Bin Laden could fly Southwest with evil intent and he would not be able to do anything. No ID checks, Security Pat-Downs, Backscatter X-rays, etc. necessary. |
I'm still of the mindset that these "checkpoints" create more of a risk than they subvert.
I mean yeah you can stick a bunch of people on a plane, plane gets jacked, people don't man up and take it back, everyone dies, whatever. How many people stand in line at these checkpoints before the flight? for how many flights? I mean if like 2 or 3 planes are boarding at the same time and they're all herding through this common lobby, seems like it'd be easier for any "terrorist" style attack to just be carried out right in the freaking lobby. Suitcase bomb set to go off right there while it's being scanned? Body strapped with C4 set off with a button push right as they step in to the scanner? how would that be for irony? I'm sure the casualty count be it in the double digits or triple digits would be no less devastating. To me, that difference isn't really worth the hassle of these scans and the privacy/safety concerns. Statistically speaking, hijackings are ridiculously rare. It's just seriously not worth the amount of money that these stupid federal agencies are pouring in to it and the amount of privacy people are sacrificing, as well as the increased amount of restrictions on what you can bring with you, and the increased amount of time to get boarded. |
flyingpasties.com
Someone has had the business sense to capitalize on this. Now, when will the sex toy industry market their products for guys to put down their pants when they go through these scanners? |
Shauk:
If you figure that due to the Shoe Bomber each airline passenger wastes about 30 seconds of their time taking their shoes off, getting them scanned, and putting them back on (conservative estimate, IMHO) then you get an interesting number: With approximately 2 million people boarding planes each day across the continental united states you can run the math at 30 seconds per person: The result is that Eric Reid and the resulting knee jerk reaction costs approximately 694 YEARS worth of wasted time, each year. Basically, the Shoebomber and the extra security measures waste approximately 8 lifetimes each year. So in ten years the TSA will have 'taxed' approximately 80 lifetimes from the flying public in order to prevent a low-probability-of-success attack which could be prevented more easily with a dog. This sort of sacrifice is only worth it if it washes out to be less costly than the anticipated risk * anticipated cost in lives. In this case I doubt you can even come close to justifying it. Even if the shoebomber was competent and had that amount of military grade explosive, and had a sufficient initiation system, and didn't get his ass kicked trying to assemble it, it would still be very difficult to crash a plane with it. The most such an attack would probably cause is a small hole in the exterior of the plane (not really a big deal) with a few injured people. Contrary to hollywood, a small amount of explosives will only cause a *surprise* small explosion, planes are pretty tough, a hole in the side won't hurt anybody provided they can figure out how to put on an O2 mask, and passenger seats are not typically placed in direct contact with crucial parts. On of the fundamental goals of terrorism is to cause a disproportionate response. By setting up a sucker to simply attempt to conduct an attack with no hope of success a terrorist network can save on resources (and competent people) while causing the US to spend Billions of dollars in order to prevent each one. We need to have enough spine to stand up and say: "We are still more likely to be struck by lightning than die in a terrorist attack, basic security is security enough statistically so no need to bankrupt the country in order to provide the illusion of security." |
Quote:
|
so now that people were starting to refuse the full scanner, TSA has implemented a 'enhanced pat down' process, which seems designed to completely embarrass said refuser. how do you all feel about giving up your rights, privacy, and dignity for a feel safe measure?
|
For those who aren't aware of what dksuddeth is talking about...
For the First Time, the TSA Meets Resistance - Jeffrey Goldberg - National - The Atlantic 'Are Any Parts of Your Body Sore?' Asks the Man From TSA - Jeffrey Goldberg - National - The Atlantic |
I always ask for the pat down. Not a big fan of having some machine blast god knows what through my body multiple times a year. As for being embarrassed, meh. Some stranger wants to cup my balls I suggest doing it lightly as my uncontrolled reaction might be to quickly connect my knee with his nut sack.
---------- Post added at 12:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:34 PM ---------- Quote:
|
Quote:
if we have to get naked in front of everybody for the sake of "security," can we at least get over our puritanical stance on nudity in the process? |
I think the next I fly I'm going to pop a couple Viagra, put on a really tight pair of briefs and just go trough the scanner. If I end up at the pat down I'll just tell the guy I was really excited about getting felt up by a stranger and wink.
|
Why settle for that when you could wear a kilt?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:20 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project