Awww man, I thought this was going to be about that sorority that just kicked out all their uggo/fatty/darkie members and then tried to claim that they weren't discriminating. That would have been way more fun :P
Awww man, I thought this was going to be about that sorority that just kicked out all their uggo/fatty/darkie members and then tried to claim that they weren't discriminating. That would have been way more fun :P
It isn't about that and yet I don't see you making a new thread for it. This isn't some type of democracy. We don't need to vote on the issue. MAKE A THREAD DAMNIT!
I personally don't care if some security guard is looking at my man-meat.
All I'm concerned about is radiation.
If its safe and makes getting on a plane faster and safer, then I say go for it. I don't personally think they will be able to get these into airports without a fight without another 911 however, as people are generally a bashful bunch.
I personally don't care if some security guard is looking at my man-meat.
All I'm concerned about is radiation.
If its safe and makes getting on a plane faster and safer, then I say go for it. I don't personally think they will be able to get these into airports without a fight without another 911 however, as people are generally a bashful bunch.
The technology is based on terahertz radition, which straddles the boundary between microwaves and visible light, so it's non-ionizing but is reflected by human tissue after a few layers.
I personally don't care if some security guard is looking at my man-meat.
All I'm concerned about is radiation.
If its safe and makes getting on a plane faster and safer, then I say go for it. I don't personally think they will be able to get these into airports without a fight without another 911 however, as people are generally a bashful bunch.
The technology is based on terahertz radition, which straddles the boundary between microwaves and visible light, so it's non-ionizing but is reflected by human tissue after a few layers.
The TSA site says:
Backscatter Facts
Backscatter scans a narrow, low energy ionizing x-ray beam over the body surface.
Each full body scan produces less than 10 microREM of emission. This is equivalent to the exposure each person receives in about two minutes of airplane flight at altitude or each person receives every 15 minutes from naturally occurring background radiation.
Passengers will participate in the pilot on a voluntary basis, as an alternative to a pat-down.
Awww man, I thought this was going to be about that sorority that just kicked out all their uggo/fatty/darkie members and then tried to claim that they weren't discriminating. That would have been way more fun :P
got a link for that article? I missed that one.
ALocksly on
Yes,... yes, I agree. It's totally unfair that sober you gets into trouble for things that drunk you did.
I so don't care about this. As a culture we're too hung up on nudity in the first place.
I know when I was in Europe they had photo galleries with full out nudity in the front windows and whatnot. If that was ever over here, we would have people complaining, saying its destroying the minds of the youth blah blah blah.
These people need to be introduced to the internet.
Awww man, I thought this was going to be about that sorority that just kicked out all their uggo/fatty/darkie members and then tried to claim that they weren't discriminating. That would have been way more fun :P
I so don't care about this. As a culture we're too hung up on nudity in the first place.
I know when I was in Europe they had photo galleries with full out nudity in the front windows and whatnot. If that was ever over here, we would have people complaining, saying its destroying the minds of the youth blah blah blah.
These people need to be introduced to the internet.
They were. That's how we ended up with Conservapedia.
I personally don't care if some security guard is looking at my man-meat.
All I'm concerned about is radiation.
If its safe and makes getting on a plane faster and safer, then I say go for it. I don't personally think they will be able to get these into airports without a fight without another 911 however, as people are generally a bashful bunch.
The technology is based on terahertz radition, which straddles the boundary between microwaves and visible light, so it's non-ionizing but is reflected by human tissue after a few layers.
The TSA site says:
Backscatter Facts
Backscatter scans a narrow, low energy ionizing x-ray beam over the body surface.
Each full body scan produces less than 10 microREM of emission. This is equivalent to the exposure each person receives in about two minutes of airplane flight at altitude or each person receives every 15 minutes from naturally occurring background radiation.
Passengers will participate in the pilot on a voluntary basis, as an alternative to a pat-down.
Huh. That's weird, because I distinctly remember reading about technology like this which was based on T-waves, with roughly the same concerns about seeing through clothing.
EDIT: This article talks partially about using T-waves to do the same thing.
I find it weird that people are hung up on this as a sexual issue when its primarily potentially a problem (lol alliteration) because of power issues that at best may be tangentially sexual. It weirds me out that I have to even virtually strip to catch a plane, and I'd be more concerned about security personnel or other passengers being assholes in a non-sexual fashion in this situation. It strikes me as oh so very retarded that the security measures around planes are so out of hand despite the fact that the cast, vast majority of terrorist incidents are carried out using ground vehicles.
1) Scans of celebs WILL end up on the Intarwebz. Some or all of them may be fake, but they will be there nonetheless.
2) I will invent a high-density cream of some sort, with which I will write "check out my cock" right on my fat tummy, with an arrow pointing down.
P.S. When I was in high school I worked in the mail room for a health insurance company, opening claims mail. Women wanting insurance to pay for breast reduction surgery had to send in a picture of themselves topless to prove that their breasts were so massive that surgery was necessary. I shit you not. Good times.
Hmm... Pat down or back scatter, I'm still working up some lumber before hand.
I'm pretty sure they can see under underwear, it is just with all that stuff mushing you junk together, there isn't a whole lot of resolution.
Freeballing with loose fitting clothing, which is pretty much how I dress to travel, should allow for a fair bit of contrast.
And because it does not penetrate skin, a trip through a metal detector would still be required, to prevent folks from bringing on implanted boobie bombs or an ass cannon.
It's retarded. Making people take off their shoes is retarded. Not letting people take liquids on planes is retarded. Having to check in 2 hours before your flight leaves is retarded. I hate airplanes, and flying and airports, but you can't take a train to europe, or really to anywhere in america, so I of course still use them to travel. The security is still crummy, and if terrorist were determined blow up planes, they could just shoot them down. They don't really do the hostage thing so much anymore. and there is plenty of protection.
This shit is overkill. The scanner thing might be a little more fair and faster, so I guess that is good. From a security standpoint, I don't feel any impact because I am not afraid to fly, I just hate the whole fucking process.
1) Scans of celebs WILL end up on the Intarwebz. Some or all of them may be fake, but they will be there nonetheless.
Any celebrity who even a modest percentage of the internet population might conceivably want to get a look at in scans like this, have already done showier spreads for mainstream magazines, or worn revealing outfits to the Oscars.
What will happen is a few of these fashion magazines and photographers will get the idea all at once to do pictorials shot or shopped to look like these scans.
Oh, and this beats the hell out of being felt up by some airport security staff.
I find it weird that people are hung up on this as a sexual issue when its primarily potentially a problem (lol alliteration) because of power issues that at best may be tangentially sexual. It weirds me out that I have to even virtually strip to catch a plane, and I'd be more concerned about security personnel or other passengers being assholes in a non-sexual fashion in this situation. It strikes me as oh so very retarded that the security measures around planes are so out of hand despite the fact that the cast, vast majority of terrorist incidents are carried out using ground vehicles.
Yeah, this is what I mean. Oppose it as a privacy issue. Oppose it because it's cost may far outweigh any threats it could stop. Oppose it because it's a panacea.
But don't give me this dongs are oh no dirty and someone might see how shameful your body is stuff. If you don't like something, at least have a grown-up reason for it.
Also, I give it about eight months before a story breaks of self-conscious men popping Viagra before a flight and being subjected to blinding agony or even injury during the after-takeoff climb to altitude.
Also, I give it about eight months before a story breaks of self-conscious men popping Viagra before a flight and being subjected to blinding agony or even injury during the after-takeoff climb to altitude.
having a boner at altitude causes agony?
ALocksly on
Yes,... yes, I agree. It's totally unfair that sober you gets into trouble for things that drunk you did.
Also, I give it about eight months before a story breaks of self-conscious men popping Viagra before a flight and being subjected to blinding agony or even injury during the after-takeoff climb to altitude.
on the bright side then, we're giving natural selection new ways to root out idiots :P
Now they just won't ever travel and the inbreeding will be insane.
--
Also: Despite my habit of going to the airport in a leather trench coat, and overall looking like "Trench Coat Mafia", they never pat me down. Hrmph.
--
This will do absolutely nothing to the ability of someone to take a soda can (twist in half for two fricking sharp blades with comfort grip) or a SOBE bottle (Hard as hell, and if it breaks, even better!), or the like.
I find it weird that people are hung up on this as a sexual issue when its primarily potentially a problem (lol alliteration) because of power issues that at best may be tangentially sexual.
Will it make it less likely that I'll be patted down?
I'd rather have a stranger looking at my ass in a blurry monochromatic picture than have a stranger grabbing it.
In any case, I oppose this because I'm not convinced that throwing additional resources to screening passengers makes us any safer. It's just like the man says, throwing money at the last high-profile security hole does not prevent the next security hole.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
I did security at the '02 Olympics in Salt Lake and I had a woman complain that I had "wanded her to closely" with the metal detector wand (you know, the one that doesen't need to actually touch the person)
This was made more amusing by the fact that we were both dressed appropriately for the nine- degree weather, (large, bulky parkas, heavy gloves etc)
ALocksly on
Yes,... yes, I agree. It's totally unfair that sober you gets into trouble for things that drunk you did.
This isn't going to patch up security holes in any major way. As long as something like random liquids are considered threatening, ones entire chest cavity may be subject to suspicion.
That's really not even the point. I think the mentality is that they don't have to work, they just have to look like they do, and anybody keen on making themselves explode will be too chicken to attempt it.
I so don't care about this. As a culture we're too hung up on nudity in the first place.
I know when I was in Europe they had photo galleries with full out nudity in the front windows and whatnot. If that was ever over here, we would have people complaining, saying its destroying the minds of the youth blah blah blah.
These people need to be introduced to the internet.
"Nudity is destroying our children!"
"Here, have some internet. That should fix your problem."
Are there any regular pictures of the person being scanned? As in, is there a comparative picture showing the average person and then how they look scanned? It would be interesting to see how different the person looks under the scanner.
We already submit to mammograms, pap smears, testicular exams, and, *shudder,* prostate exams.
I couldn't care less if someone in the next terminal saw me naked, even if it were a crystal clear picture, so long as there was nothing they could do with it aside from aesthetically appreciate my young, supple body. Furthermore, I'm not exactly happy with the prospect of someone else's modesty getting in the way of my safety. Yeah it's icky--get over it.
There is a clear difference between a personal acceptance of a trained professional going over your junk for personal and requested health reasons rather than an unknown and untrained person in an "implied"[and i use this loosly because most people wont ever know] assent to what amounts to a nudie picture.
Violating someones modesty is not something to take lightly. If this were a random guy on the street they would go to jail for said actions[as opposed to just looked at funny if they had a metal detector]. I am not sure why we you are legitimising such actions.
Also, I give it about eight months before a story breaks of self-conscious men popping Viagra before a flight and being subjected to blinding agony or even injury during the after-takeoff climb to altitude.
having a boner at altitude causes agony?
Could if you get the boner first. But cabins are pressurized and so any unwanted expansion is probably not going to happen.
I kind of agree that its a little odd thinking of this as a "sexual issue". However titilating it may seem - I think people are vastly underestimationg how "over it" security staff would be after a week. I think that you would get so bored of pasty white 3d images, that if you seriously think a secirity guard is perving at you - its your own issue.
For those of you that say "I dont want anyone checking me/my girlfriend/myboyfirend out" - Do you object to them seeing a doctor? Because I dont mean to scare you, but they will get to see everything in a LOT more detail.
This technology has been around for at least 7 years (and thats just when I first heard about it) - I think the question is whether its overkill or not.
We already submit to mammograms, pap smears, testicular exams, and, *shudder,* prostate exams.
I couldn't care less if someone in the next terminal saw me naked, even if it were a crystal clear picture, so long as there was nothing they could do with it aside from aesthetically appreciate my young, supple body. Furthermore, I'm not exactly happy with the prospect of someone else's modesty getting in the way of my safety. Yeah it's icky--get over it.
This does nothing to enhance your safety while flying, it only creates the illusion of added security. Of course I suppose that 'if you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear' and all that.
As far as the whole 'zomg penis!' I actually feel a lot more sympathy for the security guards than the passengers if this goes through. My cousin worked airport security at Midway and he had to deal with enough shit using regular stuff. He quit the week before the 'water might be a bomb' scare luckily, but oh the stories that his friends had. I can only imagine how much more of a pain this would create. On top of the fact that everyone in the world is not a model, but they all get to fly if they want to.
We already submit to mammograms, pap smears, testicular exams, and, *shudder,* prostate exams.
I couldn't care less if someone in the next terminal saw me naked, even if it were a crystal clear picture, so long as there was nothing they could do with it aside from aesthetically appreciate my young, supple body. Furthermore, I'm not exactly happy with the prospect of someone else's modesty getting in the way of my safety. Yeah it's icky--get over it.
This does nothing to enhance your safety while flying, it only creates the illusion of added security. Of course I suppose that 'if you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear' and all that.
As far as the whole 'zomg penis!' I actually feel a lot more sympathy for the security guards than the passengers if this goes through. My cousin worked airport security at Midway and he had to deal with enough shit using regular stuff. He quit the week before the 'water might be a bomb' scare luckily, but oh the stories that his friends had. I can only imagine how much more of a pain this would create. On top of the fact that everyone in the world is not a model, but they all get to fly if they want to.
We already submit to mammograms, pap smears, testicular exams, and, *shudder,* prostate exams.
I couldn't care less if someone in the next terminal saw me naked, even if it were a crystal clear picture, so long as there was nothing they could do with it aside from aesthetically appreciate my young, supple body. Furthermore, I'm not exactly happy with the prospect of someone else's modesty getting in the way of my safety. Yeah it's icky--get over it.
This does nothing to enhance your safety while flying, it only creates the illusion of added security. Of course I suppose that 'if you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear' and all that.
It might be faster, though. How long does it take compared to a pat-down?
We already submit to mammograms, pap smears, testicular exams, and, *shudder,* prostate exams.
I couldn't care less if someone in the next terminal saw me naked, even if it were a crystal clear picture, so long as there was nothing they could do with it aside from aesthetically appreciate my young, supple body. Furthermore, I'm not exactly happy with the prospect of someone else's modesty getting in the way of my safety. Yeah it's icky--get over it.
This does nothing to enhance your safety while flying, it only creates the illusion of added security. Of course I suppose that 'if you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear' and all that.
It might be faster, though. How long does it take compared to a pat-down?
Granted I don't fly very often, but this last year I splurged and was on a few planes with a group of friends. I don't think I saw anyone get patted down in the entirety of that trip. Even if it were a fairly common experience, would this machine be used solely to replace the conventional strip search/pat down or would it be used to replace the modern metal detector? If the former, then it is less invasive since you were pretty much fucked from the start due to a lottery or a security guard not liking you. That's a pretty big chunk of change that's essentially wasted to replace the much cheaper wanding that rarely happens. If the latter, then it's an invasion of privacy with no real beneficial aspect to it and even more expensive since you're replacing all the metal detectors.
We already submit to mammograms, pap smears, testicular exams, and, *shudder,* prostate exams.
I couldn't care less if someone in the next terminal saw me naked, even if it were a crystal clear picture, so long as there was nothing they could do with it aside from aesthetically appreciate my young, supple body. Furthermore, I'm not exactly happy with the prospect of someone else's modesty getting in the way of my safety. Yeah it's icky--get over it.
I must say it would never have occurred to me to equate a couple random airport security-guards to my personal physician. Good show.
Posts
All I'm concerned about is radiation.
If its safe and makes getting on a plane faster and safer, then I say go for it. I don't personally think they will be able to get these into airports without a fight without another 911 however, as people are generally a bashful bunch.
The only thing I DO mind is the prospect of getting a stiffy when the doctor checks for hernias
got a link for that article? I missed that one.
...
I'll take the pat-down.
I'm lonely.
And sad.
I know when I was in Europe they had photo galleries with full out nudity in the front windows and whatnot. If that was ever over here, we would have people complaining, saying its destroying the minds of the youth blah blah blah.
These people need to be introduced to the internet.
3DS: 2852-6809-9411
Huh. That's weird, because I distinctly remember reading about technology like this which was based on T-waves, with roughly the same concerns about seeing through clothing.
EDIT: This article talks partially about using T-waves to do the same thing.
1) Scans of celebs WILL end up on the Intarwebz. Some or all of them may be fake, but they will be there nonetheless.
2) I will invent a high-density cream of some sort, with which I will write "check out my cock" right on my fat tummy, with an arrow pointing down.
P.S. When I was in high school I worked in the mail room for a health insurance company, opening claims mail. Women wanting insurance to pay for breast reduction surgery had to send in a picture of themselves topless to prove that their breasts were so massive that surgery was necessary. I shit you not. Good times.
I'm pretty sure they can see under underwear, it is just with all that stuff mushing you junk together, there isn't a whole lot of resolution.
Freeballing with loose fitting clothing, which is pretty much how I dress to travel, should allow for a fair bit of contrast.
And because it does not penetrate skin, a trip through a metal detector would still be required, to prevent folks from bringing on implanted boobie bombs or an ass cannon.
It's retarded. Making people take off their shoes is retarded. Not letting people take liquids on planes is retarded. Having to check in 2 hours before your flight leaves is retarded. I hate airplanes, and flying and airports, but you can't take a train to europe, or really to anywhere in america, so I of course still use them to travel. The security is still crummy, and if terrorist were determined blow up planes, they could just shoot them down. They don't really do the hostage thing so much anymore. and there is plenty of protection.
This shit is overkill. The scanner thing might be a little more fair and faster, so I guess that is good. From a security standpoint, I don't feel any impact because I am not afraid to fly, I just hate the whole fucking process.
Any celebrity who even a modest percentage of the internet population might conceivably want to get a look at in scans like this, have already done showier spreads for mainstream magazines, or worn revealing outfits to the Oscars.
What will happen is a few of these fashion magazines and photographers will get the idea all at once to do pictorials shot or shopped to look like these scans.
Oh, and this beats the hell out of being felt up by some airport security staff.
But don't give me this dongs are oh no dirty and someone might see how shameful your body is stuff. If you don't like something, at least have a grown-up reason for it.
having a boner at altitude causes agony?
Now they just won't ever travel and the inbreeding will be insane.
--
Also: Despite my habit of going to the airport in a leather trench coat, and overall looking like "Trench Coat Mafia", they never pat me down. Hrmph.
--
This will do absolutely nothing to the ability of someone to take a soda can (twist in half for two fricking sharp blades with comfort grip) or a SOBE bottle (Hard as hell, and if it breaks, even better!), or the like.
Will it make it less likely that I'll be patted down?
I'd rather have a stranger looking at my ass in a blurry monochromatic picture than have a stranger grabbing it.
In any case, I oppose this because I'm not convinced that throwing additional resources to screening passengers makes us any safer. It's just like the man says, throwing money at the last high-profile security hole does not prevent the next security hole.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I did security at the '02 Olympics in Salt Lake and I had a woman complain that I had "wanded her to closely" with the metal detector wand (you know, the one that doesen't need to actually touch the person)
This was made more amusing by the fact that we were both dressed appropriately for the nine- degree weather, (large, bulky parkas, heavy gloves etc)
That's really not even the point. I think the mentality is that they don't have to work, they just have to look like they do, and anybody keen on making themselves explode will be too chicken to attempt it.
I mean really, this is much better than a patdown IMO.
"Here, have some internet. That should fix your problem."
*The next day*
"THE INTERNET IS DESTROYING OUR CHILDREN!!!"
There is a clear difference between a personal acceptance of a trained professional going over your junk for personal and requested health reasons rather than an unknown and untrained person in an "implied"[and i use this loosly because most people wont ever know] assent to what amounts to a nudie picture.
Violating someones modesty is not something to take lightly. If this were a random guy on the street they would go to jail for said actions[as opposed to just looked at funny if they had a metal detector]. I am not sure why we you are legitimising such actions.
Could if you get the boner first. But cabins are pressurized and so any unwanted expansion is probably not going to happen.
For those of you that say "I dont want anyone checking me/my girlfriend/myboyfirend out" - Do you object to them seeing a doctor? Because I dont mean to scare you, but they will get to see everything in a LOT more detail.
This technology has been around for at least 7 years (and thats just when I first heard about it) - I think the question is whether its overkill or not.
This does nothing to enhance your safety while flying, it only creates the illusion of added security. Of course I suppose that 'if you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear' and all that.
As far as the whole 'zomg penis!' I actually feel a lot more sympathy for the security guards than the passengers if this goes through. My cousin worked airport security at Midway and he had to deal with enough shit using regular stuff. He quit the week before the 'water might be a bomb' scare luckily, but oh the stories that his friends had. I can only imagine how much more of a pain this would create. On top of the fact that everyone in the world is not a model, but they all get to fly if they want to.
It might be faster, though. How long does it take compared to a pat-down?
Granted I don't fly very often, but this last year I splurged and was on a few planes with a group of friends. I don't think I saw anyone get patted down in the entirety of that trip. Even if it were a fairly common experience, would this machine be used solely to replace the conventional strip search/pat down or would it be used to replace the modern metal detector? If the former, then it is less invasive since you were pretty much fucked from the start due to a lottery or a security guard not liking you. That's a pretty big chunk of change that's essentially wasted to replace the much cheaper wanding that rarely happens. If the latter, then it's an invasion of privacy with no real beneficial aspect to it and even more expensive since you're replacing all the metal detectors.
I must say it would never have occurred to me to equate a couple random airport security-guards to my personal physician. Good show.