This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

GeekNights 20101115 - The Internets

24

Comments

  • It's little different than the "concerns" raised regarding irradiated food. When you add the word "radiation" to anything, people get scared.
    This is a little different. The food thing is silly, because people don't have any idea what radiation really works like. Unless particulate matter that is emitting radiation sticks to a item, you can't "catch radiation" from an item that has been irradiated. However, here we have different issue, namely, the exposure to screening X-Rays. Sure it is within medical dosage, but do you think that frequent X-Rays are good for you? It is ionizing radiation, and no matter how you look at it, it is harmful. When the hospital gives you an X-Ray or antibiotics for an ailment, it is because said treatment method does FAR LESS harm to your body than the illness. The harm is not equal to zero. Thus, in the same way that I would not take harsh medicines when I am not sick, I would rather not have an X-Ray if I am not in the hospital.
    However, what people are not talking about is the fact that you get probably that much or more radiation up there in the plane, but I digress.

    Also, the people who do not like being seen naked, get over it. I would rather be instantly naked on front of people than have to deal with the shoe shenanigans.
  • but you use trains to get as close as is efficient......
    But so few goods are delivered to any centralized place outside of major urban areas. Road trains are actually stupidly efficient. They can barrel along the freeways, individual local containers breaking off as necessary to make deliveries and rejoining the next train.

    It's prudent to make better use of existing infrastructure in the middle of the country. The diminishing returns of extending rail infrastructure beyond densely populated areas are overshadowed by the potential of our existing excellent road infrastructure.
  • Also, the people who do not like being seen naked, get over it. I would rather be instantly naked on front of people than have to deal with the shoe shenanigans.
    It's more than a little ridiculous to worry about shame due to "nudity" when everyone is going to be equally "nude." This would be true even if it were actual nudity and not silly scanner "nudity."
  • Also, the people who do not like being seen naked, get over it. I would rather be instantly naked on front of people than have to deal with the shoe shenanigans.
    Yes! If the backscatter replaced all of the other BS I have to go through, I'm 100% for it. Think Total Recall.
  • Exactly. It's like going to the bathhouse. Nobody is like "Wooooo, you are nekkid!" if everyone is naked.
  • Just cross-dress and go for the groping.
  • Yes! If the backscatter replaced all of the other BS I have to go through, I'm 100% for it. ThinkTotal Recall.
    I was thinking along the same lines. It should just show the skeleton and any possible suspicious things on a person.
  • Personally, I'd be much more inclined to use the body scanner if I could get a photo copy of the result :P
  • Israel's got it right in this regard. Look people in the eye, figure out of they're dangerous, scan their bags, and have armed guards hidden on every plane.
  • Israel's got it right in this regard. Look people in the eye, figure out of they're dangerous, scan their bags, and have armed guards hidden on every plane.
    Israel also has a highly trained work force pool from ex-IDF members. TSA agents are nothing more than barely trained unskilled workers which follow manuals and procedures.
  • ex-IDF members
    i.e.: Almost every Israeli.
  • i.e.: Almost every Israeli.
    Exactly.
  • TSA agents are nothing more than barely trained unskilled workers which follow manuals and procedures.
    So, we spend the money to train highly skilled professionals. Or we offer the jobs with good salary and benefits to all of our homecoming injured veterans. Or, use the National Guard.
  • I tell you what, if there was a national guard there in camo, I would not fuck around.
    I would be like the difference between having your bag searched by MacDonald's employees or by Elite Squad.
  • edited November 2010
    Some of the scanners are Terahertz-wave, and Los Alamos reports that radiowaves at that frequency can unzip and damage double-stranded DNA in vivo. I will be opting out unless they can tell me what form of radiation is being used by the scanner. Also, none of the scanners can detect cavity devices, and only a medical x-ray scanner could do so, so really any scanner is just a privacy-invasive joke and part of all the theater.

    A security expert on the Colbert Report brought up an excellent point. For privacy, human rights, and (with terahertz scanners) safety reasons, you need an opt-out option. But what if a person who's heterosexual tells the screener that he's gay in order to get a female screener to feel his junk? What if a little kid opts out? What makes us think that, if a cell is already in an airport (meaning they have avoided the gaze of every law enforcement agency out there), any trivial ball-fondling or body scanning isn't going to stop them from causing major havok anyway? It's a giant clusterfuck of ethical and logical problems arising from a need to keep the populace subdued and scared--Which means the terrorists win. The Senate is holding a hearing on the TSA tomorrow; I look forward to the results.
    Also, the people who do not like being seen naked, get over it. I would rather be instantly naked on front of people than have to deal with the shoe shenanigans.
    It's more than a little ridiculous to worry about shame due to "nudity" wheneveryoneis going to be equally "nude." This would be true even if it were actual nudity and not silly scanner "nudity."
    No one should need to be nude. The scanners do not work. We should march through metal detectors and have our bags screened, stay vigilant, and treat the Islamic peoples of the world better. That's all that is necessary.
    Rym, you stated that you really hope high speed rail comes to the northeast (or something similar enough), so that you wouldn't have to fly. Why do you think that similar security procedures will not be implemented at train stations? Also no train will ever, in our lifetime, go fast enough to make a long distance train ride seem reasonable when compared to a flight with a major carrier. Besides, we already have trains no one can afford to ride, and Amtrak already sucks at running them. Why should we give them more, or who should we give them to instead? And yes, I do believe "give" is the correct word for it, as any new rail system would require unprecedented usage of eminent domain. There is currently a media slant towards "high speed rail," but after all is said and done, our rails, even brand new ones, will be used for freight. The major freight companies spend a lot to maintain that slant.

    I agree that "opt-out" is a worthwhile protest, but don't fall for the high speed rail lie.
    I feel like this needs a Buzz Aldrining. Look at Europe, look at Japan. The Eurostar moves at 250 MPH from Paris to London and is one of the most popular options for that trip. The AVE in Spain has helped me personally make trips in two hours that would have taken eight by car. Luke and others can tell you how great high speed rail is. Germany's system is a fucking wonder; it's a hub of rail traffic that can connect you to almost any major city in the west or central part of the continent. We need new freight rail, but high-speed trains don't use the same gauge or track.

    Also, because of fossil fuel issues, planes really should only be used when overseas or incredibly fast travel is needed. A good deal of high speed rail in Europe is run by fission reactors, so that's negated. Plus, a train ride on a nice train at 250MPH is immensely relaxing.

    TL;DR:

    image
    Post edited by WindUpBird on
  • So, we spend the money to train highly skilled professionals. Or we offer the jobs with good salary and benefits to all of our homecoming injured veterans. Or, use the National Guard.
    [An analyst] estimated El Al's security bill at $100 million a year, which amounts to $76.92 per trip by its 1.3 million passengers. Half is paid by the Israeli government.

    By contrast, the TSA spent $4.58 billion on aviation security, or just $6.21 per trip by 737 million passengers, in fiscal 2005.
    It's just not feasible. Economy of scale rears it's ugly head.
  • It's just not feasible. Economy of scale rears it's ugly head.
    Then it's not feasible period. Our current system is a sham as it is.

    I would pay for the privilege of flying on unsecured flights.
  • I would pay for the privilege of flying on unsecured flights.
    ditto.jpg
  • I would pay for the privilege of flying on unsecured flights.
    Congratulations! You can!
  • Also, the people who do not like being seen naked, get over it. I would rather be instantly naked on front of people than have to deal with the shoe shenanigans.
    Yes! If the backscatter replaced all of the other BS I have to go through, I'm 100% for it. ThinkTotal Recall.
    If I don't have to take off my shoes I'll go for this.
  • I took flight lessons as a kid. I could afford them now, but it would seriously eat into my time for GeekNights and gaming.

    I'd also rather have someone else fly me. If I'm flying myself, it's like driving, and I lose many of the benefits. I also couldn't land at the convenient airports in most cases.
  • 1) Establish Rym, Inc.
    2) Use investor funds to buy Learjet for company, write off as business expense.
    3) ????
    4) PROFIT!
  • This is just an assumption, but I have a good feeling I'm right.

    @pokey: Stop believing every thing Adam Curry tells you.
  • @pokey: Stop believing every thing Adam Curry tells you.
    This thread is about the internets, of which you have just won over 9000.
  • Sure it is within medical dosage, but do you think that frequent X-Rays are good for you? It is ionizing radiation, and no matter how you look at it, it is harmful.
    The point is that the dosage administered by these machines is equivalent to the amount of ionizing radiation to which you are exposed in two minutes of flying. Two minutes. That's it. 40-something minutes of ordinary existence exposes you to just as much ionizing radiation.

    The FDA info that I linked to spells it out very plainly. You're exposed to ionizing radiation constantly. The amount of additional radiation to which these machines expose you is so small that it effectively does not exist.
  • edited November 2010
    I still remained concerned about the terahertz-wave machines that are deployed. When Los Alamos says it might be fucking up your genes, that's cause for alarm. I am unconcerned about backscatter and millimeter-wave, although I'll opt out anyway.

    Post edited by WindUpBird on
  • edited November 2010
    @pokey: Stop believing every thing Adam Curry tells you.
    Agreed. Adam Curry is good at three things - Media, Self promotion, and Being an absolutely clueless, terrified, crazy fucker who spends half his time jumping at shadows and screaming back at random noises, and the other half of his time telling others to do the same. He's utterly fucking delusional, and while he sometimes stumbles over a good point, he spends most of the time going "A Plus B equals ILLUMINATI HOLY SHIT THE NEW WORLD ORDER WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE"
    Post edited by Churba on
  • Agreed. Adam Curry is good at three things - Media, Self promotion, and Being an absolutely clueless, terrified, crazy fucker
    To his credit, I do keep listening to his program. Mostly because I am an advocate of listening to all sides before deciding things. But, I have relegated it to just background noise instead of active listening, which I do for things like... GeekNights. And ATW9K. And Fast Karate. And AWO. Among others.
  • Mostly because I am an advocate of listening to all sides before deciding things.
    It is good to listen to all "sides". But crackpot is not a side.
  • Mostly because I am an advocate of listening to all sides before deciding things.
    It is good to listen to all "sides". But crackpot is not a side.
    He does a heck of a lot more research than most pundits though. He may misinterpret it, but I can respect that he will often quote official documents word for word so I can interpret it myself. The show also features a lot of interesting sound bites that no news network will ever talk about.
Sign In or Register to comment.