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

GeekNights 20101115 - The Internets

MrPeriodMrPeriod
edited November 2010 in GeekNights

Tonight on GeekNights, after touching on a lame geek "IQ" test (come on Infoworld, you can do better than that), we discuss the state of airline security (what with Opting Out still being an option) in light of the success story that is Israel. and Facebook's re-implementation of ICQ (or something like that). Then, it's off to the Internet, other internets, Internet2, intranets, and the World Wide Web.

Download MP3
«134

Comments

  • lackofcheeselackofcheese
    Scott failing at infinities was funny.
  • OmnutiaOmnutia
    the success story that is Israel
    Erm..
  • AndrewAndrew
    There is really only two things that have made air travel safer. First is reinforced pilot cabin doors and the second is the fact that passengers know to fight back against any wrongdoers.
  • ErinErinErinErin
    The scary part about opting out of those full body scanners is when passengers do complain about the groping pat down, TSA goes on a power trip and frequently kicks people out of the airport or rips up their tickets. I recently read a story where a woman was handcuffed to the chair because she asked the TSA employee what they were going to do during the search. From what I've read the pat downs are much more intrusive to females which scares me even more being a female who often travels alone.
  • OmnutiaOmnutia
    edited November 2010
    False junk for women to freak out TSA mooks. Get on that, frivolous capitalism.

    And for men: Daddy two pee-pee.

    Also: Junk protectors?
    Post edited by Omnutia on
  • RymRym
    I sincerely hope every single person subjected to backscatter screenings opts out this holiday season. I hope travel and security lines are a disaster. I sadly hope that people are left frustrated and angry, vacations ruined. It's the only way to get people to care enough to possibly fix things.
  • trogdor9trogdor9
    I sincerely hope every single person subjected to backscatter screenings opts out this holiday season. I hope travel and security lines are a disaster. I sadly hope that people are left frustrated and angry, vacations ruined. It's the only way to get people to care enough to possibly fix things.
    Are you afraid that this protest will backfire, and people will get angry not at the TSA, but at the protesters for wasting their time? I support this and any protest against security theater bullshit, but I worry that there's nothing we can do.
  • RymRym
    Are you afraid that this protest will backfire, and people will get angry not at the TSA, but at the protesters for wasting their time? I support this and any protest against security theater bullshit, but I worry that there's nothing we can do.
    If we actually stop flying unless absolutely necessary. I flew a lot this past year. This coming year, I expect to fly exactly twice: to and from PAX. I will bus or drive anywhere else.
  • AndrewAndrew
    Not all of the imaging machines use the x-ray backscatter technique. A large portion use the millimeter radio wave technique, which is "much" safer. I put much in quotations, as aside from a small memo out of a university, I have yet to see any peer reviewed studies pointing either way towards the danger.
  • OmnutiaOmnutia
    Technology adapts to law quickly. Law rarely does the same. Discuss.
  • RymRym
    Technology adapts to law quickly. Law rarely does the same. Discuss.
    Law needs to be examined, stored, enacted, and updated via technology.

    All law should be written in a special legal markup language and extensible/inheritable from the federal level to the municipal. Problem solved.
  • trogdor9trogdor9
    Are you afraid that this protest will backfire, and people will get angry not at the TSA, but at the protesters for wasting their time? I support this and any protest against security theater bullshit, but I worry that there's nothing we can do.
    If we actually stop flying unless absolutely necessary. I flew a lot this past year. This coming year, I expect to fly exactly twice: to and from PAX. I will bus or drive anywhere else.
    Does the TSA care if we stop flying?
  • OmnutiaOmnutia
    All law should be written in a special legal markup language and extensible/inheritable from the federal level to the municipal. Problem solved.
    Good luck trying to implement that.
  • RymRym
    Does the TSA care if we stop flying?
    Airlines care. The airlines are already angry with the TSA. We just need them angry enough to start seriously lobbying.

    The fact that I'm suggested to show up two hours early for a three hour flight, just so that I can watch a pathetic security theater while standing in a long, insecure line, is ludicrous.
  • George PatchesGeorge Patches
    What's the big deal with these body scanners?
  • AprecheApreche
    I read somewhere that the "millimeter radio-wave" also includes x-rays, but that could have just been luddite FUD.
  • RymRym
    What's the big deal with these body scanners?
    Aside from privacy and safety concerns, it's time to take a stand. Security theater in America has come way too far. This far, no farther.
  • balderdashbalderdash
    What's the big deal with these body scanners?
    Some people are worried that they emit potentially harmful doses of radiation. This is probably untrue. Most people are worried about TSA screeners seeing them nekkid. This, given the washed-out, rather abstract images the scanners generate and the fact that the simple act of being seen naked doesn't hurt you, is stupid.

    A minority of people are concerned about the fact that the increasingly tedious, invasive security measures at US airports simply aren't effective and are put in place almost entirely on the strength of fearmongering, insider deals, and lobbying; and about the fact that the TSA seems to become more authoritarian, thuggish, and violently overreactive with each new additional measure put in place.
  • Victor FrostVictor Frost
    What's the big deal with these body scanners?
    Aside from privacy and safety concerns, it's time to take a stand. Security theater in America has come way too far. This far, no farther.
    *dons WWII uniform* This line is the final barrier. No further line shall be made. It is time to make our stand and hold steady. HOLD THE LINE!
  • TheWhaleSharkTheWhaleShark
    safety concerns
    Which are?
    Security theater in America has come way too far. This far, no farther.
    Well, I would like effective security technology in airports. This certainly seems like a more effective technology. The "theater" aspect comes from under-trained employees, but that can be remedied with additional funding to support more thorough training.

    Privacy concerns are legitimate, though. I just read that Gizmodo article where they released 100 pictures that were saved from the scanner. That's unacceptable.
  • TheWhaleSharkTheWhaleShark
    edited November 2010
    This is probably untrue.
    It is.

    EDIT: The FDA has a lot of information about this technology. You should read it.
    Post edited by TheWhaleShark on
  • George PatchesGeorge Patches
    edited November 2010
    This is probably untrue.
    It is.
    I was actually just reading the "letter of concern" and what utter crap it is.
    Some people are worried that they emit potentially harmful doses of radiation. This is probably untrue. Most people are worried about TSA screeners seeing them nekkid. This, given the washed-out, rather abstract images the scanners generate and the fact that the simple act of being seen naked doesn't hurt you, is stupid.
    I for one am tired of people hearing the word "radiation" and freaking the fuck out. You're bombarded with radiation all day everyday, some of it harmful, at lot of it not. It's part of living on planet earth.
    A minority of people are concerned about the fact that the increasingly tedious, invasive security measures at US airports simply aren't effective and are put in place almost entirely on the strength of fearmongering, insider deals, and lobbying; and about the fact that the TSA seems to become more authoritarian, thuggish, and violently overreactive with each new additional measure put in place.
    This is a very reasonable concern. But this opt out day isn't going to change this. You're just going to annoy the TSA officers working your check point and slow everything down. These hardware deals are made a much higher level, about 20 miles from me. They care not for you opt-out bullshit, they've already made their money.
    Post edited by George Patches on
  • TheWhaleSharkTheWhaleShark
    I was actually just reading the "letter of concern" and what utter crap it is.
    It's little different than the "concerns" raised regarding irradiated food. When you add the word "radiation" to anything, people get scared.

    Ignore the fact that the monitor you're looking at is pumping out more radiation than these machines emit, or that two mintues in flight exposes you to the same levels of ionizing radiation that these machines do.

    Their efficacy and use can be questioned. Their safety cannot.
  • pokeypokey
    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.
  • TheWhaleSharkTheWhaleShark
    Why should we give them more
    So they can suck less at running them?

    Part of the reason Amtrak sucks is that it's underfunded. You want to kill a government project? Under-fund it and then say "OMG TEH GUBMINT SUXORS!" It's the same problem with NASA and the FDA.

    Public transportation systems cost a lot of money to build and maintain.
  • George PatchesGeorge Patches
    There's high speed rail already between DC and NYC. A regular Amtrak train does well over 100 mph on the northeast corridor.
  • CremlianCremlian
    I agree that "opt-out" is a worthwhile protest, but don't fall for the high speed rail lie.
    High Speed rail lie?

    Your last part, about Major freight companies is completely stupid we should be supporting rail freight. This country went down the wrong road working the airplane/semi model of getting freight into the center of the country, we should have went heavily rail but instead we were stupid and the trucking companies bought up the rail lines and shut them down.... Single biggest mistake ever. We need more rail in this country be it high speed or regular.
  • RymRym
    Why do you think that similar security procedures will not be implemented at train stations?
    Because they never have. Rail isn't popular, and no one would back any policy that pushed people even further away from it. Last time I took a long-distance train or bus, no one even glanced at my bag or even asked for ID.
    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.
    If you factor in getting to the airport, airport security, baggage pickup, etc, it doesn't take much longer to drive to, say, Rochester from here than it does to fly: the door-to-door time is comparable.

    Other than rare trips and PAX Prime, I rarely leave the Northeastern Megalopolis. Trains between the major northeastern cities would definitely be faster door-to-door than flying (at least for my own travel).
    I agree that "opt-out" is a worthwhile protest, but don't fall for the high speed rail lie.
    If it happened, it's extremely viable in the Northeast. NIMBYs and vested opposing interests are the only barrier.
  • RymRym
    Your last part, about Major freight companies is completely stupid we should be supporting rail freight. This country went down the wrong road working the airplane/semi model of getting freight into the center of the country, we should have went heavily rail but instead we were stupid and the trucking companies bought up the rail lines and shut them down.... Single biggest mistake ever. We need more rail in this country be it high speed or regular.
    Actually, machine-driven truck caravans have the capability to be more efficient than trains considering our dispersed rural population.

    It would be perfectly viable to have trains in the four major population centers of the US, and robot truck caravans to the rest of the country.
  • CremlianCremlian
    Actually, machine-driven truck caravans have the capability to be more efficient than trains considering our dispersed rural population.

    It would be perfectly viable to have trains in the four major population centers of the US, and robot truck caravans to the rest of the country.
    Well obviously you use trucks to get to specific places, but you use trains to get as close as is efficient......
Sign In or Register to comment.