"Magic" technologies like this usually under-deliver, or do not help at all. In particular, a detection rate of 100% is simply impossible, already from purely theoretical observations and even more so in practice.
MS is adding actually useful standard tools (well, standard outside of the MS isle of incompatibility) to windows! Good. That means we are at a stage where they cannot ignore what works anymore. As usual for MS decades late, but better late than never.
Been without TV for more than a decade now and have zero regrets. More time to waste on things that are actually fun. TV has gotten so bad, the only thing it does for me is getting my blood-pressure up on the rare occasions I am exposed to it.
... has native security problems
Would not surprise me at all if this had (again) no security against intruders in it, just as FireWire. Of course security against evil copyright terrorists will be present...
Actually, it is not clear whether this does work at all with a regular USB-C cable. At least 40Gbps needs special active Thunderbolt cables, which I guess will not work as USB cables. For 20Gbps, the article is unclear. Talk about the worst design choice possible....
You seem to be unaware that 10GbE has completely different length specifications than Thunderbolt as it is aimed at a different task.
Indeed. And from the article I take that at least 40Gbps needs special cables in addition. Not sure about 20Gbps TB, the article is not clear on that.
The absolute worst design you can have is different, incompatible cables with the same connector. That will confuse not only ordinary users.
Seriously, what use is having UBS-C connectors work, but normal USB-C cables not, or at least they only deliver 20Gbps (the article is not clear on that, it may be that no USB-C cable works...).
Bullshit. The chances are basically the same today as back then. There are just not many people that are willing to really try something like this.
Complete and utter bullshit. Terrorism is not a crime of opportunity. Terrorism happens when somebody is indoctrinated enough or pissed off enough to "do something about it". That happens so rarely that it is not a safety or security concern. When it happens, it cannot be stopped either. We now have several examples of terrorist attacks from people that already were (!) under surveillance.
Due to its rarity, terrorism cannot be prevented. However, due to its rarity, terrorism is not actually a problem. What is a problem is that those in power use the "terrorism"-meme to establish laws and measures that have an entirely different purpose, namely keeping the population in check against the day when it finds out how it has been screwed over by them.
A prime target, incidentally, for the next air-travel related attack is the waiting lines before the "security" checkpoints.
Anybody that has the least bit of understanding on how to evaluate real risks is not afraid of terrorists at all. All the things done to "fight terrorists" are a source of grave concern though, as they are a real and serious threat to everybody.
Dogs have no useful context awareness for the problem at hand. The problem is that you cannot distinguish somebody that fertilized their plants on the morning from somebody that has handled explosives by residue. It just does not work and hence sniffers are a problem at sensitivity settings where they do not yet detect explosives reliably. That is the reason they are not used at airports anymore.
Sniffers have an entirely different problem: If they are too sensitive, they will trigger on a lot of people, as common fertilizer is a pretty potent explosive and many people handle that. Hence sniffers have basically been abandoned, as they do not work in practice.
That is fascinatingly uninformed. Of course these tests are done with stuff that looks very much the same on the sensors available.