Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:They arent looking for terrorists (Score 1) 609

I think the issue is not that TSA isn't a private entity, it's that the search is mandated as legal so anything found during the search is admissible in court as evidence of contraband (either drugs or weapons, both are proof of illegal activity) whereas an illegal search, such as one without probable cause, is not.

Comment Re:Israel (Score 1) 681

If someone is not randomly selected for screening, they can take weapons into the airport. The US has a single point of screening, which is burdened with the "we don't profile" excuse of randomness that makes it less effective than the Israeli method of screening with behavior profiling, regardless of ethnicity or citizenship. The US is larger and has a more diverse ethnicity and citizenry of travelers, true; but Israel has a larger problem with attempts to bypass their security than the US, and their security procedures for flight safety are more effective *and* less intrusive.

I don't understand how the specifics of the Israeli security solution that has evolved to what it is today is considered to be something of no value to a US system, regardless of its roots. It also doesn't rationalize the ineffectiveness of the US system represented by these scanners and enhanced pat-downs, so the scale of a nation's size is support of taking those extra steps rather than finding fault with them just because they're not made in America.

Having everybody go thru more advanced scanners will only be possible if said scanners do not pose a greater health risk of slowly killing everyone who boards a plane (or enters an airport) than the chances of quickly killing a few who fly. I'm sure that if such a scanner existed both the Israeli and US airports would want to use them. My point is that in the US it seems that only those would be used (along with other mostly limited procedures you mention) whereas in Israel and other countries they'd be supplemental to other more efficient *and* effective measures.

This whole "we fear more because we are greater" mentality is what allows ineffective and invasive actions by the US government to evolve into degradation of civil and human rights that we are witnessing today. Yes, the scanners are in the news more than the effective screening methods; because they are humiliating and degrading to our citizenry and to people in general while at the same time being arguably ineffective, hazardous, and suspect of a hidden agenda for profit and/or limits to freedom.

Comment Re:Israel (Score 1) 681

I questioned this assertion by Sowelu:

"The reason the US doesn't have a system like Israel's is that most flights in the US are domestic."

So you are saying that US domestic flights are more international than Israeli flights (as far as ethnicity of passengers), and that the only reason their system works in Israel is because they only screen Arab-looking individuals rather than randomly picking people out of line, and those two reasons are why a system won't work in the US?

I'm speaking of the multi-layered security approach of behavior profiling as far as what I mean by "like Israeli" system, not the racial profiling you describe. We have a single point of failure called the scanner. Even with the enhanced pat-downs and nudie scanners it is possible to get a weapon or a bomb past that checkpoint because the scans and pat-downs are not applied evenly to all passengers. To do so would be even more inefficient than either the existing US system or the Israeli system. I won't address the racial tensions in Israel because I've never been in an Israeli airport. In US airports, however, I can say that there is still a measure of hostility towards people of color, not just Arab-looking people, and as you've described the white US citizens and non-citizens are not scrutinized as much (tho sometimes they are randomly screened).

Comment Re:Israel (Score 1) 681

>The reason the US doesn't have a system like Israel's is that most flights in the US are domestic.

Seriously? What then is preventing the US from implementing Israel's international flght security system as a US domestic flight security system. From an geographic standpoint, flying from California to Oregon is as much an international flight as any flight leaving Israel; so what is the difference?

Comment Re:Good, but overrated products (Score 1) 551

I was thinking of replying to a previous post about Beatles being outdated, but I'd rather not. Especially now that I see your post, which articulates the concept more clearly than merely saying, "...these are words that go together well," still applies today as much as it did when they were written and put to music.

Comment Facinating (Score 1) 313

When I clicked to read the slashdot comments for this article, the quote at the bottom of the page reads:

"I consider a new device or technology to have been culturally accepted when it has been used to commit a murder. -- M. Gallaher"

Comment Re:Who the fuck cares? (Score 1) 449

"What really is the difference between saying 'I took a dump' and 'I took a shit'? They mean exactly the same thing, but for some reason shit is a dirty word."

My (step)son completed his Freshman term last year at a private Canadian High School. For your example "dump" *is* a dirty word in that context, and if said that way he can get into as much trouble as if he had used the word "shit" (in any context). Same goes for "frig" and many other seemingly innocent words that kids are using as codewords for naughty words.

Comment Re:the study is bogus (Score 1) 336

"DSL which was close to $50 when it first came out can be had for $15 a month these days."

Lucky you. DSL is more or less the same price when it came out as it is today in my area. Sure, there's all of two providers for ISP using DSL that compete at exactly one cent per month difference, but sadly there is only one provider of the POTS landline that makes DSL possible in my home and both DSL providers require it - one of them is the same provider of the landline service, which adds to the cost of the DSL service fee even if I don't use POTS at all. I hear that if I push the issue then I can make it a "naked DSL" service line, but it still works out to more than $50/month and I have to go with just that one ISP provider.

Comment Re:Similar example (Score 1) 138

Ya, thot so. Vague memory of being told, "That's illegal," when someone burnt a bill in protest or for a magic act or something.

Thanks for not taking my mention as an argument against your stance, as I also do not speak for the US govt (tho as a citizen of the US, I can - the whole of the people thing).

Plus, I feel better about my other reply to the parent, er, maybe gp, post when I said that burning money is as "wrong" as burning a book - both only have value that we assign to them, rather than an intrinsic value. Merely, we've assigned a very high value to a publication if it's money (so much so it is, indeed, illegal to burn it and therefore any exception to First Amendment protection is probably handled on a case by case basis).

As you state, Flag burning is more apt as a comparison to book burning (especially that it's codified by a 1989 Supreme Court ruling).

Ya, I've been all over different discussions about the whole 451 acts lately, being a literary buff and all; which is the only reason I now know that about flag burning laws.

Slashdot Top Deals

Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code. -- Dave Olson