TSA Finishes Removing "Virtual Nude" X-Ray Devices From US Airports 172
dsinc writes "The Transportation Security Administration announced it has finished removing from all airports the X-ray technology that produced graphic and controversial images of passengers passing through security screening checkpoints. The machines, which the TSA first deployed in 2008, provoked public outrage as the technology, better able than traditional X-rays to detect hidden contraband, also created images that appeared as if they were 'virtual nudes.' Critics called this an invasion of privacy and questioned whether the scanning devices truly lacked the ability to save the images, as the TSA claimed."
Analog hole (Score:5, Insightful)
The analog hole always existed, and always will. If one of the TSA Molesters, err, Protectors, saw an image on the screen they wanted to keep, all they had to do was hold up their cell phone and snap a pic.
Their arguments about how TSA agents aren't able to save the generated images is and always was total bullshit.
All part of the plan (Score:4, Insightful)
Security industrial complex got its billions and then guess what, it seems the machines have a problem. Ok, we'll buy the version 2 at only twice the price. A few years later ... what? They don't detect the latest terrorist explosives? Hey, we've just come out with version 3 and have we got a deal for you.
All the while the retiring senior TSA folks are getting job offers from the security industry to lobby and sell on these same government contracts.
Re:Misleading summary, as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
The government still gets the detailed biometric identifying information it wants, the digital 3d model of your nude body still gets stored in the databases they deny exist. They just don't show it to the operator now, so everyone feels better.
I never understood why people just go through these scanners like sheep. I have never been through one despite flying periodically -- one can and should decline the scan.
Re:Analog hole (Score:5, Insightful)
Now all they need to do is remove themselves from US airports, and preferably, from the US itself!
Claim: Verified (Score:5, Insightful)
Critics called this an invasion of privacy and questioned whether the scanning devices truly lacked the ability to save the images, as the TSA claimed."
It has always had the ability to save such images; The TSA merely claimed that such a 'diagnostic mode' was not available during normal operation. There is no way for you, the passenger, to know if and when it is in such a diagnostic mode, however. So the TSA's claim is technically true.
But since the radiation levels have also not been published, it's also technically true that the radiation levels are safe, in spite of those cancer clusters showing up, because the TSA says they're safe and therefore there is no need to publish the emission limits.
In other words... all you have to go on is their word in both cases. Which, given as many times as their statements haven't been found to be credible, is no assurance at all.
Re:Analog hole (Score:5, Insightful)
While I agree with you in concept. I would point out in 4 years no random photos of celebrities, hot women, etc found their way onto the internet.
I was fully expecting for the TSA have to denouce some photos and fire a few people by now for actually having leaked some photos.
Of course that doesn't mean the ability doesn't exist just means that those with access are keeping their mouths shut and are behaving. not impossible but I do find it unlikely.
Re:Misleading summary, as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
As a UKian, I would like to play devils advocate: if it stops one single delusional nutter from murdering upwards of 200 people
It appears to be the mainstream opinion in the UK, judging by the fact that the Prime Minister still has the office.
I wonder, is there anything that the UK population will not submit to, if submission saves the life of one abstract child?
Re:Misleading summary, as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
As a UKian, I would like to play devils advocate: if it stops one single delusional nutter from murdering upwards of 200 people in one easy stroke because the voices in their head told them to, and the only thing between that latent human homicidal psychosis and my safety is a porno machine, what do I care how many 3d pictures of my cock I have to give up?
That's not a very good devil's advocate because it is easily debunked. Rights are far more important than safety, and you could use that same argument to justify molesting people at random, regardless of their location. If one nut is stopped, who cares about silly old rights!?
That is extremely dangerous thinking, but I fear that most people truly believe such nonsense.
Re:Analog hole (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Analog hole (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Waste of money (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm trying to think if my income has gone up 50% in the last 10 years.
Maybe if we hadn't been duped into throwing the unions under the bus you might have had an organization negotiating on your behalf to get regular raises to reflect your increased productivity. Also it's not 50% since the number of employees increased too. It's more like 40% increase in wages assuming your numbers are correct. That means they got about a 3.5% raise every year. That's exactly in line with the private sector which also was projected to see on average about a 3.5% raise.
I'm still going to opt out. (Score:5, Insightful)
Pat me down.
Had the fellow at the airport literally grab my penis last time. So yeah... that was uncomfortable. But that is how you ACTUALLY drives these machines out of the airport. Refuse to use them.
When the TSA finds that pat downs are not effective at forcing people into the scanners they'll let us walk through a metal detector and leave us alone.
Its not as if the xray machines have ever stopped a terrorist attack or likely ever will.
Do you know how you stop a terrorist attack? Know who is getting on the f'ing airplane. Its not that complicated. All the people that have later gone on to do some terrorist attack were on a terrorist watch list already.
Is it fair to profile someone WHO IS ALREADY on a terrorist watch list? That is, if you're on a terrorist watch list... would it be fair to pat YOU down or scan you you or whatever? Again, not simply because of race, national origin, or anything equally specious. But contacts and behavior consistent with someone plotting a terrorist attack.
And if someone is clever enough to stay off those lists while also intending a terrorist attack... do you really think an xray machine is going to stop them? Xray machines would stop a moron that would jam explosives up his sleeves without understanding how an xray machine works. You might claim it would deter a smarter attacker but really all you've done is force him to disguise the weapon or bomb as something else.
In the end, you're pitting the intelligence of someone clever enough to stay off the watch lists against a minimum wage government drone bored off his ass while he scans yet another person that he has no belief is a threat.
When you treat EVERYONE as a threat you threat NO ONE as a threat. You have to have targeted security. Enough passive security to deter morons and really a metal detector is more then sufficient to do that. And then the FBI and CIA need to keep useful lists for the few clever ones that might try something sneaky. And when one of the sneaky ones books a plane flight... they spend an extra 10 minutes in back room as someone gropes them for... whatever. Everyone else though... don't waste our time or dull edge of your security by pretending we're a threat when we're not.
Re:Misleading summary, as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
As a USian, I'd like to respond.
My country was born when a group of doctors, lawyers, and farmers came to realization that the slim chance of gaining liberty was worth taking up arms against the most powerful military the world had ever seen. They didn't come to that realization in secret; they signed and publicly posted an open letter of treason against the Crown, who controlled the world's most powerful military, and who would have gladly put each of them to death for their treasonous act. They then proceeded to fight not one, but two wars against the world's most powerful military to secure the rights they believed all people were entitled to enjoy. They were not seasoned soldiers or military strategists who knew how to fight the armies of the Crown; they were doctors, lawyers, and farmers who were almost certainly about to die in a completely futile effort. One of the states that arose during this period adopted the motto "Live free or die".
In the spirit of their realization and their actions, please allow me to be the first to say: Fuck your safety. Being free isn't safe. Safety is never, never worth the cost of losing freedom.
I quite honestly wish that all the people who think as you do would go back to England. I think it'd return this country to a much better state; one where we still had balls and did great things.