4 ms·

I opt out of the scans pretty regularly. Of course, I'm in the queue for getting tsa precheck now, so hopefully it won't be for long. For me, it's not a radiat

by pfooti 11y ago

I opt out of the scans pretty regularly. Of course, I'm in the queue for getting tsa precheck now, so hopefully it won't be for long. For me, it's not a radiation thing. It's more about a kind of semi-philosophical objection to the idea that people should look at naked pictures of me in order to provide the illusion of safety. AIT (advanced imaging technology) seems to be the quintessence of snake oil - we're told we need it and any real research into its efficacy is discouraged (still though, there's indications that metal detectors were probably better at catching threats). [0] [1] [0]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/06/tsa_not_detecti.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/06/tsa_not_detec... [1]: https://radsec.org/secure1000-sec14.pdf https://radsec.org/secure1000-sec14.pdf

saurik 11y ago
I am very curious about the mental path you took from having a philosophical objection to intrusive scans for the purpose of security theater, to simply registering with the government ahead of time and asking them to do some background check and keep that on file. (Maybe the latter actually sounds effective to you, and so isn't only "providing the illusion of safety"?) I have considered pre-check (as one reason I opt out is the research that millimeter wave scans might "unzip" DNA and lead to epigenetic modifications), but as I am also philosophically in strong objection to the entire process I can't bring myself to lose the battle before it is even fought by "taking the easy way out" and "paying the Danegeld", giving the TSA a sweaty wad of "don't scan me cash" to join pre-check and essentially "submit" myself to a different and yet in some ways similar kind of invasive search :/. (I, personally, consider the pat downs I constantly get much less invasive.)
- barney54 11y ago
  For me, I paid th TSA Danegeld for the ease of travel, especially when traveling with children. The Pre-Check lines are great and makes you forget about how terrible the TSA is. Yes you have to pay and give them information, but they have the information anyway. For me it has been worth it, even though I coughed up the information. Travel is just so much better with Pre-Check.
- pfooti 11y ago
  It's a pragmatic thing. Similarly, sometimes I go through the imager knowing that the thing doesn't add any real security to my flight at all (so I decide to view it as a complicated piece of art in interaction between me and the TSA). At the end of the day, I have to travel - I have a job (yay) that lets me work remote (yay), but that means cross-country fights on a monthly basis. If I opt out of flying, I also opt out of working for a rad nonprofit developing software that helps teachers share artifacts of practice. Skipping flying is an option, sure (I could get a job in SF, it's not that hard probably for someone with my background), but I've prioritized keeping my existing job over that. Like it or not, we've structured an economy that requires people to fly. People should just be more aware of what they're giving up to make that happen. My objection to the scanners isn't actually about the government spying on my butt. It's about how the general public is willing to let the government look at naked pictures of them without really thinking about the trade-off they are making. Lots of people don't even realize that there is a naked picture at all - if you talk to them, they think all that happens is an outline and a yellow box. If every time you go through the scanner you're aware of the deep violation of your privacy that the scanner represents, I'm okay with that. So yeah, precheck is a cop-out. Long form performance art is a pain in the spied-upon nethers, so I'm closing the show. I'm still aware of the sacrifice of privacy we've all made, and I'll still work to make other people aware of it as well.
- vinceguidry 11y ago
  You could fight off the Danes with spears and shields. The TSA, not so much. You might get a bit of satisfaction out of making their job 1% more difficult, but be honest, that's all it is.
late2part 11y ago
Add in the fact that TSA regularly lets weapons through and has never caught a terrorist.

by pfooti 11y ago

saurik 11y ago

I am very curious about the mental path you took from having a philosophical objection to intrusive scans for the purpose of security theater, to simply registering with the government ahead of time and asking them to do some background check and keep that on file. (Maybe the latter actually sounds effective to you, and so isn't only "providing the illusion of safety"?) I have considered pre-check (as one reason I opt out is the research that millimeter wave scans might "unzip" DNA and lead to epigenetic modifications), but as I am also philosophically in strong objection to the entire process I can't bring myself to lose the battle before it is even fought by "taking the easy way out" and "paying the Danegeld", giving the TSA a sweaty wad of "don't scan me cash" to join pre-check and essentially "submit" myself to a different and yet in some ways similar kind of invasive search :/. (I, personally, consider the pat downs I constantly get much less invasive.)

barney54 11y ago
For me, I paid th TSA Danegeld for the ease of travel, especially when traveling with children. The Pre-Check lines are great and makes you forget about how terrible the TSA is. Yes you have to pay and give them information, but they have the information anyway. For me it has been worth it, even though I coughed up the information. Travel is just so much better with Pre-Check.
pfooti 11y ago
It's a pragmatic thing. Similarly, sometimes I go through the imager knowing that the thing doesn't add any real security to my flight at all (so I decide to view it as a complicated piece of art in interaction between me and the TSA). At the end of the day, I have to travel - I have a job (yay) that lets me work remote (yay), but that means cross-country fights on a monthly basis. If I opt out of flying, I also opt out of working for a rad nonprofit developing software that helps teachers share artifacts of practice. Skipping flying is an option, sure (I could get a job in SF, it's not that hard probably for someone with my background), but I've prioritized keeping my existing job over that. Like it or not, we've structured an economy that requires people to fly. People should just be more aware of what they're giving up to make that happen. My objection to the scanners isn't actually about the government spying on my butt. It's about how the general public is willing to let the government look at naked pictures of them without really thinking about the trade-off they are making. Lots of people don't even realize that there is a naked picture at all - if you talk to them, they think all that happens is an outline and a yellow box. If every time you go through the scanner you're aware of the deep violation of your privacy that the scanner represents, I'm okay with that. So yeah, precheck is a cop-out. Long form performance art is a pain in the spied-upon nethers, so I'm closing the show. I'm still aware of the sacrifice of privacy we've all made, and I'll still work to make other people aware of it as well.
vinceguidry 11y ago
You could fight off the Danes with spears and shields. The TSA, not so much. You might get a bit of satisfaction out of making their job 1% more difficult, but be honest, that's all it is.

late2part 11y ago

Add in the fact that TSA regularly lets weapons through and has never caught a terrorist.