4 ms·

You've lost when you start saying words like "sheeple" and "Orwell" in these conversations, you realize that right?

• PeCaN 10y ago
  I took zentiggr's comment to be sarcastic with a hint of truth. I don't think his choice to use "sheeple"¹ or bring up Orwell detracts from his point. ¹ And let's be realistic, anyone who thinks the TSA actually improves security is basically just listening to what the TSA itself says. As mentioned in this thread, the TSA 1) hasn't stopped known terrorist attacks and 2) isn't hard to sneak weapons past. Blindly listening to the TSA saying they're important for security is, well, sheeplish.
  • dimino 10y ago
    How is calling me "sheeplish" helpful for this conversation? The goal of the TSA is to create security theater, and that goal is effective at preventing terrorists from even attempting to attack airports. It's difficult to prove this, of course, because how does one measure a terror cell's internal and secretive planning? You don't get to collect data on the targets terrorists don't attack, because they... well, they don't attack them! It's intellectually dishonest to claim 1), because of this. As for 2), this is absolutely true, but why do you think the TSA's goal is to be functionally effective? It'd be nice, obviously, but like I said in my original comment, there is value in security theater. The head of the FBI once said that there's simply no stopping a terrorist once he has his weapon on premises. The point of the TSA is to provide a false front line for terrorists to misidentify as the significant hurdle in executing an attack, and they do that successfully. The reality is, the world's police catch terrorists before they act, the vast majority of the time. It'd be great if the TSA were effective, and it's via shitty management that they're not, this is unmistakable. But the mere presence of the TSA at US airports is an effective misdirection, because it provides what people call "security theater", and while most folks consider security theater useless, they're wrong. It has value.
• EdHominem 10y ago
  It's usually the person who says "You've lost" and mistakenly references Godwin who has lost (all hope). If you're more concerned with the form of the response than the content... > How is calling me "sheeplish" helpful for this conversation? You're the one calling yourself sheeple so you can act hurt. The parent used it as a broad descriptor of anyone who just believes what they're told. It wasn't directed at you so how is you falling on your victim card helping the conversation? > The goal of the TSA is to create security theater, I doubt you'd get any agreement with that. From them, the politicians, the taxpayers, or real security experts. > and that goal is effective at preventing terrorists from even attempting to attack airports. It's difficult to prove this, of course [...] There's literally no reason to suspect that it works. Theater fails in all contexts because only one person needs to realize it's fake and point that out. > while most folks consider security theater useless, they're wrong. It has value. Negative value. It reduces vigilance where it's truly needed.
  • dimino 10y ago
    I don't think breaking up my comment into little contextless chunks is doing this conversation any favors.