3 ms·

Hey, if it means I can keep my shoes and my belt on going through security, I'm all for it. Anything that is going to actually be effective, and not merely mas

Hey, if it means I can keep my shoes and my belt on going through security, I'm all for it. Anything that is going to actually be effective, and not merely massively inconvenient security theater.

mandeepj 9y ago
> if it means I can keep my shoes and my belt on going through security, I'm all for it. The option is already there for this - TSAPre
- tehlike 9y ago
  Get global entry instead, if you were planning to get TSAPre.
- bzbarsky 9y ago
  1) Doesn't work if you're flying international on a non-US airline (great protectionist measure there). 2) Requires you to give the government your fingerprints. This is particularly a problem if you have children between the ages of 13 and 18 (old enough to not just get pre-check if the parents have it, not old enough yet to make their own decisions about whether the government should have their fingerprints). 3) Not available at all airports. 4) Not available at all gates at the airports where it _is_ available (even for US airlines). It's better than nothing as long as item 2 is not a problem for you, but it's a lot worse than sanity would be.
Smushman 9y ago
You can get excited then, because you can be sure this will be used to supplement vs supplant any existing US security theater. We couldn't lay off the nearly 250,000 active employees of the Security Theater arm of the US Government just because we had an actionable technological solution that reliably worked. We have votes to think about!
- wallace_f 9y ago
  Just to illustrate how wasteful the TSA is. It has spent over a billion on something called deception detection. A method with no scientific foundation. It is not clear what, if any, good has come out of the program.[1] I would be interested in the cost-per-life-saved by TSA, and how many orders of magnitude larger than universal healthcare it would be. 1 - www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-aclu-tsa-20170207-story.html
  - mchannon 9y ago
    Since onerous security theater has deterred drivers from flying, who then are more statistically prone to dying during car travel, you're going to find the cost-per-life-saved number is a negative number.
- yuhong 9y ago
  Yea, the TSA is a good example of how a scare like 9/11 can be used to trigger more government spending, leading to more government debt being printed.
dogruck 9y ago
You’ve fallen into the trap. Here’s what happened: 1. Add a bunch of ineffective, but annoying so-called security procedures. Truly annoy people. Take off your shoes and belt!! 2. Offer a way out of that nonsense, in exchange for trading away your privacy. 3. Win.
- orbitur 9y ago
  It's probably naive to even think that they'll pull back on the shoes/belt bullshit. I fully expect to have to scan my face AND remove my shoes and belt. The TSA doesn't give a fuck, and no one holds them accountable for the delays they've added.

Hey, if it means I can keep my shoes and my belt on going through security, I'm all for it. Anything that is going to actually be effective, and not merely massively inconvenient security theater.

mandeepj 9y ago

> if it means I can keep my shoes and my belt on going through security, I'm all for it. The option is already there for this - TSAPre

tehlike 9y ago
Get global entry instead, if you were planning to get TSAPre.
bzbarsky 9y ago
1) Doesn't work if you're flying international on a non-US airline (great protectionist measure there). 2) Requires you to give the government your fingerprints. This is particularly a problem if you have children between the ages of 13 and 18 (old enough to not just get pre-check if the parents have it, not old enough yet to make their own decisions about whether the government should have their fingerprints). 3) Not available at all airports. 4) Not available at all gates at the airports where it _is_ available (even for US airlines). It's better than nothing as long as item 2 is not a problem for you, but it's a lot worse than sanity would be.

Smushman 9y ago

You can get excited then, because you can be sure this will be used to supplement vs supplant any existing US security theater. We couldn't lay off the nearly 250,000 active employees of the Security Theater arm of the US Government just because we had an actionable technological solution that reliably worked. We have votes to think about!

wallace_f 9y ago
Just to illustrate how wasteful the TSA is. It has spent over a billion on something called deception detection. A method with no scientific foundation. It is not clear what, if any, good has come out of the program.[1] I would be interested in the cost-per-life-saved by TSA, and how many orders of magnitude larger than universal healthcare it would be. 1 - www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-aclu-tsa-20170207-story.html
- mchannon 9y ago
  Since onerous security theater has deterred drivers from flying, who then are more statistically prone to dying during car travel, you're going to find the cost-per-life-saved number is a negative number.
yuhong 9y ago
Yea, the TSA is a good example of how a scare like 9/11 can be used to trigger more government spending, leading to more government debt being printed.

dogruck 9y ago

You’ve fallen into the trap. Here’s what happened: 1. Add a bunch of ineffective, but annoying so-called security procedures. Truly annoy people. Take off your shoes and belt!! 2. Offer a way out of that nonsense, in exchange for trading away your privacy. 3. Win.

orbitur 9y ago
It's probably naive to even think that they'll pull back on the shoes/belt bullshit. I fully expect to have to scan my face AND remove my shoes and belt. The TSA doesn't give a fuck, and no one holds them accountable for the delays they've added.