4 ms·
I think most would rather the use of these devices be banned on principles of their invasiveness rather than on safety concerns. Otherwise, you just get a "safe
by mortenjorck 16y ago
I think most would rather the use of these devices be banned on principles of their invasiveness rather than on safety concerns. Otherwise, you just get a "safer" version of the same thing in a few years.
- tomjen3 16y agoSure, but I would take getting them banned on any ground. In a few years, we will call them cancer machines again and see if we can win then. If you have a way to win on privacy issues the more power to you, but I doubt it can be done.
- roadnottaken 16y agoThat's called dishonesty.
- tomjen3 16y agoIts called politics, and as much as I hate it, thats how most stuff gets done in the real world.
- AngryParsley 16y agoThat's a different discussion. I'm just talking about safety. The scientists in the letter are just talking about safety. The FDA is just talking about safety. "Should we put these things in airports?" brings a lot more baggage with it than "Are these things safe?" I wish our opinions about backscatter devices could stay out of this discussion about their safety. I'm going to mention my opinion anyway, because otherwise people will suspect me of being on The Other Side. I think these devices are a waste of money and I don't want to be subject to them. They raise a ton of privacy concerns and make me wonder, "What's next?" But they're almost certainly safe.