10 ms·

Going against implicit expectations of others and being the only one who does something is maybe the hardest thing humans can do. Opting out could risk holding

Going against implicit expectations of others and being the only one who does something is maybe the hardest thing humans can do. Opting out could risk holding up the boarding process, possibly missing the flight, unpleasant treatment by security and being pitted against the other passengers - all of it to opt out of something is clearly a dark pattern. All of this is very well understood by the people who designed this system. Articles like that and some of the comments in this thread at least give me an idea what opting out would take.

CalRobert 7y ago
I'm always sad when I'm the only one opting for a patdown at the airport after Defcon.
- krick 7y ago
  Probably that's because I didn't travel to USA yet, but I don't understand why it's sad. Why the hell would you opt for a patdown? What must be the default then?
  - casefields 7y ago
    These: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray
    - skribbj 7y ago
      What's the problem with these exactly?
      - Tepix 7y ago
        They show you naked and invade your privacy
        Kamshak 7y ago
        And have not been used in the US for 6 years (from the wikipedia article linked above) > In the United States, the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 required that all full-body scanners operated in airports by the Transportation Security Administration use "Automated Target Recognition" software, which replaces the picture of a nude body with the cartoon-like representation.[3] As a result of this law, all backscatter X-ray machines formerly in use by the Transportation Security Administration were removed from airports by May 2013, since the agency said the vendor (Rapiscan) did not meet their contractual deadline to implement the software.[4]
        mratzloff 7y ago
        Yep. I refused the backscatter scanner when they first came out because of radiation and nude scans, but now that they've changed that I think it's fine.
        cddotdotslash 7y ago
        "Naked" is a real stretch. It's basically a black and white, lumpy x-ray viewed from a remote control room.
        cowwithbeef 7y ago
        Would Obama, Trump, and their wives be happy to have their scans available for public viewing? If it's obvious they wouldn't, it should be obvious it's an invasion of privacy.
        asark 7y ago
        For me, I'm already iffy about the whole thing when it's just me but the thought of putting my kids in one of these things makes me... very unhappy, in a bunch of different ways at once. But so does a stranger feeling them up. I'm not sure how/whether I'll ever be able to fly with them. Some posters are claiming the screens don't show the raw images anymore, but what happens to those scans? Betting they don't discard them. Ever.
      - michaelt 7y ago
        The fact a stranger gets to look at me naked is undignified - like if someone was hiding spy cameras in gym showers, or walking up to people in public and pulling down their trousers. From a Defcon angle, it's also an information security risk; even large government bodies have fallen victim to cryptolockers, so it's not like the government-grade IT security keeping the photos secure is impenetrable. The 'reassurance' that I'm too ugly and unimportant for anyone to take particular interest in does nothing to restore this dignity :)
      - dractori 7y ago
        Radiation exposure is cumulative. It's a small increase in your risk of developing cancer but it's not zero.
        RandallBrown 7y ago
        Millimeter wave scanners pose essentially no risk of cancer since they're non-ionizing.
        vokep 7y ago
        non-ionizing means mostly harmless, but there is no guarantee. Proteins come in lots of shapes and sizes, and non-ionizing radiation can still resonate.
        dijit 7y ago
        They can activate melanocytic nevus (moles) on the skin though. And their effectiveness is, questionable (Germany reports 54% false positives, TSA reports handguns being concealed successfully in underwear, etc.)
        87er43 7y ago
        Microwave ovens also produce non-ionizing radiation so I imagine that they would be safe to place one's full body inside as well.
    - andrepd 7y ago
      In the UK these are banned, and you can only use millimetre wave scanners with software interpretation, meaning agents can't see the raw (naked) images of you, just the software-identified anomalies layered on top of a stick figure drawing.
    - deelowe 7y ago
      Most airports have moved to millimeter wave instead of x-ray: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimeter_wave_scanner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimeter_wave_scanner
  - dkersten 7y ago
    > What must be the default then? Body scanners.
  - deftnerd 7y ago
    New tech allows lasers to identify a person from a great distance, even from a drone, using a laser that can analyze a persons heart beat. [1] https://futurism.com/the-byte/laser-identify-distance-heartbeat https://futurism.com/the-byte/laser-identify-distance-heartb... [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24111284 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24111284 They're already gathering facial recognition biometrics, and I wouldn't be surprised if they've been doing gait analysis biometric identifiers (it's established tech). Adding heart rate would give them three separate identifiers that can be used to identify anyone in a crowd with practically complete confidence.
- sokoloff 7y ago
  I opt-out every time. Only once have I even seen anyone else opt-out and that was leaving a tech conference in Vegas.
- yumraj 7y ago
  what do you mean by "after Defcon". Could you please elaborate what you're referring to?
  - alasdair_ 7y ago
    > what do you mean by "after Defcon". Could you please elaborate what you're referring to? https://lmgtfy.com/?s=d&q=defcon https://lmgtfy.com/?s=d&q=defcon
- alasdair_ 7y ago
  > I'm always sad when I'm the only one opting for a patdown at the airport after Defcon. I made the decision that I was okay handing over personal information one time to get TSA Pre if it meant I could skip the naked scanners, not have to take off my shoes, avoid patdowns etc. Generally when I'm coming back from Defcon I have a whole lot of stuff with me that I'd really rather avoid having someone take a closer look at. I still strongly respect people that take a stronger stance than I.
dzhiurgis 7y ago
> clearly a dark pattern. It's not clear to me at all. Explain please.
- rkachowski 7y ago
  Assuming you're not being facetious, the optional "have your facial scan data uploaded to dubious parties" choice is not presented as optional, and implied consent is the default for all fliers. This would be similar to an "opt-out" instead of "opt-in" checkbox on a "let us harvest your data" disclaimer, except that the checkbox is at 0% opacity so you don't know it's there.
  - beatgammit 7y ago
    Not to mention that you usually don't know about it until you get there, so you don't have time to look up anything about it to see whether you can avoid it. I read about it after buying my last ticket and learned about the passport thing, but that was because I'm interested in what the TSA does and follow security and privacy blogs.
- master-litty 7y ago
  A "dark pattern" tricks people into doing something they normally wouldn't do. In this case, to board your flight you may verify your identity in one of two ways: 1. Present your passport 2. Use the Facial Recognition software They are tricking people into using option 2 by not informing them of option 1.
  - mti27 7y ago
    Just like Disney World - they scan your finger print upon entry to the park. When you ask to opt out, they're like "Well you're going to need to step out of line over here and give my manager some information.."
dalore 7y ago
Yes I asked if I could get a pat down instead of the backscatter x-ray at Heathrow. Was made to feel like a criminal, questioned etc and put under pressure. And then to be told I don't have to get scanned but I can't get on my flight unless I do. There wasn't even an opt out.
- userbinator 7y ago
  I guess they were also very surprised, because most people would rather not be touched by a stranger.
  - bin0 7y ago
    I am stuck doing this for medical reasons, and it is certainly one of the most degrading experiences I have ever had the displeasure of enduring. It's very possible he's stuck doing it for similar reasons. Most machines in America aren't backscatter, but I still can't use them. It's also a crapshoot - you may have an aggressive officer, or a friendly one. I've been patted down twice for absolutely no reason; not a second screening, the guy just went over me two times. I keep wondering why we have chosen to sacrifice freedom for some small measure of security. More importantly, I don't really believe airport security stops much - it's security theater.
    - sokoloff 7y ago
      It's a jobs program.
      - bin0 7y ago
        It's a jobs program which humiliates innocent Americans and treats those who have committed no crime as common criminals without any warrant or probable cause. It's a violation of individual sovereignty without reason. Jobs are good, but the ends do not justify the means.
        sokoloff 7y ago

CalRobert 7y ago

I'm always sad when I'm the only one opting for a patdown at the airport after Defcon.

krick 7y ago
Probably that's because I didn't travel to USA yet, but I don't understand why it's sad. Why the hell would you opt for a patdown? What must be the default then?
- casefields 7y ago
  These: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray
  - skribbj 7y ago
    What's the problem with these exactly?
    - Tepix 7y ago
      They show you naked and invade your privacy
      - Kamshak 7y ago
        And have not been used in the US for 6 years (from the wikipedia article linked above) > In the United States, the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 required that all full-body scanners operated in airports by the Transportation Security Administration use "Automated Target Recognition" software, which replaces the picture of a nude body with the cartoon-like representation.[3] As a result of this law, all backscatter X-ray machines formerly in use by the Transportation Security Administration were removed from airports by May 2013, since the agency said the vendor (Rapiscan) did not meet their contractual deadline to implement the software.[4]
        mratzloff 7y ago
        Yep. I refused the backscatter scanner when they first came out because of radiation and nude scans, but now that they've changed that I think it's fine.
      - cddotdotslash 7y ago
        "Naked" is a real stretch. It's basically a black and white, lumpy x-ray viewed from a remote control room.
        cowwithbeef 7y ago
        Would Obama, Trump, and their wives be happy to have their scans available for public viewing? If it's obvious they wouldn't, it should be obvious it's an invasion of privacy.
        asark 7y ago
        For me, I'm already iffy about the whole thing when it's just me but the thought of putting my kids in one of these things makes me... very unhappy, in a bunch of different ways at once. But so does a stranger feeling them up. I'm not sure how/whether I'll ever be able to fly with them. Some posters are claiming the screens don't show the raw images anymore, but what happens to those scans? Betting they don't discard them. Ever.
    - michaelt 7y ago
      The fact a stranger gets to look at me naked is undignified - like if someone was hiding spy cameras in gym showers, or walking up to people in public and pulling down their trousers. From a Defcon angle, it's also an information security risk; even large government bodies have fallen victim to cryptolockers, so it's not like the government-grade IT security keeping the photos secure is impenetrable. The 'reassurance' that I'm too ugly and unimportant for anyone to take particular interest in does nothing to restore this dignity :)
    - dractori 7y ago
      Radiation exposure is cumulative. It's a small increase in your risk of developing cancer but it's not zero.
      - RandallBrown 7y ago
        Millimeter wave scanners pose essentially no risk of cancer since they're non-ionizing.
        vokep 7y ago
        non-ionizing means mostly harmless, but there is no guarantee. Proteins come in lots of shapes and sizes, and non-ionizing radiation can still resonate.
        dijit 7y ago
        They can activate melanocytic nevus (moles) on the skin though. And their effectiveness is, questionable (Germany reports 54% false positives, TSA reports handguns being concealed successfully in underwear, etc.)
        87er43 7y ago
        Microwave ovens also produce non-ionizing radiation so I imagine that they would be safe to place one's full body inside as well.
  - andrepd 7y ago
    In the UK these are banned, and you can only use millimetre wave scanners with software interpretation, meaning agents can't see the raw (naked) images of you, just the software-identified anomalies layered on top of a stick figure drawing.
  - deelowe 7y ago
    Most airports have moved to millimeter wave instead of x-ray: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimeter_wave_scanner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimeter_wave_scanner
- dkersten 7y ago
  > What must be the default then? Body scanners.
- deftnerd 7y ago
  New tech allows lasers to identify a person from a great distance, even from a drone, using a laser that can analyze a persons heart beat. [1] https://futurism.com/the-byte/laser-identify-distance-heartbeat https://futurism.com/the-byte/laser-identify-distance-heartb... [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24111284 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24111284 They're already gathering facial recognition biometrics, and I wouldn't be surprised if they've been doing gait analysis biometric identifiers (it's established tech). Adding heart rate would give them three separate identifiers that can be used to identify anyone in a crowd with practically complete confidence.
sokoloff 7y ago
I opt-out every time. Only once have I even seen anyone else opt-out and that was leaving a tech conference in Vegas.
yumraj 7y ago
what do you mean by "after Defcon". Could you please elaborate what you're referring to?
- alasdair_ 7y ago
  > what do you mean by "after Defcon". Could you please elaborate what you're referring to? https://lmgtfy.com/?s=d&q=defcon https://lmgtfy.com/?s=d&q=defcon
alasdair_ 7y ago
> I'm always sad when I'm the only one opting for a patdown at the airport after Defcon. I made the decision that I was okay handing over personal information one time to get TSA Pre if it meant I could skip the naked scanners, not have to take off my shoes, avoid patdowns etc. Generally when I'm coming back from Defcon I have a whole lot of stuff with me that I'd really rather avoid having someone take a closer look at. I still strongly respect people that take a stronger stance than I.

dzhiurgis 7y ago

> clearly a dark pattern. It's not clear to me at all. Explain please.

rkachowski 7y ago
Assuming you're not being facetious, the optional "have your facial scan data uploaded to dubious parties" choice is not presented as optional, and implied consent is the default for all fliers. This would be similar to an "opt-out" instead of "opt-in" checkbox on a "let us harvest your data" disclaimer, except that the checkbox is at 0% opacity so you don't know it's there.
- beatgammit 7y ago
  Not to mention that you usually don't know about it until you get there, so you don't have time to look up anything about it to see whether you can avoid it. I read about it after buying my last ticket and learned about the passport thing, but that was because I'm interested in what the TSA does and follow security and privacy blogs.
master-litty 7y ago
A "dark pattern" tricks people into doing something they normally wouldn't do. In this case, to board your flight you may verify your identity in one of two ways: 1. Present your passport 2. Use the Facial Recognition software They are tricking people into using option 2 by not informing them of option 1.
- mti27 7y ago
  Just like Disney World - they scan your finger print upon entry to the park. When you ask to opt out, they're like "Well you're going to need to step out of line over here and give my manager some information.."

dalore 7y ago

Yes I asked if I could get a pat down instead of the backscatter x-ray at Heathrow. Was made to feel like a criminal, questioned etc and put under pressure. And then to be told I don't have to get scanned but I can't get on my flight unless I do. There wasn't even an opt out.

userbinator 7y ago
I guess they were also very surprised, because most people would rather not be touched by a stranger.
- bin0 7y ago
  I am stuck doing this for medical reasons, and it is certainly one of the most degrading experiences I have ever had the displeasure of enduring. It's very possible he's stuck doing it for similar reasons. Most machines in America aren't backscatter, but I still can't use them. It's also a crapshoot - you may have an aggressive officer, or a friendly one. I've been patted down twice for absolutely no reason; not a second screening, the guy just went over me two times. I keep wondering why we have chosen to sacrifice freedom for some small measure of security. More importantly, I don't really believe airport security stops much - it's security theater.
  - sokoloff 7y ago
    It's a jobs program.
    - bin0 7y ago
      It's a jobs program which humiliates innocent Americans and treats those who have committed no crime as common criminals without any warrant or probable cause. It's a violation of individual sovereignty without reason. Jobs are good, but the ends do not justify the means.
      - sokoloff 7y ago