4 ms·

There's no harm in filming your daughter changing clothes at these booths we installed all over the beaches. We are keen at protecting her data and making sure

There's no harm in filming your daughter changing clothes at these booths we installed all over the beaches. We are keen at protecting her data and making sure her face stays blurred. If we'd stop the costs of going to beach would go up tremendously, so that's out the question.

the_snooze 5y ago
You're probably joking, but the TSA has made that exact argument for their full-body scanners. >"The (body image scanning) technology is sent to the airports without the ability to save, transmit or print the images," said Greg Soule, TSA spokesman, in an interview with CBSNews.com. "At airports, the images are examined by a security officer in a remote location, and, once the image is cleared, they're deleted." https://www.cbsnews.com/news/naked-body-scan-images-never-saved-tsa-says/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/naked-body-scan-images-never-sa...
- Terretta 5y ago
  Of course, the images may not be deleted. Unless someone notices, such as with these 35,000 from Orlando: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2010/11/100_images_from_the_controvers.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2010/11/100_images_from_the_... And an alleged insider discussion of how those "remote" viewers respect passenger privacy: "Personally, in the I.O. room, I witnessed light sexual play among officers, a lot of e-cigarette vaping, and a whole lot of officers laughing and clowning in regard to some of your nude images, dear passengers." https://takingsenseaway.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/letter-from-a-passenger-what-really-happens-in-the-tsa-private-room/ https://takingsenseaway.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/letter-from...
- ForHackernews 5y ago
  I mean, at least the putative negative consequences they're trying to avoid are exploded jetliners and hundreds of deaths, not "advertising would be somewhat less effective and profitable" (similar to all advertising before about 2002).
  - blueline 5y ago
    it's very charitable for you to accept at face value that that's what the TSA security theater is for
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - mhb 5y ago
      He doesn't. That's why it said putative.
- mumblemumble 5y ago
  > The (body image scanning) technology is ... without the ability to ... transmit ... the images," > the images are examined by a security officer in a remote location oh dear. More seriously, at least TSA can at least make a proportionality type of argument, along the lines of, this invasion of privacy is justified on the grounds that it might save lives. Adtech is just going to use it to try and figure out how to convince me to buy a motorized turnip twaddler.
  - skinnymuch 5y ago
    I don’t see why the TSA having awful reasons they can get away with is any better or any better hedge than any other player invading privacy unnecessarily.
    - meowface 5y ago
      Even if it may be awful on an absolute scale, on a relative scale, I find egregious privacy violations more justifiable if the claimed intention is mitigating supposed risk of bodily harm or death rather than showing me advertisements. I have the right to simultaneously hate and be disgusted by the TSA yet hate and be disgusted by advertisers and ad tech even more.
      - skinnymuch 5y ago
        Interesting. I feel the opposite. Theater and bad faith lying or trickery are far worse to me. The intent from the get go isn’t even trying to do the right thing while also trying to show themselves as the “good”.
  - curryst 5y ago
    Of the data that I've seen, adtech has about as much legitimacy in claiming they "might" save lives as the TSA does.[1] The last year the TSA released the stats on their Red Team tests, they failed to detect 95% of threats. Some of the threats that made it through were fully assembled handguns, fully assembled bombs, and partially disassembled versions of both. As many have pointed out, the TSA is largely security theater. It makes people feel better that we're doing something, and apparently the greater the intrusion on privacy, the more secure people feel. https://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-tsa-screeners-20150602-story.html https://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-tsa-screeners...
- toss1 5y ago
  >> >"The (body image scanning) technology is sent to the airports without the ability to save, transmit or print the images,...and, once the image is cleared, they're deleted." Perhaps from the machine, but what prevents a TSA viewer in the remote location from snapping an image of the screen with their smartphone, or wearing an always-on logging camera to the workstation?
  - the_snooze 5y ago
    The TSA's proud culture of professionalism and integrity, of course.
    - toss1 5y ago
      ... well, there ya go! Why didn't I think of that?
jtdev 5y ago
Plus, we’re able to help these ladies by recommending beachwear that is aligned with their sensibilities… it’s really a win-win for all parties.

the_snooze 5y ago

You're probably joking, but the TSA has made that exact argument for their full-body scanners. >"The (body image scanning) technology is sent to the airports without the ability to save, transmit or print the images," said Greg Soule, TSA spokesman, in an interview with CBSNews.com. "At airports, the images are examined by a security officer in a remote location, and, once the image is cleared, they're deleted." https://www.cbsnews.com/news/naked-body-scan-images-never-saved-tsa-says/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/naked-body-scan-images-never-sa...

Terretta 5y ago
Of course, the images may not be deleted. Unless someone notices, such as with these 35,000 from Orlando: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2010/11/100_images_from_the_controvers.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2010/11/100_images_from_the_... And an alleged insider discussion of how those "remote" viewers respect passenger privacy: "Personally, in the I.O. room, I witnessed light sexual play among officers, a lot of e-cigarette vaping, and a whole lot of officers laughing and clowning in regard to some of your nude images, dear passengers." https://takingsenseaway.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/letter-from-a-passenger-what-really-happens-in-the-tsa-private-room/ https://takingsenseaway.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/letter-from...
ForHackernews 5y ago
I mean, at least the putative negative consequences they're trying to avoid are exploded jetliners and hundreds of deaths, not "advertising would be somewhat less effective and profitable" (similar to all advertising before about 2002).
- blueline 5y ago
  it's very charitable for you to accept at face value that that's what the TSA security theater is for
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - mhb 5y ago
    He doesn't. That's why it said putative.
mumblemumble 5y ago
> The (body image scanning) technology is ... without the ability to ... transmit ... the images," > the images are examined by a security officer in a remote location oh dear. More seriously, at least TSA can at least make a proportionality type of argument, along the lines of, this invasion of privacy is justified on the grounds that it might save lives. Adtech is just going to use it to try and figure out how to convince me to buy a motorized turnip twaddler.
- skinnymuch 5y ago
  I don’t see why the TSA having awful reasons they can get away with is any better or any better hedge than any other player invading privacy unnecessarily.
  - meowface 5y ago
    Even if it may be awful on an absolute scale, on a relative scale, I find egregious privacy violations more justifiable if the claimed intention is mitigating supposed risk of bodily harm or death rather than showing me advertisements. I have the right to simultaneously hate and be disgusted by the TSA yet hate and be disgusted by advertisers and ad tech even more.
    - skinnymuch 5y ago
      Interesting. I feel the opposite. Theater and bad faith lying or trickery are far worse to me. The intent from the get go isn’t even trying to do the right thing while also trying to show themselves as the “good”.
- curryst 5y ago
  Of the data that I've seen, adtech has about as much legitimacy in claiming they "might" save lives as the TSA does.[1] The last year the TSA released the stats on their Red Team tests, they failed to detect 95% of threats. Some of the threats that made it through were fully assembled handguns, fully assembled bombs, and partially disassembled versions of both. As many have pointed out, the TSA is largely security theater. It makes people feel better that we're doing something, and apparently the greater the intrusion on privacy, the more secure people feel. https://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-tsa-screeners-20150602-story.html https://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-tsa-screeners...
toss1 5y ago
>> >"The (body image scanning) technology is sent to the airports without the ability to save, transmit or print the images,...and, once the image is cleared, they're deleted." Perhaps from the machine, but what prevents a TSA viewer in the remote location from snapping an image of the screen with their smartphone, or wearing an always-on logging camera to the workstation?
- the_snooze 5y ago
  The TSA's proud culture of professionalism and integrity, of course.
  - toss1 5y ago
    ... well, there ya go! Why didn't I think of that?

jtdev 5y ago

Plus, we’re able to help these ladies by recommending beachwear that is aligned with their sensibilities… it’s really a win-win for all parties.