A very interesting read. I found that Harris' argument was more immediately graspable and intuitive (There's a higher risk of an Arabic-looking passenger being

A very interesting read. I found that Harris' argument was more immediately graspable and intuitive (There's a higher risk of an Arabic-looking passenger being a terrorist [though that's _higher_, not _high_], so check them more than others) but Bruce's analysis was far more convincing in the end due to the way he laid out his cost-benefit analysis. Bruce did a good job at mostly avoiding emotional appeals to a sense of fairness and focused on the efficacy of the system in practical terms. The argument from simplicity is a strong one. However, he does seem to miss some points he should've addressed, especially right at the end where Harris challenges him on why randomness isn't more generally applicable, if Bruce thinks it's the best approach here. While I don't think it's a devastating point, I think it needed a reply, and I think Bruce did a bit of the 'repeating yourself without listening' approach. Harris is mostly rational and objective about the risk of Muslim passenger. However, he occasionally strays into making what I feel are unfair generalisations. At one point he gestulates about 'what other religion does X Y Z now'. I immediately thought of the Christian extremist groups in America. It seems his view of the number of Muslims who are in favour of or are not against terrorist is a bit skewed.