5 ms·

The $45 pays for extra checks and scrutiny.

deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]
dheera 8mo ago
I'm almost positive they get paid the same at the end of the day either way and the $45 just lines the pockets of someone on the top.
- iknowstuff 8mo ago
  Do you not see how an organization discouraging the use of something inefficient benefits as a whole? Thats why cashless businesses exist, why you pay more for things that involve human attention instead of automated online solutions etc.
  - beeflet 8mo ago
    Who does it benefit? Not me. Maybe it benefits Mastercard and Visa.
    - iknowstuff 8mo ago
      Yes it benefits the consumer through lower prices, and in the case of cashless specifically, less tax fraud, etc
      - craftkiller 8mo ago
        Most businesses near me offer lower prices to people paying with cash.
        iknowstuff 8mo ago
        High interchange fees? https://www.clearlypayments.com/blog/interchange-fees-by-country/ https://www.clearlypayments.com/blog/interchange-fees-by-cou... or tax fraud, otherwise cashless is obviously cheaper
- alecbz 8mo ago
  It's not that they'd pay individual employees more, it's that they'd hire more workers to account for the fact that their existing workers are tied up doing extra verification. Though they might not do that either.
  - ibejoeb 8mo ago
    Even that fails a sanity test. They're not doing anything more than they would have done 25 years ago when the whole damn thing started.
    - alecbz 8mo ago
      I wasn't flying 25 years ago but I'm not sure what you mean, or how that's relevant actually. The point is just that it takes them more time to do the "extra screening" if you don't have your ID than the standard screening if you did have your ID.
      - ibejoeb 8mo ago
        Sure. A couple of things to clarify: 1. They're not doing screening. The screening comes later. At this stage, they're attempting to identify someone. That has never been the job. The job is to prevent guns, knives, swollen batteries, or anything else that could be a safety threat during air travel. 2. Regardless, the reality is that they do identify travelers. Even so, the job has not changed. If you don't present sufficient identification, they will identify you through other mechanisms. The only thing the new dictate says is that they don't want this document, they want that document.
        FireBeyond 8mo ago
        > That has never been the job. The job is to prevent guns, knives, swollen batteries, or anything else that could be a safety threat during air travel. A job that by their own internal testing, they do well less than 5% of the time (some of their audits showed that 98% of fake/test guns that were sent through TSA got through checkpoints).
glaucon 8mo ago
What are these checks and scrutiny and how are they applied in the time available? Given the time available is not great ("I'm on the next flight") and the amount of money is modest if humans are involved I'm intrigued to know what could be done that $45 would cover.
- wmf 8mo ago
  Data brokers already know everything about every American so the TSA is just buying existing information from them. Then they can quickly quiz you on the information to verify that you are you. https://network.id.me/article/what-is-knowledge-based-verification-kbv/ https://network.id.me/article/what-is-knowledge-based-verifi...
- crazygringo 8mo ago
  It's a database lookup that takes 5-15 minutes once you get to an available officer, but then depending on what it returns you may need additional screening, which will also need to wait for someone available. That's why if you don't have an ID, you should get to the airport at least an hour earlier than otherwise (already accounting for long security lines), and more during peak travel times. If you get slowed down, you're going to miss your flight. They're not going to speed it up for you.
  - eitally 8mo ago
    To me this makes no sense at all. The visual (or computational) ID check takes a second. Why is a manual entry of someone's name/DOB something that takes 5-15 minutes? This is a process control issue, not a technical problem.
    - crazygringo 8mo ago
      You're misunderstanding. What's preventing me from finding someone on Facebook who looks kind of similar to me, finding out their address and phone number, and then claiming I'm them but forgot my ID? Or if I'm a serious criminal planning ahead, applying for a legitimate driver's license in that other person's name with easily-forgeable documentation that less strict DMV's accept when they aren't RealID? That's what they're guarding against. There's is no secure enough visual or computational ID check that takes a second when you're not already carrying a RealID or passport, that's the point. They have to start getting a bunch of information from databases, determining if it seems like a real person, and quizzing you on information you should know if you're the real you, and seeing if it all adds up or not.
beeflet 8mo ago
what the fuck extra checks and scrutiny could they possibly need? They already go through an x-ray machine and get molested before we get on the plane, "real ID" or not.
- kube-system 8mo ago
  There are more criteria to get through security than "not carrying prohibited items". Several of those are dependent on identity, which is why they verify identity.
  - AngryData 8mo ago
    It seems to me that all those other consideration only matter for international travel, while for domestic travel its an obvious waste of time from every angle.
    - kube-system 8mo ago
      Why would you think that? All four of the hijacked flights that led to the creation of the TSA were domestic flights.
      - AngryData 8mo ago
        And how many of those would additional federal ID have prevented?
        kube-system 8mo ago
        Pre 9/11 you didn’t even need an ID to board a flight. And you could take a knife with you. Having a reliable ID system is only useful if you have a security apparatus to check them, which literally did not exist then.
        beeflet 8mo ago
        What difference does it make if it's a foreign or domestic terrorist on a domestic flight? If you're a foreign terrorist and you get can get in the USA, you've probably have some excuse to be in the US, whether that's as a tourist or with a work visa or something. So you can probably board a domestic flight either way. The justification for all of the security theatre after 9/11 was that it would stop terrorist attacks. Makes no difference what passport they have as long as you can determine they're not smuggling a bomb up their ass. Not to mention that you can't take down a plane with a box-cutter anymore. The only way the 9/11 hijackers were successful is that the remaining passengers thought that the hijackers were pirates. It's a burned 0-day. You could just enact a policy of shooting down all planes within a certain radius of large buildings. I wouldn't be surprised if the annual cost would be orders of magnitude less than the annual cost of TSA. As long as you could ensure that aircraft couldn't be weaponized against major infrastructure, hijacking a plane would be no more dangerous than hijacking a train.
sailfast 8mo ago
Bullshit. Also not legally required.
steele 8mo ago
Got a bridge to sell you

deleted 8mo ago

[deleted]

I'm almost positive they get paid the same at the end of the day either way and the $45 just lines the pockets of someone on the top.

iknowstuff 8mo ago
Do you not see how an organization discouraging the use of something inefficient benefits as a whole? Thats why cashless businesses exist, why you pay more for things that involve human attention instead of automated online solutions etc.
- beeflet 8mo ago
  Who does it benefit? Not me. Maybe it benefits Mastercard and Visa.
  - iknowstuff 8mo ago
    Yes it benefits the consumer through lower prices, and in the case of cashless specifically, less tax fraud, etc
    - craftkiller 8mo ago
      Most businesses near me offer lower prices to people paying with cash.
      - iknowstuff 8mo ago
        High interchange fees? https://www.clearlypayments.com/blog/interchange-fees-by-country/ https://www.clearlypayments.com/blog/interchange-fees-by-cou... or tax fraud, otherwise cashless is obviously cheaper
alecbz 8mo ago
It's not that they'd pay individual employees more, it's that they'd hire more workers to account for the fact that their existing workers are tied up doing extra verification. Though they might not do that either.
- ibejoeb 8mo ago
  Even that fails a sanity test. They're not doing anything more than they would have done 25 years ago when the whole damn thing started.
  - alecbz 8mo ago
    I wasn't flying 25 years ago but I'm not sure what you mean, or how that's relevant actually. The point is just that it takes them more time to do the "extra screening" if you don't have your ID than the standard screening if you did have your ID.
    - ibejoeb 8mo ago
      Sure. A couple of things to clarify: 1. They're not doing screening. The screening comes later. At this stage, they're attempting to identify someone. That has never been the job. The job is to prevent guns, knives, swollen batteries, or anything else that could be a safety threat during air travel. 2. Regardless, the reality is that they do identify travelers. Even so, the job has not changed. If you don't present sufficient identification, they will identify you through other mechanisms. The only thing the new dictate says is that they don't want this document, they want that document.
      - FireBeyond 8mo ago
        > That has never been the job. The job is to prevent guns, knives, swollen batteries, or anything else that could be a safety threat during air travel. A job that by their own internal testing, they do well less than 5% of the time (some of their audits showed that 98% of fake/test guns that were sent through TSA got through checkpoints).

glaucon 8mo ago

What are these checks and scrutiny and how are they applied in the time available? Given the time available is not great ("I'm on the next flight") and the amount of money is modest if humans are involved I'm intrigued to know what could be done that $45 would cover.

wmf 8mo ago
Data brokers already know everything about every American so the TSA is just buying existing information from them. Then they can quickly quiz you on the information to verify that you are you. https://network.id.me/article/what-is-knowledge-based-verification-kbv/ https://network.id.me/article/what-is-knowledge-based-verifi...
crazygringo 8mo ago
It's a database lookup that takes 5-15 minutes once you get to an available officer, but then depending on what it returns you may need additional screening, which will also need to wait for someone available. That's why if you don't have an ID, you should get to the airport at least an hour earlier than otherwise (already accounting for long security lines), and more during peak travel times. If you get slowed down, you're going to miss your flight. They're not going to speed it up for you.
- eitally 8mo ago
  To me this makes no sense at all. The visual (or computational) ID check takes a second. Why is a manual entry of someone's name/DOB something that takes 5-15 minutes? This is a process control issue, not a technical problem.
  - crazygringo 8mo ago
    You're misunderstanding. What's preventing me from finding someone on Facebook who looks kind of similar to me, finding out their address and phone number, and then claiming I'm them but forgot my ID? Or if I'm a serious criminal planning ahead, applying for a legitimate driver's license in that other person's name with easily-forgeable documentation that less strict DMV's accept when they aren't RealID? That's what they're guarding against. There's is no secure enough visual or computational ID check that takes a second when you're not already carrying a RealID or passport, that's the point. They have to start getting a bunch of information from databases, determining if it seems like a real person, and quizzing you on information you should know if you're the real you, and seeing if it all adds up or not.

beeflet 8mo ago

what the fuck extra checks and scrutiny could they possibly need? They already go through an x-ray machine and get molested before we get on the plane, "real ID" or not.

kube-system 8mo ago
There are more criteria to get through security than "not carrying prohibited items". Several of those are dependent on identity, which is why they verify identity.
- AngryData 8mo ago
  It seems to me that all those other consideration only matter for international travel, while for domestic travel its an obvious waste of time from every angle.
  - kube-system 8mo ago
    Why would you think that? All four of the hijacked flights that led to the creation of the TSA were domestic flights.
    - AngryData 8mo ago
      And how many of those would additional federal ID have prevented?
      - kube-system 8mo ago
        Pre 9/11 you didn’t even need an ID to board a flight. And you could take a knife with you. Having a reliable ID system is only useful if you have a security apparatus to check them, which literally did not exist then.
        beeflet 8mo ago
        What difference does it make if it's a foreign or domestic terrorist on a domestic flight? If you're a foreign terrorist and you get can get in the USA, you've probably have some excuse to be in the US, whether that's as a tourist or with a work visa or something. So you can probably board a domestic flight either way. The justification for all of the security theatre after 9/11 was that it would stop terrorist attacks. Makes no difference what passport they have as long as you can determine they're not smuggling a bomb up their ass. Not to mention that you can't take down a plane with a box-cutter anymore. The only way the 9/11 hijackers were successful is that the remaining passengers thought that the hijackers were pirates. It's a burned 0-day. You could just enact a policy of shooting down all planes within a certain radius of large buildings. I wouldn't be surprised if the annual cost would be orders of magnitude less than the annual cost of TSA. As long as you could ensure that aircraft couldn't be weaponized against major infrastructure, hijacking a plane would be no more dangerous than hijacking a train.

sailfast 8mo ago

Bullshit. Also not legally required.

steele 8mo ago

Got a bridge to sell you