3 ms·

>Their product giving false positives (unnecessary challenges for a normal browser humans commonly use) to real people is definitely their fault. Is it TSA's "

• forkerenok 7mo ago
  We're discussing the quality of screening here, not the act/necessity of screening itself.
  • gruez 7mo ago
    >We're discussing the quality of screening here The "quality" of TSA's screening seems be pretty bad too given how many people have to go through secondary screening vs how many terrorist they catch (0?)
    • DonHopkins 7mo ago
      They are failing to meet there quotas of shooting innocent people in the face, so ICE is helping out.
    • bdangubic 7mo ago
      they caught 11 million by now (just as arbitrary as your 0 but probably more accurate since we haven’t had a large terrorist attack since they got the gig to serve and protect and before we lost thousands of lives…)
      • gruez 7mo ago
        >they caught 11 million by now (just as arbitrary as your 0 but probably more accurate Nice try but I used "caught", not "stopped", which requires they actually apprehended someone, not just prevented some hypothetical attack. >since they got the gig to serve and protect and before we lost thousands of lives…) You could easily reuse this argument for cloudflare: "if it wasn't for such invasive browser fingerprinting openai would be drowning in bajillion req/s from bots."
        • bdangubic 7mo ago
          > “if it wasn't for such invasive browser fingerprinting openai would be drowning in bajillion req/s from bots." of course they would be drowning! I have no issues with what CF is doing. too funny that people use tools like chatgpt and expect privacy?!
• lxgr 7mo ago
  No, but it's entirely within TSA's hands to make that process as frictionless as possible. (It's a different question whether zero friction is actually desired, or whether some security theater is actually part of the service being provided, but that's a different question.)