3 ms·

Actually, the article does say it---just above the heading for "Privacy concerns". It also says, near the end, that of the new contracts, two are with companie

by blahedo 14y ago

Actually, the article does say it---just above the heading for "Privacy concerns". It also says, near the end, that of the new contracts, two are with companies that use millimeter-wave, and one is with a company that uses backscatter. So the privacy thing probably isn't just a cover story, or at least not for the X-ray issue.

cpeterso 14y ago
It's sad (but unsurprising) that the machines are being removed for reasons other than safety or effectiveness.
- zaroth 14y ago
  I'm not sure if you're trolling? The machines are being removed precisely due to concerns over safety and effectiveness. Efficiency is the number one reason they are being removed, as stated by the TSA. The backscatter machines produce an R-rated image of the person being scanned. This requires secondary personnel to view the image in a separate area and then communicate back to the primary personnel at the checkpoint. TSA asked Rapidscan to write software which could render a non-R-rated image which could be displayed and interpreted at the checkpoint, but Rapidscan could not or would not. If you have studied HCI, the simplicity and efficiency of the interface is highly correlated with the ability of the user to complete a designated task. Making the checkpoint more efficient increases TSA personnel's ability to accomplish their objectives. The UI of the ProVision is specifically designed for 'non-experts' -- it shows a simple stick figure and a bright colored box for any area of the body that triggers an alert. What could be easier to interpret? You can even look at your own results as you walk through. Whether or not you're a fan of TSA, whether you believe the increased efficiency is simply a face-saving excuse to get the "naked body scanners" out of there, the TSA's rightfully concluded the ProVision (RF, non-ionizing) scanners are a superior product, and everyone should be happier to get to walk through them rather than the X-ray based machines. Personally I'd be happier not having to queue and walk through any fixed scanner... and they are working on airport designs which will make that a reality.

by blahedo 14y ago

cpeterso 14y ago

It's sad (but unsurprising) that the machines are being removed for reasons other than safety or effectiveness.

zaroth 14y ago
I'm not sure if you're trolling? The machines are being removed precisely due to concerns over safety and effectiveness. Efficiency is the number one reason they are being removed, as stated by the TSA. The backscatter machines produce an R-rated image of the person being scanned. This requires secondary personnel to view the image in a separate area and then communicate back to the primary personnel at the checkpoint. TSA asked Rapidscan to write software which could render a non-R-rated image which could be displayed and interpreted at the checkpoint, but Rapidscan could not or would not. If you have studied HCI, the simplicity and efficiency of the interface is highly correlated with the ability of the user to complete a designated task. Making the checkpoint more efficient increases TSA personnel's ability to accomplish their objectives. The UI of the ProVision is specifically designed for 'non-experts' -- it shows a simple stick figure and a bright colored box for any area of the body that triggers an alert. What could be easier to interpret? You can even look at your own results as you walk through. Whether or not you're a fan of TSA, whether you believe the increased efficiency is simply a face-saving excuse to get the "naked body scanners" out of there, the TSA's rightfully concluded the ProVision (RF, non-ionizing) scanners are a superior product, and everyone should be happier to get to walk through them rather than the X-ray based machines. Personally I'd be happier not having to queue and walk through any fixed scanner... and they are working on airport designs which will make that a reality.