backtop


Print 61 comment(s) - last by fteoath64.. on Mar 11 at 8:19 AM


  (Source: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer/Warner Bros.)
Scanner couldn't even perform as well as a basic metal detector, but it's good at looking at your genitals

Body scanners are a controversial tool that's currently being installed at airports worldwide -- particularly in the U.S., where the government has paid contractors such as Rapiscan and Brijot hundreds of millions of dollars to deploy over 500 of the devices.  In the U.S. the deployment has reportedly been pushed by illicit financial ties, such as former U.S. Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) chief Michael Chertoff's financial relationship with Rapiscan, who paid off the chief for his "consulting services."

Michael Chertoff
Ex-DHS chief Michael Chertoff accepted payments from Rapiscan, even as he was promoting paying the contractor millions of dollars in body scanner contracts. [Image Source: DHS]

Meanwhile, there have been reports of U.S. Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) officials abusing the devices to make fun of peoples' genitals.  And reports also indicate health risks and the possibility that the DHS may be storing nudes scans of people for later reference.

But the most damning piece of evidence against the scanners yet may have just landed, delivered by college-educated engineer Jonathan Corbett, who runs the blog "TSA Out of Our Pants".

Mr. Corbett has identified a weakness in the device, which essentially renders them useless.  He noticed that both the older backscatter machines and the new millimeter wave scanners, chose the color of spotted solid objects as identitical to the background, allowing techs to spot items hidden against the body (colorized as white), such as weapons or bomb-making chemicals.  So he decided to see what happened if a secret pocket was stitched into a shirt, well off of the body.

Body scanner images
Body scanners rely solely on contrast -- making them useless if the weapon or bomb-making supply is held off the body, tests have shown. [Image Source: TSA]

He tested the theory using a metal case stored inside a secret pocket.  Had he put the object in his chest pocket, it would have been spotted in the scans and he would almost certainly have been detained. But by using the secret side pocket, which was not contrasted in the image against his body, he eluded both the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport's backscatter machine and the Cleveland-Hopkins International Airport's newest millimeter wave machine.

He comments to top UK news site Mail Online, "While I carried the metal case empty, it could easily have been filled with razor blades, explosives, or one of Charlie Sheen’s infamous seven gram rocks of cocaine.  With a bigger pocket, perhaps sewn on the inside of the shirt, even a firearm could get through."

The metal case would have been detected by the old security checkpoint of a decade ago, as it had metal-detectors.  However, the new checkpoints largely have no built-in metal detection of on-person objects, relying solely on full-body scanners and occasional pat-downs (which Mr. Corbett did not receive).

Cleverly, Mr. Corbett video-taped his clean scan, by putting his camera, running, on the conveyor belt and allowing it to travel through luggage X-Ray scan, spotting him on his way out.

Jonathan Corbett
Jonathan Corbett -- an engineer-turned blogger -- has presented compelling evidence that body scanners decrease security and are ineffective at fighting terrorism.  He is suing the TSA
[Image Source: Jonathan Corbett/Mail Online]

"Now, I'm sure the TSA will accuse me of aiding the terrorists by releasing this video, but it's beyond belief that the terrorists haven't already figured this out and are already plotting to use this against us.  It’s also beyond belief that the TSA did not already know everything I just told you, and arrogantly decided to disregard our safety. The nude body scanner program is nothing but a giant fraud."

In the past it was shown that less-dense objects like plastic guns or low-density explosives could be missed in backscatter images.  However, this is the first compelling proof that millimeter wave designs are also useless -- another prop in the government's expensive game of "security theater" -- a game that has been potentially motivated by financial corruption.

Mr. Corbett recalls thinking when he first envisioned the work-around, "It can't possibly be that easy to beat the TSA’s billion dollar fleet of nude body scanners, right? The TSA can't be that stupid, can they?"

Summarizing his findings, he comments, "Unfortunately, they can, and they are."

Airport travellers
An engineer has offered evidence that the TSA and DHS have recklessly endangered hundreds of thousands of Americans by promoting a false illusion of security with body scanners.
[Image Source: Corbis]

The TSA has refused to comment on these developments.

Video of the incident can be found here:



Google Inc.'s (GOOG) YouTube (the host) has rated this video 18+ as per its "Community Guidelines", although it does not contain any profanity or any ostensibly inappropriate content.

Other threats to the effectiveness of the devices are also looming.  Recently, terrorists in Saudi Arabia have resorted to increasingly complex methods for disguising improvised explosive devices, such as inserting bombs in their rectal cavities [1][2]. The question becomes whether the TSA will go as far as ordering "cavity searches" of travellers, in addition to genital-region pat downs of everyone from children to the elderly.

The embarassment for the TSA and DHS -- and the Bush and Obama administrations that supported the scanner rollout -- is unlikely to fade any time soon, though.  Mr. Corbett has taken the bold move of suing [PDF] the TSA for the scanner rollout, which he complains was a waste of money that decreased security versus traditional metal detectors and pat-downs.

Sources: TSA Out of Our Pants [press release], [lawsuit], Daily Mail



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

But... But...
By MrBlastman on 3/7/2012 2:11:15 PM , Rating: 5
/begins to recite a mantra

The Government is our keeper, our protector, our savior. The only solution is more Police, more laws and less freedoms. I believe our our country, for which is stands, one nation under oppression for the greater good of the collective.

Hrm. So much for the mantra, eh? How is our Police State going to save us, now?




RE: But... But...
By Mithan on 3/7/2012 2:13:05 PM , Rating: 4
People are dumb and believe they can be 100% protected.

They can't.


RE: But... But...
By rburnham on 3/7/2012 3:20:09 PM , Rating: 3
But we sure as hell are going to pay a lot of money to feel secure, even when we are not.


RE: But... But...
By MrBlastman on 3/7/2012 3:36:25 PM , Rating: 1
A few bucks buys me some ammo. A few more bucks buys me food for my best friend--my dog. That's all most of us really need to be secure.


RE: But... But...
By semiconshawn on 3/7/12, Rating: 0
RE: But... But...
By rs2 on 3/7/2012 9:17:37 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, knowing that every random wacko and their dog is armed to the teeth, out of dollars from buying ammo and dog-food, and subsisting on said dog-food certainly makes me feel more secure.

Wait. No it doesn't. Their guns and ammo won't provide them with food or shelter unless they actually use them to threaten people, or kill things, or kill people, or all of the above.


RE: But... But...
By tng on 3/8/2012 8:12:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Their guns and ammo won't provide them with food or shelter unless they actually use them to threaten people, or kill things, or kill people, or all of the above.
Or, they protect your food and shelter from people who would take them from you?

Guns are not evil, but a small minority of the people who have them are. One of the greatest myths put out there by the current "police state" is that guns are inherently evil and should be banned. As seen by what has happened in the UK, that is a bad idea.


RE: But... But...
By tng on 3/8/2012 9:42:41 AM , Rating: 2
Can't beleive that I got rated down for that. Guns are just a tool. Any tool can be used for good or bad, the people who would rate me down probably have at least one screwdriver and just don't realize that you can use it to kill somebody.


RE: But... But...
By MrBlastman on 3/8/2012 10:03:08 AM , Rating: 2
It's surprising how many people are afraid of them and have no clue. My neighbor is from Britain and his mum was visiting one day. She happened to be ranting about how scared she was earlier in the day because she saw a neighborhood boy walking around with a BB Gun hunting squirrels.

She proclaimed, "I can't believe that is legal here! He must have been breaking the law! That's dangerous!"

I just sighed and shook my head, not wanting to stir the pot with her. A BB Gun. Seriously?

:(


RE: But... But...
By Ringold on 3/8/2012 2:03:09 PM , Rating: 4
You didn't let out a big sigh of relief as you took a full-sized 1911 out of a holster and plopped it down on the table and said "Man, this thing chafes some times"? :P


RE: But... But...
By SirZ on 3/8/2012 11:04:14 AM , Rating: 2
Uh....what happened in the UK, a High School shooting with slingshots? Five victims? Three dead? </sarcasm>

Which side of the gun issue were you arguing for anyway?

BTW, I believe in the right to bear arms, though most don't deserve that right... military service should be a mandatory prerequisite for firearm ownership IMHO. Want to carry heat? fine, do it on the front lines first.


RE: But... But...
By Kurz on 3/8/2012 11:51:34 AM , Rating: 3
Umm... the primary reason for the right to bear arms is allow the citizenry to instill fear in our government.


RE: But... But...
By JediJeb on 3/8/2012 2:44:39 PM , Rating: 3
And in any would be invaders who would also need to plan how to deal with an armed citizenry.


RE: But... But...
By macca007 on 3/9/2012 8:24:13 PM , Rating: 2
Any would be invaders? LOL
That is no excuse for needing to have guns, Which idiotic country would be fkn stupid enough to attack the greatest military power on the planet?
Don't think those countries would give 2 shits about being afraid of citizens carrying hand pistols or even high powered rifles.
Those would be invaders would just bomb the citizens back to the stone age, cripple infrastructure power/water,take over farms etc etc sure some could manage to go bush and live off land for a while but seriously 300,000,000 Americans citizens doing that aint gonna work for very long,End up turning on each other when things get scarce. lol
By all means carry a weapon to defend yourself/family, But seriously cut the crap about needing guns to defend against an invading army when your country has not only Nukes but the greatest fighting force on the planet, Almost an insult to those that serve thinking a Rambo with a gun can hold off another invading super power.


RE: But... But...
By fteoath64 on 3/11/2012 8:19:00 AM , Rating: 2
"the greatest fighting force on the planet".

The NDAA just made that greatest fighting force on the planet turn AGAINST You!. That is why. They determine who an "enemy combatant" is and it has no relevance to the truth, just whatever they have determined.


RE: But... But...
By rs2 on 3/8/2012 7:53:48 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't say guns are evil, or that nobody should have them. I said that people who feel that "ALL they need" are bullets and dogfood don't exactly inspire feelings of safety in me. And I stand by that.

Everyone needs/wants more than just ammo and dogfood, and a person who has only those two things doesn't exactly have very many options in terms of how they're going to acquire the other things they want.

There's nothing wrong with people owning and using guns responsibly. However, the people who are so vehemently pro-gun as to assert that having every single person walking around with a concealed weapon on their person is a good idea that will increase safety are really not any better than the people in the "guns are evil" crowd. It's seldom wise to take the extremist viewpoint on either side of an argument. The best answer is typically somewhere in the middle.


RE: But... But...
By tng on 3/9/2012 2:29:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
...having every single person walking around with a concealed weapon on their person is a good idea that will increase safety are really not any better than the people in the "guns are evil" crowd.
Criminals like people who can't or wont defend themselves. Why would you take on someone who may have a firearm when there is a person down the street who doesn't?

In response to the UK comment, after the UK took all the guns off the streets and out of the hands of responsible owners, violent crime has not gone away. If you can't shoot someone, you use the next best thing, a knife. This has prompted UK officials to look into banning certain kinds of knives. Of course this will not stop people who will start using bats, and so on.


RE: But... But...
By MrBlastman on 3/8/2012 9:59:56 AM , Rating: 1
You're really a fool if you think that all of us with guns and ammo go around every single day looking for people to threaten, rob, beat and murder for our food. LOL!

Guess what? The people that DO go around doing that are insane and should be put down/put away/whatever--and they are a minority. I have my ammo and dog to protect myself from those people.

Think about it--say you are walking along downtown one day and three of those "wackos" fan out around you while you're minding your own business in the street. You look around and notice nobody else is on the street with you except those thugs. You have a few options...

1. Pick up your phone and try and call the cops... good luck with that, they'll be on top of you so fast it isn't funny.

2. Scream for help! That's not going to do you any good either because by the time the cops DO arrive, you've been beaten, shot and left for dead.

3. Fan out your shirt/coat over your sidearm. They'll get the picture quick and walk away. Most of these thugs don't want trouble and would rather just move along to an easier target.

Most of us that do have ammo and a dog respect:

a. The Constitution
b. Our State laws
c. Our Freedoms

We don't want to jeopardize them so we'd rather be good, law abiding people like the rest of America. The only difference is when trouble happens, we aren't at the mercy of our "system" and instead can do something about it, letting the "system" do their job as well--which is to clean up the mess after it happens. The "system" doesn't save you, it just finds the problem individuals after it happens.

But you go ahead and keep thinking we're all nuts and as you lose your freedoms, one day you'll wake up and think to yourself--gee, this really stinks, I can't do anything anymore in my town because the police and surveillance are everywhere. Who knows... maybe you'll pick your nose wrong and end up thrown in jail because of it.


RE: But... But...
By JediJeb on 3/8/2012 2:49:23 PM , Rating: 1
I guess most anti-gun people think that when someone is breaking in your front door, you can ask them politely to stand outside while you call the police and to wait for them to come arrest them instead of beating you up and taking all you have.

There is probably a good reason why out here in the rural parts we don't hear of things such as home invasions. Most home invaders are afraid to try it because they never know which house might have the shotgun waiting for them just inside the door.


RE: But... But...
By macca007 on 3/9/2012 8:38:14 PM , Rating: 2
True but that's what insurance is for,No different from a shop owner. If at gunpoint better off just letting them take the shit instead of either getting killed or put in jail for manslaughter.

No,The reason is why would some thugs drive all that way out there to some rural town to steal a tv from you,Makes no sense. The city or suburbs with houses crammed together offers more potential stealing,They also have no clue which house owner carries the .50 desert eagle, No difference there between rural folk and city folk.
Too much shit is shown on tv where the good guy wins, In real life it's not always pretty, You put up a fight you or your wife or kid gets killed over a stupid fkn tv!


RE: But... But...
By EricMartello on 3/8/12, Rating: 0
RE: But... But...
By Paj on 3/8/2012 7:25:13 AM , Rating: 2
There s a huge difference between a police state and law and order.


RE: But... But...
By tng on 3/8/2012 8:25:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
There s a huge difference between a police state and law and order.
Depends on what you call law and order.

I grew up in a very rural area where almost every body owned a gun. There was no crime to speak of, unless you count breaking traffic laws. When I moved to a large metro area I found that people there were afraid of guns and many were afraid of me because I had used guns before. It was just sad. Most of these people were just waiting to be a victim of crime, scared of almost everything.


RE: But... But...
By Kurz on 3/8/2012 10:48:22 AM , Rating: 3
Fear is the mind killer.


RE: But... But...
By Invane on 3/8/2012 12:15:51 PM , Rating: 3
This is the method the government is currently using to push their gun control agenda. If they can get it to the point that most people fear guns, tighter and tighter gun control will be a foregone conclusion.

I also grew up in smaller rural areas where guns were commonplace. Having a gun rack in the back window of your truck was fairly commonplace. Nowadays people freak out at the mere sight of a gun.

The lack of education and knowledge about firearms is the real problem here, and I have no doubt this is intentional. Switzerland has mandatory training in this regard for all males as well as one of the highest firearm ownership rates in the world. Shooting is a national pastime, and seeing someone carrying a rifle in plain sight down the street is common. It also has some of the lowest crime rates.

Once you give up the knowledge and right to defend yourself, and expect some other empowered party to do it for you, you submit to anything that empowered party wants to do to you. This is quickly becoming the state of American law enforcement as police departments become more militarized while gun legislation becomes more and more strict.

Firearms have played an important role in our country's history. They are a tool, and, like any other can be used for whatever purpose the human being using them chooses. I used to have an aversion to guns, but I've since come to understand the purpose they serve. I sincerely wish more Americans would educate themselves on this point and begin exercising their right to own a gun. An armed society is a polite society.


RE: But... But...
By JediJeb on 3/8/2012 2:55:36 PM , Rating: 2
Correct! If people want the police to be the ones that will constantly protect them, then they will have to be willing to put up the money to expand the police force until there can be an officer on ever corner 24/7, otherwise there will be openings in the coverage and someone is going to get through.

Home defense should be every person's responsibility personally. Problem is now days everyone wants to just have their fun and never be bothered with the responsibilities required for everyday life.


RE: But... But...
By Strunf on 3/8/2012 8:03:08 AM , Rating: 1
I would even say the more advanced a system is the more flaws it may have.

Full body scanners are useless if you put whatever you want inside your own body, also seeing how this work you could come up with something that would encase your object in such a way that the X-Ray would not see where your body ends and this encasing starts.


RE: But... But...
By Sazabi19 on 3/7/2012 4:18:58 PM , Rating: 2
By the time the general public realizes this it will be too late to try to change anything whithout a large cost (one way or another).


RE: But... But...
By Dorkyman on 3/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: But... But...
By JediJeb on 3/7/2012 6:05:11 PM , Rating: 4
DHS is one agency that never should have been created. It was created to help organize the sharing of data between all of our other agencies, and yet now is one of the most powerful and invasive agencies we have. Just do away with it and force the FBI, CIA, ATF, NSA and Military to all share their information and we could save billions of dollars each year. Matter of fact move the firearms and explosives work of the ATF(or whatever it is called now) into the FBI and the alcohol and tobacco into the FDA and we can kill off another agency. Wow, what a thought, less government and less expenses, that should be good for our budget shouldn't it?


RE: But... But...
By Solandri on 3/8/2012 1:32:04 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, DHS as a department makes a lot of sense IMHO. Before, you had INS (including customs and border patrol) in the Dept. of Justice, FEMA as a part of Dept. of Housing and Urban Development until it was made an independent agency, and in the Dept. of the Treasury you had the Secret Service (which fights counterfeiting) and Coast Guard (no idea why it went there), except during wars when the Coast Guard was transferred to the DoD.

All of these agencies serve to protect the country's borders and interior. From a bureaucratic perspective, consolidating them all under DHS made a lot of sense (though the name is kinda goofy). The problem is the TSA - an agency created to provide security theater but which takes its job way, way too seriously.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater


RE: But... But...
By spread on 3/8/2012 5:23:23 PM , Rating: 2
You're talking about good government. Government that can be kept in check. Government that is afraid and respects it's citizens. The ideal government.

This is not what we have. It has some positives, but everyday it becomes more infected with these parasites. The answer is not to remove government. Only the infection within.


"Relies on contrast"
By rs2 on 3/7/2012 6:26:48 PM , Rating: 5
I'm disappointed at encountering such a technical misstatement on a tech-themed news site. The machines themselves do not rely on contrast for anything. Only the visualization produced by the machine does that. In terms of the scanner itself, a metallic object will produce a distinct physical reading no matter where it is placed.

So the only real problem is that some idiot decided to make the color for "empty space" be exactly the same color as "solid object". If they just made the "solid object" color red or something (or the background light-blue, or whatever), then it would no longer be possible to defeat the machines this way.

Anyhow, I'm not defending the full body scanners, nor the culture of fear that led to their use. I think they're idiotic and I hope this guy succeeds in his lawsuit. However I don't like seeing technical inaccuracies, especially on a tech site. The flaw that was exploited is purely one of poor visualization, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the underlying scanner technology. It could, in fact, probably be fixed with a simple firmware update to existing machines to change how they visualize the data coming in off the scanner.




RE: "Relies on contrast"
By dark matter on 3/8/2012 7:06:49 AM , Rating: 2
The bigger idiot is the ones walking through the scanners.

You don't have to do what you're told to do. You do realise this. Technical aspects not withstanding.


RE: "Relies on contrast"
By Kurz on 3/8/2012 10:44:59 AM , Rating: 2
I will always asked to be pat down instead.
No need to see my small penis.


Rapiscan?
By kattanna on 3/7/2012 2:15:23 PM , Rating: 5
LOL.. did anyone else read that as "rapist scan"?




RE: Rapiscan?
By Gondor on 3/7/2012 3:32:15 PM , Rating: 3
Yup, especially the picture with that old crook's face (the former DHS guy) provoked that thought.


I wonder..revenge?
By tamalero on 3/9/2012 11:41:41 AM , Rating: 2
I know some of the groups (NSA, TSA,etc..) can act like brats when someone shows them wrong..
I wonder if they will either ban this fellow scientist/engineer from traveling or if they will make his life hell if he goes thru US airports.




TSA
By jurgen vandecasteele on 3/8/12, Rating: 0
Easy Fix
By jemix on 3/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: Easy Fix
By JasonMick (blog) on 3/7/2012 2:27:21 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Seems to me that this flaw can be fixed if they replace the black background with a white background. Easy and cheap... and now, more secure!
I believe the contrast works not because of the color, but because of the thickness of the human body providing a strong density base reading -- I'm not sure whether clothing would provide enough contrast to create an accurate reading... not sure if your solution would work and even if it does, oh goodie that means spending another $1B USD on scanners and overhauling the airports.

And it still wouldn't stop cavity IEDs. What's your proposal for them? :)


RE: Easy Fix
By MrBlastman on 3/7/2012 3:12:21 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
And it still wouldn't stop cavity IEDs. What's your proposal for them? :)


Stop flying! The terrorists are dangerous and flying is dangerous! Ground all the airplanes. Shut down the airports. We have to stop them at all costs so this is our only option. We can't let them win!

*throws arms up in the air an runs around scared*

Oh help me, please help us all great Government!

I think the moral of this whole story is:

1. Stop playing to Terrorist's games--i.e. cut the crap on the absurd security measures.

2. Stop being scared on a plane... if you see a terrorist, get out of your seat and drop them yourself.

3. Go about your life like you did before any attack. That means don't increase security, don't increase police... just act like nothing happened (and refer to number two if something does).

Sadly, so few in our country realize number three is the best solution of all.


RE: Easy Fix
By ClownPuncher on 3/7/2012 3:35:01 PM , Rating: 3
I've been saying that for years, but was called "unpatriotic" in the early 2000's.


RE: Easy Fix
By Sazabi19 on 3/7/2012 4:16:37 PM , Rating: 2
Our contry in general has been getting dumber for years, there's honestly almost no reason to be patriotic anymore accept to honor our past, but not so much the present, and honestly I do not look forward to the future of this country especially if it keeps going like this. I'm getting my passport soon; I would also get at least a sidearm.


RE: Easy Fix
By semiconshawn on 3/7/2012 5:44:48 PM , Rating: 5
This attitude right here contributes as much to the demise of or country as anything. Things suck no future country in the toilet blah blah. You live in the greatest country the world has ever known. Dont beleive me get that passport and travel around. The world is a fantastic place Europe, Asia, South America spent months in each. And yet everyone everywhere wants to come here. Why? Because the things you take for granted dont exist everywhere. Such as buying that gun you want or leaving with that passport whenever you want. Our government is a stagnated mess no doubt but this is still by far the GREATEST COUNTRY IN HISTORY and you should feel lucky to live here (maybe you would have prefered to be born in Syria?). Instead you berate it. I for one look forward to the day you get your passport and leave.


RE: Easy Fix
By Paj on 3/8/2012 7:37:24 AM , Rating: 1
A free-market system with little labor protection; an adversarial legal system; high murder rates; high rates of gun ownership; a large prison population; capital punishment; a military history chequered by expensive, largely pointless wars with little to no benefit; a brutal history of indigenous oppression and slavery; inequitable and expensive health care and education; and relatively widespread poverty.

America has given the world a great deal. But the world is getting sick of it taking more than its fair share. Its time at the top is drawing to a close - witness the rise of China.

I'd struggle to say its the greatest country, nation, or empire in history. I'm sure those within the Greek, Roman, Mongol, Ottoman and British empires thought the same things during their period of hegemony. Where are these empires now? As they discovered, hubris has a nasty habit of biting people in the ass.


RE: Easy Fix
By tng on 3/8/2012 9:16:02 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
A free-market system with little labor protection...
Really? The rise of lawyers that are just itching to take on any cause for money has become the best labor protection there is in the US. Fear of class action lawsuits IMO is what keeps allot of large corporations in line nowdays.

quote:
high murder rates; high rates of gun ownership...
What is high to you? I would also think that you equate higher rates of gun ownership to higher murder rates, while the FBI has estimated that guns probably prevent at least 2 million crimes each year. Wish I could find the link on that for you, but crimes prevented by the use of a gun are not reported on by media, since that would go against their bias against guns.

quote:
...a large prison population; capital punishment...
I will agree with you on this, something needs to be done about it.

quote:
largely pointless wars with little to no benefit
Afghanistan, started out as a war of vengeance and the people of Afghanistan did understand that, however it turned into something else for political purposes when people in DC took control from the soldiers. Iraq was pointless IMO.

quote:
...a brutal history of indigenous oppression and slavery...
Old history and not really uncommon for any country in history.

quote:
...relatively widespread poverty.
Well the poor here in the US are better off than most of the poor in the world, however IMO there is no solution to the poverty problem. Some people will excel within a given system while others will not be able to cope, a reminder that everybody is different. Offering equal opportunity to all will not give equal results to all.

quote:
I'd struggle to say its the greatest country, nation, or empire in history. I'm sure those within the Greek, Roman, Mongol, Ottoman and British empires thought the same things during their period of hegemony. Where are these empires now? As they discovered, hubris has a nasty habit of biting people in the ass.
Ditto.

People in the US need a revolution, government has gotten to big and out of touch with the citizens. I think that one of the founding fathers said that revolution was necessary from time to time.


RE: Easy Fix
By Etsp on 3/8/2012 9:26:34 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
but crimes prevented by the use of a gun are not reported on by media, since that would go against their bias against guns.
Oh FFS. There IS no bias. These events do not provoke the same interest in the news as the crimes that weren't prevented. It's about ratings, that's all it is. Here's a hint: You don't hear about that sort of thing on Fox news either.

To the best of my knowledge the only media empire in the US with an agenda is Murdoch's. Of course, it's also his empire that's going on and on about the "Liberal Media Agenda".


RE: Easy Fix
By Paj on 3/8/2012 10:25:38 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Really? The rise of lawyers that are just itching to take on any cause for money has become the best labor protection there is in the US. Fear of class action lawsuits IMO is what keeps allot of large corporations in line nowdays.


That doesn't have a lot to do with unionism, more to do with regulation.

quote:
What is high to you? I would also think that you equate higher rates of gun ownership to higher murder rates, while the FBI has estimated that guns probably prevent at least 2 million crimes each year. Wish I could find the link on that for you, but crimes prevented by the use of a gun are not reported on by media, since that would go against their bias against guns.


The debate will no doubt rage on for ever. In my view, gun ownership in the US has its roots in 18th century paranoia about tyranny and the British. I find it amusing that the government allows its citizenry to own arms to be used as an instrument against tyranny, yet its perfectly OK to use pepper spray against handcuffed civilians.

quote:
I will agree with you on this, something needs to be done about it.


Glad we agree. Perhaps the point above has a lot to do with it?

quote:
Afghanistan, started out as a war of vengeance and the people of Afghanistan did understand that, however it turned into something else for political purposes when people in DC took control from the soldiers. Iraq was pointless IMO.


Yep. Aside from the wars, the degree to which the US has meddled in foreign governments is astonishing - Latin America, Iran, Europe, Israel, for most of the 20th century.

quote:
Old history and not really uncommon for any country in history.


True, this still doesn't make it OK.

quote:
Well the poor here in the US are better off than most of the poor in the world, however IMO there is no solution to the poverty problem. Some people will excel within a given system while others will not be able to cope, a reminder that everybody is different. Offering equal opportunity to all will not give equal results to all.


We make more than enough food to feed everyone, enough money to give everyone a decent standard of living. Greed, corruption and indifference prevent this from happening - nothing more.

quote:
People in the US need a revolution, government has gotten to big and out of touch with the citizens. I think that one of the founding fathers said that revolution was necessary from time to time.


You're probably right about that.


RE: Easy Fix
By Ringold on 3/8/2012 2:24:24 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
We make more than enough food to feed everyone, enough money to give everyone a decent standard of living. Greed, corruption and indifference prevent this from happening - nothing more.


Average "poor" person is probably overweight in America. Dont have a link to prove it, but I suspect.

The same "poor" person, relative to the rest, in Somalia probably is much shorter than they should be, malnourished, and looks like bones shrink-wrapped in skin.

Lets be fair and accept that the welfare state in America is generous enough that, accounting for all the products and services the "poor" consume that they probably don't HAVE to consume (like cell phones), they have plenty enough to feed themselves. And a local news station here in Florida revealed abuse, fraud, and incredible waste in food stamps around here, ranging from using food stamp cards to pay for porn, to using them at casinos, and just paying twice what was necessary with the poor loading up on groceries at gas stations.


RE: Easy Fix
By Paj on 3/8/2012 3:04:19 PM , Rating: 2
I wasn't referring to the USA, but the world. An estimated 30-40% of perfectly good food is thrown away in the Western world. If that wasnt bad enough, it could be used as fertilizer, fuel, or to feed the world's poor, but instead mostly goes to landfill.


RE: Easy Fix
By JediJeb on 3/8/2012 3:13:41 PM , Rating: 2
But here in the US I have the right to stand up and speak out against such thing as you listed, or to speak for them.

The thing I fear most is that the US will fall into the same fate as all the other "Empires" you mentioned because we are slowly traveling down the same path as all of those past empires and including the EU. That path is that the Federal government is trying to bring more and more control into the centralized point under its control instead of being a guide post to many dispersed State and local governments. Every empire that has moved to a strong central control has soon fallen. The founders of the US government knew this and from the beginning it was set up so that the States were to do the bulk of the social work and control and the Federal government was to give them guidance and mediate any disputes among them while also providing a national defense. All of these problems have risen since the shift began towards a more powerful Federal government and I am afraid it will only get worse unless we return to our founding Constitutional values.


RE: Easy Fix
By Paj on 3/8/2012 7:27:05 AM , Rating: 2
Agree completely. This is one instance where the US government has got it badly wrong.


RE: Easy Fix
By phatboye on 3/7/2012 8:58:03 PM , Rating: 2
guys, I'm pretty sure he was bing sarcastic, I don't know why jemix is being downvoted


RE: Easy Fix
By MozeeToby on 3/7/2012 2:27:57 PM , Rating: 2
The background of the image is black because there is no backs-scatter coming from it. It's not just an arbitrary choice some programmer made, it's an inherent flaw in the system.


RE: Easy Fix
By kattanna on 3/7/2012 2:31:13 PM , Rating: 3
um.. or they could simply have people turn in a circle while in the scanner

expect to see this new rule the next time you go to the airport.. walk in and turn 360 degrees, exit


RE: Easy Fix
By JasonMick (blog) on 3/7/2012 2:41:48 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
um.. or they could simply have people turn in a circle while in the scanner

expect to see this new rule the next time you go to the airport.. walk in and turn 360 degrees, exit

Will they do the "hokey pokey" next?


RE: Easy Fix
By kattanna on 3/7/2012 2:42:39 PM , Rating: 2
LOL why not? you know.. to complete the farce that it is


RE: Easy Fix
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 3/7/2012 10:11:19 PM , Rating: 2
No, but he is quite right. Generally you have them stand in the scanner facing one of the walls and it scans between them. The simple solution is then to make them turn 90 degrees in either direction and take a second snapshot.

However, there are other means to defeat this using custom containers that will scatter the radiation, similar to the concepts of Stealth used in Aircraft to shrink their RCS profile from a large aircraft to say the size of a ball bearing. Not nearly as expensive as radar due to the lower power but still a moderate challenge. The other option is use a material that will absorb the radiation, also used in aircraft like the F-117.


RE: Easy Fix
By Tyndel on 3/8/2012 11:48:54 AM , Rating: 2
If sewn into the inside of the pants leg a 90 degree turn wouldn't find the item.

From the first time these were talked about being purchased and rolled out people have been pointing out ways to bypass them. Any security has its vulnerability and if someone takes the time to study it even and average person can defeat it in various ways.


RE: Easy Fix
By semiconshawn on 3/7/2012 4:56:13 PM , Rating: 2
hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha good one!!! Unless you were serious. If so go in to your moms room and have her slap the crap out of you.


"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki