Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> somebody wrote:
>
> > Are you saying those who design airport security are dumb?
>
> No, just handicapped by politics and economics.
>
> In this world, rarely is the best technical solution the one that
> actually gets chosen. (Exhibit A: Betamax.)

I've seen a specific security measure, like, "Your FOO is going to be thoroughly
examined and you may only possess items measured less than BAR."  So everyone is
greatly inconvenienced with their FOO's and measuring things less than BAR.
This is maddening to me because crazy bad guys could still create mischief with
their non-FOO and with something of size less than BAR.  Given the possibility,
I believe it is a cynical  response-- motivated not by security of the
passengers but to avoid lawsuits-- to have the current level of inconveniences.
So, in this analysis, security measures are nowhere near tough enough.

I'm wondering what security measures would be in place after a century of
dealing with the bad guys pushing of the envelope.  Yes, do we use knockout gas
and transport people nude in plasteel bubbles, do we give up on the whole thing,
do we use Trek-style transporters?   For example, do we just have a spigot on
the back of the seat for drinking water, and ban all fluids of any size?

As for intelligence of transport authority figures, there is one story of a
guard having "discovered" someone guilty of "industrial espionage."  Turned out
it was a lame artist with a notebook full of cartoony sketches of cars he'd seen
in Europe, (cars available for sale to the public, ones for which the internet
had hundreds of online photos available to anyone, spy or no.)

Post a reply to this message