Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

TSA Terminates Its Contract With Maker of Full-Body Scanner

samzenpus posted about a year and a half ago | from the time-to-go dept.

Government 268

McGruber writes "The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has ended a contract with Rapiscan, a unit of OSI Systems Inc., manufacturer of about half of all of the controversial full-body scanners used on air passengers. TSA officials claim that Rapiscan failed to deliver software that would protect the privacy of passengers, but the contract termination happened immediately after the TSA finally got around to studying the health effects of the scanners, and Congress had a hearing on TSA's 'Scanner Shuffle'."

cancel ×

268 comments

WHERE AM I GONNA GET MY PORN NOW ?? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624699)

I luv the ladies !! Big fat ones !!

Re:WHERE AM I GONNA GET MY PORN NOW ?? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625187)

Try 4chan.

pronounciation (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624701)

is the first 'a' in Rapiscan pronounced as just a regular 'a' or like 'ae' ?

Re:pronounciation (5, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624769)

Since full body scanning does not make boarding a plane go more rapid, I think the answer is obvious.

Re:pronounciation (4, Funny)

Jason Levine (196982) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625059)

Oddly enough, in all the times I've read that word, I've never once pronounced it in my head as "Rapi(d) Scan". I've always pronounced it as "Rape-i-scan" (with a short i like in "it"). For some reason, them trying to play on the word "rapid" just never came to mind.

Re:pronounciation (2)

asifyoucare (302582) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625867)

You have not been sufficiently conditioned. Adjustment bureau coming up.

Re:pronounciation (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625753)

The scanners are actually pretty quick, it's having to take off your shoes that delays you

Re:pronounciation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624803)

I don't know, but it's "pronunciation", not "pronounciation".

Re:pronounciation (-1, Offtopic)

chilvence (1210312) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624887)

Re:pronounciation (0)

show me altoids (1183399) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624977)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pronunciation [wikipedia.org] No, you fail.

Re:pronounciation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625153)

You realize these are two different words, right? And that the top post used the right one correctly? Your pronunciation is how you pronounce words.

Re:pronounciation (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625189)

Check the subject:

Re:pronounciation (0)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625239)

Showing results for pronounced
Search instead for pronunced

Youre either a genius troll or havent had your morning coffee.

Re:pronounciation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625149)

Considering "a" can be pronounced in multiple ways, I'd suggest you clarify. I'm sure it's supposed to be pronounced like "rapid", but we prefer to pronounce it like "rape".

Re:pronounciation (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625809)

I pronounce the first "a" like "ae" and the "i" like "ey."

alpha test? (5, Insightful)

OffTheLip (636691) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624723)

Why wasn't this determined during the test and acceptance phase for this product. Perhaps it's my cynical nature tempered by years of working for the government but this type of thing happens far too frequently.

Re:alpha test? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624737)

Because by the time that scientists can get through all of the obfuscation, the administrators that approved it will be retired. And the current administrators can simply say that it wasn't their decision. Everybody wins! (except almost everybody)

Re:alpha test? (0)

0100010001010011 (652467) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625935)

Exactly, the company got their $. They don't care if they actually use the product. They'll hire lobbyists to convince congress we need the next big thing they're selling. Spend a few million/billion on it and cycle repeats.

Re:alpha test? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624763)

I'd sooner trust the terrorists than the TSA. At least the terrorists are up-front about their agenda.

Re:alpha test? (5, Funny)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624767)

Because if you respect people's privacy and safety, the terrorists win.

Re:alpha test? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624825)

Because if you respect people's privacy and safety, the terrorists win.

Based on the way the West has acted in "The War Against Terror", the terrorist *have* won. They have us jumping at shadows, wasting millions of dollars on useless schemes, and all they have to do is make scary noises from time to time.
How many plane/bomb threats have been averted by DHS vigilance in the last ten years? The few that have been found have all been foiled by traditional counter-terrorism techniques: the security theater in airports is just a way for certain groups to siphon off public money into their own pockets.

Re:alpha test? (4, Funny)

Jason Levine (196982) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625095)

It's almost to the point where the terrorists don't need to actually pull off an attack. They just release "chatter" about an attack and watch the West scurry around. I wonder how long until the terrorists try to see just how outrageous they can be and still have the West react. "There are reports that a terrorist group has come up with a nose bomb. Everyone will now submit to a TSA-enforced sinus inspection before boarding their planes."

Re:alpha test? (5, Interesting)

Zemran (3101) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625285)

I think the real irony is that if you want to blow up a plane you need to use the tried and tested methods as they are the only ones that we do not protect against. No one has ever blown up a plane with a bottle of water, it was theoretical, but you cannot take a bottle of water onto a plane. Most planes were blown up with bombs made to look like ordinary objects. The bomb that blew up the plane over Lockerbie was made to look like a radio and the explosives were disguised as batteries, this would still work today as no one stops you from having a radio in your suitcase in the hold.

The security theatre has only served to frighten the people into letting our rulers do as they wish. The lack of real terrorist events is because no one is really trying to kill us. If a group started up today with the brains of the IRA we would be just as screwed today as we were back then. Although most of their success was due to American help which might not be as easy to get today.

Re:alpha test? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625401)

Yeah, the next time they want to attack American soil, they'll take *advantage* of the congestion caused by our current security theatre. You want a body count, and to frighten people? Go to a busy airport during a rush period, and set off your bomb while you're in the middle of the security line. Hundreds of people, packed into a tiny area with no way to quickly escape.

Re:alpha test? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625549)

"Everyone will now submit to a TSA-enforced sinus inspection before boarding their planes."

Did anyone else read that as sinus infection?

Re:alpha test? (5, Interesting)

Agent0013 (828350) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625737)

It's almost to the point where the terrorists don't need to actually pull off an attack. They just release "chatter" about an attack and watch the West scurry around.

It's pretty close to how the U.S. brought down our big enemy during the cold war, U.S.S.R. We made these big plans about Star Wars, and having satellites that would be able to shoot down any missile. Our side was mostly talk. On their side they spend enormous amounts of money trying to keep up with what they thought we were doing. Our president actually hired science fiction writers to come up with some of these fantastic ideas that sounded plausible and expensive. If the terrorists figure this out they can just up the chatter until we spend ourselves into bankruptcy and fall like Rome. Then the terrorists win.

Re:alpha test? (1)

0123456 (636235) | about a year and a half ago | (#42626031)

I read a news article a while back about how some Al Qaeda guy under torture said their agents were stuffing explosives in birds' butts in Central Park, leading to the FBI running around looking for birds who were walking funny.

So I think we've already passed that point.

Re:alpha test? (4, Insightful)

JeanCroix (99825) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625229)

The few that have been found have all been foiled by traditional counter-terrorism techniques: the security theater in airports is just a way for certain groups to siphon off public money into their own pockets.

Heh. Passengers dogpiling on anyone who starts acting fishy on a flight has now become, indeed, a traditional counter-terrorism technique.

Re:alpha test? (4, Insightful)

SecurityGuy (217807) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625709)

This is a ridiculous assertion, and completely wrong. They have us jumping at shadows and wasting billions of dollars on useless schemes.

Re:alpha test? (4, Insightful)

berashith (222128) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625739)

A bigger element than the planes not being blown up is the nothing else being blown up. If the terrorists were as determined as we are beig told, then why havent they been thwarted by our awesome new security doodads and moved on to other things. I am sure that in a few minutes I can think of at least 15 places where people can be successfully killed in large numbers that could have ripples through the economy. As these havent been blown up, then the terrorists as presented arent out there.

Unfortunately the TSA knows all this and is working to protect those other places so that the lack of successful terrorist plots remains at the hands of our saviors in the TSA, and no one will discover that the narrrative is bullshit.

Re:alpha test? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624949)

Privacy and safety are racist.

Re:alpha test? (5, Informative)

lorenlal (164133) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624771)

Because Chertoff was the principal lobbyist for Rapiscan was a former DHS head. They were able to just get the contract in without any sort of vetting. It's one of the more shameful episodes in shady government contracts, except those involved seem immune to shame.

Re:alpha test? (1, Funny)

will_die (586523) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624889)

Please try to be truthful about this, you know that Chertoff or his organization was never a lobbyist for Rapiscan. You can verify that with US Congress records on lobbyists. If you don't know this then please stop reading stupid sites like huffington post that don't inform you of the truth. If you were mistaking them for the Daschle family who were lobbyists for the company then I apologize.
While Chertoff was head of DHS he did, and still does, push for contactless scanners as the means for providing safety. Personally I would prefer them, over the current airport probe, provided that they are safer but guess that is just me.

Re:alpha test? (4, Informative)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624937)

Chertoff Group, which he founded represents scanner makers. They are a security consulting group that sells the things as well. How does that not look like a revolving door?

Personally I would prefer something that did not use ionizing radiation or waste everyone's time. If that means going back to metal detectors that would be fine.

Re:alpha test? (5, Insightful)

RoTNCoRE (744518) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625089)

Yep, just you. Remember what flying was like pre-9/11? We're no safer now, aside from the fact that the cabin is now inaccessible to passengers.

Also, just because it isn't on the congressional record doesn't mean it didn't happen - maybe a sweetheart deal like, if you push these through, we'll give you a sweet consultancy gig afterwards? Like his current role as head of a consultancy firm for the industry called the Chertoff Group? Do you think just maybe Rapiscan has even been a client? Similar to how generals become board members for the defense industry the second they leave service. Crony capitalism (corruption) at it's best. These postings need to have 20 year non-compete and NDA type clauses. I'm sure the pension isn't lacking...

Re:alpha test? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624883)

I agree. The health effects should have been the most criticized and tested feature before implementation. If the effects were severe with people with some conditions, its too late to say ooops.

Re:alpha test? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624921)

There are a whole bunch of TSA screeners getting gigantic tumors all of a sudden.

http://takingsenseaway.wordpress.com/2013/01/03/letter-from-a-former-screener/

The passengers only go through a handful of times, but the screeners are getting exposed for their entire working day.

Re:alpha test? (2)

blueg3 (192743) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625029)

The other X-ray scanners -- the ones not designed to put humans for them -- are probably to blame for that, if anything. The backscatter X-ray source isn't particularly powerful, but the other scanners use pretty serious radiation fluxes. They're shielded to protect the operator and passers-by, but some spots around the machine still expose you to a pretty decent level of radiation. (And, as you note, the operators are standing there for long periods of time.) They test the things for occupational safety, but that doesn't keep people from spending too long in the "don't spent too long here" zone.

Re:alpha test? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625291)

Posting AC to keep my mod points.

> The other x-ray scanners ...

I think you're overlooking the timeline. Those "powerful x-ray scanners" were in use long before the full-body scanners were, and yet, the reported decline in TSA employees' health occurred *after* the full-body units were installed.

Re:alpha test? (2)

blueg3 (192743) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625365)

They've made a lot of other changes, too. Any effects would take a while to set in, so there's necessarily a decent delay between a causative agent and the effect. They've hired more poorly-trained people (including people who send themselves through the baggage scanner) and they've changed policies and procedures about how things are scanned through the baggage scanners. A subtle difference that causes people to spend more time in the bad spots of a baggage scanner is almost as bad as joining every single scanned person in the backscatter machine.

Re:alpha test? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625467)

Good. I hope everyone of them dies a slow painful death after a extended cancer fight that bankrupts them.

Re:alpha test? (2, Informative)

blueg3 (192743) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625099)

The health effects were actually a key design criterion for the original product. Hell, they were a key criterion in the research that preceded the development of the product. In the patent (which is pretty readable for a patent), they work through the math for figuring out resolution and sensitivity given a maximum total dose, where the maximum total dose is limited to a well-accepted definition of "negligible".

It's not actually something you can test. You can test the emitted dosage, sure, but I guarantee you they did that. (Many times and by multiple different agencies, eventually.) You can't test the health effects directly because they're too infrequent. Even if you spent ages exposing thousands of people to the scans, the number of cancers caused by the machines is much lower than the random variability in the number of cancers gotten through other means in your test population.

Re:alpha test? (1)

will_die (586523) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624963)

It was determined to be a problem in early testing however the FDA signed off on the usage of them as being being Ok for your health.
Some of this acceptance was later pulled then it just took the stanard government time for the process to sit around and be processed.

Re:alpha test? (2)

Jason Levine (196982) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625073)

This was the test phase. Everyone who went through one of these machines (including myself) was a guinea pig.

By the way, the test phase was a complete success. Rapiscan was paid tons of money. Wait, you thought the test was about the machines being safe for the people operating them or the people in them? *falls over laughing*

Re:alpha test? (1)

berashith (222128) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625789)

hahahah
i am sure if we saw the contracts that the money was made on delivery of the device, not some long running concept of small profit ( or loss ) on the hardware delivery, but updates, service, and maintenance fees (nearly pure profit) extending over the next 5 or 10 years.

Beta testing about to start (3, Interesting)

Comboman (895500) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625097)

Why wasn't this determined during the test and acceptance phase for this product.

It was. You, me and millions of others have been alpha testing this product for years. Now, bend over and get ready the beta testing phase.

Re:alpha test? (3, Interesting)

blueg3 (192743) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625161)

What's "this"?

The health effects were well-studied long before they even tried to sell them to the government. They did ensure the health effects were acceptably small, but nobody believes them, because it combines the TSA and radiation. One is always scary and the other is always incompetent (only one of the two deserve the label), and so the combination can't possibly be good.

You say you work for the government -- do you really think that "we're agreeing to study the health effects (again)" turned into cancelling their contract in less than a month *and* they dug up an excuse?

As far as the stated reason for cancelling the contract -- which is probably really the reason -- without additional information, I'm going to assume incompetence over malice. They probably simply did not realize that people would view it as such a big privacy problem. Surely the engineers didn't -- it's easy to get blinded into thinking your product has no flaws. I don't know about the government folks, but it can be hard to resist flashy new technology that will Totally Stop The Terrorists(tm).

Re:alpha test? (1)

IceNinjaNine (2026774) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625207)

The health effects were well-studied long before they even tried to sell them to the government.

Maybe.. maybe not.. Shades of the taser... [wikipedia.org]

Re:alpha test? (1)

blueg3 (192743) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625329)

Maybe.. maybe not.. Shades of the taser... [wikipedia.org]

Don't give me that bullshit just because you don't know. Not only is the analysis in the original patent, it's much-discussed in the scientific literature back when they were first trying out Compton-effect backscatter scanning of humans in labs. (I did research at an X-ray lab and have done backscattering, but not of anything living.)

Clearly ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624757)

Clearly these scanners didn't give them a clear enough image of everybody's bodies. They want more clarity, more embarrassing images, more power to force you to stand quietly like a sheep and be treated worse than luggage or be subject to their highly invasive personal inspections.

Just another day. (1, Informative)

vinehair (1937606) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624759)

It's a shame that nothing will really change despite having this validate almost everything that was ever said by the anti-crowd against these things. Health and privacy concerns, a nice double-whammy. I was tempted to skip these the last time I flew, but I'm a Brit and I was trying to get into the USA, and I was already having trouble with people not believing my passport photograph (oh no, new hair styles, you're a different person!!!) and I think I would have just gotten immense grief from security if I'd have asked for the extended groping session. Plus, my balls are for my fiancée only.

Re:Just another day. (2, Informative)

isorox (205688) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624985)

It's a shame that nothing will really change despite having this validate almost everything that was ever said by the anti-crowd against these things. Health and privacy concerns, a nice double-whammy.

I was tempted to skip these the last time I flew, but I'm a Brit and I was trying to get into the USA, and I was already having trouble with people not believing my passport photograph (oh no, new hair styles, you're a different person!!!) and I think I would have just gotten immense grief from security if I'd have asked for the extended groping session. Plus, my balls are for my fiancée only.

There are no scanners on the way into the U.S. You were either in the U.S. leaving (or an internal flight), or you encountered the scanner in the UK.

In the UK you are not allowed to opt-out from these scanners. You don't go through, you don't fly.

The same happens in Russia and Israel

Re:Just another day. (3, Informative)

vinehair (1937606) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625137)

There are no scanners on the way into the U.S. You were either in the U.S. leaving (or an internal flight), or you encountered the scanner in the UK.

Didn't know Schipol, Amsterdam was really in the U.S.A. That's some good-ass weed, right there.

No, seriously, they had them and they had people choosing not to use them, but the representatives just prior to that had refused to believe my passport photo and my drivers license photo, so I wasn't going to press it.

Re:Just another day. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625617)

Did you intentionally misunderstand GP? His point was there are no scanners on the arrival side when you enter the US. I can't see how your experience in Amsterdam (which you never made mention of in your original post) could possibly reflect on the US.

There are arrival scanners at some US airports (4, Informative)

xenoc_1 (140817) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625829)

There are scanners and TSA upon arrival at many USA airports. If you got out of your basement and traveled the world you would see them at SEA (Seattle-Taccoma International), MEM (Memphis International), and at least up until a year or so ago, at ATL (Atlanta International). In those and likely some others, US Customs (which happens after US Immigration) exits into the airside "sterile" section of the airport, not "landside". So in order to arrive in the USA and exit the airport, yes, you do have to clear through TSA. I've flown into the USA into all three airports internationally and have had to go through TSA to get out.

More common in US airport layout is where the US ICE section exits to the outside, or to the main concourse, such as Boston Logan Terminal E, Denver International, the TBIT terminal at LAX, the various terminals at JFK, O'Hare International in Chicago, etc. But not all.

BTW there are no X-Ray whole-body scanners in Amsterdam, as the EU doesn't allow them [forbes.com] . What there is at AMS is at-gate security of the typical x-ray carryon bag scanner, before you are able to enter the actual departure lounge area. Plus if flying out of AMS on a USA-based airline, a contract employee asking you the stupid questions that they stopped asking in the USA 10 years ago. "Who packed your bag?", etc.

vinehair could have hit scanners and the TSA full monty in the USA. If flying out of AMS to the USA, there is a high likelihood he was on either Delta or KLM, a Delta hub because of the old KLM-Northwest joint venture, and two of the AMS-US likely routes are into either MEM or ATL. With SEA also a possibility; I think KL still flies that.

Re:There are arrival scanners at some US airports (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625911)

There are scanners and TSA upon arrival at many USA airports. If you got out of your basement and traveled the world you would see them at SEA (Seattle-Taccoma International), MEM (Memphis International), and at least up until a year or so ago, at ATL (Atlanta International). In those and likely some others....

So "two and possibly more" now equals "many"? I need to start telling people I own MANY CARS!

If you got out of your basement and traveled the world....

He hasn't flown from Europe into one of two US airports you cherrypicked to prove your weird point? Damn, he really hasn't left the basement, has he?

Re:Just another day. (1)

6Yankee (597075) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625903)

There are no scanners on the way into the U.S. You were either in the U.S. leaving (or an internal flight), or you encountered the scanner in the UK.

That must have changed recently, then. In May, I flew MAN-IAD-SLC (via SFO - thanks United! - and an epic TSA screw-up, but that's another story). On arrival at IAD I did indeed have to go through security again, and was indeed directed towards a pornoscanner. I opted out - at least the US gives you the option - and was yelled at. For opting out, then again for standing a foot away from where I was supposed to (but exactly where the thug in question pointed), then a third time for leaning against something while they bothered their arses to find someone to do the pat-down. Wonderful experience.

Re:Just another day. (1)

6Yankee (597075) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625925)

CPH-IAD, even. They're all starting to blur into each other....

reasons (3, Interesting)

stoolpigeon (454276) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624789)

I wish I were optimistic enough to believe that this change had something to do with safety or people's rights.

My guess is that the right people made enough money or the right favors were repaid and now it's time to move on to making someone else richer.

Re:reasons (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624913)

Most likely. But it's also possible that some TSA bigwig's family was herded through a PornScanner, and their dim intellects finally grasped that Operative Sweaty McPerv gets to stare at their offsprings' junk.

Re:reasons (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624959)

They don't give a shit about that. Nobody is taking away the millimeter-wave scanners.

I'm guessing the cancer rate among screeners is higher than anyone there wants to admit.

Fun fact: they used to issue exposure film (like what employees of nuclear power plans carry) to screeners so they could see if the baggage X-ray was leaking. This was stopped for "budget reasons" a little while before the backscatter X-ray machines were introduced.

Re:reasons (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624997)

Who really cares about the millimeter wave scanners?

Is non-ionizing radiation something you worry about?

The waste of money is a whole other topic, and we would be better served spending it on repairing highways or anything that actually kills a reasonable amount of Americans.

rights and safety...maybe (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625231)

not everything done for us is for our rights or safety....is that all bad? In this case, I think that all the airport security is for the general public's peace of mind. Sure, its irritating, but the general public 'feel' safer once they are through it. If they never did anything after 9/11 and it happened a second time, so many would stop flying it could kill the industry. If they took steps to only stop knives (like was used on 9/11) and some next used a stick, everyone would be mad that they didn't think to look for stick.
 
Since we are trying to protect the public for some in the public, we need to allow a level of inspection of us all. Personally, I have nothing to hide at anytime. I don't care what they watch, track or see. They got nothing on me. Big whoop.

Re:rights and safety...maybe (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625731)

not everything done for us is for our rights or safety....is that all bad? In this case, I think that all the airport security is for the general public's peace of mind. Sure, its irritating, but the general public 'feel' safer once they are through it. If they never did anything after 9/11 and it happened a second time, so many would stop flying it could kill the industry. If they took steps to only stop knives (like was used on 9/11) and some next used a stick, everyone would be mad that they didn't think to look for stick. Since we are trying to protect the public for some in the public, we need to allow a level of inspection of us all. Personally, I have nothing to hide at anytime. I don't care what they watch, track or see. They got nothing on me. Big whoop.

The only thing needed to prevent another 9/11 was a good strong door to keep passengers out of the cockpit. Combine that with the fact that passengers now assume they are going to be murdered instead of held hostage and it gets extremely difficult to take control of an airliner.

Re:rights and safety...maybe (3, Insightful)

IndustrialComplex (975015) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625799)

If they never did anything after 9/11 and it happened a second time,

If they never did anything, 9/11 couldn't happen a second time. Examples include the times that someone DID try to rush the cabin, pretty much everyone on the plane lept to action.

The rest of your post... It's an anathema to democracy. But I suppose that someone posting as 'anonymous' should be taken seriously when they state they have nothing to hide at anytime.

Re:rights and safety...maybe (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625999)

Personally, I have nothing to hide at anytime. I don't care what they watch, track or see. They got nothing on me. Big whoop.

Well, you did post as AC. Just sayin'...

I fucking love the names these days (5, Funny)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624799)

Everyone and everything's name is hilarious, but RAPEYSCAN really takes the proverbial cake, and eats it too.

Re:I fucking love the names these days (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625751)

but RAPEYSCAN really takes the proverbial cake, and eats it too.

whether you want it to or not

Re:I fucking love the names these days (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625933)

See this name, I assume this is a prank and not an actual name. http://cheezburger.com/6981818880 [cheezburger.com]

That's just the cover story... (2)

SomeoneGotMyNick (200685) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624841)

The real reason is that the agents have a deep rooted "touching fetish" that they need to keep satisfied.

Re:That's just the cover story... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625047)

Ironically, the groping, safety, and privacy issues combine to form the perfect cover for the real agenda: getting rich on government contracts.

So, Chertoff (Deviloff) got rich and you folks got (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624863)

So, Chertoff (Deviloff) got rich and you folks got screwed for a billion bucks worth useless, and potentionaly harmful, HW.

Great news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624873)

I, for one, have not flown for years, as neither the Rapiscan scanners, nor the pat down meet my religion's modesty requirements. Also, I'm of the opinion that the less radiation I'm exposed to, the better. :)

The L3 scanners would seem to be sort of a perfect alternative. Is that too optimistic? Is there some danger with their technology of which I am not aware?

The SA (1)

Korruptionen (2647747) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624901)

.... probably in favor of the new "Double dozen hand groping machine - If a machine is grabbing your junk, you can't be offended" :-|

Who named this company? (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624903)

If I made a scanner that looked through your clothes I sure as hell would make sure not to call my company "Rapey-scan". You would think they would have gone with something friendlier.

Re:Who named this company? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42624969)

The one company that gives us honesty in its marketing and you are all upset.

Some people are never satisfied!

Re:Who named this company? (2)

blueg3 (192743) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624989)

Perhaps now people have learned an important lesson about letting engineers name products.

"Rapiscan -- it's scanning that's rapid. Clever, right? Nobody will ever misinterpret that!"

This is great news for L-3 Communications (4, Informative)

ahecht (567934) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624919)

From the TFA:

"The TSA plans to remove 174 Rapiscan machines from U.S. airports, with the company absorbing the cost, according to TSA officials. The machines will be replaced by L-3 scanners."

It's not like the scanners are going away. They're just replacing the backscatter X-Ray scanners from Rapiscan with the millimeter radio-wave scanners from L-3 Communications.

Re:This is great news for L-3 Communications (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624953)

The ones that use ionizing radiation are going away. Which I thought was the major health complaint here.

I don't care if you see my balls, but I would like to prevent my thyroid condition from getting any worse. What exactly is the rational objection to millimeter wave? Just the slow down at the airport? Or the cost not being worth it?

Re:This is great news for L-3 Communications (5, Insightful)

show me altoids (1183399) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625113)

Do a Google search on "security theater." That's all these scanners are.

Re:This is great news for L-3 Communications (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625181)

Which if it was fast and free it would be fine to do as far as I can tell.

So your real objection is cost? Or are you opposed to pretending?

Re:This is great news for L-3 Communications (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625459)

No, the objection has absolutely nothing to do with cost (other than that *any* money spent on these machines is a complete waste).

The primary objection has to do with being subjected to an illegal, unconstitutional search of my person and effects by a government agency.
The other objection is that this illegal, unconstitutional search, is being done *despite* the fact that it has absolutely no measurable impact on safety or security.

Re:This is great news for L-3 Communications (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625749)

I do not believe these are illegal or unconstitutional according to the courts. If you believe they are you should file a suit to find out.

Re:This is great news for L-3 Communications (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625775)

Are you seriously this flipping stupid? People hate the scanners because it's a useless invasion of privacy that provides no fucking security whatsoever. It has nothing to do with cost or health reasons. Do you work for TSA?

Re:This is great news for L-3 Communications (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#42626027)

Not at all.
I just don't see how it is less or more of an invasion than the pat downs.

If you want to get rid of those as well, then I can agree with you.

Re:This is great news for L-3 Communications (1)

tgd (2822) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625169)

The ones that use ionizing radiation are going away. Which I thought was the major health complaint here.

I don't care if you see my balls, but I would like to prevent my thyroid condition from getting any worse. What exactly is the rational objection to millimeter wave? Just the slow down at the airport? Or the cost not being worth it?

And, as someone who travels a lot, its a huge benefit just because the old ones were both dangerous, useless AND slow. At least the new ones are safe(r), and fast(er), if still as useless.

Re:This is great news for L-3 Communications (1)

Tridus (79566) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625289)

Well, I do care if some random jackass wants to see my balls.

I also have a problem with wasting time and huge amounts of taxpayer dollars on security theatre.

What's the rational reason for paying a fortune on security devices that don't improve security?

Re:This is great news for L-3 Communications (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625949)

Well, I do care if some random jackass wants to see my balls.

Why? I don't get "modesty"; I wear clothing for convenience, comfort, and courtesy (you're welcome, people that don't want to see my junk, belly, or hairy back). I don't care if I'm seen naked. If she or he is titillated, all the better, glad to brighten somebody's day.

Exactly (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625035)

The only thing that is changing here is the vendor to which the money goes. L-3 has successfully forced Rapiscan out of the picture and probably the market.

This has absolutely zero to do with outrage, safety, congress or anything else besides good old fashioned business skulduggery.

Stay in line sheeple, lest you be an enemy combatant!

Re:Exactly (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625101)

well, except that X-rays are ionizing radiation, whereas millimeter-wave is what comes out of your cellphone

Re:This is great news for L-3 Communications (1)

Fesh (112953) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625773)

Hmm. Maybe the Rapiscan was introduced PRECISELY to make the L-3 machines look better by comparison? I smell boiling frog...

Used it once, still had to get pat down (4, Interesting)

kannibal_klown (531544) | about a year and a half ago | (#42624993)

I flew for the first time in a while a couple of months ago and gave it a try. The line was shorter and if they want to go blind seeing me nekkid then so be it, and I doubt one time would mean much with the health concerns (frequent flyers another story).

I'd gone to the airport prepped accordingly and took of my slip-on shoes, my thinner belt, emptied my pockets entirely... ready to just go through quickly.

STILL... they had to pat me and a bunch of people down.

W T H I thought the whole point of this thing was to go through quicker AND not have to be man-handled!?

Re:Used it once, still had to get pat down (4, Funny)

Jason Levine (196982) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625119)

My wife went through one and needed to get the pat down too. They found an "anomaly" on her that required further inspection. Note to any women out there: Spanx are an anomaly to the TSA and you will get the patented TSA Feel Up to make sure that your undergarment is what is causing the issue.

Re:Used it once, still had to get pat down (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625699)

Note to any women out there:

HELLO... Hello... hello....
ECHO... Echo... echo...

Re:Used it once, still had to get pat down (2)

IndustrialComplex (975015) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625831)

W T H I thought the whole point of this thing was to go through quicker AND not have to be man-handled!?

That's why I always opt-out. If I don't opt out, I get scanned... AND they will probably pat me down too.

At least with the pat-down I get to skip the scan entirely, and my privacy violation lasts only as long as the memory of a single TSA screener.

OSI Systems Inc (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625105)

Interesting name. It's the same as the Office of Strategic Influence, the psyops department of the DOD. The OSI was later renamed for PR reasons, but apparently it lives on.

Yes, patching, that's what's wrong with them. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625407)

Nothing to do with the massive public outcry, or the groped, irradiated, molested, and strip searched passengers. No, it's because they didn't provide timely patches...

Early Termination Fees? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42625545)

Just how much do the rapists making the child-porn-source-scanning devices get for early contract termination?

Hoping it's multiple life sentences for making devices intentionally to produce child porn.

Service contract? (1)

greg_barton (5551) | about a year and a half ago | (#42625791)

So the question now is: will ere be an ongoing service contract to repair the existing scanners? How about ongoing safety testing?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...