Quote: Baggage searches are SOOOOOO early-21st century. Homeland Security is now testing the next generation of security screening — a body scanner that can read your mind.
Most preventive screening looks for explosives or metals that pose a threat. But a new system called MALINTENT turns the old school approach on its head. This Orwellian-sounding machine detects the person — not the device — set to wreak havoc and terror.
MALINTENT, the brainchild of the cutting-edge Human Factors division in Homeland Security's directorate for Science and Technology, searches your body for non-verbal cues that predict whether you mean harm to your fellow passengers.
It has a series of sensors and imagers that read your body temperature, heart rate and respiration for unconscious tells invisible to the naked eye — signals terrorists and criminals may display in advance of an attack.
But this is no polygraph test. Subjects do not get hooked up or strapped down for a careful reading; those sensors do all the work without any actual physical contact. It's like an X-ray for bad intentions.
Currently, all the sensors and equipment are packaged inside a mobile screening laboratory about the size of a trailer or large truck bed, and just last week, Homeland Security put it to a field test in Maryland, scanning 144 mostly unwitting human subjects.
(More at Link)
A fine example of our hard-earned taxpayer dollars at work :-| ...
Granted, this device will be predominantly used for screening people at airports. Unfortunately the problem with stuff like this is that it inevitably expands in use, and the company that has designed it *does* want to use it for screening people at sporting events, and other public functions. Additionally technology tends to miniaturize with time (consider the fact that computers used to be the size of buildings and now can fit in your pocket as i-Phones and Blackberries). How long before we will have a Department of Pre-Crime like the 2002-film Minority Report?
I understand the need to keep people safe from terrorists, but if we abandon all our freedoms in order to do it, the terrorists have won.
Ihadapheo From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 6028 posts, RR: 55
Reply 2, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1496 times:
Ah yes, the new "jHst" technology. The ideal version would be an RFID that is implanted in currency they can keep an eye out for "wrong thinkers". I guess this will be the end of poker's popularity...
I would hate to be a TSA agent sitting there whilst trying to screen out the babbling going on in the minds of some of the travelers, It is hard enough for them to find concealed weapons and now they have to find concealed "evil doer" thoughts
i have serious doubts that this will come to fruition
Pray hard but pray with care For the tears that you are crying now Are just your answered prayers
Arrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1386 times:
Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 3): This isn't an erosion of freedom. It's an enhancement to what is being done currently.
This is a sick joke. A machine that reads all these body functions for a TSA agent to interpret is going to lead to a lot of people pulled out of the line for no good reason. If you know you are being scanned, you'll get nervous and exhibit the very symptoms they are looking for.
In my own case, I regularly register blood pressure readings in the mid to low 120s -- except when I'm getting it done in my cardiologist's clinic, when it routinely jumps to the 140s. It's called white coat syndrome, and I can see thousands of people in security lines needlessly hauled out for a check just because they are sweating, or breathing faster, or show a higher than normal heart rate.
What's next? a USB port in your head so they can do a neurological scan? A mind meld? If the TSA agents all suddenly have pointy ears and green blood, we're in trouble.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
There is always some RISK to life--everything you do. Accepting these risks is a part of living. It's true we can prevent risk and take measures to avoid misfortune. But there is a line that should not be crossed. Substituting electrionic instruments for physical checks does NOT make it any less obtrusive. This is an alarming trend -- after getting strip-searched by a machine, you can now hop right over to this one!
the problem is that a "good" terrorist/criminal when being checked might concentrate to think about a good meal or a good drink when being checked or when being in an area where he likely may be checked
Fr8Mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5989 posts, RR: 15
Reply 10, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1286 times:
Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 8): the problem is that a "good" terrorist/criminal when being checked might concentrate to think about a good meal or a good drink when being checked or when being in an area where he likely may be checked
You guys are still under the impression that these security provisions that are in place are designed to stop the professional. They are not. If someone truly wants to hijack an aircraft and ram it into a building, getting through TSA is child's play. It's the rest of the scheme that would present issues.
The security measures in place and those we're talking about will deter and/or capture the amateur, the untrained and the stupid who intend to do harm; the 'good' or professional will elude the measures.
Just about everything the TSA and your respective governments do as security measures just make the nervous feel good and allow the politicians to say they are doing something.
Blackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1218 times:
Actually from what I read... when a person was told to try to sneak something through the system (during tests) always caught them. If they were anxious (but not trying to slip something through) they were not snagged.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 21464 posts, RR: 60
Reply 12, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1193 times:
Quoting Arrow (Reply 4): If the TSA agents all suddenly have pointy ears and green blood, we're in trouble.
No, that would be a good thing because then they'd have to use logic. And wouldn't that be nice?
Now, here's my question. How the heck did they calibrate this machine? On what evidence is it based?
The only way to test such a machine is to have a bunch of real terrorists board real flights and see what biophysical markers they have that set them apart from innocents >95% (2 S.D.'s) of the time. Now, this can be done provided that you catch all the terrorists before they blow up the planes. If you don't and planes blow up, you might lose your research grant and that would be inconvenient.
ME AVN FAN From Algeria, joined May 2002, 13937 posts, RR: 24
Reply 14, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1126 times:
Quoting Fr8Mech (Reply 10): are still under the impression that these security provisions that are in place are designed to stop the professional. They are not. If someone truly wants to hijack an aircraft and ram it into a building, getting through TSA is child's play. It's the rest of the scheme that would present issues.
What in fact has improved security is the combination of various measures, of which a single one would not succeed.