loading

Airport Security...

we all hate it... it makes air travel a hassle... way too much attention is paid to it... it's useless... what do you think? what should we do about it? tips?

Picture of Airport Security...
sort by: active | newest | oldest
1-10 of 95Next »
Derin8 years ago
They should make a conveyor belt that you go through FAST and then your bag goes in a x-ray machine then if you need additional screening your bag is stored then you pick it up when you go to the plane
I've never had a real problem. The thing is, even though it may not seem to do a lot of good, if there weren't x-rays checking your shoes for bombs, then we would have hundreds every day. Airport security, in my opinion, has more of a purpose in preventing things from coming to the airport, than from finding what makes it there.
i think our passports should have digital records on them to see if we are probable terrorists. then they would only have to put possible terrorists through security.
I suggest you read Cory Doctrow's "Little Brother". Within it is the following passage which explains why your idea won't ever work.

"If you ever decide to do something as stupid as build an automatic terrorism detector, here's a math lesson you need to learn first. It's called "the paradox of the false positive," and it's a doozy.

Say you have a new disease, called Super-AIDS. Only one in a million people gets Super-AIDS. You develop a test for Super-AIDS that's 99 percent accurate. I mean, 99 percent of the time, it gives the correct result -- true if the subject is infected, and false if the subject is healthy. You give the test to a million people.

One in a million people have Super-AIDS. One in a hundred people that you test will generate a "false positive" -- the test will say he has Super-AIDS even though he doesn't. That's what "99 percent accurate" means: one percent wrong.

What's one percent of one million?

1,000,000/100 = 10,000

One in a million people has Super-AIDS. If you test a million random people, you'll probably only find one case of real Super-AIDS. But your test won't identify *one* person as having Super-AIDS. It will identify *10,000* people as having it.

Your 99 percent accurate test will perform with 99.99 percent *inaccuracy*.

That's the paradox of the false positive. When you try to find something really rare, your test's accuracy has to match the rarity of the thing you're looking for. If you're trying to point at a single pixel on your screen, a sharp pencil is a good pointer: the pencil-tip is a lot smaller (more accurate) than the pixels. But a pencil-tip is no good at pointing at a single *atom* in your screen. For that, you need a pointer -- a test -- that's one atom wide or less at the tip.

This is the paradox of the false positive, and here's how it applies to terrorism:

Terrorists are really rare. In a city of twenty million like New York, there might be one or two terrorists. Maybe ten of them at the outside. 10/20,000,000 = 0.00005 percent. One twenty-thousandth of a percent.

That's pretty rare all right. Now, say you've got some software that can sift through all the bank-records, or toll-pass records, or public transit records, or phone-call records in the city and catch terrorists 99 percent of the time.

In a pool of twenty million people, a 99 percent accurate test will identify two hundred thousand people as being terrorists. But only ten of them are terrorists. To catch ten bad guys, you have to haul in and investigate two hundred thousand innocent people.

Guess what? Terrorism tests aren't anywhere *close* to 99 percent accurate. More like 60 percent accurate. Even 40 percent accurate, sometimes."

Sorry for the pastebomb, but it's worth it.
AnarchistAsian (author)  whatsisface8 years ago
i believe you misunderstood me... it was just an idea that could be elaborated... and your wrong... i meant people who were DEFINETLEY not terrorists wouldn't have to go through security. (based on race, religion, backround, family, e.t.c.)
I don't think any of those can rule out someone from being a terrorist.
You know, I'm not racist, but all of the terrorists I've seen are Muslim........see a pattern? They've declared a holy war on us, expect them to attack us. This doesn't mean that every Muslim is a terrorist either.
Yep,I'm Muslim,and I hate terrorism.
Some terrorists would then not register as a Muslim to avoid the filter, it's really that easy.
Not to mention the difficulty of identifying religions that already exists. *cough* Barack Obama *cough*
1-10 of 95Next »