this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2024
34 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

10304 readers
2931 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.


Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 month ago (7 children)

The TSA is something that shouldn't exist in its current form. They very often fail their audit checks and normalize invading your privacy to an extreme degree like body scanners and pat downs. If water bottles are considered potentially explosive then why dump them on a bin next to a line of people where they can go off? This is low grade security theater that inconveniences passengers at best.

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's security theater through and through.

Apart from the obvious failings of these checks, think about what kind of damage a single backpack of explosives can do to a packed airport during holiday season. You can literally put a ton of explosives on one of those trolleys, roll it into the waiting area and kill 200 people easily. No security whatsoever involved.

Reality is, most security measures are designed to keep the illusion of control. Nothing more. Penetration testers show again and again that you can easily circumvent practically all barriers or measures.

[–] Tamo240@programming.dev 0 points 1 month ago (4 children)

The goal is not to stop the people in the queue being attacked, its to stop someone boarding a plane with the means to hijack it

[–] nednobbins@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They fail gloriously at at that too.

Whenever they get tested the red teams manage to smuggle in everything needed to hijiack a plane plus a kitchen sink.

The few times that terrorists tried to board planes, they made it through security and were caught by other passengers.

[–] FinalRemix@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's what's changed. Before, a hijacking meant a free trip to south America or Cuba. Now it means you're likely to die if you don't stop the hijackers. A planeful of pissed off passengers determined to live are gonna stop a would-be hijacker.

[–] SSJMarx@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Plus the cockpit doors lock. Which can turn out to be a double-edged sword if the pilot has a breakdown and decides he wants to take everyone else with him.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

Rigidly hierarchical control structures always carry the implicit assumption that those at the top are the good guys. (That is if they’re being sold as a way to ensure good)

The common trope about “if you don’t have anything to hide why have privacy?” is overturned by challenging that assumption. Sometimes the guys doing the surveillance turn bad and then it’s a worse situation than if there wasn’t total surveillance.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Yeah, and you don't need the TSA for that. Just do as they already do: lock the cockpit.

[–] w2tpmf@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Little known fact: many of the pilots behind those locked doors are armed as well.

The Flight Deck Officer program allows pilots to volunteer to become deputized Air Marshals. They receive training and are issued a badge and a gun.

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Good guy with a gun, we're not mentally ill at all !

[–] w2tpmf@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Police officers are mentally ill? Interesting take.

Also, we're talking about pilots that you are already trusting with you're life and the lives of hundreds of people with you. If they were mentally ill they could just crash the plane and kill you.

These guys are genuinely invested in maintaining the safety of human lives.

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago

They should continue focusing on that instead of gun politics and their farcical contrived scenarios to have guns on a civil plane.

[–] w2tpmf@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So police officers are mentally ill? Interesting take.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well, conceivably those in the cockpit could be manipulated through other threats. Either threats to crash the plane, or threats to hurt the people in the back.

[–] w2tpmf@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Part of their training includes risk assessment that teaches them to sacrifice individuals if it is in favor of maintaining control of the plane.

They flat out train them to shoot through a hostage someone is holding. That one person's life isn't worth sacrificing the lives of hundreds of others on board as well is casualties on the ground.

[–] KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

They had to do something about the plague of people hijacking planes with bottles of water.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

I’ll drown him! I swear to god I’ll drown him!

[–] Tamo240@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

IIRC water happens to appear similarly to a lot of explosives on the metric they use for what the composition of items in the scanner is.

Improvements are being made though so soon we may be allowed to take water through unrestricted:

Why Airport Security Suddenly Got Better (13:01) https://youtu.be/nyG8XAmtYeQ?si=RTjA8GRuZaMIJs9d

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Ah yes, it's okay if we die, just don't take the corporate infrastructure with you when you go...

[–] psivchaz@reddthat.com 3 points 1 month ago

It's basically the only type of jobs program that both sides of our broken government can agree on: petty nonsense that looks like it might do something useful, but really doesn't, and only inconveniences the poors.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The main reason that rule still exists is to sell overpriced water. Otherwise they could just ask you to drink some of it to prove it's water.

[–] cactusupyourbutt@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

you are allowed to take empty bottles with you, just saying

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 month ago

Some airports have no place to refill and have only hot water in the toilet sinks. It's inhumane.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago (6 children)

The main reason why it exists is to provide jobs. The number of people who work at the TSA at every airport in every state...no representative wants to cut those jobs.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] fermionsnotbosons@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

According to the story I heard as to the origin of the "no liquids over X amount" rule, years ago there was a terrorist that tried to smuggle hydrogen peroxide and acetone - which can be used to rather easily synthesize triacetone triperoxide (TATP, a highly sensitive explosive) - onto a plane in plastic toiletry bottles. They got caught and foiled somehow, and then the TSA started restricting liquids on planes. This was in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, if I recall correctly.

And I happen to know, from a reliable source, of someone who accidentally made TATP in a rotary evaporator in an academic lab. So it seems plausible.

Not that the rule is actually effective prevention against similar attacks, nor that the TSA even knows what the reason is behind what they do at this point, haha. I just thought it was an interesting story.

[–] m4xie@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

hydrogen peroxide and acetone

So there are worse cleaning chemicals to mix than bleach and vinegar

[–] Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

They treat people like cattle because they are protecting the airplanes and the airline's liability, not the people onboard or in line to board.

If people think it's unsafe people won't pay up to fly.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

It's because all the shops inside want you to buy their shit.

[–] Mercuri@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's actually stated on the TSA website that frozen liquids are permitted. https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/whatcanibring/items/ice

[–] stalfoss@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

Notice the footnote on every TSA webpage that their officers can always change the rules on the spot if they feel like it. So it’s always a gamble.

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Big caveat

The final decision rests with the TSA officer on whether an item is allowed through the checkpoint.

[–] Hegar@fedia.io 1 points 1 month ago

Ah yes, the "rules only apply when I say they do" rule. Much legitimate.

[–] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 month ago

The longer they discuss the less it is allowed.

[–] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Dear TSA,

The human body is mostly water. And it's way more than 3 oz.

[–] robocall@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I brought frozen fish with ice packs through TSA. The TSA guy was a fisherman and wanted to talk about fishing.

[–] Zwiebel@feddit.org 1 points 1 month ago

Do you think they get mad if I bring plasma

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago
[–] ma11ie@lemmy.one 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] jlow@beehaw.org 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Is there a reasoning for this? The whole liquid thing has to do something with explosives?

[–] ma11ie@lemmy.one 1 points 1 month ago

It’s because of a particular incident. Similar to what happened with the shoe bomber and why you have to take off your shoes. Things like this are why we can’t have nice things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_transatlantic_aircraft_plot

load more comments
view more: next ›