Maybe, maybe not, but the software engineer is probably not the one who wrote the specs, or stated the specs to the potential buyer, or over-promised and under-delivered because the claimed capabilities had not yet been worked out. Maybe the manufacturer provided a beta unit to try and provide the customer with the requirements in the rfp, knowing they couldn't currently provide what is needed. Or maybe, in the rush to get the hardware and software out the door, proper beta testing was not done and a severe bug was overlooked, that will appear one day when somebody is seriously injured by the equipment. Ever heard of the Therac-25? That device was even monitored and controlled under the FDA. The TSA can't even provide true peer reviews of the equipment to prove safety, much less a process for handling bugs, errors and failures to protect the operators and users.

On top of all that, the manufacturers requested and received exceptions of liability(via the Safety Act), to limit their liability, most assuredly for safety. Sorry, the company wants to sell the devices and make money, that is their primary concern, and in a race to get gov. money, there's no telling what they skipped. Neither they nor the TSA can be trusted when it comes to the equipment.

I thought they stop doing it? Doesn't says ain't no bodyscanners to installed at nations airport anymore. It should have enough to installed more bodyscanners. It should have a trusted those passengers to kept their privacy and no one ever go through the bodyscanners. Enough is enough!!!

Good riddance to TSA & John Pistole!!! :mad::mad::td::td:

Maybe they thought he was just happy to see them and no one wanted to pat it down.

I will too!! No offense, but I don't trust the TSA. One time, I had a nasty TSO who clearly did not like me when I was using the MMW. I gave her some attitude back, which I probably shouldn't have. I should have treated her like she was the queen of the airport. She told me that I couldn't hold my ID and airline ticket while in the scanner and I saw her look at my name and info when she took them from me. I had to wait a very long time after the scan before the person from the secret booth "cleared" me through the whisper microphones. I'm actually a little scared that they saved my picture and put my name on the no-fly list. Seriously, I don't want that picture and my name saved and posted somewhere for some stranger to see!! I have nothing to hide, I'm not fat or anything, I'm thin but still, I get to choose who I get naked for, not the government. For those of you that think I'm being paranoid, I hope the next time you fly, some TSO will rub your crotch multiple times and ask you for your name.

If they ever get rid of the opt-out option and make NOS primary, I will start looking for a new job in an enlightened country such as Switzerland or Sweden and I'll go to Mexico to fly to my new home country!!!

So first they said the machines couldn't save images at all, and clearly they lied.

Then they said the images could only save in test mode, and clearly they lied.

Why the bleep is no one going to jail over this?

Now you've got me second-guessing myself. The testimony was from the March 16 House Oversight Committee hearing.

Can't find a transcript anywhere right now. He might have said that the machines were initially password protected when rolled out but a software change had completely closed down the ability to save images. Wish I could find his exact words.

Regardless, the machines in the airports had the capability to save images long after TSA said they didn't. And they currently have the capability with no more than a software change necessary.

If anyone is a regular contributor on Chaffetz's website or Facebook page, you might ask the question there. The testimony was probably before his subcommittee, or his boss' committee (Issa). They might even provide the submitted written testimony, a transcript from the hearing, and any relevant follow-up questions-for-the-record.

Then, we have to sort out whether or not he was being truthful.

This effectively addresses the modesty issue, only one of the big four.

As a reminder, the current procedures are opposed for four reasons:

1. A virtual nude search and/or a law enforcement type pat down may be an unreasonable search.
   
2. Many people have concerns based on modesty.
   
3. There are suspicions that the machines may not be as safe as stated.
   
4. The implementation creates an expense of taxpayer funds that can not be justified.

This change may reduce the severity of #2. The other remain virtually unchanged.

Technology that could scan my house and show a picture of contraband hidden in my desk drawer is no less intrusive than the same technology indicating its location with a line drawing.

It is not how they are looking under our clothes it is the fact that they are looking under our clothes.

+1

But I would add to your list:
5. They are slower than the WTMD, meaning either longer lines or more lanes.
6. Passengers being scanned have difficulty maintaining line-of-sight to their belongings (which includes, now, wallets and watches), increasing the risk of property theft.

I definitely agree. #5 is loosely connected to #4. Both #5 and #6 are probably more due to the inability of the screeners to be trained, their little tyrant attitudes, or the failure of the system to see passengers as more than self loading luggage. Those problems occurred before the scanners and will likely continue after they are gone.

The presence of the scanners provides opportunity to observe these failures more often and in higher clarity.

So let's combine and add a #5:

1. A virtual nude search and/or a law enforcement type pat down may be an unreasonable search.
   
2. Many people have concerns based on modesty.
   
3. There are suspicions that the machines may not be as safe as stated.
   
4. The implementation creates an expense of taxpayer funds that can not be justified.
   
5. The technology has been poorly implemented due to inadequate training and abilities of the TSA screeners in addition to the physical limitations of many preexisting screening areas.

I would rephrase #1:

A virtual nude search and/or a law enforcement type pat down at an airport may be is an unreasonable search.

If this remains the case, then this ATR stuff is simply a waste of time and will just make passengers more ticked off. You can't have people being pawed over for no reason other than machine issues.

bolding mine: ^^^^^^^ 100% agreement! Noone (n.b. NOONE) who works for the government deserves to see how pretty my titties really are!!! :D

TSA press release:

AIT safely screens passengers without physical contact for both metallic and non-metallic threats, including weapons and explosives.

Yet another TSA statement that plays loose with the facts:

• There are no peer-reviewed studies that show these machines are safe

• Going through one is no guarantee of not receiving a physical grope; in fact the odds are greater since the software has been problematic, so a grope will be needed to resolve what the software thinks it sees

• The machines do not detect explosives

Jim Harper's analysis on Cato
 

The full post is at http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/tsas-...ll-body-scans/