FliesWay2Much

...most of them to Michigan.

Remember, back in the day before the PreCheck extortion that silenced most dissent, that the TSA denied that the Cancer Boxes stored information?

Shocker!!! They were lying.

jkhuggins

The pedant in me feels obliged to point out ... this isn't technically evidence of lying.

The article states that the system in question still contained SSI. They don't state what kind of information was found (after all, that information would itself be SSI). The SSI information might have been passenger data, or it might have been any number of other types of data (TSA procedures, parameter settings, etc.).

I'm not taking a position on whether or not the Rapiscan old systems stored passenger data. I'm just saying that this statement isn't the smoking gun that proves that claim --- other evidence presented over the years makes a much better case, I believe.

ou81two

Oh wo is me. Someone might see an xray rendering of my nether regions. I don't know how I'll go on living my life.

jkhuggins

Different people have different viewpoints on what constitutes an invasion of privacy. Some of those viewpoints are closely held, and come directly from ideas deeply rooted in identity, in religion, and in past traumatic experiences.

Mocking those who believe differently from you is not helpful.

ou81two

I'm not mocking anyone. I'm just putting forward my opinion.

Nobody here is J-Law, nobody is going to even want to see those images. Even if they could, the machines don't link to any specific identity. I spent a lot of time with frequent flyers. First class cabins aren't exactly filled with the most attractive people

jkhuggins

You really need to spend some time reading up on what folks have been saying about TSA for years ... including former TSA screeners who reported on exactly what it was like looking at all of those images:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...l#.VCSuBvldVqU

ou81two

Honestly, I really don't care. If you sat there and looked at naked renderings of the average american body you'd probably want to skip lunch. I really don't care if my images are on that machine. If you told me that someone downloaded them I wouldn't care either. There are much bigger things to worry about in life.

petaluma1

Somebody seems quite angry and bitter.

RadioGirl

NIST is (or used to be, anyway) one of the better US agencies. Dare we hope that they got one so they could evaluate it, rather than using it on staff or visitors?

On the other hand, I really don't want to know what the Secret Service is using theirs for.

FliesWay2Much

I do know that NIST acquired a cancer box for research. I can say with 100% certainty that Cancer Boxes aren't present at any NIST facility entrance. They are a lot smarter than that!

Schmurrr

Modesty is not the issue. Take a look at the 5,000+ comments about body scanning technology that the public submitted to TSA at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketD...=TSA-2013-0004.

VelvetJones

I'm sure you would feel completely the same if those images were of your wife or child.

halls120

You don't care, and that's your prerogative. Many others do, and you might not want to be so dismissive of their desires. Or you can mock them.

Not an effective discussion strategy, but to each his/her own.

WillCAD

I'm going to try to explain this to you without sarcasm or rancor, difficult as that is given my strong feelings on the subject.

YOU have the right to determine who sees YOUR body. It's called your right to privacy, and it's protected by the 4th Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable search and seizure. If YOU don't have a problem with exposing yourself to strangers, that is YOUR decision, and YOURS alone.

Neither you nor the government has the right or the authority to make that choice for anyone else. It is MY right to control who sees my body, and YOU have no say in the matter, just as I have no say in who sees YOUR body.

Now, you may bring up the old, "well, if you don't like it, don't fly" argument, or the "but there are TERRORISTS out there!" argument, but neither of them holds water. Firstly, giving me a choice between stripping my Constitutionally protected right to unrestricted travel or my Constitutionally protected right to privacy means that one way or another, one of my rights is violated. And second, the fact that there are people out there who want to abuse their rights and do harm to others does not make it acceptable for the government to strip those rights from millions of people on a daily basis, just to fight a hypothetical threat.

This is not about discomfort or modesty. It's about civil rights. And neither you nor the government can strip the civil rights from anyone.

ou81two

Thousands of comments by people who are mostly sad, overly emotional and uneducated. Most of them would be better off spending their time at the library than flying. There's probably a good number of them by tin foil hat wearing conspiracy types that don't even fly.