http://www.npr.org/2010/11/19/131450...-stick-figures

They aren't getting rid of them. Instead they are attempting to appease the privacy concerns by using software that converts the images to stick figure graphics instead of high res photo graphics. How easy it is to turn of this filtering software and the penalties for doing so are open to question. The only way I can imagine this actually working is if it is fully computer controlled. That is, the computer is the one who decides what doesn't look right.

I live in the Boston area so I am quite relieved to hear about this. Although I am also wary. I don't plan to travel anywhere until the scanners have been fully upgraded in every terminal. And even then I won't go through unless I have seen convincing evidence that the only human viewable information really is nothing more than a stick figure. For instance a stick figure that still shows my C&B with photorealism is still unacceptable. And the TSA has lied too many times before to trust them now. It could be nothing more than a ruse of some kind. I have to admit though that the idea of allowing a computer to analyze the images instead of a human is intriguing to me. This won't help people with concerns about the health issues of course, but I'm not really bothered so much by that. I'm personally willing to increase my risk of cancer in order to fly. I'm not willing to be photo strip searched though. I was once stripped search in an airport for bringing contraband (not drugs) into a foreign country and it actually wasn't as bad as these machines, mainly because I wasn't forced to remove my underwear.

And my pet rock is preventing rabid white elephants from invading my backyard in the Baltimore suburbs...see, it is just as effective as TSA.

Thanks for the link - I was going to provide that and you saved me the trouble.

You've also given me much to think about - thank you. But I'm a bit confused, as the news report I heard on NPR said that the stick figure machines wouldn't involve the same radiation issues as the nude scanners.

Yes, I would be perfectly happy getting on a flight where people simply got on the plane.

In fact, I have been perfectly happy getting on flights with no screening at all. This was the norm for domestic flights in some European countries before the EU regulations after 9/11.

So true! I travel by air only occasionally with my family, but neither I nor my children will be flying as long as these policies remain in place.

They are exactly the same machines: backscatter xray. The only difference would be new software that hides the details of the scanned body from the TSA. Think of it as a much more sophisticated version of the face blurring software that is already used, except it eliminates all detail and the AI screens the travelers instead of humans. If the software were hardcoded and hack-resistant and all details really were removed it seems like it could be a pretty good system for those not concerned with the health risks. Seems like a huge compromise in favor of privacy over security though, which makes me skeptical that it will really be adopted. Or the software could be used for 6 months to get wider acceptance and then it could be removed without informing anyone.

I guess you like xrays? University of San Francisco Phd's indicate xray exposure at skin level is 1-2 orders of magnitude (100x) then what the scanner manufacturers say. They used whole body mass instead of skin mass to calculate radiation effects to make the Nude Body Scanners seem much safer.

They are being sued to release all testing and medical health data for independent review. The Nude Body Scanner companies refuse... Sounds like Vioxx to me, air at ground zero after 911 and many other official lies that we have been told.

So what. Original high def scans will always be stored on the machine and probably stored elsewhere via wireless network. This is part of the Total Information Awarness plan, 3d parametric data on all travlers, along with radiation.

Radiation effects will occur much later and will be a big bonus profit for the Big pharma and the cancer death cult industry.

We can ask for anything at any time.

Nope, it still isn't minimally invasive.

The TSA exists to make the plane safe and/or make the passengers feel safe.

Body scanners in any form will never be able to tell the difference between a potential weapon, and a benign object. It's a dragnet, regardless of how much of the analysis gets shifted to the computer, it will "catch" non dangerous items. And probably a large helping of false positives/resolution pat downs.

Items such as cameras, cash, medical devices, data storage devices and other items that may well be considered contraband, but present no actual threat to the aircraft (or train, bus or whatever TSA wants to screen next month)


Thats not their purpose, and we shouldn't expand the scope of an already dangerously extra-constitutional agency without careful consideration.

Actually, all the linked article says is:
That is:
a) there is software
b) it might be tested at Boston. Or not. Sometime. Or not.
c) John Pistole explains what the software does but does NOT say "soon" or "Boston".
d) and it's "not ripe yet."

This is more TSA obfuscation. The software exists and has been in use in Amsterdam for over a year, yet TSA is still evaluating and refuses to commit to IF or WHEN it will use it. If you're planning your trip based on when all the scanners at BOS have been upgraded, you could be waiting a very very long time.

In response to someone else, whether the scanner shows a stick figure or not is independent of the level of radiation. X-rays scanners are just as bad, even if they show a stick figure. MMW scanners are (from a radiation viewpoint) harmless, even if they show a nude picture. You will have to weigh the issues of privacy and health risk separately.

As for saving the "original" picture, these are digital scans. The imaging beam moves over your body and stores a series of pixels - essentially a gray-scale code for each point across and up. These pixels can then be assembled by software to create a detailed image on the screen (current system) and/or analysed by software to see if there's an unexpected pattern in the sequence (ATR system). The second option does not necessarily mean that an image (in the usual sense of the word) is ever created. No, I don't trust the TSA as far as I could throw their HQ building, but in theory it is possible that such a system could be "non-invasive" from a privacy POV.

None of which resolves the remaining NoS issues of x-ray exposure, speed of getting through the checkpoints, outrageous cost of the machines as well as additional staff to run them, and the risk of losing your wallet, handbag and laptop while you're being scanned.

OPT OUT.

I thought the resolution patdown was supposed to be the only part of the scan that needed resolution. i.e. left leg, torso etc.