12,000 lost laptops
ZBicyclist
"Around 637,000 laptops are lost each year at US airports -- an
astonishing number -- according to a survey by the Ponemon Institute
reported by the IDG News Service. It says:
"'Close to 10,278 laptops are reported lost every week at 36 of
the largest US airports, and 65% of those laptops are not reclaimed,
the survey said. Around 2,000 laptops are recorded lost at the
medium-sized airports, and 69% are not reclaimed.'
"Laptops are most often lost at security checkpoints. Why the found
ones are not reclaimed is another issue, because the security
implications are frightening."
-- But there's some reason to be skeptical.
"The survey was paid for by Dell, which today launched a security
service that uses technologies such as GPS tracking to recover lost
laptops."
A similar story is also here:
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/147739/laptops_lost_like_hot_cakes_at_us_airports.html
--
Mike Kruger
"viewed in retrospect, it is clear that it has been quite
predictable." (David Runciman)
"I'd only call it "predictable" if you actually predict it ahead of
time" (Andrew Gelman)
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
ZBicyclist wrote:
>
> <http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/07/07/more_than_12000_laptops_a_week_go_missing_at_us_airports.html>
>
> "Around 637,000 laptops are lost each year at US airports -- an
> astonishing number -- according to a survey by the Ponemon Institute
> reported by the IDG News Service. It says:
>
> "'Close to 10,278 laptops are reported lost every week at 36 of
> the largest US airports, and 65% of those laptops are not reclaimed,
> the survey said. Around 2,000 laptops are recorded lost at the
> medium-sized airports, and 69% are not reclaimed.'
> "Laptops are most often lost at security checkpoints. Why the found
> ones are not reclaimed is another issue, because the security
> implications are frightening."
>
> -- But there's some reason to be skeptical.
>
> "The survey was paid for by Dell, which today launched a security
> service that uses technologies such as GPS tracking to recover lost
> laptops."
>
How hard could it be to locate someone if they put their name and
phone number in the root directory as file names? More likely than
not, this suggests that the airport doesn't want to find you.
--
"It happens sometimes, people just explode, natural causes."
-+Alex Cox, "Repo Man"
Opus the Penguin
> ZBicyclist wrote:
>>
>> <http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/07/07/more_than_12000
>> _laptops_a_week_go_missing_at_us_airports.html>
>>
>> "Around 637,000 laptops are lost each year at US airports -- an
>> astonishing number -- according to a survey by the Ponemon
>> Institute reported by the IDG News Service. It says:
>>
>> "'Close to 10,278 laptops are reported lost every week at 36 of
>> the largest US airports, and 65% of those laptops are not
>> reclaimed, the survey said. Around 2,000 laptops are recorded
>> lost at the medium-sized airports, and 69% are not reclaimed.'
>> "Laptops are most often lost at security checkpoints. Why the
>> found ones are not reclaimed is another issue, because the
>> security implications are frightening."
>>
>> -- But there's some reason to be skeptical.
>>
>> "The survey was paid for by Dell, which today launched a security
>> service that uses technologies such as GPS tracking to recover
>> lost laptops."
>>
> How hard could it be to locate someone if they put their name and
> phone number in the root directory as file names? More likely than
> not, this suggests that the airport doesn't want to find you.
>
Why do you believe it is the airport's job to track you down?
--
Opus the Penguin
It makes me think of Dorothy in "The Wizard of Oz", but with lots of
straps, zippers, and hooks-and-eyes. - Les Albert
Bob Ward
You don't think that the SECURITY personnel to whom you entrusted your
laptop (involuntarily) have some sort of responsibility to make some
sort of effort to return your laptop if it is recovered? It's not
like a skycap lifted it because the owner failed to tip him, after
all.
Having the owner carry the responsibility to call to recover his
property would be a bad parody of the kids in the bask seat ...
"Is it there yet? No."
"Is it there yet? No."
"Is it there yet? No."
"Is it there yet? No."
"Is it there yet? No."
Opus the Penguin
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 05:27:08 +0000 (UTC), Opus the Penguin
> <opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') wrote:
>>> ZBicyclist wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/07/07/more_than_120
>>>> 00 _laptops_a_week_go_missing_at_us_airports.html>
If I'm understanding the situation, the owner put the laptop through
the X-Ray machine and walked off without it. The security people are
quite busy and, at least in some cases, have no access to the
intercom system. If there's a lull, one of them might amble over to
the nearest gate and request an announcement telling the doofus who
left the laptop behind to come back to security.
If it's busy, they figure you'll come back and get it if you want it.
People leave stuff behind all the time. Security turns it over to the
airport and the airport hangs onto it for a while. You aren't paying
them to find you when you forget to keep track of your own
possessions.
--
Opus the Penguin
Most of us don't store much fat in our heads. - bill van
huey.c...@gmail.com
> > ZBicyclist wrote:
> >> <http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/07/07/more_than_12000
> >> _laptops_a_week_go_missing_at_us_airports.html>
> >> "Around 637,000 laptops are lost each year at US airports
> >> the largest US airports, and 65% of those laptops are not
> >> reclaimed
> > phone number in the root directory as file names? More likely than
> > not, this suggests that the airport doesn't want to find you.
> Why do you believe it is the airport's job to track you down?
The people who separated you from your laptop have no obligation to see
to it that you are reunited with it?
How is that not STEALING?
--
Huey
Blinky the Shark
> If I'm understanding the situation, the owner put the laptop through
> the X-Ray machine and walked off without it. The security people are
> quite busy and, at least in some cases, have no access to the
> intercom system. If there's a lull, one of them might amble over to
> the nearest gate and request an announcement telling the doofus who
> left the laptop behind to come back to security.
Kinda begs the question that they give a rip in the first place, no?
--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
huey.c...@gmail.com
> If I'm understanding the situation, the owner put the laptop through
> the X-Ray machine and walked off without it.
...along with everything he was carrying, and his jacket, and his shoes,
and everything that was in his pockets. If someone is carrying a lot of
shit, frazzled (from, among other things, waiting in line to go through
security) and being rushed, it's not unimaginineable that he'll forget
something. Possibly something very expensive.
> The security people are quite busy and, at least in some cases, have
> no access to the intercom system.
That seems like a design flaw.
> If there's a lull, one of them might amble over to the nearest gate
> and request an announcement telling the doofus who left the laptop
> behind to come back to security.
> If it's busy, they figure you'll come back and get it if you want it.
...and not, y'know, get on a plane or anything between when you lose it
and when you realize you've lost it.
> People leave stuff behind all the time.
People beat their wives all the time. Your point?
> Security turns it over to the airport and the airport hangs onto it
> for a while. You aren't paying them to find you when you forget to
> keep track of your own possessions.
We are, however, paying them to separate us from our possessions, while
NOT paying them to ensure that we get them back.
There are very few things in life that I am completely certain of. For
most of my adult life, I would have insisted that first and foremost
among these was "My wife loves me, and would never do anything to hurt
me", and it was quite the quel surprise when I discovered that this was
not the case. Because of that, I am in many respects less certain about
almost everything I think I know -- because, after all, if the one thing
I was the most certain of could be wrong, could not everything else be
wrong similarly?
But still, I am certain, on a scale somewhere between "the sun will rise
tomorrow" and "the US government will want me to pay more taxes than I
might have chosen", that NONE OF MY LAPTOPS CONTAIN A BOMB, and without
doing any websearches or citing anything authoritative (and disregarding
any incidents caused by Sony laptop batteries) I'm almost equally
confident that NO AIRPLANE HAS EVER BEEN DAMAGED BY A BOMB IN A LAPTOP,
and so, having to routinely demonstrate that my laptops, which have
never caused an accident on an airplane, still contain no bombs, which
is similar to all other laptops in that none of them have, MAKES ME WANT
TO FIND THE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS IN CHARGE
OF POLICY AND SET THEM ON FIRE. And if any such person exists who is
smarter than a toaster, they should all have the Wikipedia entry for
"Security Theater" tattooed on their ass with a rusty underpowered
woodburning iron, after which they should be made to stand in the
backscatter X-ray detector such that all of the OTHER TSA employees
could look into the display and READ THAT DEFINITION OFF OF THEIR ASS,
WHILE THEY'RE ON FIRE.
--
Huey
Bob Ward
Apparently they sub out the actual stealing to another subsidiary.
Rick B.
@4ax.com:
Where do the unclaimed laptops wind up? Perhaps at that place in Alabama that
gets the unclaimed baggage?
Opus the Penguin
> Opus the Penguin <opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') wrote:
>> > ZBicyclist wrote:
>> >> <http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/07/07/more_than_12
>> >> 000 _laptops_a_week_go_missing_at_us_airports.html>
>> >> "Around 637,000 laptops are lost each year at US airports
>> >> "'Close to 10,278 laptops are reported lost every week at 36
>> >> of
>> >> the largest US airports, and 65% of those laptops are not
>> >> reclaimed
>> > How hard could it be to locate someone if they put their name
>> > and phone number in the root directory as file names? More
>> > likely than not, this suggests that the airport doesn't want to
>> > find you.
>> Why do you believe it is the airport's job to track you down?
>
> The people who separated you from your laptop have no obligation
> to see to it that you are reunited with it?
>
> How is that not STEALING?
>
Well, they store it for you for a time free of charge. When you come
to claim your lost item, they cheerfully give it to you. So it's
pretty much like the lost and found at Disneyworld. You figure
Disneyworld goes through the pictures in your digital camera to see
if they can gain clues to your identity? Nah, they just steal it.
They're as bad as those airport thieves.
--
Opus the Penguin
Maybe there's just something about the way I look that screams out
"cheese smuggler". - Bill Kinkaid
Opus the Penguin
> Opus the Penguin <opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If I'm understanding the situation, the owner put the laptop
>> through the X-Ray machine and walked off without it.
>
> ...along with everything he was carrying, and his jacket, and his
> shoes, and everything that was in his pockets. If someone is
> carrying a lot of shit, frazzled (from, among other things,
> waiting in line to go through security) and being rushed, it's not
> unimaginineable that he'll forget something. Possibly something
> very expensive.
>
Of course. And I'm sympathetic. But he's not paying the security
people to dress him back up afterwards and make sure he remembers to
pick everything up. It would be nice if they had that kind of time.
Unfortunately, that's a burden that the traveler has to assume.
>> The security people are quite busy and, at least in some cases,
>> have no access to the intercom system.
>
> That seems like a design flaw.
>
Perhaps. All airports are laid out differently. I'm guessing they all
have design flaws that make travelers shake their heads and wonder
what crack-addled dope-smoking low-IQ weasel designed the place.
>> If there's a lull, one of them might amble over to the nearest
>> gate and request an announcement telling the doofus who left the
>> laptop behind to come back to security.
>> If it's busy, they figure you'll come back and get it if you want
>> it.
>
> ...and not, y'know, get on a plane or anything between when you
> lose it and when you realize you've lost it.
>
Yeah, that sucks. Then you have to call the airport and arrange to
have the thing sent to you at your own expense. It's not fun. Do you
really want to pay the higher ticket price to get a full service
airport? They could say, wow, we're sorry we were so busy and
distracting that you forgot some stuff; here, let us hire people to
investigate all these things and track you down and ship your stuff
to you gratis because it's our fault, really. But it's going to cost
you.
>> People leave stuff behind all the time.
>
> People beat their wives all the time. Your point?
>
That in both cases they are responsible for their own actions.
You walked right into that one.
>> Security turns it over to the airport and the airport hangs onto
>> it for a while. You aren't paying them to find you when you
>> forget to keep track of your own possessions.
>
> We are, however, paying them to separate us from our possessions,
> while NOT paying them to ensure that we get them back.
>
What do you mean by "ensure"? How much are you willing to pay for
that? No one is stopping you from reclaiming your possessions.
That's a different matter of course. I don't know enough to comment
on the effectiveness of making you run your laptop through the X-ray.
I suppose you could hollow it out and keep a knife in there. Maybe a
gun if it's thick enough.
--
Opus the Penguin
It's just a sneaky way to make sure everyone reads all your posts,
just to see if they get quoted. - Bill Kinkaid
Opus the Penguin
> Bob Ward <bob...@email.com> wrote:
>> huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>
>>>The people who separated you from your laptop have no obligation
>>>to see to it that you are reunited with it?
>>>
>>>How is that not STEALING?
>>
>> Apparently they sub out the actual stealing to another
>> subsidiary.
>
> Where do the unclaimed laptops wind up? Perhaps at that place in
> Alabama that gets the unclaimed baggage?
>
>
ITYM stolen baggage.
--
Opus the Penguin
Otherwise I'd just poop in my hand in the kitchen, see, and then
carry it to the bathroom when I was done reading the paper. - Kevin
O'Neill
xho...@gmail.com
>
> That's a different matter of course. I don't know enough to comment
> I suppose you could hollow it out and keep a knife in there. Maybe a
> gun if it's thick enough.
Spot the taco.
Xho
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked
advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate
this fact.
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
If I found a laptop (in the context of it not being abandoned) and
it had the owner's name and phone number in the root directory, I
think it would be something I'd need to do. Don't you think you
would need to too? If all is so, then why shouldn't a government or
semi-government entity that regularly finds laptops do the same?
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
Opus the Penguin wrote:
>
> (huey.c...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > Opus the Penguin <opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> If I'm understanding the situation, the owner put the laptop
> >> through the X-Ray machine and walked off without it.
> >
> > ...along with everything he was carrying, and his jacket, and his
> > shoes, and everything that was in his pockets. If someone is
> > carrying a lot of shit, frazzled (from, among other things,
> > waiting in line to go through security) and being rushed, it's not
> > unimaginineable that he'll forget something. Possibly something
> > very expensive.
> >
>
> Of course. And I'm sympathetic. But he's not paying the security
> people to dress him back up afterwards and make sure he remembers to
> pick everything up. It would be nice if they had that kind of time.
> Unfortunately, that's a burden that the traveler has to assume.
>
I thought that they might look in the root directory for a name and
phone number and maybe address and send him a postcard: "We've got
your laptop, please go through this channel to claim it."
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
Opus the Penguin wrote:
>
> (huey.c...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > The people who separated you from your laptop have no obligation
> > to see to it that you are reunited with it?
> >
> > How is that not STEALING?
> >
>
> Well, they store it for you for a time free of charge. When you come
> to claim your lost item, they cheerfully give it to you. So it's
> pretty much like the lost and found at Disneyworld. You figure
> Disneyworld goes through the pictures in your digital camera to see
> if they can gain clues to your identity? Nah, they just steal it.
> They're as bad as those airport thieves.
>
Most of these devices have some sort of root directory. If it were
routinely known that every owner of every one of these devices had
put his name, phone number and mailing address as a filename in
said root directory, they could just look there.
Opus the Penguin
>
>
> Opus the Penguin wrote:
>>
>> Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') wrote:
>> > ZBicyclist wrote:
>> >>
>> >> <http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/07/07/more_than_12
>> >> 000 _laptops_a_week_go_missing_at_us_airports.html>
>> >>
>> >> "Around 637,000 laptops are lost each year at US airports --
>> >> an astonishing number -- according to a survey by the Ponemon
>> >> Institute reported by the IDG News Service. It says:
>> >>
>> >> "'Close to 10,278 laptops are reported lost every week at 36
>> >> of
>> >> the largest US airports, and 65% of those laptops are not
>> >> reclaimed, the survey said. Around 2,000 laptops are recorded
>> >> lost at the medium-sized airports, and 69% are not reclaimed.'
>> >> "Laptops are most often lost at security checkpoints. Why the
>> >> found ones are not reclaimed is another issue, because the
>> >> security implications are frightening."
>> >>
>> >> -- But there's some reason to be skeptical.
>> >>
>> >> "The survey was paid for by Dell, which today launched a
>> >> security service that uses technologies such as GPS tracking
>> >> to recover lost laptops."
>> >>
>> > How hard could it be to locate someone if they put their name
>> > and phone number in the root directory as file names? More
>> > likely than not, this suggests that the airport doesn't want to
>> > find you.
>> >
>>
>> Why do you believe it is the airport's job to track you down?
>>
> If I found a laptop (in the context of it not being abandoned) and
> it had the owner's name and phone number in the root directory, I
> think it would be something I'd need to do. Don't you think you
> would need to too?
Of course.
> If all is so, then why shouldn't a government
> or semi-government entity that regularly finds laptops do the
> same?
>
The word "regularly" is the key, I think. If you couldn't step out
your door without finding two or three lost laptops, would you
continue to track down each and every owner?
Bob Ward
<opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Rick B. (deep...@sprynet.com.aq) wrote:
>> Bob Ward <bob...@email.com> wrote:
>>> huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>
>>>>The people who separated you from your laptop have no obligation
>>>>to see to it that you are reunited with it?
>>>>
>>>>How is that not STEALING?
>>>
>>> Apparently they sub out the actual stealing to another
>>> subsidiary.
>>
>> Where do the unclaimed laptops wind up? Perhaps at that place in
>> Alabama that gets the unclaimed baggage?
>>
>>
>
>ITYM stolen baggage.
I think so too - I know I handed them over to the skycap and tipped
him a couple of bucks to check them through for me, so it must have
been him.
Opus the Penguin
Or, as I say, people could stick a label on their computer.
--
Opus the Penguin
The forest is fraught with marauders. - Les Albert
Opus the Penguin
Do laptops generally have a name, phone number, and address in the
root directory somewhere? I don't think mine does. I'm sure with some
detective work and computer knowledge, you could figure out who my
laptop belongs to and how to get in touch with me. Might even take
less than half an hour. Do you want the airports to hire computer-
knowledgeable people whose job it is to search through the laptops to
find this information?
I believe, though I'm not sure, that if you have this information
pasted to the outside of the computer, they'll give you a call.
Perhaps the best cheap solution is for laptop owners to label their
computers. Maybe the airline could even provide cheap sticky labels.
But right now they're trying to cut costs, so I'm thinking they won't
want to do even that.
--
Opus the Penguin
Think what you will of the man, but you have to give him credit
where it's due - he got really sick. - One of the Bob Gearys
danny burstein
>I thought that they might look in the root directory for a name and
>phone number and maybe address and send him a postcard: "We've got
>your laptop, please go through this channel to claim it."
Ok boys and girls. Let's see a show of hands:
How many of your computer laptops (and similar items)
have a label or tag on them, giving contact info?
Ok, all of you who kept your hands down, you know
what today's assignment is.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Hactar
ZBicyclist <ZBicy...@excite.com> wrote:
> <http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/07/07/more_than_12000_laptops_a_week_go_missing_at_us_airports.html>
>
> "Around 637,000 laptops are lost each year at US airports -- an
> astonishing number -- according to a survey by the Ponemon Institute
> reported by the IDG News Service. It says:
>
>
>
> "'Close to 10,278 laptops are reported lost every week at 36 of
> the largest US airports, and 65% of those laptops are not reclaimed,
> the survey said. Around 2,000 laptops are recorded lost at the
> medium-sized airports, and 69% are not reclaimed.'
> "Laptops are most often lost at security checkpoints. Why the found
> ones are not reclaimed is another issue, because the security
> implications are frightening."
>
> -- But there's some reason to be skeptical.
>
> "The survey was paid for by Dell, which today launched a security
> service that uses technologies such as GPS tracking to recover lost
> laptops."
>
> A similar story is also here:
> http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/147739/laptops_lost_like_hot_cakes_at_us_airports.html
How can one distinguish a lost laptop from one that's stolen based on
the chance that it'll be fencable, then found not to be fencable and
dumped?
--
The powers in charge keep us in a continuous stampede of patriotic
fervor with the cry of national emergency. Always there has been some
terrible evil to gobble us up if we did not furnish the sums demanded.
Yet these disasters seem never to have been quite real. -- D. MacArthur
Opus the Penguin
> In <48738955...@yahoo.co.uk> "Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel
> is People'')" <tributyl...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>
>>I thought that they might look in the root directory for a name
>>and phone number and maybe address and send him a postcard: "We've
>>got your laptop, please go through this channel to claim it."
>
> Ok boys and girls. Let's see a show of hands:
>
> How many of your computer laptops (and similar items)
> have a label or tag on them, giving contact info?
>
> Ok, all of you who kept your hands down, you know
> what today's assignment is.
>
>
Complain about airport security?
--
Opus the Penguin
I have a two year old. It doesn't matter which way it hangs. - Glenn
Dowdy
Greg Goss
>I believe, though I'm not sure, that if you have this information
>pasted to the outside of the computer, they'll give you a call.
>Perhaps the best cheap solution is for laptop owners to label their
>computers. Maybe the airline could even provide cheap sticky labels.
>But right now they're trying to cut costs, so I'm thinking they won't
>want to do even that.
Every laptop case that I've ever owned has had a slot with clear
plastic or mesh cover exactly business card sized. I think it's
fairly clear that laptop case designers want you to get your computer
back.
Now, if only the computer was still in its case. I have a business
card tucked under the battery, but I doubt that the airport would be
pulling batteries.
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
Anny Middon
news:vOSdnRwdfeA-lO7V...@speakeasy.net...
>
> But still, I am certain, on a scale somewhere between "the sun will rise
> tomorrow" and "the US government will want me to pay more taxes than I
> might have chosen", that NONE OF MY LAPTOPS CONTAIN A BOMB, and without
> doing any websearches or citing anything authoritative (and disregarding
> any incidents caused by Sony laptop batteries) I'm almost equally
> confident that NO AIRPLANE HAS EVER BEEN DAMAGED BY A BOMB IN A LAPTOP,
> and so, having to routinely demonstrate that my laptops, which have
> never caused an accident on an airplane, still contain no bombs, which
> is similar to all other laptops in that none of them have, MAKES ME WANT
> TO FIND THE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS IN CHARGE
> OF POLICY AND SET THEM ON FIRE. And if any such person exists who is
> smarter than a toaster, they should all have the Wikipedia entry for
> "Security Theater" tattooed on their ass with a rusty underpowered
> woodburning iron, after which they should be made to stand in the
> backscatter X-ray detector such that all of the OTHER TSA employees
> could look into the display and READ THAT DEFINITION OFF OF THEIR ASS,
> WHILE THEY'RE ON FIRE.
Lovely rant.
But of course you are aware that the point of the TSA inspection of air
travelers is not to make flying more secure, but to make flying appear to be
more secure.
I can't fly with a 4-oz tube of hand cream, but I can with a 3-oz bottle of
Da Bomb or Dave's Insanity or Endorphin Rush hot sauce, any of which could
be used to incapacitate lots of people.
Anny
QueBarbara
Which is a lot more pratical, since most laptops have these things
called "login passwords" or "thumbprint readers."
--
QueBarbara
Bob Ward
I'd think they would reexamine their procedure to determine why these
lost laptops keep appearing and make the necessary changes.
Opus the Penguin
> Opus the Penguin <opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
>>(tributyl...@yahoo.co.uk) wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Opus the Penguin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') wrote:
>>>> > ZBicyclist wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> <http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/07/07/more_than_
What if those changes cost? Are you willing to pay?
--
Opus the Penguin
Some days there isn't enough herring in the world to give you the
smack you're asking for. - Veronique
Bill Turlock
>
> <http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/07/07/more_than_12000_laptops_a_week_go_missing_at_us_airports.html>
>
> "Around 637,000 laptops are lost each year at US airports -- an
> astonishing number -- according to a survey by the Ponemon Institute
FPA "Pokemon" Inst.
> reported by the IDG News Service. It says:
>
> "'Close to 10,278 laptops are reported lost every week at 36 of
> the largest US airports, and 65% of those laptops are not reclaimed,
> the survey said. Around 2,000 laptops are recorded lost at the
> medium-sized airports, and 69% are not reclaimed.'
> "Laptops are most often lost at security checkpoints. Why the found
> ones are not reclaimed is another issue, because the security
> implications are frightening."
>
> -- But there's some reason to be skeptical.
>
> "The survey was paid for by Dell, which today launched a security
> service that uses technologies such as GPS tracking to recover lost
> laptops."
>
Hactar
Opus the Penguin <opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
> (tributyl...@yahoo.co.uk) wrote:
>
> > Opus the Penguin wrote:
> >>
> >> (huey.c...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >> > Opus the Penguin <opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> If I'm understanding the situation, the owner put the laptop
> >> >> through the X-Ray machine and walked off without it.
> >> >
> >> > ...along with everything he was carrying, and his jacket, and
> >> > his shoes, and everything that was in his pockets. If someone
> >> > is carrying a lot of shit, frazzled (from, among other things,
> >> > waiting in line to go through security) and being rushed, it's
> >> > not unimaginineable that he'll forget something. Possibly
> >> > something very expensive.
> >>
> >> Of course. And I'm sympathetic. But he's not paying the security
> >> people to dress him back up afterwards and make sure he remembers
> >> to pick everything up. It would be nice if they had that kind of
> >> time. Unfortunately, that's a burden that the traveler has to
> >> assume.
> >>
> > I thought that they might look in the root directory for a name
> > and phone number and maybe address and send him a postcard: "We've
> > got your laptop, please go through this channel to claim it."
>
> Do laptops generally have a name, phone number, and address in the
> root directory somewhere?
Mine has a business-card-size translucent pocket on the rear. I haven't
filled it yet. I should get some calling cards made and do so.
--
-eben QebWe...@vTerYizUonI.nOetP http://royalty.mine.nu:81
AQUARIUS: There's travel in your future when your tongue freezes to the
back of a speeding bus. Fill the void in your pathetic life by playing
Whack-a-Mole 17 hours a day. -- Weird Al, _Your Horoscope for Today_
Bob Ward
<opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
When did we ever get to choose?
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
Can I get a free laptop?
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
I'm not arguing against doing that or even scratching something
into the device. But I think that generally putting info in the
root directory of cameras, flash drives, laptops and the like is a
good idea.
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
danny burstein wrote:
>
> In <48738955...@yahoo.co.uk> "Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')" <tributyl...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>
> >I thought that they might look in the root directory for a name and
> >phone number and maybe address and send him a postcard: "We've got
> >your laptop, please go through this channel to claim it."
>
> Ok boys and girls. Let's see a show of hands:
>
> How many of your computer laptops (and similar items)
> have a label or tag on them, giving contact info?
>
> Ok, all of you who kept your hands down, you know
> what today's assignment is.
>
I can see putting a sticker on a laptop, but it's difficult with a
camera, a flash card or something else like that. That's why I have
gone to the root directory info thing.
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
I was suggesting that you add that root directory information so
that anyone looking could quickly figure out whose laptop it was.
> I believe, though I'm not sure, that if you have this information
> pasted to the outside of the computer, they'll give you a call.
>
By all means do that.
> Perhaps the best cheap solution is for laptop owners to label their
> computers. Maybe the airline could even provide cheap sticky labels.
>
I think they have them. Now we'll find out that people are losing
their laptops while they fill out the sticky labels.
> But right now they're trying to cut costs, so I'm thinking they won't
> want to do even that.
>
Then they could just sell the laptops.
Richard Evans
>Do laptops generally have a name, phone number, and address in the
>root directory somewhere? I don't think mine does. I'm sure with some
>detective work and computer knowledge, you could figure out who my
>laptop belongs to and how to get in touch with me. Might even take
>less than half an hour. Do you want the airports to hire computer-
>knowledgeable people whose job it is to search through the laptops to
>find this information?
>
>I believe, though I'm not sure, that if you have this information
>pasted to the outside of the computer, they'll give you a call.
'Cause they ain't gonna get past my password to see what's actually on
the computer. I'm not saying a password can't be defeated, just that
the guy at the airport lost and found isn't likely to do it.
David Lesher
>The people who separated you from your laptop have no obligation to see
>to it that you are reunited with it?
>How is that not STEALING?
We're from the government; we're here to help you.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
huey.c...@gmail.com
> >> through the X-Ray machine and walked off without it.
> > ...along with everything he was carrying, and his jacket, and his
> > shoes, and everything that was in his pockets. If someone is
> > carrying a lot of shit, frazzled (from, among other things, waiting
> > in line to go through security) and being rushed, it's not
> > unimaginineable that he'll forget something. Possibly something very
> > expensive.
> Of course. And I'm sympathetic. But he's not paying the security
> people to dress him back up afterwards and make sure he remembers to
> pick everything up. It would be nice if they had that kind of time.
So, instead of spending so much time looking for bombs that aren't
there, how about spending some time making sure that, if you're going to
force people to drop everything, remove everything, and open everything,
they pick up everything, put everything back on, and close everything? I
don't understand how that's not possible. I mean, if you're building
security checkpoints for airports, why build in enough time for
everybody to get checked, but not enough time for everybody to get
reunited with their shit?
> >> If there's a lull, one of them might amble over to the nearest
> >> gate and request an announcement telling the doofus who left the
> >> laptop behind to come back to security.
> >> If it's busy, they figure you'll come back and get it if you want
> >> it.
> > ...and not, y'know, get on a plane or anything between when you lose
> > it and when you realize you've lost it.
> Yeah, that sucks. Then you have to call the airport and arrange to
> have the thing sent to you at your own expense. It's not fun. Do you
> really want to pay the higher ticket price to get a full service
> airport?
I'd REALLY like to pay a lower ticket price for an airport that wasn't
overrun with TSA goons, but unfortunately, the free market to provide
one is constrained by government crackweasels who like security theater.
> >> People leave stuff behind all the time.
> > People beat their wives all the time. Your point?
> That in both cases they are responsible for their own actions.
> You walked right into that one.
And in both cases, it's not something the system should encourage. In
fact, I'd go so far as to say that, in both cases, it's something we
should strive to eliminate.
> >> Security turns it over to the airport and the airport hangs onto it
> >> for a while. You aren't paying them to find you when you forget to
> >> keep track of your own possessions.
> > We are, however, paying them to separate us from our possessions,
> > while NOT paying them to ensure that we get them back.
> What do you mean by "ensure"? How much are you willing to pay for
> that?
I dunno. What am I paying for TSA goons NOW? And are the TSA goons
wasting huge amounts of money in other areas, like, I dunno, backscatter
X-ray machines? Perhaps some of that money could be recovered, we could
put more TSA goons on the bag-inspection deal, and ensure that people
get reunited with their shit for less money than we're paying now.
--
Huey
huey.c...@gmail.com
> > Bill Bonde <tributyl...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> >> I thought that they might look in the root directory for a name and
> >> phone number and maybe address and send him a postcard: "We've got
> >> your laptop, please go through this channel to claim it."
> > Ok boys and girls. Let's see a show of hands:
> > How many of your computer laptops (and similar items) have a label
> > or tag on them, giving contact info?
> > Ok, all of you who kept your hands down, you know what today's
> > assignment is.
> Complain about airport security?
Are you not paying attention? Or was "SET THEM ON FIRE" too subtle?
--
Huey
huey.c...@gmail.com
> > I'd think they would reexamine their procedure to determine why
> > these lost laptops keep appearing and make the necessary changes.
> What if those changes cost? Are you willing to pay?
You keep asking this, like it's the end of the world. We're already
paying for a massive (like, STUPIDLY massive) TSA to do a lot of stupid
(like, MASSIVELY stupid) things, things that don't actually enhance
security all that much. And now we find out that, among the massively
stupid things the stupidly massive TSA is accomplishing is essentially
stealing tens of thousands of laptops, costing travelers millions. So,
it's costing us a lot of money to have them do something that then costs
us a lot more money. Eliminating any part of that saves us some money,
and it could be as simple as a procedural change with a negligible cost.
We're already paying to be inconvenienced. How about we pay the same
amount to be inconvenienced less?
--
Huey
D.F. Manno
danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> wrote:
> How many of your computer laptops (and similar items)
> have a label or tag on them, giving contact info?
Zero out of one.
--
D.F. Manno | dfm...@mail.com
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man零 oldest exercises in
moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification
for selfishness. (John Kenneth Galbraith)
N Jill Marsh
<opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Do laptops generally have a name, phone number, and address in the
>root directory somewhere?
All the laptops and portable drives owned by members of this household
have simple text files either in the top directory or on the desktop
that say "read_me_if_found.txt". In that is contact information and a
very nice plea to please return it.
nj"ground-breaking"m
--
Send reggae, guns & numbers.
Opus the Penguin
> Opus the Penguin <opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> (huey.c...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> > Opus the Penguin <opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> If I'm understanding the situation, the owner put the laptop
>> >> through the X-Ray machine and walked off without it.
>> > ...along with everything he was carrying, and his jacket, and
>> > his shoes, and everything that was in his pockets. If someone
>> > is carrying a lot of shit, frazzled (from, among other things,
>> > waiting in line to go through security) and being rushed, it's
>> > not unimaginineable that he'll forget something. Possibly
>> > something very expensive.
>> Of course. And I'm sympathetic. But he's not paying the security
>> people to dress him back up afterwards and make sure he remembers
>> to pick everything up. It would be nice if they had that kind of
>> time.
>
> So, instead of spending so much time looking for bombs that aren't
> there, how about spending some time making sure that, if you're
> going to force people to drop everything, remove everything, and
> open everything, they pick up everything, put everything back on,
> and close everything? I don't understand how that's not possible.
> I mean, if you're building security checkpoints for airports, why
> build in enough time for everybody to get checked, but not enough
> time for everybody to get reunited with their shit?
>
I think there is time. Some people don't take the time. They get
confused or distracted. It's understandable. I suppose we could send
them through one at a time. That way if there's anything sitting on
the belt, you know it's yours. We could probably speed things up by
letting families and groups of four go through together. As long as
there's nothing left on the belt when they leave, everything's ok.
I think the major source of your frustration is the belief that these
security procedures don't really increase security. I don't know
whether that's so or not. I can understand the insult to injury
complaint though.
--
Opus the Penguin
Facts are for wimps. Real usenet posters just say stuff that sounds
right. - Huey Callison
Opus the Penguin
> Opus the Penguin <opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Bob Ward (bob...@email.com) wrote:
>> > I'd think they would reexamine their procedure to determine why
>> > these lost laptops keep appearing and make the necessary
>> > changes.
>> What if those changes cost? Are you willing to pay?
>
> You keep asking this, like it's the end of the world. We're
> already paying for a massive (like, STUPIDLY massive) TSA to do a
> lot of stupid (like, MASSIVELY stupid) things, things that don't
> actually enhance security all that much. And now we find out that,
> among the massively stupid things the stupidly massive TSA is
> accomplishing is essentially stealing tens of thousands of
> laptops, costing travelers millions.
How is it "stealing" to maintain a lost and found?
Look. Forget TSA. They make you angry. You hate everything about
them, so you're not about to let them off the hook for anything. I
understand.
Go back to the Disneyworld example. They find all kinds of lost stuff
there daily. You figure they have an obligation to track down the
owners? I doubt they find many laptops. But they certainly find video
cameras and such. I mean, you would've held onto your bag, but there
was GOOFY putting his arm around your woman and she seemed to be
enjoying it and you figured you needed to intervene and by the time
you've asserted your manliness you've forgotten all about the bag.
But if someone wants to review the footage, maybe they can figure out
how to get in touch with you. And it's totally Disney's fault for
hiring that pervert dog.
> So, it's costing us a lot of
> money to have them do something that then costs us a lot more
> money. Eliminating any part of that saves us some money, and it
> could be as simple as a procedural change with a negligible cost.
> We're already paying to be inconvenienced. How about we pay the
> same amount to be inconvenienced less?
>
So you want them to do more work for the same price. It's not going
to happen. You've got two choices, and blowing up TSA and living free
and wild doesn't figure in either of them:
1. Keep things the way they are and keep track of your stuff.
2. Shift the burden for keeping track of your stuff to TSA and pay
them more money.
--
Opus the Penguin
Maybe there's just something about the way I look that screams out
"cheese smuggler". - Bill Kinkaid
huey.c...@gmail.com
> (huey.c...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > Opus the Penguin <opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Bob Ward (bob...@email.com) wrote:
> >> > I'd think they would reexamine their procedure to determine why
> >> > these lost laptops keep appearing and make the necessary changes.
> >> What if those changes cost? Are you willing to pay?
> > You keep asking this, like it's the end of the world. We're already
> > paying for a massive (like, STUPIDLY massive) TSA to do a lot of
> > stupid (like, MASSIVELY stupid) things, things that don't actually
> > enhance security all that much. And now we find out that, among the
> > massively stupid things the stupidly massive TSA is accomplishing is
> > essentially stealing tens of thousands of laptops, costing travelers
> > millions.
> How is it "stealing" to maintain a lost and found?
It isn't, unless you also force things to become lost in the first
place, and then make it effectively impossible for people to claim them.
> Look. Forget TSA. They make you angry. You hate everything about them,
> so you're not about to let them off the hook for anything. I
> understand.
I don't hate everything about them, just the bits that seem broken by
design. I'm sure most TSA employees aren't stealing stuff from luggage
and really do mean well, but the truth is that they could tell you to
comb three raw eggs into your hair and put your socks on your hands, and
justify their actions with nothing more than "I'm sorry, sir, but it's
the new policy". ...and everyone would probably believe them, because
most of their policies make about that much sense, and you know the
$10/hr monkey with fake badge didn't just dream up anything that
moronic, no, it had to come from a political appointee.
> Go back to the Disneyworld example.
The Disney example isn't a particularly good one, because Disney doesn't
wait until you're tired, stressed, and in a hurry, and then force you to
get your shit all akimbo, and then make you pick it all back up,
immediately prior to getting on a plane and leaving.
> > So, it's costing us a lot of money to have them do something that
> > then costs us a lot more money. Eliminating any part of that saves
> > us some money, and it could be as simple as a procedural change with
> > a negligible cost. We're already paying to be inconvenienced. How
> > about we pay the same amount to be inconvenienced less?
> So you want them to do more work for the same price.
No. I want them to do different work for the same price. Instead of
buying a red car and then paying to have it painted blue, how about we
just buy the blue one to begin with? If the system is broken by design,
the solution might not be "bolt on a bunch of extra stuff", it might be
"fix the design".
> It's not going to happen.
Of COURSE it's not going to happen. However, this will not stop me from
pointing out that it COULD.
> You've got two choices,
Things are rarely that simple, and the TSA, certainly not.
> and blowing up TSA and living free and wild doesn't figure in either
> of them:
> 1. Keep things the way they are and keep track of your stuff.
> 2. Shift the burden for keeping track of your stuff to TSA and pay
> them more money.
Okay, how's this: Going through security at Dulles, there's around a
dozen or so conveyor belts. Currently, the procedure is for:
1) people to go to whatever conveyor belt strikes their fancy and un-ass
their shit into plastic tubs on the conveyor belt,
2) TSA goon looks at X-ray of shit, TSA goon #2 looks at metal dectector
of person beeping and says "watch, keys, belt-buckle", and makes the guy
do the little dance, then
3) people re-ass their shit out of plastic tubs on the conveyor belt at
the other end, while TSA goon #3 holds up things and goes "Whose is this?",
...in a huge clusterfuck of people all trying to get through as fast as
they can.
Instead of doing THAT, how about:
1) TSA goon #3 in the above scenario moves to the START of the conveyor
belt, and says 'NEXT' when the previous person has picked up all of
their shit off his conveyor. SHAZAM! His "Whose is this?" job is
eliminated. His new job is to yell 'NEXT'. Hopefully, with an extensive
federally-funded retraining program, most of the existing TSA goon #3s
can manage to find jobs in this bold new initiative, and then
2) TSA goon looks at X-ray of shit, TSA goon #2 looks at metal dectector
of person beeping and says "watch, keys, belt-buckle", and makes the guy
do the little dance, then
3) people re-ass their shit out of plastic tubs on the conveyor belt at
the other end, and TSA goon #3 watches them do it. He could even say
something helpful, like "Dude, you forgot your shit", before he calls
for the next victim.
How does this cost any more money, besides the millions we'll have to
spend retraining the "Whose is this?" guys to say "Next!" and "Dude, you
forgot your shit", and the $50 sign that says "PLEASE WAIT HERE UNTIL
ONE OF OUR GOONS YELLS 'NEXT'" that you put in front of it all?
And I tell ya what: I'll even pay the $50.
--
Huey
Opus the Penguin
> Instead of doing THAT, how about:
> 1) TSA goon #3 in the above scenario moves to the START of the
> conveyor belt, and says 'NEXT' when the previous person has picked
> up all of their shit off his conveyor. SHAZAM! His "Whose is
> this?" job is eliminated. His new job is to yell 'NEXT'.
> Hopefully, with an extensive federally-funded retraining program,
> most of the existing TSA goon #3s can manage to find jobs in this
> bold new initiative, and then 2) TSA goon looks at X-ray of shit,
> TSA goon #2 looks at metal dectector of person beeping and says
> "watch, keys, belt-buckle", and makes the guy do the little dance,
> then 3) people re-ass their shit out of plastic tubs on the
> conveyor belt at the other end, and TSA goon #3 watches them do
> it. He could even say something helpful, like "Dude, you forgot
> your shit", before he calls for the next victim.
>
> How does this cost any more money, besides the millions we'll have
> to spend retraining the "Whose is this?" guys to say "Next!" and
> "Dude, you forgot your shit", and the $50 sign that says "PLEASE
> WAIT HERE UNTIL ONE OF OUR GOONS YELLS 'NEXT'" that you put in
> front of it all?
>
Maybe I'm not understanding your proposal. But it seems to me it
would considerably lengthen the time it takes for people to go
through security. This is bad enough. But it would probably lead to
more conveyor belts and more employees to semi-compensate. Maybe I'm
wrong. If you can get appointed as head of TSA I'll definitely cheer
you on.
Well ... right up until your plan blows up and everybody starts
complaining about the numbskull that made things even worse than they
were and even an idiot could have figured out that the new procedures
would create inordinate delays. Then I'll just whistle and look like
I don't know you.
--
Opus the Penguin
I vehemently believe in both sides of the argument. - Greg Goss
D.F. Manno
huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
> What am I paying for TSA goons NOW?
Bush has requested a budget of $3 Billion for "Transportation Security
Officers" for FY2009, which starts 1Oct08.
huey.c...@gmail.com
> > Instead of doing THAT, how about:
> > 1) TSA goon #3 in the above scenario moves to the START of the
> > conveyor belt, and says 'NEXT' when the previous person has picked
> > up all of their shit off his conveyor. SHAZAM! His "Whose is this?"
> > job is eliminated. His new job is to yell 'NEXT'. Hopefully, with an
> > extensive federally-funded retraining program, most of the existing
> > How does this cost any more money, besides the millions we'll have
> > to spend retraining the "Whose is this?" guys to say "Next!" and
> > "Dude, you forgot your shit", and the $50 sign that says "PLEASE
> > WAIT HERE UNTIL ONE OF OUR GOONS YELLS 'NEXT'" that you put in front
> > of it all?
> Maybe I'm not understanding your proposal. But it seems to me it
> would considerably lengthen the time it takes for people to go
> through security.
I don't know about 'considerably', but I'm willing to concede that it
may be longer. ...it'd also be SAFER, given that, in the previous
system, TSA goon #3 shouting "Whose is this?" implies that they don't
know. If I'm a bad guy trying to sneak something through, I feign
ignorance and let him hang on to it, and instead of blowing up a plane,
my laptop blows up a security screening station with a gagglefuck of
people and TSA goons in it.
> This is bad enough.
It is, but if we're currently spending some amount of time on
ineffective security, why not spend an extra ten seconds and have
both EFFECTIVE security AND not lose ten thousand laptops?
> But it would probably lead to more conveyor belts and more employees
> to semi-compensate.
Most of the airports I've been in recently seem to have finally added
enough screeners anyway. If they're already adequately staffed, I don't
think re-orienting them will cause nightmares.
> Maybe I'm wrong. If you can get appointed as head of TSA I'll
> definitely cheer you on.
> Well ... right up until your plan blows up and everybody starts
> complaining about the numbskull that made things even worse than they
> were and even an idiot could have figured out that the new procedures
> would create inordinate delays. Then I'll just whistle and look like I
> don't know you.
If I get appointed as head of TSA (something that I expect will happen
right after I'm voted MVP of the NBA) I assure you that Things Will Be
Different.
--
Huey
Peter Boulding
<AnnyM...@hotNOSPAMmail.com> wrote in
<YzMck.14994$N87....@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>:
>But of course you are aware that the point of the TSA inspection of air
>travelers is not to make flying more secure, but to make flying appear to be
>more secure.
Like Hell. Increased airport security is designed to make travelers feel
*less* secure, and therefore more likely to accept yet more reductions in
civil liberties and intrusions into personal privacy, and to re-elect its
"tough on terror" government.
Of course this is more obvious if you live in a country whose government
stationed tanks--yes, tanks--supposedly to counter a terrorist threat, a few
days before the big anti-invasion march.
--
Regards, Peter Boulding
p...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk (to e-mail, remove "UNSPAM")
Fractal music & images: http://www.pboulding.co.uk/ and
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=794240&content=music
Rick B.
news:Xns9AD56D74EB5AAop...@127.0.0.1:
> I believe, though I'm not sure, that if you have this information
> pasted to the outside of the computer, they'll give you a call.
> Perhaps the best cheap solution is for laptop owners to label their
> computers. Maybe the airline could even provide cheap sticky labels.
> But right now they're trying to cut costs, so I'm thinking they won't
> want to do even that.
Don't know about everyone else, but I rarely go through a week without
receiving a year's supply of address labels from some worthy organization
that hopes I will donate money to them in gratitude. The laptop has one of
those labels on it, hoping not to have to explain that the summary isn't
going to happen this week because it was last seen at check-in at PHL.
David Lesher
>In <48738955...@yahoo.co.uk> "Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')" <tributyl...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>>I thought that they might look in the root directory for a name and
>>phone number and maybe address and send him a postcard: "We've got
>>your laptop, please go through this channel to claim it."
>Ok boys and girls. Let's see a show of hands:
>How many of your computer laptops (and similar items)
>have a label or tag on them, giving contact info?
And when TSA demanded you take it OUT of the bag; and
you had the tag on the bag.....
Anny Middon
news:Xns9AD58FB8138Fop...@127.0.0.1...
> (huey.c...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>>
>> So, instead of spending so much time looking for bombs that aren't
>> there, how about spending some time making sure that, if you're
>> going to force people to drop everything, remove everything, and
>> open everything, they pick up everything, put everything back on,
>> and close everything? I don't understand how that's not possible.
>> I mean, if you're building security checkpoints for airports, why
>> build in enough time for everybody to get checked, but not enough
>> time for everybody to get reunited with their shit?
>>
>
> I think there is time. Some people don't take the time. They get
> confused or distracted. It's understandable. I suppose we could send
> them through one at a time. That way if there's anything sitting on
> the belt, you know it's yours. We could probably speed things up by
> letting families and groups of four go through together. As long as
> there's nothing left on the belt when they leave, everything's ok.
>
TSA and airport personnel may allow people as much time as needed, but there
are other considerations. Most folks feel a certain amount of pressure to
get through security quickly so as not to make people behind them have to
wait.
Last November. when Mike and I flew to San Diego to see my mom, there were
two security checkpoints open for everyone going to the United concourse.
(United has a concourse pretty much to themselves at O'Hare.) One of the
checkpoints was reserved for those flying business class or first class and
the like. That meant that all of United's coach passengers had to go
through one TSA checkpoint.
As you might expect, the line was quite long. I needed to use the rest
room -- I spend roughly half my life looking for rest rooms because I have
to pee. I'm sure there were others in that circumstance. Plus the ones who
were afraid they'd miss their flight. And the parents with small children
who were whining about being thirsty or bored or whatever. And the ones who
wanted to chug a cup of coffee or a bloody mary before the flight.
When there are a couple hundred antsy people behind you in line, most people
will rush to keep from inconveniencing others.
> I think the major source of your frustration is the belief that these
> security procedures don't really increase security. I don't know
> whether that's so or not. I can understand the insult to injury
> complaint though.
Has TSA ever found anyone with explosives in their shoes?
Anny
huey.c...@gmail.com
> huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
> > What am I paying for TSA goons NOW?
> Bush has requested a budget of $3 Billion for "Transportation Security
> Officers" for FY2009, which starts 1Oct08.
Hey, isn't that, like, twice what the Iraq war was supposed to cost? I
mean, seeing as how it'll all be paid for by the Iraqi oil revenue?
...hrm...
I've GOT IT! Let's start drilling for oil in airline passengers!
--
Huey
Anny Middon
news:H7udnbJfgZVuTO7V...@speakeasy.net...
>
> Okay, how's this: Going through security at Dulles, there's around a
> dozen or so conveyor belts. Currently, the procedure is for:
> 1) people to go to whatever conveyor belt strikes their fancy and un-ass
> their shit into plastic tubs on the conveyor belt,
> 2) TSA goon looks at X-ray of shit, TSA goon #2 looks at metal dectector
> of person beeping and says "watch, keys, belt-buckle", and makes the guy
> do the little dance, then
> 3) people re-ass their shit out of plastic tubs on the conveyor belt at
> the other end, while TSA goon #3 holds up things and goes "Whose is
> this?",
> ...in a huge clusterfuck of people all trying to get through as fast as
> they can.
>
In your experience, is TSA goon #3 asking "Whose is this?" designed to help
assure that people take all their stuff with them? Because the two times
the guy held up something of mine and asked the question, it was a prelude
to a hand search of my carry-on.
In neither case did my purse/briefcase hold anything that was not allowed.
I don't know if they couldn't tell what something was on the X-ray, or if
TSA rules have them doing a hand-check on every nth piece that goes through
the machine.
Anny
huey.c...@gmail.com
Bruce Schneier has just reminded me that there was an ideal choice for
head of the TSA, but sadly, too late:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBxzvSbGJ2w
(Warning: audio at this URL contains more instances of the word 'Fuck'
than my average post AND all of Kay's posts put together)
--
Huey
Greg Goss
In my case, there were a bunch of cables in my computer case, and a
sheet of one-ounce silver coins and two gold coins. (I was moving and
didn't want to either check the coins or send them with the movers, so
I tucked them into my computer case. Apparently wires and disks looks
like batteries or something. Then because there was nobody behind me,
I argued with the guy about bullion theory.
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
Bill Turlock
>
> (huey.c...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > Instead of doing THAT, how about:
> > 1) TSA goon #3 in the above scenario moves to the START of the
> > conveyor belt, and says 'NEXT' when the previous person has picked
> > up all of their shit off his conveyor. SHAZAM! His "Whose is
> > this?" job is eliminated. His new job is to yell 'NEXT'.
> > Hopefully, with an extensive federally-funded retraining program,
> > most of the existing TSA goon #3s can manage to find jobs in this
> > bold new initiative, and then 2) TSA goon looks at X-ray of shit,
> > TSA goon #2 looks at metal dectector of person beeping and says
> > "watch, keys, belt-buckle", and makes the guy do the little dance,
> > then 3) people re-ass their shit out of plastic tubs on the
> > conveyor belt at the other end, and TSA goon #3 watches them do
> > it. He could even say something helpful, like "Dude, you forgot
> > your shit", before he calls for the next victim.
> >
> > How does this cost any more money, besides the millions we'll have
> > to spend retraining the "Whose is this?" guys to say "Next!" and
> > "Dude, you forgot your shit", and the $50 sign that says "PLEASE
> > WAIT HERE UNTIL ONE OF OUR GOONS YELLS 'NEXT'" that you put in
> > front of it all?
Works at Fry's. I've _never_ seen the "next" goon not present.
And their biggest store has ~100 checkouts. srsly
ZBicyclist
>> pasted to the outside of the computer, they'll give you a call.
>> Perhaps the best cheap solution is for laptop owners to label
>> their
>> computers. Maybe the airline could even provide cheap sticky
>> labels.
>> But right now they're trying to cut costs, so I'm thinking they
>> won't
>> want to do even that.
>
> plastic or mesh cover exactly business card sized. I think it's
> fairly clear that laptop case designers want you to get your
> computer
> back.
>
> Now, if only the computer was still in its case. I have a
> business
> card tucked under the battery, but I doubt that the airport would
> be
> pulling batteries.
Tape a business card to the top and bottom of the laptop.
We're pretending here that disappearances are due to forgetting the
laptop. But a lot of them are thefts while going through
security -- swap an old one for a new one, and if caught just say
you made an inadvertent error. A laptop that's unmarked is a better
target for theft.
--
Mike Kruger
"viewed in retrospect, it is clear that it has been quite
predictable."
(David Runciman) "I'd only call it "predictable" if you actually
predict it ahead of time" (Andrew Gelman)
ZBicyclist
> danny burstein wrote:
>>
>> In <48738955...@yahoo.co.uk> "Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel
>> is
>> People'')" <tributyl...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>>
>>> I thought that they might look in the root directory for a name
>>> and
>>> phone number and maybe address and send him a postcard: "We've
>>> got
>>> your laptop, please go through this channel to claim it."
>>
>> Ok boys and girls. Let's see a show of hands:
>>
>> How many of your computer laptops (and similar items)
>> have a label or tag on them, giving contact info?
>>
>> Ok, all of you who kept your hands down, you know
>> what today's assignment is.
>>
> I can see putting a sticker on a laptop, but it's difficult with a
> camera, a flash card or something else like that. That's why I
> have
> gone to the root directory info thing.
Digital camera's easy. I have a picture of my business card as the
first entry, and never delete that picture.
Bob Ward
The Frys goons have incentive to work quickly.
Ulo Melton
>2) TSA goon looks at X-ray of shit,
Dude, that guy had the bomb in his SHOE. How many times do we have to
tell you that?
--
Ulo Melton
http://www.sewergator.com - Your Pipeline To Adventure
"Show me a man who is not afraid of being eaten by an alligator
in a sewer, and I'll show you a fool." -Roger Ebert
Bill Turlock
Does it exist?
huey.c...@gmail.com
> <huey.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 3) people re-ass their shit out of plastic tubs on the conveyor belt
> > at the other end, while TSA goon #3 holds up things and goes "Whose
> > is this?",
> help assure that people take all their stuff with them?
Hell, I dunno. It could be because he really likes the purse and wants
to know where you got it, I suppose. My only point there is that, as a
security goon, if he doesn't KNOW whose that is, that represents a
problem.
> In neither case did my purse/briefcase hold anything that was not
> allowed. I don't know if they couldn't tell what something was on the
> X-ray, or if TSA rules have them doing a hand-check on every nth piece
> that goes through the machine.
There's no way for us to know, because of course they can't TELL us what
the security procedures are, because that would make it easier for the
bad guys to game the system, and you're probably a bad guy. I'll bet
your foundation powder is actually some kind of granulated explosive.
Or maybe he's just bored, and wants to see if you have anything
embarassing in there?
--
Huey "woohoo! Underpants!" Callison
huey.c...@gmail.com
> huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
> >2) TSA goon looks at X-ray of shit,
> Dude, that guy had the bomb in his SHOE. How many times do we have to
> tell you that?
I crap shoes.
--
Huey
D.F. Manno
Bill Turlock <"Bill Turlock "@sonnnic.invalid> wrote:
> Greg Goss wrote:
>
> > In my case, there were a bunch of cables in my computer case, and a
> > sheet of one-ounce silver coins and two gold coins. (I was moving and
> > didn't want to either check the coins or send them with the movers, so
> > I tucked them into my computer case. Apparently wires and disks looks
> > like batteries or something. Then because there was nobody behind me,
> > I argued with the guy about bullion theory.
>
> Does it exist?
Yep. I've got some in my kitchen as I type this.
--
D.F. Manno | dfm...@mail.com
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
ZBicyclist wrote:
>
> Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') wrote:
> > danny burstein wrote:
> >>
> >> In <48738955...@yahoo.co.uk> "Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel
> >> is
> >> People'')" <tributyl...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> >>
> >>> I thought that they might look in the root directory for a name
> >>> and
> >>> phone number and maybe address and send him a postcard: "We've
> >>> got
> >>> your laptop, please go through this channel to claim it."
> >>
> >> Ok boys and girls. Let's see a show of hands:
> >>
> >> How many of your computer laptops (and similar items)
> >> have a label or tag on them, giving contact info?
> >>
> >> Ok, all of you who kept your hands down, you know
> >> what today's assignment is.
> >>
> > I can see putting a sticker on a laptop, but it's difficult with a
> > camera, a flash card or something else like that. That's why I
> > have
> > gone to the root directory info thing.
>
> Digital camera's easy. I have a picture of my business card as the
> first entry, and never delete that picture.
>
That's a good idea but would still put in the info in directory
itself. You can't go wrong putting it in several ways.
BTW, obviously you can take macro pics with your camera. What is
it?
--
"It happens sometimes, people just explode, natural causes."
-+Alex Cox, "Repo Man"
ZBicyclist
>
> Go back to the Disneyworld example. They find all kinds of lost
> stuff
> there daily. You figure they have an obligation to track down the
> owners?
Metra (the Chicago area commuter train) will call you up if you have
left ID with a misplaced ticket, backpack, or briefcase.
It's not like it's impossible to imagine a public agency doing this.
I wouldn't expect TSA to do it for an umbrella, but a laptop is
another thing entirely.
Veronique
wrote:
> Bob Ward (bobw...@email.com) wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 05:27:08 +0000 (UTC), Opus the Penguin
> > <opusthepenguin+use...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') wrote:
>
> >>>> <http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/07/07/more_than_120
> >>>> 00 _laptops_a_week_go_missing_at_us_airports.html>
>
> >>>> "Around 637,000 laptops are lost each year at US airports -- an
> >>>> astonishing number -- according to a survey by the Ponemon
> >>>> Institute reported by the IDG News Service. It says:
>
> >>>> "'Close to 10,278 laptops are reported lost every week at 36
> >>>> of
> >>>> the largest US airports, and 65% of those laptops are not
> >>>> reclaimed, the survey said. Around 2,000 laptops are recorded
> >>>> lost at the medium-sized airports, and 69% are not reclaimed.'
> >>>> "Laptops are most often lost at security checkpoints. Why the
> >>>> found ones are not reclaimed is another issue, because the
> >>>> security implications are frightening."
>
> >>>> -- But there's some reason to be skeptical.
>
> >>>> "The survey was paid for by Dell, which today launched a
> >>>> security service that uses technologies such as GPS tracking to
> >>>> recover lost laptops."
>
> >>> How hard could it be to locate someone if they put their name
> >>> and phone number in the root directory as file names? More
> >>> likely than not, this suggests that the airport doesn't want to
> >>> find you.
>
> >>Why do you believe it is the airport's job to track you down?
>
> > You don't think that the SECURITY personnel to whom you entrusted
> > your laptop (involuntarily) have some sort of responsibility to
> > make some sort of effort to return your laptop if it is recovered?
> > It's not like a skycap lifted it because the owner failed to tip
> > him, after all.
>
> If I'm understanding the situation, the owner put the laptop through
> quite busy and, at least in some cases, have no access to the
> intercom system. If there's a lull, one of them might amble over to
> the nearest gate and request an announcement telling the doofus who
> left the laptop behind to come back to security.
>
> If it's busy, they figure you'll come back and get it if you want it.
> People leave stuff behind all the time. Security turns it over to the
> airport and the airport hangs onto it for a while. You aren't paying
> them to find you when you forget to keep track of your own
> possessions.
No, but it would be nice if the airport had any sort of system for
handling items left in security.
In my case (pre 9/11), I remembered my expensive SLR camera after the
flight took off. I spoke to a stewardess, who said I'd have to call
the airport when I landed. I called the airport and more or less left
a message. I also had a family member who was nearer the airport by
several thousand miles call the airport. Neither of us heard anything
ever again. My impression is that if it isn't checked luggage, there
is absolutely no system in place at all to return belongings to
people. Of course, the problem is exacerbated when the person losing
the item maybe several hundred to thousand miles away whilst
attempting to recover it.
V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep
Hactar
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') <tributyl...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> ZBicyclist wrote:
> >
> > Digital camera's easy. I have a picture of my business card as the
> > first entry, and never delete that picture.
> >
> That's a good idea but would still put in the info in directory
> itself. You can't go wrong putting it in several ways.
>
> BTW, obviously you can take macro pics with your camera. What is
> it?
Just because the picture's there doesn't mean that camera took it. Mith
many, you can stick any properly-named JPEG in the right place and it'll
show up.
--
-eben QebWe...@vTerYizUonI.nOetP royalty.mine.nu:81
This message was created using recycled electrons.
Hactar
ZBicyclist <ZBicy...@excite.com> wrote:
> Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') wrote:
> > danny burstein wrote:
> >>
> >> How many of your computer laptops (and similar items)
> >> have a label or tag on them, giving contact info?
> >>
> >> Ok, all of you who kept your hands down, you know
> >> what today's assignment is.
> >>
> > I can see putting a sticker on a laptop, but it's difficult with a
> > camera, a flash card or something else like that. That's why I
> > have
> > gone to the root directory info thing.
>
> Digital camera's easy. I have a picture of my business card as the
> first entry, and never delete that picture.
My name and phone number are on the splash screen, which you see at each
power-on.
--
The mnky gibbering and screeching used to keep me up at night, although
in the lst week or so it's prtty mch tailed off to nthng. The smell has
gttn noticbly worse in the last cple of days, too. The next time I get
a barrl full of mnkys, I'm going to try taking the lid off. -groo, AFCA
ZBicyclist
>> Digital camera's easy. I have a picture of my business card as
>> the
>> first entry, and never delete that picture.
>>
> That's a good idea but would still put in the info in directory
> itself. You can't go wrong putting it in several ways.
>
> BTW, obviously you can take macro pics with your camera. What is
> it?
Canon PowerShot SD 800 IS. Nothing exotic, except that because I
have a hand tremor so I have the "shake control" or whatever that's
called.
Bob Ward
wrote:
>
>Just because the picture's there doesn't mean that camera took it. Mith
>many, you can stick any properly-named JPEG in the right place and it'll
>show up.
Well, at least until you examine the EXIF data in the file...
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
Hactar wrote:
>
> In article <48741964...@yahoo.co.uk>,
> Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') <tributyl...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > ZBicyclist wrote:
> > >
> > > Digital camera's easy. I have a picture of my business card as the
> > > first entry, and never delete that picture.
> > >
> > That's a good idea but would still put in the info in directory
> > itself. You can't go wrong putting it in several ways.
> >
> > BTW, obviously you can take macro pics with your camera. What is
> > it?
>
> Just because the picture's there doesn't mean that camera took it. Mith
> many, you can stick any properly-named JPEG in the right place and it'll
> show up.
>
That's a valid point. I am just looking for a cheap camera to take
notes with and therefore was wondering.
Bob Ward
<ZBicy...@excite.com> wrote:
>Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') wrote:
>> ZBicyclist wrote:
>>> Digital camera's easy. I have a picture of my business card as
>>> the
>>> first entry, and never delete that picture.
>>>
>> That's a good idea but would still put in the info in directory
>> itself. You can't go wrong putting it in several ways.
>>
>> BTW, obviously you can take macro pics with your camera. What is
>> it?
>
>Canon PowerShot SD 800 IS. Nothing exotic, except that because I
>have a hand tremor so I have the "shake control" or whatever that's
>called.
That's the IS - Image Stabilization.
Greg Goss
There's lots of theories. They all disagree with each other. One of
them says that the Dow approaches the value of gold every several
decades, and that we're supposed to expect an ounces-per-Dow of about
two sometime soon, presumably with gold at 3600 and the Dow under
8000.
But he wasn't really up even on the basics. He tried to tell me that
gold coins were always 92% pure. The coins in my computer case were
99.99% pure. The old Krugerrands and older US coins were 92%. Newer
coins are 3-nines or 4-nines pure. Canada is selling one coin at
five-nines pure, but they're charging a hefty premium for it.
Bill Turlock
>
> Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') wrote:
> > danny burstein wrote:
> >>
> >> In <48738955...@yahoo.co.uk> "Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel
> >> is
> >> People'')" <tributyl...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> >>
> >>> I thought that they might look in the root directory for a name
> >>> and
> >>> phone number and maybe address and send him a postcard: "We've
> >>> got
> >>> your laptop, please go through this channel to claim it."
> >>
> >> Ok boys and girls. Let's see a show of hands:
> >>
> >> How many of your computer laptops (and similar items)
> >> have a label or tag on them, giving contact info?
> >>
> >> Ok, all of you who kept your hands down, you know
> >> what today's assignment is.
> >>
> > I can see putting a sticker on a laptop, but it's difficult with a
> > camera, a flash card or something else like that. That's why I
> > have
> > gone to the root directory info thing.
>
> Digital camera's easy. I have a picture of my business card as the
> first entry, and never delete that picture.
>
veddy clever!!
Bill Turlock
Isn't just about any kind of granulated powder capable of
exploding?
> --
> Huey "woohoo! Underpants!" Callison
Yeah!!
Bill Turlock
>
> Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') wrote:
> > ZBicyclist wrote:
> >> Digital camera's easy. I have a picture of my business card as
> >> the
> >> first entry, and never delete that picture.
> >>
> > That's a good idea but would still put in the info in directory
> > itself. You can't go wrong putting it in several ways.
> >
> > BTW, obviously you can take macro pics with your camera. What is
> > it?
>
> Canon PowerShot SD 800 IS. Nothing exotic, except that because I
> have a hand tremor so I have the "shake control" or whatever that's
> called.
Technical term for that is "anti-shaky thing". HTH
bill van
huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you spare a couple for Les?
--
bill
remove my country for e-mail
Mark Brader
> handling items left in security.
>
> In my case (pre 9/11), I remembered my expensive SLR camera after the
> flight took off. I spoke to a stewardess, who said I'd have to call
> the airport when I landed. I called the airport and more or less left
> a message. I also had a family member who was nearer the airport by
> several thousand miles call the airport. Neither of us heard anything
> ever again. My impression is that if it isn't checked luggage, there
> is absolutely no system in place at all to return belongings to
Well, there was when I had a similar experience on a flight from
Vancouver to San Francisco in 1986. The item I left at security
was either binoculars or a camera, I forget which. But I was able
to collect it in San Francisco two or three days later.
--
Mark Brader "Metal urgy. The urge to use metals.
Toronto That was humans, all right."
m...@vex.net -- Terry Pratchett: Truckers
Jen
<snip>
> I think the major source of your frustration is the belief that these
> security procedures don't really increase security. I don't know
> whether that's so or not. I can understand the insult to injury
> complaint though.
I was once, post 9/11, flying from San Diego to Brisbane, Australia, via
LA. The security wonks made me hand them my passport and travel
documents, rather than carrying them through the metal detector. After
leaving security I realized I didn't get them back. Went back to
security; they swore blind they had given them back to me. I had a very
nasty half hour ripping my bags apart and wondering how to find out the
number of the local Australian consulate, before being paged by the
airline. Turns out they'd given my documents to a *man*, who was half
way to LA before he realized he had the wrong passport.
I'm not Miss World, but I'm detectably female, even in my passport
photo. So I remain unconvinced that the TSA is making my life safer.
--
Jen
Mark Brader
> The security wonks made me hand them my passport and travel
> and wondering how to find out the number of the local Australian
> consulate, before being paged by the airline. Turns out they'd
> given my documents to a *man*, who was half way to LA before he
> realized he had the wrong passport.
One wonders who had *his* travel documents!
> I'm detectably female, even in my passport photo.
> So I remain unconvinced that the TSA is making my life safer.
Begging to be taken out of context!
--
Mark Brader "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you
Toronto do say can and will be misquoted and used against
m...@vex.net you in a future post." -- Tanja Cooper, misquoted
epbrown
careless laptop owners. If we fix the airports so that CLOs can't be
separated from their laptops there, they'll just leave them at the
gate, on the plane, in the cab, in the hotel, at Starbucks, pretty
much anywhere they might see something bright and shiney and get
distracted. There's tons more hotels, coffee shops and taxis than
there are airports - if they ever notice their portable computing
thingy or whatever is missing, this way they'll have fewer places to
look.
Jen
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 11:27:42 -0500, "Anny Middon"
> <AnnyM...@hotNOSPAMmail.com> wrote in
> <YzMck.14994$N87....@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>:
>
>> But of course you are aware that the point of the TSA inspection of air
>> travelers is not to make flying more secure, but to make flying appear to be
>> more secure.
>
> Like Hell. Increased airport security is designed to make travelers feel
> *less* secure, and therefore more likely to accept yet more reductions in
> civil liberties and intrusions into personal privacy, and to re-elect its
> "tough on terror" government.
>
> Of course this is more obvious if you live in a country whose government
> stationed tanks--yes, tanks--supposedly to counter a terrorist threat, a few
> days before the big anti-invasion march.
>
I think another major motivation is ass-covering. The government knows
it can't counter every possible threat, but if anything major does
happen it will be able to say "See! We warned you! We did all we could,
but if you'd been prepared to give us more leeway we could have
prevented this".
--
Jen
Hactar
Bill Turlock <"Bill Turlock "@sonnnic.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > There's no way for us to know, because of course they can't TELL us what
> > the security procedures are, because that would make it easier for the
> > bad guys to game the system, and you're probably a bad guy. I'll bet
> > your foundation powder is actually some kind of granulated explosive.
> >
> > Or maybe he's just bored, and wants to see if you have anything
> > embarassing in there?
>
> Isn't just about any kind of granulated powder capable of
> exploding?
Asbestos dust? Small sand grains?
#include "gnomes.h"
> > Huey "woohoo! Underpants!" Callison
>
> Yeah!!
--
I firmly believed we should not march into Baghdad ...To occupy Iraq
would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world
against us and make ... a latter-day Arab hero assigning young soldiers
to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator[.] -- GHWB
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
"M. Shirley Chong" wrote:
>
> Opus the Penguin wrote:
>
> >> But right now they're trying to cut costs, so I'm thinking they won't
> >> want to do even that.
>
> Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') wrote:
>
> > Then they could just sell the laptops.
>
> Which is, in fact, what they do. Along with all the other stuff
> people lose or fail to claim. In one case, a necklace estimated to
> be worth over $65,000. It's amazing what people don't pick up.
>
It helps when they don't know where to pick it up and you don't
provide a clear mechanism to do so.
Bill Turlock
>
> huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > But still, I am certain, on a scale somewhere between "the sun will rise
> > tomorrow" and "the US government will want me to pay more taxes than I
> > might have chosen", that NONE OF MY LAPTOPS CONTAIN A BOMB
>
> And you are so sincere looking that I should take your word for this?
>
> > and without
> > doing any websearches or citing anything authoritative (and disregarding
> > any incidents caused by Sony laptop batteries) I'm almost equally
> > confident that NO AIRPLANE HAS EVER BEEN DAMAGED BY A BOMB IN A LAPTOP
>
> Pam Am Flight 103 was brought down over Lockerbie Scotland by one
> pound of plastic explosive concealed inside a Toshiba radio/cassette
> player. Consulting my terrible memory, I'm thinking that it was
> probably not larger than one of the larger laptops.
>
> Of course, that radio/cassette recorder would not have been caught
> by the TSA today, either, since it was in the hold and had been
> routed from Malta, through Germany to London, then placed aboard
> Flight 103. Unaccompanied luggage was not supposed to be allowed on
> board but they found some trick to get it through the paperwork system.
>
> > so, having to routinely demonstrate that my laptops, which have
> > never caused an accident on an airplane, still contain no bombs, which
> > is similar to all other laptops in that none of them have, MAKES ME WANT
> > TO FIND THE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS IN CHARGE
> > OF POLICY AND SET THEM ON FIRE.
>
> Of course, you Windoze users run the risk of not being able to
> demonstrate your laptop works. I do admit that Windoze does seem to
> be more reliable than it was in the late nineties, when a friend of
> mine couldn't get hers to boot up at the airport.
>
> All of which is not to say I disagree about the TSA. I think it's
> all show and very little effectiveness. I used to love it when they
> inspected my *service dog* for bombs.
>
> I had to say something about the size of bomb that could be fitted
> into a laptop because it was getting close to someone being wrong on
> the internet!!!!11!! You weren't wrong... but it was close! and that
> counts on usenet!
>
> Shirley
No kidding??!?
Bill Turlock
>
> In article <487441DC...@sonnnic.invalid>,
> Bill Turlock <"Bill Turlock "@sonnnic.invalid> wrote:
> > huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > There's no way for us to know, because of course they can't TELL us what
> > > the security procedures are, because that would make it easier for the
> > > bad guys to game the system, and you're probably a bad guy. I'll bet
> > > your foundation powder is actually some kind of granulated explosive.
> > >
> > > Or maybe he's just bored, and wants to see if you have anything
> > > embarassing in there?
> >
> > Isn't just about any kind of granulated powder capable of
> > exploding?
>
> Asbestos dust? Small sand grains?
"just about" allows for exceptions, you know.
Bill "weasel words" Turlock
Bob Ward
So, Professor Eppes, why is it that equal numbers of laptops are not
already being left at the gate, on the plane, in the cab, in the
hotel, at Starbucks, and pretty much anywhere they see something
bright and shiny? Why is it that they only spazz out and leave them
at the security checkpoint? If your theory is correct, you should be
able to provide mountains of data to support it. Why have the studies
not detected these mountains of laptops amassing everywhere we look?
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
Mark Brader wrote:
>
> Jen Hallinan:
> > The security wonks made me hand them my passport and travel
> > documents ... I had a very nasty half hour ripping my bags apart
> > and wondering how to find out the number of the local Australian
> > consulate, before being paged by the airline. Turns out they'd
> > given my documents to a *man*, who was half way to LA before he
> > realized he had the wrong passport.
>
> One wonders who had *his* travel documents!
>
Dr Soyburger, a crustacean left in the freezer for a year but still
safe to eat.
Ray
> In <48738955.2976...@yahoo.co.uk> "Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')" <tributyltinpa...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>
> >I thought that they might look in the root directory for a name and
> >phone number and maybe address and send him a postcard: "We've got
> >your laptop, please go through this channel to claim it."
>
> Ok boys and girls. Let's see a show of hands:
>
> How many of your computer laptops (and similar items)
> have a label or tag on them, giving contact info?
>
> Ok, all of you who kept your hands down, you know
> what today's assignment is.
>
> _____________________________________________________
> Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
> dan...@panix.com
> [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Ooooh! Me, me, me! My aging gps receiver displays my name and address
on power-up. Not that I care that much if I lost it, as it would be an
excuse to buy a better one.
And I don't own a laptop, but if I did, I think I would label it, as a
person who found it might not have the smarts to dig around to find a
name in a file somewhere.
--
Ray
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'')
huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> D.F. Manno <dfm...@mail.com> wrote:
> > huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > What am I paying for TSA goons NOW?
> > Bush has requested a budget of $3 Billion for "Transportation Security
> > Officers" for FY2009, which starts 1Oct08.
>
> Hey, isn't that, like, twice what the Iraq war was supposed to cost? I
> mean, seeing as how it'll all be paid for by the Iraqi oil revenue?
>
> ...hrm...
>
> I've GOT IT! Let's start drilling for oil in airline passengers!
>
I think you'd have more luck drilling for oil in Walmart shoppers.
--
Peter Boulding
<g51sqd$109$1...@aioe.org>:
>I think another major motivation is ass-covering. The government knows
>it can't counter every possible threat, but if anything major does
>happen it will be able to say "See! We warned you! We did all we could,
>but if you'd been prepared to give us more leeway we could have
>prevented this".
Agreed. And to add another layer: security services alwa6ys want more
resources, more power, and less regulation, so they constantly paint for the
benefit of their masters the kind of scenario that could end political
careers on a "king must die" basis. The same commonly applies to the
political appointees who head security services.
The chances are that very few of the said politicians or appointees know
that it would be difficult-to-impossible to assemble a peroxide-based
explosive device on an airliner; that on the only occasions on which such a
device have been used successfully on a commercial flight the preparation
was done in advance and used a lot of workspace, a lot of ventilation, and
refrigeration.
--
Regards, Peter Boulding
p...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk (to e-mail, remove "UNSPAM")
Fractal music & images: http://www.pboulding.co.uk/ and
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=794240&content=music
M. Shirley Chong
E Brown
wrote:
>So, Professor Eppes, why is it that equal numbers of laptops are not
>already being left at the gate, on the plane, in the cab, in the
>hotel, at Starbucks, and pretty much anywhere they see something
>bright and shiny? Why is it that they only spazz out and leave them
>at the security checkpoint?
The answer is in the lack of data. The airport is amassing laptops
and tracking their numbers - everywhere else, they're repurposed
and/or redistributed by people more... flexible about such things, or
simply less willing to create a bureacracy just for the lost and
found.
epbrown
M. Shirley Chong
>> But right now they're trying to cut costs, so I'm thinking they won't
>> want to do even that.
Bill Bonde { ''Soylent Diesel is People'') wrote:
> Then they could just sell the laptops.
Which is, in fact, what they do. Along with all the other stuff
people lose or fail to claim. In one case, a necklace estimated to
be worth over $65,000. It's amazing what people don't pick up.
Shirley
Richard R. Hershberger
wrote:
> Look. Forget TSA. They make you angry. You hate everything about
> them, so you're not about to let them off the hook for anything. I
> understand.
>
> Go back to the Disneyworld example.
Bad example. I hated Disney long before I hated the TSA.
huey.c...@gmail.com
> huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Ulo Melton <melt...@sewergator.com> wrote:
> > > huey.c...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >2) TSA goon looks at X-ray of shit,
> > > Dude, that guy had the bomb in his SHOE. How many times do we have
> > > to tell you that?
> > I crap shoes.
> Could you spare a couple for Les?
No shit.
--
Huey
M. Shirley Chong
About what?
Shirley