undefined | Better HN

0 pointslatchkey1y ago0 comments

> The original version did use low power x-ray and people quite rightly raised a stink about that. Now it's backscatter in the radio frequencies--should be harmless.

"trust me bro" science at its finest.

Do we get to see the service interval on these machines to ensure that they are operating fine and have never had an issue?

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3936792/

"Based on what is known about the scanners, passengers should not fear going through the scans for health reasons, as the risks are truly trivial. ... it is premature to put a whole population through this with out more due diligence and independent testing"

Even the papers on this stuff can't come to any sort of agreement.

Easy enough to opt-out and just avoid the question entirely. I'm not bothered at all by the pat down.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

LorenPechtel1y ago· 1 in thread

What failure mode could produce harmful energy? The circuit will be designed for the intended power levels and you'll let the smoke out long before you actually put out a dangerous energy level.

Not to mention how could you have the energy levels way off yet the machine "work"--produce an image?

(And, personally, I don't like the pat-down. I'd actually prefer an option to go back a version to the machines that actually displayed the image rather than had a computer process it for anomalies. The stupid computer always flags the pocket I carry my phone in--can't tell the difference between a little bit of sag and something there.)

latchkeyOP1y ago

> What failure mode could produce harmful energy? The circuit will be designed for the intended power levels and you'll let the smoke out long before you actually put out a dangerous energy level.

Hi! Obviously, the specific science of the matter doesn't matter to me. It is an irrational fear. The machine is supposed to be safe and declared as such by people whom it is "not my job."

> I don't like the pat-down....

NOBODY likes the pat-down. What I said is that I'm not bothered by it. I can tolerate it as an alternative of going through the machine.

It is intentionally designed to be something you don't like, in order to encourage compliant people to just go through the machine. They create a relatively high stress situation (not enough flow and long lines) and the easy way out is to have people go through the machine as the fastest way out.

> The stupid computer always flags the pocket I carry my phone in--can't tell the difference between a little bit of sag and something there.

I would suggest changing clothes that you go through the scanner with.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse