|
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8303983.stm
This is a story about a scanner that can capture "intimate" photos through the clothes...
They all laughed... years ago... when me and other nerdlings kept trying on those fake x-ray glasses at joke shops... but I say... we are so damn close to real ones...
|
I remember reading about this. I honestly don't care, as long as it doesn't get too detailed. I agree with the non-pornographic images. Honestly, you get a basic physical shape, meaning it would be about the same as looking at a plain, opaque human model.
|
I don't mind it that much either, but it does bring up privacy issues. Fat kids keep their shirts on at the public pool for a reason.
|
Ew... I really would not be ok with that at all. Yeah, security is very important, but this is not necessary. Not to the point that I am okay with someone basically seeing me naked. That's a privilege I get to bestow!
|
"Passengers could refuse to be scanned, she added."
I'm fine if they use this as an alternative to the pat down, as some people might feel that it's less invasive. I don't think this is going to be used as a second metal detector everyone has to go through. There's really no violation of privacy rights as long as this thing isn't mandatory.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Don't think I'd care tbh.
|
On October 15 2009 04:08 Archaic wrote: I remember reading about this. I honestly don't care, as long as it doesn't get too detailed. I agree with the non-pornographic images. Honestly, you get a basic physical shape, meaning it would be about the same as looking at a plain, opaque human model. Agreed. Judging by the pictures in the link, there will be little differentiation from person to person. Everyone (without weapons or dangerous materials) will basically appear the same, so why worry?
|
I wouldn't mind. It's really not like a naked image, because they just the the outlines of the body. (Although it would probably be possible to construct pretty close naked images to real naked images if those ones would get stolen) But if they are destroyed right away that shouldn't be an issue and I don't think the authorities get horny by seeing thousands of those images every day. I think its more emberassing to strip down if they can't find the mettal that makes the detector beep than going through that thing.
|
Meh wouldnt really care if people could see me naked. I guess alot of women would have problems with this though. I guess i dont really have to care then.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
This could never be legal tbh.
Celebs bodies in the nude can be worth millions.. additionally they can ruin careers/lives. NO WAY this ever gets implemented in widespread use.
|
On October 15 2009 04:38 {88}iNcontroL wrote: This could never be legal tbh.
Celebs bodies in the nude can be worth millions.. additionally they can ruin careers/lives. NO WAY this ever gets implemented in widespread use.
it's not like you can really tell form the pictures who it is.. you can't really see any facial details or anything like that
|
Crap, now I need a tinfoil suit to go with my hat.
|
time to work for airports ~_~
|
i don't see any problem with this. i mean its just like a "visual metal detector". people simply get too upset about stuff no one besides them actually cares about.
|
On October 15 2009 05:31 ShoCkeyy wrote: time to work for airports ~_~
yeah fuck hd porn i want to look at blurry black and white pictures of people naked all day most of which are either male/old/ugly/gross/fat
|
On October 15 2009 05:36 Frits wrote:yeah fuck hd porn i want to look at blurry black and white pictures of people naked all day most of which are either male/old/ugly/gross/fat
You read my thoughts, really!
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On October 15 2009 05:17 Xenocide_Knight wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2009 04:38 {88}iNcontroL wrote: This could never be legal tbh.
Celebs bodies in the nude can be worth millions.. additionally they can ruin careers/lives. NO WAY this ever gets implemented in widespread use. it's not like you can really tell form the pictures who it is.. you can't really see any facial details or anything like that
And when they explain that to Meghan Fox you think she will go "oh, ok" ?
|
didnt know national security was put on hold for hot chicks..
|
imagine britney walking down there... all the guard would see is silicone...
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On October 15 2009 05:42 Duke wrote: didnt know national security was put on hold for hot chicks..
Didn't know national security was dependent on seeing people in the nude(ish).
Privacy should still hold some ounce of importance people. I'm fine with them padding me down, making me walk through a metal detector, having dogs roam around etc.. but this is a bit much.
And it simply won't fly.. I promise you.
|
|
|
|
|
|