The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.
X-Rated Airport X-Rays Get The Go Ahead
news.com.au — AIRPORT authorities have confirmed that images of travellers' breasts and genitals will not be obscured during a trial of a high-tech scanner. For the next six weeks domestic travellers at Melbourne Airport will have the option to go through the airport's new "virtual strip search" which can see through clothing and show peoples' private parts...
upick- 143 diggs
- digg it
- ScottMcIntyre, on 10/15/2008, -0/+11This is certainly an innovative technology and a development likely to improve airline security. However, I can't imagine anyone willingly opting to have their 'bits 'exposed in a queue for boarding.
QFA: "For the next six weeks domestic travellers at Melbourne Airport will have the option to go through the airport's new "virtual strip search" which can see through clothing and show peoples' private parts."- levitron, on 10/15/2008, -0/+1If it results in faster queues at the airport and I'm in a hurry, I very well might go for this.
- OfNumbers, on 10/15/2008, -0/+5They couldn't just stay satisfied with the right to detain and cavity search any suspect.
- MacBookForMe, on 10/15/2008, -0/+3What should I do now, if I get a 'hard-on' while seeing that ultra cute and sexy stewardesses running around in that short red and blue mini skirts...and security guys could accuse me that I am a bad guy and sex predator? :)
- monkeysama, on 10/15/2008, -1/+5If they need an X-Ray machine to determine you have a hard-on I'd presume the first thing you should do is ask them to stop laughing and accept their apologies.
- BullHunter, on 10/15/2008, -0/+2I'm just worried about the sniffer dogs. Will they be "Fur-Less"?
Everyone. Look away! Grandma is walking through the Scanner! - philostrato, on 10/15/2008, -0/+2wow. wonder how they'll determine who gets that job.
- oceanghost, on 10/15/2008, -0/+3Meh, I have nothing to be ashamed of.
- MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/15/2008, -1/+4It's the perpetual security problem.
No matter what they do, the threat of terrorism is going to exist. Yet here they are giving up all these freedoms, privacies, etc. You can't protect freedom by taking it away.
The best approach is to simply make everyone like you. That way you don't get terrorist groups trying to sneak in and blow ***** up. When that fails then yeah you might have to chase after a few people, but you need to take the high road. That way you can reconcile with the people when its over. US has Guantanamo Bay, and numerous other abuses which ruined that opportunity.
At some point you need leadership. You need to tell your people to have courage, and to not let terrorists sway them. Terrorism only works if people respond with fear, if it causes policy change. If they didn't think it would get them anywhere groups like alqueda wouldn't be using it.
At the end of the day you need to ask, what am I really getting and what am I really giving up? - thelif, on 10/15/2008, -0/+2I will need one of these machine to properly evaluate its performance.
- Falldog, on 10/15/2008, -0/+3I'll begin writing '***** you' in heavy paint across my back.
- Zero2aHero, on 10/15/2008, -0/+3Pair this with the behavior of the people from the NSA who were recreationally listening in on "pillow talk," and we already know that people in government aren't mature or responsible enough to deal with using this kind of technology.
- austinwpetersen, on 10/15/2008, -0/+2Those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for security, deserve neither liberty, nor security.
- Nattybumpoe, on 10/15/2008, -0/+1Do they make these in goggle form?
- boardthis, on 10/15/2008, -0/+2i think it would be more R rated than anything. there won't be gaping holes shown while people are walking past the scanner.
and to people who would want to get hired to sit back and watch... 95% of the people that walk by, you probably would not want to see.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is