That actually makes a lot of sense. The book, because of the type of pages it uses, reflects with a signature that the TSA is trained to identify as a possible explosive. The bags are scanned after the passenger checks in, but before passing the checked luggage to the airline. This means that the TSA personnel needed to manually open each bag after identifying its owner and stepping into the secondary screening area. Enough consecutive hits and the conveyor belt has to stop moving, the line stops moving, and the check-in counters stop moving.
Yes, after the first couple dozen hits turn out to be the same book, they're probably expecting to find a book. But they still have to open every bag, because the scan matches the explosives image they're trained for.
I'm actually kinda pleased that they didn't just stop scanning bags. IF the scanning is a necessary and effective means (not just theater) of securing travel, you shouldn't just be able to blow off your responsibility because the process got slow.
If the system isn't working you need to revise the system, not just randomly turn it off when overloaded.
I don't understand why checked luggage would make the security checkpoint lines overflow outside.
Some airports have x-ray machines in the lobby that you have to run your suitcase through before turning it over to the airline. Perhaps that was the case here? But again, a general announcement about removing the book would work for that.
Exactly. Your plan for getting people to "first inform the manufacturer" is to swear you'll fully prosecute anyone who admits to testing? That's just a recipe for anonymously published 0-days popping up all over the Internet.
Start a bounty program and make people want to help you. Exploits are going to be found. Period. It's your choice how you'll be informed about them.
Also the point of the litigation was to expose the resultant documents, as opposed to those class action suits whose purpose is to financially compensate a wronged class. The lawyers didn't take 90% of the documents and leave a pittance to be divided among their clients.
This man's job is to shovel enough money at people fast enough to make some of them not totally despise Comcast. Is there a doubt in anyone's mind that Comcast would pay him to sit idly at a desk with his hands folded 81% percent of the time to skirt legally binding restrictions on influencing elected officials?
It seems a little like companies that think they need to defend their trademarks to maintain validity.
To maintain the finely crafted veneer of "totally-intentionally barely-technically not-a-lobbyist" Cohen, Comcast keeps "correcting" people who "mischaracterize" his actions (*wink*) and malign his forthright and uncontroversial (*grin*) work.
They've got no right or power to stop people from using the completely appropriate term, but public consensus is reminded that he still technically isn't a lobbyist instead of settling on the reasonable and accurate belief that he is.
I think this is the point where the CIA would start torturing people to "create" golden key encryption.
It's really the best way to get what they want; for security professionals to say what the government wants to hear despite the fact that it's not true and the torturees don't believe it. Why else do people keep starting the same "conversations" about things that things that can't be done?
If TQP isn't around any more to pay the legal fees by the time this all gets sorted, the buck would seem to stop in East Texas. If it's not bad intent then someone's negligence is costing them a nice chunk of change.
It was a $40 difference when Smith suggested that die-hards would purchase the $80 noob-tastic collector's edition instead of only the $40 Taken King DLC. Now the sweet dance moves can be had for $20 on top of the DLC $40.
Yes it kinda stings how these charges seem to add up (especially since I had to by the base game again when I upgraded consoles), but if you actually use it the price averages out to something like $11 a month. That's way more value for engagement than I got from a stack of other games on my shelf.
For all the folks that self-identify as ignorant of video games in general or Destiny specifically. Hurling insults accusing gamers of being too splineless to boycott on this either A) completely misinterprets the situation or B) is highly hypocritical.
The people who are upset really like Destiny. They want more of it, and they plan to spend money to get it. If they weren't invested they would walk away. This is the third major DLC in under a year, without which the base game is essentially useless. That's because the game is centered more around events and community than delivering a static narrative; it's a living organism that changes over time. So if you don't like buying DLC or you want to wait for the "Game of the Year" edition, that's fine but you'll be playing a vastly different game than the rest of us.
Bungie and the Destiny community have nearly weekly feedback sessions about how the game is running, what to expect, what we've broken, and what we'd like changed. Pushback is a regular occurrence, this time it happens to be about price structure instead of Shotgun Damage which means non-gaming publications are giving it more credence because they understand the terms. (Smith giving a douchy interview didn't help things)
So $40 for some dance moves and a new gun doesn't seem fair, but it's not worth burning your profile over. Do you cancel your ISP subscription because they give better promotional rates to new customers? Do you quit the gym because they have pizza night for new members? Do you trash all your team jerseys because the game airs at a strange time of day when they travel? It's not that big a deal, and frankly you all should wish you have as much pull as the Destiny community does at Bungie.