[SilasX]

No. She went into an airport wearing a circuitboard with flashing lights that made some people uneasy. When they asked her about it, she ignored them. Edit: Also, she was holding Play-doh, which no adult does at an airport, and can look like plastic explosives.

Even if they did overreact (and they pretty much have to aggressively err on the side of caution), it was a bit tone deaf and callous for her to act that way.

[Mithorium]

Well, if in her view, it was just a nametag and not a scary piece of technology, then I think it's reasonable to not understand why anyone would be uneasy. Did people wearing google glasses back when that was a thing respond to everyone who harassed them about it? If you were walking with your phone in your hand and someone came up to you accusing you of trying to bomb them, would you bother responding or just roll your eyes and keep walking?

Or other similar airport stories I've read of people in an airport terminal remoting into work being accused of hacking because scary linux terminals are the tools of hackers who are trying to hack planes and crash them. If that happened to me, I'd probably ignore the person while thinking to myself "what the fuck is this guy's problem, have they never seen a computer before"

[SilasX]

Being tone-deaf means being unaware of what kinds of things would make others uneasy. If the world changed to the point that a phone like mine was easily confused with a bomb, then I would consider it tone-deaf for me to carry on in ignorance of this dynamic.

[ihtfp07]

I can acknowledge that in retrospect she could have acted differently and avoided this whole situation...

But she was mainly the victim.

The over reaction by the initial reporter and the authories above them seem a bit wrong but not egregious. The real unforgivable failure is how after the incident the authorities had to double down, never admit any fault, and unfairly paint her as some nefarious perpetrator. Someone is quoted with saying she’s “lucky she ended up in a jail cell and not the morgue”.

They propagated the narrative that it was an intentional hoax and bomb scare and mis-used her claim that it was art. (she was saying her shirt was just art, not that the bomb scare was art) The “hoax device” charges brought on her were thrown out. She never was never found to have broken any law.

[SilasX]

>She never was never found to have broken any law.

That's not the same as not being callously disrespectful of others' concerns.

[Mithorium]

Well I guess our disagreement is that the world at that point had the dynamic where any electronic item was to be confused with a bomb. I was alive in 2007, some LED lights arranged in a star would certainly not have screamed "bomb" at me, and I would not have expected anyone else to have been scared of it either. If she was carrying around a clock like that one kid made, maybe, but even by 2007 movie standards a bomb would at least have a countdown timer of some kind

I'm imagining her wearing something like https://www.flashingblinkylights.com/jade-led-christmas-tree... with a little less production value, if that can be mistaken for a bomb then those people better stay away from office christmas parties

[SilasX]

Right, there isn't much I can say to convince you why a block of blinking electronics on someone walking around at an airport and ignoring everyone's questions, at a time of heightened airport security against suicide bombers, is tone deaf.

[stickfigure]

She was holding play-dough. You honestly don't think she was deliberately pushing people's buttons?

[kalleboo]

You can google what it actually looked like. It was a breadboard ziptied to her sweater with a bunch of wires and a 9V battery on the side

Looks harmless to me but after the moonite scare it's also pretty obvious that airport security would freak out

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_RwdLdQxhZGk/RvQAv2mTWfI/AAAAAAAAB...

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_RwdLdQxhZGk/RvQDoGmTWhI/AAAAAAAAB...

Also, is that a burning man sweater?