[krisoft]

> even if you aren't doing anything wrong

I mean... joking about bomb threats at an airport is not "not doing anything wrong".

Should we throw the person in prison for it? No, of course not. Is it a dumb thing to do? I think so. Very dumb.

> you should always use E2E encrypted communication

I agree with that.

[Zak]

Joking about bombs in a private conversation with six friends who know it's a joke is different from joking about bombs where others might overhear. The kind of person who posts on HN might assume Snapchat isn't really private, but most people would not.

[ghaff]

Well, the current evidence is that there's at least a reasonable chance that one of the friends wasn't in on the joke.

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

> I mean... joking about bomb threats at an airport is not "not doing anything wrong".

This isn't just Snapchat surveillance. Most of the people joking about "bombs" aren't at the airport. If they knew he both joked, and was currently at the airport, then the surveillance has to be much more pervasive somehow.

[Der_Einzige]

Sorry, but by this example I shouldn't say "Hi" to my friend "jack" at the airport because it will sound like "hijack". I expect airports to have uniquely high numbers of "jokes" about airplane hijackings as such a thing is on everyones mind.

[mig39]

That was a great episode of Three's Company!

[redeeman]

> I mean... joking about bomb threats at an airport is not "not doing anything wrong".

in a private message to friends? it most definitely is.

also what does airports have to do with anything? are you implying its okay to do if the target is a rural farmhouse, but not an airport?

[krisoft]

> what does airports have to do with anything?

Happy to explain. Due to previous attacks people and law enforcement around air travel are more on edge about such threats. This is because for inherent technical reasons during a flight a relatively small explosive can have devastating consequences. This is due to the pressure difference between the cabin and the atmosphere at cruise altitude , and the inherent energies incorporated in an airliner. (Both potential energy due to altitude, kinetic energy due to speed and chemical energy in the fuel.)

> are you implying its okay to do if the target is a rural farmhouse, but not an airport?

I'm not implying that. I simply did not claim anything about threats agains rural farmhouses.

> in a private message to friends? it most definitely is.

It seems we disagree on this point then.

[alwa]

There’s also the small matter of that attack mode having actually been fashionable amongst murderously-suicidal ideologue types over the years.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_airliner_bombing...

Security forces pay more attention to threat vectors that have a track record of actively being exploited.

[redeeman]

whether law enforcement is more on edge is their problem. Either you are ACTUALLY threatening, or you're not. A joke between friends in a private channel is NOT a threat.

[dylan604]

a farmhouse is a funny thing to jump to as an example.

s/farmhouse/school/ and holy hell will rain down upon you. the zero tolerance at schools has become ridiculous.

[PretzelPirate]

I had a gate agent joke about needing to check a replacement plane for bombs before we can board. She said it over the intercom and then said "I probably can't joke about that at an airport."

There was a lot of laughter and it made me far less annoyed about the delay. It was hilarious.

[itishappy]

The situations are not equal.

"We are checking the plane for bombs" cannot be interpreted as a threat. If it were to be misunderstood as serious, it would indicate an abundance of caution by the airline.

"I am going to blow up a plane" sure can. If it were to be misunderstood as serious, it would indicate an immediate threat to the health and safety of hundreds of people.

[_chu1]

I never said they weren't doing anything wrong though. Maybe it shouldn't be as easy to wander into an airport with a bomb.