[andrepd]

> The incentive is to avoid searching as many people as possible

Oh good lord. Now it's no longer even "have you read a history book on the 20th century?" anymore, it's "have you been paying attention to the world for the past 15 years?".

[loverofhumanz]

> Oh good lord. Now it's no longer even "have you read a history book on the 20th century?" anymore, it's "have you been paying attention to the world for the past 15 years?".

Spare me the hysterics and the insults. What exactly is your claim?

That body cavity searches have increased rapidly over the last 15 years? That it's a common occurrence? That security personnel actually has an incentive to do them more rather than less?

Give me the books you read and sources you read that support your claim. I doubt they exist. I suspect you're going off "vibes" here, but I'll gladly read them if you can cite them.

[andrepd]

> What exactly is your claim?

I think it's plain enough. That giving the state security apparatus more tools to arbitrarily harass people at their discretion is a Bad Idea™.

> That security personnel actually has an incentive to do them more rather than less?

I have absolutely no idea where you're going with this or what makes you believe this is how the world works. Are you from the US? Certain "security personnel" have been working overtime since the start of the current presidency as I'm sure you're aware... And again: picking up a history book will lead you to realise how mistaken your quaint belief is ("incentive to work less"?).

[loverofhumanz]

> That giving the state security apparatus more tools to arbitrarily harass people at their discretion is a Bad Idea™.

Measuring heart rate, using a computer which can log its data, is the exact opposite of arbitrary. It's an objective measurement. You don't seem to understand the words that you're using.

Are you somehow unaware of the fact that security personnel, for example TSA at airports, are already empowered to use their own discretion in deciding that particular people seem to merit extra scrutiny?

Any TSA officer can flag any person as suspicious for almost any reason. They don't abuse this power generally because they have very little incentive to and there are checks on it.

> I have absolutely no idea where you're going with this or what makes you believe this is how the world works.

Do you think TSA officers are incentivized to do more or fewer body cavity searches? Do you think they get bonuses for doing them? It's beyond ridiculous that you can't keep your argument straight and have to reference Trump in the context of a discussion about secure environment screening technology.

> And again: picking up a history book will lead you to realise how mistaken your quaint belief is ("incentive to work less"?).

I've almost certainly read far more than you on history and law. I'm likely more experienced, well traveled, and much more concerned about actual infringement on liberties.

Which, I'd argue, is why I'm less concerned about this technology than you. I know what kinds of things actually infringe on people's liberties.

Your weak attempts to talk down to me, while at alluding to non-specific events in history, would embarrass you if you knew enough to be embarrassed.

[andrepd]

Jesus christ give the body cavity thing a rest. It was an expression somebody said 1 time and you latched on like a pitbull to an infant. Obviously you're not in good faith arguing like this.

> Measuring heart rate, using a computer which can log its data, is the exact opposite of arbitrary. It's an objective measurement. You don't seem to understand the words that you're using.

There is NO correlation between that measurement and criminal activity, that's the point. It's NOT OBJECTIVE like a polygraph test is not objective even though it's recording objective measurements. This would be just a tool for the state apparatus to harass arbitrary citizens with a veil of plausible deniability ("ah but my sensor says you're nervous, what are you hiding citizen??"). I would also do well without the condescending attitude tyvm.

> Do you think they get bonuses for doing them? It's beyond ridiculous that you can't keep your argument straight

Did ICE need bonuses to ramp up their actions over the past 9 months? Did the SS need bonuses, did the Stasi, the NKVD, any of the repressive apparatus of any totalitarian regime of the 20th century? Jesus h christ.

> I've almost certainly read far more than you on history and law. I'm likely more experienced, well traveled, and much more concerned about actual infringement on liberties.

> Your weak attempts to talk down to me, while at alluding to non-specific events in history, would embarrass you if you knew enough to be embarrassed.

Ahaha okay this is one step below a navy seals copypasta, so let's leave it at this. Enjoy your weekend!