Blogs
Jul 10, 2012 at 11:12 am
Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
"Recently developed methods of THz time-domain spectroscopy (THz TDS) and THz tomography have been shown to be able to perform measurements on, and obtain images of, samples that are opaque in the visible and near-infrared regions of the spectrum. The utility of THz-TDS is limited when the sample is very thin, or has a low absorbance, since it is very difficult to distinguish changes in the THz pulse caused by the sample from those caused by long-term fluctuations in the driving laser source or experiment. However, THz-TDS produces radiation that is both coherent and spectrally broad, so such images can contain far more information than a conventional image formed with a single-frequency source."
The terahertz band is no set of bollocks, sadly.
Honestly, though, if they could do it, I really wouldn't care. More accurate information means less harassment and groping and faster security lines. I'd rather have them instantly scan for the bomb I obviously don't have than stop me and pat me down and make me go through security three times because I forgot I had a quarter-full water bottle in my backpack.
Nice marketing, but light travels less than 1/3 of a millimeter in a picosecond. The clock on a 1 GHz computer is 1 cycle / 1000 picoseconds.
Apparently the picosecond identifier is for the length of the pulses--picosecond bursts of laser which can then go up and down frequencies (but it takes microseconds to adjust per the data sheet). How long it takes to identify things at a distance isn't stated in the data sheet. It might be seconds or it might be minutes. It seems like there is a lot of data that needs to be gathered and that it would take some time to process.
@ 7, the only thing that worries me is something like the ability to detect trace amounts of cocaine on dollar bills, which are probably numerous enough that we've probably all handled such a bill even if we've never snorted a line even once in our lives. Would such a thing mark you for extra scrutiny? If you pull the wrong TSA agent, it would.
These technologies are all only as good as the people who are in charge of using them, and TSA is definitely an agency that has problems with the quality of their personnel.
I know its fashionable to get all freaked out about the government, but we have more protections from the police and more protections for privacy than any point in history. The only real difference between now and the past is that we hear about abuses a lot more and tend to give more of a shit.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-…
And yes, I realize that this isn't as drastic in the US (yet), but the UAE will no doubt deploy this technology to scan EVERYONE for even a minute amount of drugs anywhere on their person. Don't plan on going anywhere near there- just in case you stepped on a speck of weed smaller than a grain of salt.
Seriously?
I would love to be able to just waltz into an airport and get on my plane without wasting 45-90 minutes of my life waiting and wondering how much of an interest a stranger is going to take in my testicles, but more intrusive technology isn't going to get us there.
Trying to envision the infrastructure of the data management running the program that identifies molecular level amounts of every particle on earth is a bit mind blowing...add in undertrained TSA agents and you have a recipe for 100% failure.
But have fun living in your dreamland Police State in the interim.
Remember: America (tm), Land of the Serfs and Home of the Rich Uberlords.
Lets not forget that if these statements were all true we'd already be, for example, flying a replacement space shuttle since 2008 with a plan to be on the moon in 2015....
Now, getting this into airports will be a logistical challenge that should take a good ten years. And, it would require even longer lines at security.
I'm less afraid of these in airports, and more afraid of what else the government will be doing with them.
How fun will it be when people eventually hack into said data management and change all substances deemed "dangerous" to "kittens" causing the entire airline industry to come to a complete halt.
It's one thing to be able to create a technical innovation and an entire different thing to keep it secure.
Just spill some gunpowder in the elevators at the airport outside of the security area. Eventually they'll have to give up as more and more people are showing up "positive".
The same for drugs. You want to move a pound through customs? Then have someone dump an ounce in the hallway and hour before you walk through.
Wikipedia (which knows all with perfect accuracy) says:
"Terahertz radiation can penetrate fabrics and plastics, so it can be used in surveillance, such as security screening, to uncover concealed weapons on a person, remotely. This is of particular interest because many materials of interest have unique spectral "fingerprints" in the terahertz range. This offers the possibility to combine spectral identification with imaging. Passive detection of terahertz signatures avoid the bodily privacy concerns of other detection by being targeted to a very specific range of materials and objects."
@11 has this right.
Think Michael Chertoff's buddies care if their machines actually ever detected a ceramic knife or a small bottle of incendiary material taped to someone's ankle? They're too busy toasting each other's "job-creator" status while sucking down cocktails bought with profits from your taxes. And fuck those poor losers who want "entitlements" (which they EARNED by working!)