The vapour sniffer is the only feature I see that would work with (hopefully) few false positives. But instead, perhaps they should fit them to the screening at the airport - not when boarding a plane.
The rest look like just show to me and will produce more issues than anything meaningful.
Lots of show, but I'm not sure that plane will ever get off the ground...
Tell me, exactly how far are we all prepared to let this paranoia go? It's telling that the MEP quoted in the article cited above said "We have to sacrifice some privacy and some freedom...". She goes on to state that people can defend themselves against any invasion of their privacy, but fails to mention any additional safeguards that would be instituted to assure that this is the case! She goes on the say that good citizens "accept" such measures in a "crisis", but "six months after the crisis, everyone will forget". And we lurch from 'crisis' to 'crisis', being kept on high terror alert, reassured that anti-terrorism measures are keeping us all safe , a little of our freedom and privacy being chipped away with every new 'security strategy'.
Monitoring of conversations, continuous facial scanning, listening devices in toilets... what a nightmare! This is presumably additional to the increased level of screening at the airport, which I doubt will be downgraded once this generation of aircraft can 'defend themselves". The automated systems will be even more arbitrary that the oft-maligned human security at airports. Can the code-writers account for tone-of-voice or context in conversations? The facial tic that has a neuropathological basis? The likelihood that a determined terrorist has undertaken training to avoid using speech or gestures that may alert the system to their malicious intent? And all the while we accept this rubbish for the sake of 'safety'.
What's next? A world without passports, in which we all have RFID chips imbedded in our skulls? 24/7 audiovisual surveillence everywhere, on the off-chance that someone says the words "bomb" or "Bin Laden"? Seems like George Orwell was on the right track in '1984', he just missed the date by 30 years or so.
As Benjamin Franklin said, "Those who would sacrifice essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety". Spoken some 250 years ago, these words are, today, more apt than ever. Let's not all become stupid, terrified sheep, led down the path of perpetual anxiety by self-serving, fear-mongering politicians.
If this ridiculous aircraft-based system ever comes to fruition, I will be wearing a balaclava and sunglasses for every minute of every flight. I will also be covering my mouth each time I speak. If I am challenged, I will claim that it is my religious beliefs that require me to dress and behave in such a manner. Citing a religious motivation seems to work for all sorts of bizarre behaviours, so just let them try and stop me! I don't get mad, I get litigious!:evil:
OH! I was expecting a plane that from 10,000m above showered disenfranchised people with hope and ambition - but instead just the usual "curtail freedoms" rubbish so we're all scared and waste more money to make a handful even wealthier.
From just $6 we'll remove all advertisements so that you can enjoy a cleaner and uninterupted viewing experience.And you'll be supporting us so that we can continue to provide this valuable resource :)