I liked this piece by Lawrence O’Donnell calling out the corporate media for being too stupid and doing 2016 all over again. Why does the media bother with this dumbass?
Looks like at some of their claims have the “door” for the bags that is plenty big enough for a person to crawl through. If that’s what happened, I honestly don’t know how you make a system that physically protects against it while still being flexible enough to handle any piece of luggage that will fit.
“Sensors” sounds like a magical solution that hasn’t been thought through, but the marketing guys already sold it and won’t listen to the engineers explaining how difficult it is to actually build such a thing.
Companies use them in conveyor systems quite extensively. They can be used to detect anomalies, differentiate between different types of product, etc. the technology already exists, it would just need to be adapted and programmed to this specific use. Airports already use similar technology for baggage routing, although they’re scanning tags instead of image processing.
Muting! I have done a few safety light curtains before and it is really cool how they can tell the difference between a human and a pallet/part/etc with just lasers. There are some really complex safety scanners out there, such as the area ones, but it is neat.
The thing that would make this easiest is the direction of travel. If everything goes the same way around the belt, not terribly difficult to detect things going the opposite direction.
Main point is there are a lot of easy ways to prevent stupid, but stupid will still try and circumvent it.
I mean. It’s not magic. Even I could run a basic computer vision system from a raspberry pi and a webcam. They could easily come up with a system that returns confidence percentages for bags vs humans. Assuming the baggage isn’t coming in too warm, they could have an IR thermal camera that stops the line if it detects any temperature over a certain threshold. They could also use other tests, like two pictures a few seconds apart to see if something is moving on its own on the belt. I’m sure there are even more tests than the ones above, let alone design changes that could disincentivize folks doing dumb stuff, or making their dumb stuff easier to spot - like putting the end of the return conveyer behind plexiglass, so the person is visible on the conveyer before they disappear into the wall.
All of the above are not 100% solutions, but taken together, they can establish a reasonable confidence level they’re not about to intake something that isn’t a bag.
I see many comments discrediting this somehow, but I want to put my two cents in as someone who does work with sensor based AI assisted processing in real time and safety reliant environments.
Just because a concept can be thought of that sounds reasonable and maybe even works in simple tests, that doesn’t mean that it’s actually useful for the real use case. Many typical approaches to creating models that can solve computer vision tasks such as this can result in unstable results and no system that has a considerable false positive rate would be tolerated by any airliner. This isn’t even to speak of the false negative rate which might then still be rather high, which still leaves the system useless.
Naturally it’s not to say that no such system could be created, but they can’t be just whipped out like some people here claim. If, as people here are already assuming, the problem happened because someone climbed onto the conveyor belt and was carried in, then this type of problem is sufficiently unthinkably rare that most companies didn’t think about it much either.
Clearly greater security is necessary, but people are being unreasonable with how trivial they portray the solution as being.
They can only really include sensors for weight and stuckage without an expensive retrofit. You can have something that could potentially stop and inappropriate object, probably use it x-rays and computer recognition (or some guy at a monitor) but you see all of that costs money. They don’t want to spend that money. Especially on such a fringe case. And let’s be honest, nobody wants to spend millions of dollars trying to protect the dumbest possible people from themselves. I mean, they say you can’t put a value on human life, but we all know that everybody does anyway. Especially when they’re rich and in a position of any kind of authority.
Just an FYI: Kevin Dave, who hit and killed Jaahnavi Kandula, still has his job and faced no disciplinary action for going 74 mph in a 25 mph zone. He was fired from his job with the Tempe police where he was drunk driving and ran from the police.
WISH-TV - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for WISH-TV:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
it is and they do have a list of targets they are after especially on the borders of states and yes being overly tan like people get in the summer will get you pulled on suspicion of being of Mexican descent
drive with your windows up and arms inside your vehicle when in the US and obey the speed limits and always use turn signals even when merging from a lane that is ending
some states go further and have no bail which lets the arrested person go same day if they are nonviolent until charges are brought up and then a pay for lawyer delivers the court date with your charges usually in the mail in the form of a spammy advertisement looking piece of mail
just like voting the justice system here in the US is a sham ran by kangaroos
It’s dangerously easy to obtain ownership over an animal in some states in the US, and it’s the reason why so many dogs are euthanized for almost no reason. My neighbor just got a dog from a southern state off of their execution list, he’s not even done growing, full of energy, just being abandoned and unwanted in overcrowded shelters almost cost him his life.
Grants Pass has just one overnight shelter for adults, the Gospel Rescue Mission. It has 138 beds, but rules including attendance at daily Christian services, no alcohol, drugs or smoking and no pets mean many won’t stay there.
Crammed in with potentially dangerous people, having to attend services for a religion you don’t believe in, risking loss of your belingings and with rules disallowing self-medication, all to sleep in a place that makes you send away a beloved family member. None of that sounds humane.
One designated camping site will allow people to stay up to four days, while the other three allow people to stay for one day.
Imagine not having a home and being hungry a lot and tired from a lack of sleep. And now picture having to move around constantly. This is cruel but typical treatment thanks to cities like Grants Pass.
More than 650,000 people are estimated to be homeless]
Some over at r/homeless believe this number might be much higher. Evidently many people live in cars, but to keep a car you must have a home address, so many people fake it. This makes them look housed on paper. (Disclaimer: I’m not homeless and I don’t drive, so I don’t know the full truth of that.)
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.