Support NeoGAF

[killer rin]

...But why?

Kind of a random ban from out of nowhere.

 

[hanspampel]

This is disgusting. Do you expect people to just stare at the seat in front of them for 12+ hours?

I'm traveling to Germany this summer and will literally lose it if this starts expanding to other countries. They seriously want to insulate the US from other countries.

the seat in front of you has a monitor
the seat next to you has music
read a book
sleep

 

[Grym]

Believe it or not, people at one point flew on planes without any electronics. I know, I was shocked too when I found out!

Awwww yeah.....Maybe America is becoming great again. Heading back to those no electronics days when we could smoke on flights, bring a gallon of our own whiskey onboard, sexually assault the stewardess' when she brought the inflight meal, and the plebs didn't travel by air anyway because it was too damn expensive.

 

[distantmantra]

Is this effective for flights originating from the mentioned airports and airlines, regardless of passenger nationality, or is nationality a factor?

Nothing to do with passenger nationality.

Not yet, at least. :-/

 

[smokeymicpot]

Must have gotten wind of something specific.

This. Especially now that the UK is doing it.

 

[heyf00L]

Any of these flights will have a screen you can use. And I was just on an Etihad flight and they're piloting (pun intended) a movie service you use on your phone over WiFi. It was free, but I didn't try it.

 

[Audioboxer]

if you seriously believe this, considering what the Trump administration has done in regards to not wanting those big bad brown people on their shores, then I don't know what to say

The UK followed suit and I seen it on BBC. As other GAFers are speculating probably reactionary to intelligence services warning about something.

As much as you might want to lambaste your own security and intelligence agencies, part of their job is trying to be counter-active at times, rather than just reactionary. This is where international global security is no joke.

At this stage is it really that big a hassle to put your electronics in the hold? As I finished with before anyway, I fully expect to see the day come where all large electronics get the hold treatment.

 

[IdreamofHIME]

Mod really needs to update title so UK is added, maybe stop the drive by anti trump posts.

 

[M3d10n]

Believe it or not, people at one point flew on planes without any electronics. I know, I was shocked too when I found out!

This legislation is dumb as hell, but at least you still get your phone. You're not going to be staring at the seat in front of you (unless there's an entertainment hub there, which most long flights have now).

The problem isn't using the devices in the cabin, is having to send them in the checked bag, where's there's a larger chance of them being stolen, damaged or misplaced.

I don't stress much if something happens to my trunk if it only contains clothing, but having nearly a grand in equipment there would make me worried.

 

[distantmantra]

Any of these flights will have a screen you can use. And I was just on an Etihad flight and they're piloting (pun intended) a movie service you use on your phone over WiFi. It was free, but I didn't try it.

Delta and Alaska have this already available, it works well.

 

[Piggus]

Awwww yeah.....Maybe America is becoming great again. Heading back to those no electronics days when we could smoke on flights, bring a gallon of our own whiskey onboard, sexually assault the stewardess' when she brought the inflight meal, and the plebs didn't travel by air anyway because it was too damn expensive.

Baby steps.

 

[MaxSnake1]

As I said security is often reactionary (after something occurs) and/or based around laws of averages (where most incidents occur from). You might not like me saying this but go and do research as to where most aviation security incidents have occurred in our lifetimes. Intelligence services aren't going to spend the same time, money and effort focussing on global affairs in places which have had low incident rates or none.

This isn't always a case of "equality". It's intelligence and security and like it or not reports of potential threats may be more concentrated from certain sources than others. That's the real world, and life in general. If you were in charge of aviation intelligence services and thought your efforts would be best focussed on threats coming from Norway, then fair enough, but history, stats and current day intelligence probably isn't suggesting Norway is a big threat to international flights. It is targeting of countries, but it's supposed to be based on intelligence and credible threat levels, that's where we are suppose to have impartial security forces.

For what it's worth I do think the day approaches where all large scale electronics will be banned on all flights.

How for example Qatar, UAE are threat to the safety and security of the international flights?
and what are the incidents that you are referring to?
answer with sources and credible information or don't justify these acts,

 

[Nightbird]

Even Kindles?

Yea, fuck them

 

[Grym]

Baby steps.

 

[Audioboxer]

How for example Qatar, UAE are threat to the safety and security of the international flights?
and what are the incidents that you are referring to?
answer with sources and credible information or don't justify these acts,

You might find this interesting reading, if you aren't just looking for a one liner reply

https://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2015/index.htm

Notably

https://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2015/257517.htm

See sections on QATAR and UAE seeing as those are the two you want to single out.

Keep in mind this report is from 2015 (it's before Trump!!!), before an incident with a laptop being discussed just now. My point even if you skim it is like it or not some places in the world themselves even accept they can have issues with radicalisation and groups within their own countries or regions that they themselves are actively having to combat, and prevent from getting out of the country. Information on these groups/individuals is often handed off to international intelligence services as a means of co-operating, communication and warning (and sharing watch lists between nations).

Ergo, American intelligence services, let alone those in the UK and many other countries actually actively work with these countries. The lack of consideration for how seriously complex global politics and affairs are is rather unsettling at times, as if it's all just Twitter wars, mean tweets and international airports doing shit for the lulz.

"Trump!" posts might have credibility a lot of the time, but if that is the level of discourse that will continue now till American politics changes it up, that is doing a huge disservice to the intelligence communities that operate regardless of who the president is and will continue operating long after presidents change hands again. Trump's travel ban was a heavy-handed cesspit of garbage. This requirement for electronics to go in the hold is far more likely to be handled civilly, reasonably and may well be reactionary to reports of radicals planning on using electronics as a means of subterfuge again in the near future. It has been tried before, and given how complex modern day technology is becoming, I think it's likely to be attempted again.

 

[Pixieking]

So, I've got three 3.5 internal HDDs that are housed in external enclosures. They usually go in my hand luggage, and they're my media, Steam games and archive drives. They're not "devices". But they are electronics. Soooooooo... How would that work?

Fun fun. :/

 

[adamantypants]

This is just petty. "Can't get them banned? MAKE THEM BORED"

 

[FortuneFaded]

Even Kindles?

Yea, fuck them

Kindles can be used to smuggle insects.

 

[Grym]

I'll just leave these here in case they are related in any way

from 2015: https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisv...es-target-open-skies-agreements/#22916a495c16

from Feb 2017: https://theintercept.com/2017/02/09/airline-competition-trump/

 

[Heshinsi]

Most of the terrorism in the United States and Europe this past decade have come at the hands of locals. How does this make anyone safe when some radicalised French guy isn't affected by this for example?

 

[Audioboxer]

Most of the terrorism in the United States and Europe this past decade have come at the hands of locals. How does this make anyone safe when some radicalised French guy isn't affected by this for example?

Have you considered that may well be the case because intelligence agencies are often doing their jobs and successfully blocking, stopping or preventing incoming terrorism from other countries? I mean, that is why they exist, to try and prevent "bad people" from getting into the country, therefore stopping terrorism from abroad.

Internally it's much hard to stop, as often homegrown terrorism comes through radicalisation that is broadcast from outside of the country via social media/tv and radio or some sort of video content. Or it's coming from closed off communities that do a lot of teaching and radicalising in private, and obviously, they have freedom of speech and freedom of religion "backing" them in many Western societies. In other words, they are allowed to teach some hateful shit when it remains as words. Often when it turns to actions it's already too late to prevent. It's incredibly difficult for security services to track people just "thinking" and know when "thinking" might turn into actions. In many cases home grown radicals do end up on watch lists, but it's very difficult to legally monitor people 24/7. That's arguably something we don't want, as there is the moral arguments around the invasion of privacy.

 

[MaxSnake1]

You might find this interesting reading, if you aren't just looking for a one liner reply

https://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2015/index.htm

Notably

https://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2015/257517.htm

See sections on QATAR and UAE seeing as those are the two you want to single out.

Keep in mind this report is from 2015 (it's before Trump!!!), before an incident with a laptop being discussed just now. My point even if you skim it is like it or not some places in the world themselves even accept they can have issues with radicalisation and groups within their own countries or regions that they themselves are actively having to combat, and prevent from getting out of the country. Information on these groups/individuals is often handed off to international intelligence services as a means of co-operating, communication and warning (and sharing watch lists between nations).

Ergo, American intelligence services, let alone those in the UK and many other countries actually actively work with these countries. The lack of consideration for how seriously complex global politics and affairs are is rather unsettling at times, as if it's all just Twitter wars, mean tweets and international airports doing shit for the lulz.

"Trump!" posts might have credibility a lot of the time, but if that is the level of discourse that will continue now till American politics changes it up, that is doing a huge disservice to the intelligence communities that operate regardless of who the president is and will continue operating long after presidents change hands again. Trump's travel ban was a heavy-handed cesspit of garbage. This requirement for electronics to go in the hold is far more likely to be handled civilly, reasonably and may well be reactionary to reports of radicals planning on using electronics as a means of subterfuge again in the near future. It has been tried before, and given how complex modern day technology is becoming, I think it's likely to be attempted again.

I did read the Qatar section, it's completely against your point of view, the report praises the security of Qatar a lot.

 

[Ishan]

Most of the terrorism in the United States and Europe this past decade have come at the hands of locals. How does this make anyone safe when some radicalised French guy isn't affected by this for example?

Whoa whoa if this has a valid terror threat I fully support it . Some random airline lobby stuff def don't . But given uk also did this yes support and I doubt you or me or anyone outside the anti terrorism ppl would know how and why this is effective . So leave it to the experts imo

 

[Audioboxer]

I did read the Qatar section, it's completely against your point of view, the report praises the security of Qatar a lot.

Which is? Just so I'm clear on what you think I think. However, we can agree from that report the Qatar government does a lot to aid in counter-terrorism. From the report though we can also see why the government is needing to do as it does, because there are issues within the country with radicalisation. That report states that the government of Qatar shares intelligence with the global scene/UN, in praise of that, but if there is worry for a threat, won't other nations act accordingly? It's not a personal slight on Qatar, it's counter-intelligence working hand-in-hand.

I empathise people can take it very personally when a country they have ties to, are from, or even just like is involved in something like this. Often it far exceeds feelings. Feelings are irrelevant for counter-intelligence. What you don't want to see is intelligence services being abused/ignored/twisted and so forth, but let's get a grip here, it's a request for laptops (generally speaking, large electronics) to go into a hold. Hardly an insane human rights abuse. If there are concerns radicals, notably from known groups in certain countries/areas are passing on chat about using technology again in an airline, then if an intelligence service catches wind of that it will spread throughout the global scene for a reaction.

 

[phxxBullet]

Tablets not allowed, nothing bigger than a mobile phone?

So.. are they going to check every "Tablet-like-device" if it's actually just a big smartphone/phablet or an actual tablet?

 

[Shiggy]

How come the UK follows this measure but the rest of the EU doesn't see any such necessity?

 

[MaxSnake1]

Which is? Just so I'm clear on what you think I think. However, we can agree from that report the Qatar government does a lot to aid in counter-terrorism. From the report though we can also see why the government is needing to do as it does, because there are issues within the country with radicalisation. That report states that the government of Qatar shares intelligence with the global scene/UN, in praise of that, but if there is worry for a threat, won't other nations act accordingly? It's not a personal slight on Qatar, it's counter-intelligence working hand-in-hand.

I empathise people can take it very personally when a country they have ties to, are from, or even just like is involved in something like this. Often it far exceeds feelings. Feelings are irrelevant for counter-intelligence. What you don't want to see is intelligence services being abused/ignored/twisted and so forth, but let's get a grip here, it's a request for laptops (generally speaking, large electronics) to go into a hold. Hardly an insane human rights abuse. If there are concerns radicals, notably from known groups in certain countries/areas are passing on chat about using technology again in an airline, then if an intelligence service catches wind of that it will spread throughout the global scene for a reaction.

I mean the point of view which you are justifying, from the report we can find that Qatar do no harm to the international flights, which makes this decision racist rather than for safety reasons.

 

[smokeymicpot]

https://www.buzzfeed.com/nancyyoussef/airline-electronics-ban?utm_term=.gcZ60rAr2#.jmBlZEREP

The Airline Electronics Ban Came After Militants Said They Want To Hide Bombs In Laptops: US Official

”It was driven by intelligence," deputy White House spokesperson Michael Short told BuzzFeed News when asked whether the electronics ban originated in the White House as the official indicated.

”Evaluated intelligence indicates that terrorist groups continue to target commercial aviation and are aggressively pursuing innovative methods to undertake their attacks, to include smuggling explosive devices in various consumer items. Based on this information, Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly and Transportation Security Administrator Acting Administrator Huban Gowadia have determined it is necessary to enhance security procedures for passengers at certain last point of departure airports to the United States," the statement said.

The department said airlines would have 96 hours to comply with the new rules and the ban would remain in place until ”the threat changes."

 

[louiedog]

Tablets not allowed, nothing bigger than a mobile phone?

So.. are they going to check every "Tablet-like-device" if it's actually just a big smartphone/phablet or an actual tablet?

Years ago the TSA decided tablets don't need to come out of bags for screening but laptops do. And netbooks and 2-in-1s? I forget the actual wording but the head of the TSA said something like "smaller than normal laptops can stay in bags" but never defined what that meant. I don't think they really think these things through and leave it up to agents to enforce as they see fit, so good luck.

 

[Audioboxer]

How come the UK follows this measure but the rest of the EU doesn't see any such necessity?

Often America, and the UK, notably London, are seen as big targets to go after.

I mean the point of view which you are justifying, from the report we can find that Qatar do no harm to the international flights, which makes this decision racist rather than for safety reasons.

Qatar isn't a collective? It's not as if all the people there get together and say what the whole country is or isn't going to do. As with any terrorism or radicals, it is groups operating out of countries, often NOT with government help. Although some governments do aid in terrorism. Most though are engaged with their own inner battles to try and squash terrorism within their country.

Brief statement from the BBC. Things often look "over the top" from the outside, as a citizen, but when it comes to airlines and transport simply being reactionary doesn't work. You can't always wait till something happens to go "okay, NOW we'll rethink electronics like we did liquids". Playing with people's safety is never an option. Often even if there is just a hint that something might happen, reasonable actions are taken. As I said above a stricter stance on large electronics is hardly the end of the world for anyone travelling.

This is a controversial decision, and, I'm told, not an easy one for the government.

The UK ban goes even further than the US move which does not affect national carriers.

It is not the result of a specific, identified terrorist plot, but of mounting concern in US and British intelligence circles at the ongoing interest amongst jihadist groups in the Middle East in blowing up a passenger plane in mid-air.

For more than two years, the official UK threat level for international terrorism has stood at severe, meaning an attack is "highly likely".

In July 2014, passengers at UK airports were advised to ensure electronic devices were charged so they could be switched on for security checks.

The ban on liquids over 100ml in hand luggage - introduced after a foiled 2006 plot to blow up planes using explosives hidden in drink bottles - also remains in place.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39343971

 

[DarkLordMalik]

I hope Vita is allowed since no one remembers it.

 

[Brhoom]

It's your loss America. I have other, more welcoming countries to spend my money on.

 

[danowat]

Because they can't detonate a laptop bomb in the hold?

 

[pswii60]

This has nothing to do with terrorism.

This is 100% a way to impact the large middle eastern airlines like Emirates and Etihad which are taking market share away from US airlines.

If there was a clear threat from these so called devices, then why not apply the rules to all airlines? Or every flight coming to the US?

It's no coincidence that the leaders and executives of the large US airlines met with Trump a few weeks ago and complained about losing to Etihad/Emirates which are state-sponsored and are more competitively priced.

Everything is a ruse.

How do you explain the UK ban then, which affects six British airlines too? Your conspiracy theory nonsense sounds almost as bad as the crap that comes out of Trump's mouth on a daily basis.

 

[Ishan]

It's your loss America. I have other, more welcoming countries to spend my money on.

It's a terror related measure .... Uk followed suit .

 

[iMax]

Because they can't detonate a laptop bomb in the hold?

Yeah, can anyone explain this? I'm confused why it's safer to check them in.

 

[Ishan]

How do you explain the UK ban then, which affects six British airlines too? Your conspiracy theory nonsense sounds almost as bad as the crap that comes out of Trump's mouth on a daily basis.

This I don't blindly trust us under trump but if the uk ollowed suit I'll trust it .... Not everything is about trumps agenda . I'll def give them the benefit of the doubt given uk followed suit with uk airlines too

 

[Audioboxer]

Because they can't detonate a laptop bomb in the hold?

It's taking a 99.8% certainty and trying to take it to 99.9%. All to do with statistics. I'm pretty certain intelligence wants airport security to do 99.8% of the job required and confiscate, find and stop any dodgy looking stuff getting through scanners. In the occurrence that something gets through (which it does, like drugs and other hidden objects or anything illegally smuggled), then the next small layer of protection is it's not in the hands of whoever it belongs to, it's in the hold.

Could something still be detonated in a hold? Sure, but if you look at it that way rather than a statistical game of lessening %'s, you might as well just ban everything on a plane. No suitcases. No belongings. Heck, strip people of all their clothes. Chances are anyway if you're talking remote detonation that also requires a detonator to get through along with the "bomb". Further adding to a statistical tilt in favour of a plot being foiled. Home made detonators will also have their own issues with range and reliability even if one does get on board a cabin.

I don't blame anyone for not thinking this way, but it's the way the world of intelligence and security thinks. Try to stop 100%, but realise you can't ever hit 100% reliably, so in the 1 out of a 1,000,000 instances where security fails to prevent, try and make it as difficult as possible to carry out.

It's always a game of looking at the lowest common denominator and having to consider it/act. It can lower QOL for passengers, but let us face it as I said earlier a purpose of being on a plane is to get somewhere, not to live on it. Until the day humans can teleport places, planes will always be somewhat of an inconvenience of boredom when talking about getting around.

 

[Afrikan]

uhh...doesn't he realize that for a lot of Americans Doha, Dubai or even Abu Dhabi are gateways to the East/Africa?

Stupid.

They don't give a fuck... In fact it might be an added bonus.

I have to fly back for a wedding in the summer...I'm planning to take Turkey Airlines... so oh well, gotta adjust.

I don't use a laptop or tablet on flights..but I should as hell wouldn't want to keep them with the check in bags.

 

[StoOgE]

Having been on a long-ass flight before, this will suck. This will suck a lot.

I can't imagine a flight to Hong Kong without an iPad in 2017.

I'm not going to any of these places in the near future, but if this starts to proliferate with retaliatory stuff and cascades, frequent flyers lives are about to get a lot worse.

 

[danowat]

Having been on a long-ass flight before, this will suck. This will suck a lot.

I can't imagine a flight to Hong Kong without an iPad in 2017.

I'm not going to any of these places in the near future, but if this starts to proliferate with retaliatory stuff and cascades, frequent flyers lives are about to get a lot worse.

I can remember doing long haul with nothing more than a Walkman and some books, it wasn't bad, and people were smoking as well!

 

[Mr. Giggles]

I hope Vita is allowed since no one remembers it.

This was uncalled for.

 

[jmdajr]

I hope Vita is allowed since no one remembers it.

This was uncalled for.

lolz

 

[n0razi]

So Switch is a no-go... what about 3DS, VIta?

 

[Lego Boss]

I can remember doing long haul with nothing more than a Walkman and some books, it wasn't bad, and people were smoking as well!

Only crack though if l remember rightly?

 

[danowat]

Only crack though if l remember rightly?

I don't know, I didn't inhale.

 

[Philly40]

Isn't this more security theatre nonsense like the 100ml liquid restrictions?


UK blindly following US rules while other countries roll their eyes.

 

[The Omega Man]

Introducing Nintendo Switch Mini, now the size of an iphone, for those frequent flyers, 800$

 

[ProtomanNeo]

Interesting. I start shooting a documentary this summer and really was hoping to get a lot of b-roll with me on flights. Going to have to look more into this.

 

[Lego Boss]

Will a Game and Watch be OK?