Comments on: TSA to Block "Controversial Opinion" on the Web
Add a Comment
- I guess that means Oilbozo will be censored? LOL
- Reply to this comment
- CBS seems to be censoring my comment...testing
- Reply to this comment
- Wow, people are still blaming Bush for this and that, buildings magically fell. If you choose to work for someone, guess what you work by their rules or hit the highway. You are not entitled a job, get the F* over your I deserve this and go make a living for yourself. If you don't have the necessary knowledge and tools for a better job, go to get them!
- Reply to this comment
- What is done by your employer is one thing. What you do at home on your own computer is another thing. Shut up people, you have a job. Love it or leave it. Then you all should have known working for the Government would be like joining the army. Their way or the highway. As a former supervisor of people, this isn't such a bad thing. If your people are surfing, they are not working. To the people that actually work when they punch the clock, this kinda looks like stealing from the company. Since this is a government job, these people are stealing tax dollars. This is a non issue. Should not have even been a story. Other than to set prescidence in non governmental work places.
Work or go home and whine. - Reply to this comment
- Controversial is a funny word, it roughly means you are in disagreement with someones point of view. The usual means of dealing with controversial content is to either consider the points made, reject the points made or simply ignore the content.
In the olden days this was a simple matter of personal determination, to each his own, one mans meat is another mans poison sort of thing.
In the "progressive" times of today where everything seems to be going backwards, technology is coming to our assist. Self-determination takes some effort and authorities would like to spare us that effort, apparently.
For a while I have wondered a couple of things, who is it that will play opinion god and decide what controversial content is? I have wondered also, how long will it be before the self-appointed den-mother of opinion steps forward and twists the elitist power know to dial out said content from citizen view?
It seems I need wonder no more.
more http://beyondprophecy.blogspot.com/2010/07/controversial-sites-blocked-what-is.html - Reply to this comment
- The Government is obviously afraid that their own employees may come to understand they are on the wrong side of history. Hence this obvious design to keep government employees obedient by keeping them deaf, dumb, and blind to what is really going on in the world.
- Reply to this comment
- AS a former supervisor with TSA and a member of the original SWAT (supervisory workforce action team), in other words the first 1200 persons hired by TSA. We were later identified as MSF (mobile security force), I have seen the boondoggle that TSA has became. According to TSA, SSI (sensitive security information) prevents them from disclosing how many of the original 1200 are still employed. As if that would mean anything to a terrorist. I doubt there is a single 1 of us.
I now work for a major airline as a security specialist. It's my companies goal to prevent a terrorist or bomber from ever reaching the TSA checkpoint. We use other technologies to insure this doesn't happen, because we feel the TSA is ineffective. We've installed security internationally to insure the safety of our passengers and flight crews.
TSA has a serious mission. It is to prevent terrorists and bombers from boarding airplanes. Unfortunately, the bureaucracy in Washington has prevented this from happening.
It get's worse as it goes. The entire process is a system of smoke and mirrors. It's not the screener at the gate. Don't take it out on them. They are only doing what the bureaucracy tells them they have to do. For the most part, the screeners are a dedicated group of individuals who are doing what they can with the tools they have to work with.
The tools they're working with are antiquated technology from the early 80's. New technology does exist but isn't being purchased by the government. For example, Rapiscan has developed a 3d x ray machine. Not a 1 has been deployed by the government.
The ability of detecting dangerous or prohibited items in carry on luggage, through x ray with the current equipment, is truly an art. The government uses a system called ITP (Image threat projection) to test x ray operators. It's a joke.
In reality a weapon carefully placed into a carry on bag, by somebody who knows how to place it, cannot be detected by currently deployed equipment. Even a firearm can be taken on a plane if you know how to do it.
The TSA hired many thousands of people, trained them, then laid them off or fired them. All they succeeded in doing was to provide them in training of how to beat the security system. I could walk through a security checkpoint today with a loaded weapon and it'd never be detected by current technology.
For obvious reasons I'm not going to tell you how, but believe me, the terrorists know. If you don't believe that terrorist organizations like Al Queda don't own a Walk Through Metal Detector and a Rapiscan or Heillman x ray machine, to test their theories on, you live in a dream world. - Reply to this comment
- If they're at work, using company computers, then what's the problem. They're lucky to have internet access at all. Some companies don't even allow email anymore. It's too much of a nightmore for network administrators to keep the computers free of malware and viruses, if people are surfing the net. This article kinda sounds as if it's stirring up trouble where there isn't any.
- Reply to this comment
- OK, 1 more time. All access to the internet is not being blocked, which is within the rights of the agency/company that owns the computer, network system, and internet access. I have worked for a company in the past that DID block all access to the internet except for a few who had to submit their request to visit a non company internet site and justify their request. No checking of non company email accounts, either. Yes they invested some serious $$ in monitoring software & had an IT team that did nothing else but monitor the monitoring software, more serious && in man-hours. But the company figured that 1. They weren't paying for hardware, bandwidth, and an IT team for you to surf the internet and 2. The productivity increase & resulting security that kept some nimrod from accidentally importing some malware/virus was money well spent. If you didn't like their IT policy you were more than welcome to find someplace else to work. They pay very well, have outstanding benefits, and expect to get their moneys worth from their employees.
- Reply to this comment
- I used to work for a state agency. They too had the official policy of computers and internet access was strictly for work. Yuk, yuk! The unofficial policy was that during our break times, so long as we weren't accessing porn sites or something, they would look the other way. I'm talking about 15-30 minutes per day. That would cover a couple of breaks and lunch time. More than that, you got locked out. For all of you zero tolerance yo-yo's, look back at the time you wasted on the job gossiping, razzing the other guy about the game, etc. and stop calling the kettle black.
I am constantly amazed at the number of people with opinions about something they have absolutely no knowledge or experience. Jefferson was right, the common person is too ignorant to be given the vote. - Reply to this comment
