• @AbidanYre
      link
      English
      536 months ago

      But you can be damn sure they’ll catch that 5oz bottle of shampoo you’ve got.

      BTW: your link is broken because you have a 9 at the beginning

      • SSTF
        link
        136 months ago

        fixed

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      386 months ago

      Yet they never, ever fail to miss the banana I have in my carry-on for manual review. They very literally only look for the lowest-hanging fruit in scans. And that’s not a joke, they focus on the easiest to do and accept or reject.

      • SSTF
        link
        316 months ago

        They keep intensely checking my stuffed triceratops. Triclor is a good boy and they need to stop picking on him.

        • @AliasVortex
          link
          English
          156 months ago

          Aww! It’s not a pet per se, so I can’t invoke the pet tax, but might I request a picture of your stuffed friend?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        116 months ago

        I’ve accidentally brought my pocket knife through the TSA multiple times. But coffee? That that’s clearly a bomb let’s scan it.

        • @foggy
          link
          36 months ago

          I brought a used weed pipe, a used grinder, and a baggie of psilocybin powder through TSA by mistake.

          Good times.

      • @9point6
        link
        46 months ago

        Perhaps attach the banana more securely so it’s not hanging

    • sp3ctr4l
      link
      fedilink
      34
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Yeah, wtf do they mean ‘they don’t know how?’.

      The TSA is probably the only employer in America worse than Boeing when it comes to employees giving a shit about doing their jobs and actually doing them well.

      Both organizations promote incompetent ass kissers over those who actually give a shit, and both orgs also have a massive culture of making up excuses for why something that was supposed to happen did not.

      Oh right, both also have absurd amounts of paperwork that ‘ensures’ policy was followed, but seeing as everyone hates you if you actually try to keep up with it, most people just focus on a few main things and sign off on anything.

      • @9point6
        link
        96 months ago

        I mean “they don’t know how” doesn’t have to mean this is an exceptional case

        They could just be ubiquitously incompetent and they don’t know how a lot of stuff happens

        • sp3ctr4l
          link
          fedilink
          56 months ago

          I mean it in the sense of:

          Every job I’ve ever worked, if someone asks ‘how did this happen?’, that is a question that has an actual answer within usually 30 seconds, maximum 30 minutes.

          I basically agree with you, I’m phrasing it as if I were some kind of competent person asking where a whole bunch of taxpayer money is going.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            36 months ago

            There are times when it takes longer, such as when Fukushima had a meltdown. The thirty-second answer only starts to explain how it happened, the thirty-minute one makes you start to realize that a good part of it is because people fucked up, and the full answer, which requires going over reports since the construction of the plant shows you just how comprehensive the fuck-ups were and why it was only a matter of time for something that catastrophic to happen.

            But yes, usually these things can be figured out pretty quickly. It doesn’t take nuclear science to figure out why they can’t do their job.

            • sp3ctr4l
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              I totally agree with you that systemic failures require a systemic evaluation to figure out what actually happened. Most of the jobs I’ve worked have been as an analyst of one kind or another, so I of course know that many things do not have quick answers.

              So yes technically I should have added some kind of qualifier, but you seem to get that I mean that common, routine job functions or system functions pretty much always should have fairly simple explanations as to why something routine happens or does not.

              So, it takes me a while to do a root cause analysis of a quarter or years worth of one kind of failure in a complex process or another, but I very rarely have to manually investigate some specific totally unknown thing in person, as the system is (or should) be designed in such a way that tbis stuff is tracked and easily analyzed.

              Contrast that with: Why isn’t the report released yet?

              Oh, because a data set I need access to is offline right now, or some dumbass changed the access creds without informing me prior, I emailed them a week ago, and they have not responded.

              That is a simple answer.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      26 months ago

      I flew across country and back twice with a pack of super sharp Olfa snap off replacement blades that if forgotten were tucked into the bottom of my laptop bag.

    • Khrux
      link
      fedilink
      English
      26 months ago

      I once lived and worked in a small store in rural Australia. When I left the job, I threw my box cutter in my backpack at the end of my shift without thinking.

      They flew me back to the nearest city when I left, then from there I flew to Bali and back, then eventually I flew home. Every time I flew. I used that backpack as my carry on luggage. It was found when I landed after that final flight. I’d totally forgotten it was in there, and it had been scanned for all of those flights.