Not The Onion

hideshow 24 child comments

[–] Admetus@sopuli.xyz 70 points 5 months ago (23 children)

I mean, a 12 year old is more likely than not to name a cylindrical boombox a 'bomb' and forget about it. Hopefully a sincere apology will suffice instead of a ban or criminal charges.

hideshow 23 child comments

parent

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 77 points 5 months ago (13 children)

According to discussion about this elsewhere, there's a bluetooth speaker model named 'Bomb' that defaults to that name, whose website, humorously, has been rate limited due to I'm sure more traffic than they've ever had in its entire existence.

hideshow 13 child comments

parent

[+] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz -13 points 5 months ago (12 children)

That's fucked up, and honestly negligent on the company's part. I hope they get sued.

hideshow 12 child comments

parent

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 20 points 5 months ago (11 children)

Or we could stop pushing security theatre.

hideshow 11 child comments

parent

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz -3 points 5 months ago (10 children)

I don't know, I think airlines should have a responsibility to address potential bomb threats on their commercial flights but that might just be me...

hideshow 10 child comments

parent

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 9 points 5 months ago (9 children)

Yes, terrorists are absolutely going around naming their WiFi and Bluetooth devices 'bomb'.

hideshow 9 child comments

parent

[–] imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 months ago (4 children)

I think a simple rule of "Better safe than sorry" applies here. It is as if a robber comes with a plastic gun that looks like a real one. Nobody wants to figure out if it is real or not.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] joelfromaus@aussie.zone 4 points 5 months ago

Best case, inconvenience. Worst case, death. Being stuck in a metal tube kilometres above the earth I’m going to lean towards caution.

parent

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

This resembled the actual thing less than finger guns resemble the real ones.

parent

[–] imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

I know that in modern times most toy guns look nothing like a real weapon (colorful, looking weird, and so on), but you can still find some guns like this one:

parent

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago

Finger guns

parent

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 0 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Not saying that's logical, but it's something the airlines have to act on. They have policies in place that they need to follow, and even if it's a finer comb than it needs to be it's better than having no policy at all.

People forget how many skyjackings there were in the 80s and 90s when they say airport security is worthless. Like "How many incidents have they prevented?" "Only all the ones that didn't happen..."

parent

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 1 point 5 months ago (2 children)

parent

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 3 points 5 months ago (1 child)

So is your suggestion to do away with airline security?

parent

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 months ago

Not entirely. But it's undeniable that most security measures are rooted in nothing more than a desire for a bigger budget.

parent

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 19 points 5 months ago (8 children)

Honestly, I don't see any way this could result in criminal charges. It's a Bluetooth name, not someone actually threatening with a weapon. It's like walking around with a fake gun. You can't be charged with anything without actual intent to deceive people, and good luck proving that.

At most, this is a civil charge. The airline might try to get some money out of this person.

parent

[–] kunaltyagi@programming.dev 13 points 5 months ago (1 child)

Poor chap. Chances are the person was flying economy. No way that person can give enough to recoup even the lawyer fees for the airline

parent

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 4 points 5 months ago

Yep. They might still try it to punish them/set an example. They're not getting enough out of it to be worth it though, so odds are nothing happens.

parent

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 5 points 5 months ago

I think it depends on the color of your skin.

Many kids with fake guns have been executed for this, because their skin is black

parent

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 months ago (1 child)

It could absolutely result in a criminal charge. If it results in a criminal conviction or not is another question.

But any prosecutor could make the argument that it's a terroristic threat.

parent

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 months ago

It'd be a waste of time, but yeah.

parent

[–] chocrates@piefed.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 child)

You can still be prosecuted for things you didn't intend, the laws are usually less harsh. Manslaughter vs Murder for instance. I have no idea if a speaker whose name auto sets to bomb is illegal though. Seems dumb if it were

parent

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 points 5 months ago

IIRC, all the laws about terrorism require intent.

parent

[–] fizzle 2 points 5 months ago

Naming a Bluetooth device "bomb" could absolutely be intentionally disruptive or threatening.

Im not saying thats provable beyond reasonable doubt in this case.

parent

[–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 71 points 5 months ago* (10 children)

Just changed my phone's Bluetooth name to "Not A Bomb". Hopefully no one is confused by it.

hideshow 10 child comments

[–] turtlesareneat@piefed.ca 16 points 5 months ago

Also wise to spray paint it on your luggage, just so they know.

parent

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago (8 children)

Now go on a flight with it active and see how well that goes.

Almost every single aspect of airport security before and after you board is written in blood.

parent

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 months ago (7 children)

Fake theatre blood, usually.

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 1 point 5 months ago (6 children)

I dont know if you're trying to troll or if you're actually that dumb. Regardless, here's a non exhaustive list of all of this "fake theatre blood"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_airliner_bombing_attacks

parent

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago (5 children)

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago (4 children)

particularly in discussions surrounding the United States Transportation Security Administration (TSA).

Despite popular belief, the world is a lot bigger than just the US, and any airline from across the world would have done the same upon the discovery of a device called "bomb"

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago* (3 children)

I'm not sure what makes you think I was talking about the US in particular. I've never been to the US. Unfortunately, their ludicrous practices have proliferated, probably due to them requiring the same practices at origins of flights headed there.

parent

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I’m not sure what makes you think I was talking about the US in particular.

So you did not read the link you sent? Which spoke extensively about the theatrical practises of the US TSA.

Fantastic.

parent

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

As I said - most of those theatre practices, while they originated in the US, have now spread far and wide.

parent

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago

You say you've never been in the US. But i have, and I've flown both inside and internationally in and out of US. And I strongly disagree. European airports are not the same. They do not look the same.

parent

[–] murvel@feddit.nu 125 points 5 months ago (6 children)

Multiple Redditors claimed to be on the flight

The real reason for the turn-around

[–] cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 30 points 5 months ago

must have smelled so bad

parent

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 24 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Flight was too heavy

parent

[–] OleFoFa@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago (1 child)

It only had one person onboard: your mom

parent

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 3 points 5 months ago

RIP

parent

[–] Summzashi@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

They're lucky there weren't any power mods, they would have that person banned from 38 different subreddits that post identical content before you could even mutter the 4 letter word!

parent

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 point 5 months ago

Ha ha ha.

parent

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 49 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

A certain four-letter word

Poot?

You can't joke about that stuff in an airplane setting, they recirculate that air.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

Did you ever see that youtube video from like 2 decades ago where the woman is standing up on the airplane while everyone else is seated, (and looking annoyed), while she waves her arms around yelling "THIS MAN FARTED!!! THIS MAN FARTED WHILE SEATED RIGHT NEXT TO ME!!! WE'RE SO CLOSE OUR ELBOWS TOUCHED BRIEFLY!!! HE FARTED!!! THAT WAS NOT ME THAT FARTED!!!"

And everybody else is just looking at her like "Lady....shut the fuck up".

There are some youtube videos I wish I saved. Thats one.

https://gizmodo.com/teen-fine-joke-text-taliban-jets-scramble-in-spain-1851192668

parent

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 45 points 5 months ago* (9 children)

It is at least less crazy than the Snapchat incident

We need to stop the crazy paranoia now that 9/11 is 25 years behind us. If someone is going to through the effort to blow up a plane they probably aren't going to be dumb enough name there bluetooth speaker "bomb"

hideshow 9 child comments

[–] wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago (8 children)

link

So what I'm getting from this, is that you should use a VPN if you're using the airports wifi.

Like today's sponsor...

parent

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 5 months ago (7 children)

Fun fact: VPNs don't do shit

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago (6 children)

How so? I know many of the vpns sell your information, what if you have a trustworthy vpn, are you suggesting the traffic is compromised at levels before and after the vpn? I mean I know it is to some degree I just don't know exactly.

parent

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 4 points 5 months ago* (5 children)

Your traffic is already encrypted with https so yes, the "compromise" here is after the VPN.

I put compromise in quotes since in reality the system is working as designed. You need to use a end to end encrypted messaging app like Signal if you want your communications to stay private.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] skibidi@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

Your traffic is encrypted, but it is still possible to see what sites you are visiting without a VPN.

With a VPN, all your traffic will just be to the VPN server, and any logs of the sites you visit will sit with the VPN operator.

parent

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

This is mostly true but I'll add in some additional info.

Both QUIC and ECH make it harder to easily track what sites are being visited. Not all websites support these but maybe some day they will be standard.

None of this applies to messaging as the messages are being stored on a server unencrypted in most cases.

parent

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 point 5 months ago* (2 children)

Thank you for the response I value this information.

For the record, I suspect signal has a back door for the US government.

parent

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

I can say with a very high degree of confidence that Signal does not have a backdoor. What's far more likely is that you are a victim of a misinformation campaign. In reality there are many organizations that would prefer you that you use something that isn't end to end encrypted.

That's not to say that Signal is flawless as it does have some known weaknesses. The issue is that people tend to fall back to not using encrypted messaging at all which is much worse.

parent

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 1 point 5 months ago

My mistrust is not based in anything new, just in a decades old knowledge that everything is compromised. Everything.

parent

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 38 points 5 months ago (8 children)

I suspect the personality profiles of people with who would make the joke of calling their bluetooth device "bomb" and people who would blow up an airplane full of people is almost diametrically opposite.

[–] GalacticGrapefruit@lemmy.world 22 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (5 children)

My mother used to have a Bluetooth speaker in our car that she took with her. It wasn't deliberately shaped that way, but with the silhouette, the color, and the volume it produced, we ended up dubbing it 'the hand grenade'.

After the hand grenade finally broke, my mother got a nice JVC speaker, a long cylinder. It was promptly named 'the pipe bomb'.

For context, my mother is the most bland, inoffensive Midwest Christian white lady you will ever meet. She has an unusual sense of humor that comes out in the strangest ways. She laughed her ass off all the way through the FNAF games because she thought the animatronics were funny.

I think the TSA just hates people with a personality, period.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 5 months ago (1 child)

I like to believe that people with quirky senses of humour see the various social conventions and other broadly treated as "this is the way things are done" patterns of behavior in human societies with a different perspective so often see the silly side of many such things (hence the quirky sense of humour), making them significantly less likely to simply submit to arbitrary orders from those in positions of authority than the average person.

People that don't just meekly comply are more disliked by "little dictators" - people in positions were they have a little bit of power which they use to push others around to satisfying petty personal needs to feel powerful.

parent

[–] GalacticGrapefruit@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Sounds about right.

parent

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago*

One time a TSA guy started to open my wife's carry-on, which she had packed VERY tightly. She said, "Careful, it might explode." This got a raised eyebrow.

parent

[–] Snailpick42@lemmus.org 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

Christians are rather offensive people. Especially the ones that force religion and their laws on people.

parent

[–] GalacticGrapefruit@lemmy.world 1 point 5 months ago

And she loves her Atheist kid.

Don't you fucking dare pin that on my mother.

parent

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 1 point 5 months ago* (1 child)

You'd think so, but they don't realize that.

I like how they think turning it around would even change anything??? Like, just dumb.

parent

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 5 months ago

I suspect it's a bit more of Security Theatre

parent

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 36 points 5 months ago (4 children)

friendly reminder that what you think is a clever WiFi or Bluetooth name probably isn’t

Nonsense, Your Honor. As evidence I present Promised LAN, Nacho Wifi, and Hurts When IP.

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] 0x0@infosec.pub 12 points 5 months ago

8hz_wan_ip

parent

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 12 points 5 months ago (1 child)

I like the use of the phrase "forced to turn around." They chose to turn around because somebody had a string of letters on their bluetooth name that they didn't feel comfortable with. WTF would they do with a passenger in a Che Guevara T shirt?

parent

[–] Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 5 months ago

And it's not like turning around wouldn't have made the "bomb" (if there WAS one) to blow up.

parent

[–] Poem_for_your_sprog@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

what's wrong with GIANTPENIS69?

parent

[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 32 points 5 months ago (1 child)

If you named a Bluetooth speaker “Just an ordinary Bluetooth speaker, nothing to see here”, would that be seen as an implied terrorist threat?

[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 21 points 5 months ago

Try naming it "Fuck ICE" and see what happens . . . or don't, because for whatever reason the special snowflakes of that criminal org get really pissy when members of the public offer them honest and heartfelt feedback.

parent

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 28 points 5 months ago (12 children)

What if I name my speaker "This bomb will explode if plane goes below 5k meters. To disarm it send 1000 bitcoin to 1Dkfz1uJ45zRXey2iZmvCZPfLDTPPw6KQt"?

hideshow 12 child comments

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 18 points 5 months ago (8 children)

You go to prison?

parent

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 11 points 5 months ago (7 children)

But it's just a prank, bro!

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 11 points 5 months ago (6 children)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpN_RjIaVw8

parent

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 4 points 5 months ago (3 children)

The Onion had some amazing videos xD

parent

[–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Has

parent

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

Is this a political statement?

You are really digging into the haves and have nots

parent

[–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 1 point 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

They used to be good. They’re still good, but they used to be too.

https://theonion.com/how-to-build-a-bomb

parent

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

Sadly its 404

parent

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 point 5 months ago

It works for me

parent

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (1 child)

1Dkfz1uJ45zRXey2iZmvCZPfLDTPPw6KQt

Did you use a real address hoping someone here would give you some lmao?

parent

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 14 points 5 months ago

No but now I think I should have.

parent

[–] LiveLM@lemmy.zip 1 point 5 months ago

I believe the average length before getting truncated is 14 chars so I guess the best you could do is "This Bomb Will".

parent

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 28 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I guess you need to rename all your Bluetooth bombs before flying now. Thanks Obama.

[–] TeddE@lemmy.world 25 points 5 months ago (1 child)

Thanks, O-bomb-a.

parent

[–] wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

🎶 But you turned me out, baby 🎶

parent

[–] ThanksObama@sh.itjust.works 1 point 5 months ago

parent

[–] kayohtie@pawb.social 26 points 5 months ago

The real reason is because some jackass turned their Bluetooth speaker on during a flight.

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 21 points 5 months ago (3 children)

If they thought it was real, why wouldn't they land at the closest airport? Why fly all the way back to the origin point?

[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 5 months ago (1 child)

Its a transatlantic flight, new york origin is probably still the closest airport that can handle the larger plane.

parent

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago*

Boston Logan and Bangor should have both been able to handle the flight and are closer. In fact, Bangor has a massive runway and is the defacto airport for flights that need to divert from transatlantic international routes.

parent

[–] tehredmage@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 5 months ago

Because the pilot told them they would turn this flight around!

Also, maybe clearance wasn't possible on closer airports?