Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   TSA starts banning all electronic devices larger than an exploding Samsung Galaxy 7 on airlines from 13 countries   ( theguardian.com) divider line
    More: Murica, United States Department of Homeland Security, Royal Jordanian airlines, Jordan, Homeland security, United States Coast Guard, Mobile phone, Oneworld, Embraer E-Jets  
•       •       •

6792 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Mar 2017 at 8:27 PM (22 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



127 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-03-20 05:27:19 PM  
Seems like a totally pointless dick move to discourage brown people from visiting the US, or to put it another way, "what half the country wants".
 
2017-03-20 05:56:47 PM  
imgs.xkcd.com

/obligatory xkcd
 
2017-03-20 05:58:38 PM  
"Bomb threats" aside, i'm sure it has nothing at all to do with giving border agents the opportunity to covertly check said electronic devices.

Nope. I'm not paranoid at all.
 
2017-03-20 06:06:16 PM  
I assume this means my Newton....

fark
 
2017-03-20 06:06:34 PM  
"Saudi Arabia's Saudia Airlines and Royal Jordanian airlines are among the affected countries; the full list has not been revealed to the affected airlines themselves."

Don't worry, people. In a few years, once the details are hammered out bribes hit the bank accounts, Trump air will gladly fly you from the affected countries to the US with a special prescreening already in place, at on 3 times the cost.
 
2017-03-20 06:18:53 PM  
But, allow them in the check luggage?

This is probably the worse place for a potential fire. At least in a cabin you can put it in a fire bag.
 
2017-03-20 06:21:57 PM  
Oh yah, keep enticing me to visit your vile ass-country with benevolent and well-thought out policies like this.  Thank a deplorable appropriately for this absolute garbage.
 
2017-03-20 07:27:53 PM  
I have to leave Dr. Theopolis at home

vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2017-03-20 07:56:09 PM  
Yet more security theatre!
 
2017-03-20 08:33:45 PM  

optikeye: But, allow them in the check luggage?

This is probably the worse place for a potential fire. At least in a cabin you can put it in a fire bag.


Yep. This isn't about "lithium battery safety concerns," though. The real question to ask is "which 13 countries?" See, I'm thinking that there are rather more countries included here than in the two-time loser Trump travel ban, and I'm wondering why...
 
2017-03-20 08:35:35 PM  
Safer and more bigly winninger every day.
MAGA!!!
 
2017-03-20 08:35:56 PM  
Jesus. Why would anyone travel by plane ever? It's getting more ridiculous than it already was. I've probably been charged a fee by American Airlines for typing "travel by plane" in this post.
 
2017-03-20 08:37:31 PM  

ThatBillmanGuy: Jesus. Why would anyone travel by plane ever? It's getting more ridiculous than it already was. I've probably been charged a fee by American Airlines for typing "travel by plane" in this post.


I only travel by dirigible.
 
2017-03-20 08:38:42 PM  

ThatBillmanGuy: Jesus. Why would anyone travel by plane ever? It's getting more ridiculous than it already was. I've probably been charged a fee by American Airlines for typing "travel by plane" in this post.


That will be an additional  $25.00. Thank you and enjoy your flight.
 
2017-03-20 08:41:26 PM  

FormlessOne: optikeye: But, allow them in the check luggage?

This is probably the worse place for a potential fire. At least in a cabin you can put it in a fire bag.

Yep. This isn't about "lithium battery safety concerns," though. The real question to ask is "which 13 countries?" See, I'm thinking that there are rather more countries included here than in the two-time loser Trump travel ban, and I'm wondering why...


Why? They freely admitted there are more majority-Muslim countries than in the travel bans, so... kudos to them for finally learning their names.
 
2017-03-20 08:41:34 PM  
He's gutting our infrastructure and regressing us back decades in just about every measurable way, but I think he's doing a great job, because he's sticking it to the Mexicans and Moose lambs.
 
2017-03-20 08:44:35 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2017-03-20 08:45:44 PM  

ThatBillmanGuy: Jesus. Why would anyone travel by plane ever?


Because sometimes you have to get somewhere, and don't have time to sail. The question I've been asking is: How are restrictions on flying domestically (that is, not the point of this article, but when are we ever focused on that?) not a violation of the right of peaceable assembly, dammit?

Last I checked, even if the time it takes to go a longer distance than a day's drive was acceptable, neither Amtrak, Greyhound, nor my car could take me to a peaceable assembly in Hawaii.
 
2017-03-20 08:45:48 PM  
Damn, glad I was traveling last month and not this one.

If I wasn't allowed to bring my Kindle I would have been a very unhappy camper since at that point I'd already been traveling more than 36 hours without any actual sleep.  Plus I wouldn't trust my camera, even in a camera bag, in my checked luggage.  Good lenses are really expensive.
 
2017-03-20 08:45:57 PM  

DammitIForgotMyLogin: "Bomb threats" aside, i'm sure it has nothing at all to do with giving border agents the opportunity to covertly check said electronic devices.

Nope. I'm not paranoid at all.


This was exactly my first thought.  If you see the CBP agents open your bags you know your data has been vacuumed up.  If they vacuum all your checked devices, well plausible deniability.  Note that it only applies to foreign flag carriers -- wouldn't want US carriers getting sued for all the high dollar devices that go missing.
 
2017-03-20 08:47:09 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2017-03-20 08:47:17 PM  

optikeye: But, allow them in the check luggage?

This is probably the worse place for a potential fire. At least in a cabin you can put it in a fire bag.



Most cargo holds are not pressurized. Lack of oxygen would put out the fire*.


*assuming oxygen generating devices are not on fire as Valujet crash.
 
2017-03-20 08:48:31 PM  
The TSA agents haven't been able to steal enough iPads / laptops from the checkpoints, so they are insisting they be put into checked luggage?

DOT and IACO both prohibit transporting lithium batteries in the cargo hold, so how's this supposed to work?
 
2017-03-20 08:50:14 PM  

TedCruz'sCrazyDad: optikeye: But, allow them in the check luggage?

This is probably the worse place for a potential fire. At least in a cabin you can put it in a fire bag.


Most cargo holds are not pressurized. Lack of oxygen would put out the fire*.


*assuming oxygen generating devices are not on fire as Valujet crash.


This is absolutely incorrect.  The plane is a pressurized tube.  The floor is a thin insert within the tube, not a pressure bulkhead.  Some cargo areas aren't as well climate controled, which is why pets can't go in some jets on very hot or cold weather days, but they're all pressurized.
 
2017-03-20 08:53:14 PM  

ThatBillmanGuy: Jesus. Why would anyone travel by plane ever? It's getting more ridiculous than it already was. I've probably been charged a fee by American Airlines for typing "travel by plane" in this post.


Visiting another continent by ship would be incredibly time consuming.  My work is fairly generous with vacation time by US standards, but nowhere near THAT generous.
 
2017-03-20 08:53:50 PM  
If the ban doesn't affect American carriers, then this seems to be more about certain foreign airlines than the people in those countries. It raises the questions of: 1) which of their carriers pose risks, and 2) what the fark those risks could be.
 
2017-03-20 08:53:56 PM  
 
2017-03-20 08:55:47 PM  
A lot of devices use Lithium Ion batteries, so aren't likely to be allowed in your checked baggage either.

Have fun getting that laptop hold. Maybe FedEx will take it.
 
2017-03-20 08:56:03 PM  
i like how this was a secret order.. that the public - probably american, wasnt supposed to know about it... which we woulda anyways after the 96 hours was up...

also how it only affects non american airlines to and from those countries. i dont even know what to say here....
 
2017-03-20 09:01:33 PM  

siennaskye: i like how this was a secret order.. that the public - probably american, wasnt supposed to know about it... which we woulda anyways after the 96 hours was up...

also how it only affects non american airlines to and from those countries. i dont even know what to say here....


Might be a good time to throw in a BSAB, shake things up a little.
 
2017-03-20 09:03:46 PM  

midigod: TedCruz'sCrazyDad: Most cargo holds are not pressurized. Lack of oxygen would put out the fire*.

Yes, they are both pressurized and temp controlled, because of some of the "live" cargo they carry (pets, live animals for restaurant menus). Also, some of the larger wide-body aircraft have galley facilities in the cargo hold area that flight attendants have to access during flight.


Not only that there are plenty of simple things that can go off with no oxygen, which I know because I have been helping someone design a rocket (don't ask)
 
2017-03-20 09:05:55 PM  

interstellar_tedium: midigod: TedCruz'sCrazyDad: Most cargo holds are not pressurized. Lack of oxygen would put out the fire*.

Yes, they are both pressurized and temp controlled, because of some of the "live" cargo they carry (pets, live animals for restaurant menus). Also, some of the larger wide-body aircraft have galley facilities in the cargo hold area that flight attendants have to access during flight.

Not only that there are plenty of simple things that can go off with no oxygen, which I know because I have been helping someone design a rocket (don't ask)


Considering your screen name, I'm sure the answer would be boring.
 
2017-03-20 09:06:08 PM  
How doomed is the US tourism industry with all of this?
 
2017-03-20 09:07:05 PM  

born_yesterday: siennaskye: i like how this was a secret order.. that the public - probably american, wasnt supposed to know about it... which we woulda anyways after the 96 hours was up...

also how it only affects non american airlines to and from those countries. i dont even know what to say here....

Might be a good time to throw in a BSAB, shake things up a little.


BSAB?
 
2017-03-20 09:09:18 PM  
Vegas and Disney won't take this stupid shiat on the chin for too long.
 
2017-03-20 09:11:14 PM  

Sum Dum Gai: Visiting another continent by ship would be incredibly time consuming.  My work is fairly generous with vacation time by US standards, but nowhere near THAT generous.


You just made me realize that mine is that generous. Heh. I work for a record label, with no real restrictions on vacation, sick time, etc... which I'm using to drive to Vegas and back instead of flying later this year.

But yeah, I get the obvious reasons why people would still need to fly. Hyperbole aside, I would still probably sail myself to the continent than deal with an airline.
 
2017-03-20 09:12:41 PM  

theToadMan: How doomed is the US tourism industry with all of this?


Not just tourism. Business travel. If I were a professional photographer, I wouldn't trust my camera bodies to checked baggage. Heck, I'm an amateur and wouldn't trust them down there either.
On the other hand, with the wide latitude CPB gets in searches at the border, I probably wouldn't bring a laptop with any valuable business info through Customs anyway.
 
2017-03-20 09:13:55 PM  
And how will they enforce this exactly on foreign carriers flying from outside the US?
 
2017-03-20 09:13:58 PM  

theToadMan: How doomed is the US tourism industry with all of this?


It's all part of the War on Tourism.
 
2017-03-20 09:15:45 PM  

siennaskye: i like how this was a secret order.. that the public - probably american, wasnt supposed to know about it... which we woulda anyways after the 96 hours was up...

also how it only affects non american airlines to and from those countries. i dont even know what to say here....


Assuming these electronics don't get pilfered along the way,  I really don't see them surviving.  I've seen what happens to laptops when a soft sided laptop bag goes through checked baggage. That plane lucked out that the cells didn't rupture.  The laptop had a 20 degree bend down the middle from back to front.  It shattered the mobo, display, keyboard and split the magnesium base assembly.  Please note this was one of exploding battery Dells before the battery got replaced.  So they could have ended up with a combination lithium and magnesium fire in the hold of the plane.
 
2017-03-20 09:17:18 PM  

BumpInTheNight: Oh yah, keep enticing me to visit your vile ass-country with benevolent and well-thought out policies like this.


We are trying to keep you out, hello?
 
2017-03-20 09:17:50 PM  

cyberspacedout: interstellar_tedium: midigod: TedCruz'sCrazyDad: Most cargo holds are not pressurized. Lack of oxygen would put out the fire*.

Yes, they are both pressurized and temp controlled, because of some of the "live" cargo they carry (pets, live animals for restaurant menus). Also, some of the larger wide-body aircraft have galley facilities in the cargo hold area that flight attendants have to access during flight.

Not only that there are plenty of simple things that can go off with no oxygen, which I know because I have been helping someone design a rocket (don't ask)

Considering your screen name, I'm sure the answer would be boring.


Yeah it would.  If I was ever in a car accident or something similar I would look at my life flashing before my eyes and go "man work was really boring, fortunately my family was not"
 
2017-03-20 09:18:01 PM  

born_yesterday: siennaskye: i like how this was a secret order.. that the public - probably american, wasnt supposed to know about it... which we woulda anyways after the 96 hours was up...

also how it only affects non american airlines to and from those countries. i dont even know what to say here....

Might be a good time to throw in a BSAB, shake things up a little.


BSAB?
 
2017-03-20 09:19:25 PM  

cyberspacedout: interstellar_tedium: midigod: TedCruz'sCrazyDad: Most cargo holds are not pressurized. Lack of oxygen would put out the fire*.

Yes, they are both pressurized and temp controlled, because of some of the "live" cargo they carry (pets, live animals for restaurant menus). Also, some of the larger wide-body aircraft have galley facilities in the cargo hold area that flight attendants have to access during flight.

Not only that there are plenty of simple things that can go off with no oxygen, which I know because I have been helping someone design a rocket (don't ask)

Considering your screen name, I'm sure the answer would be boring.


Rockets are never boring.
 
2017-03-20 09:19:30 PM  

Sum Dum Gai: Damn, glad I was traveling last month and not this one.

If I wasn't allowed to bring my Kindle I would have been a very unhappy camper since at that point I'd already been traveling more than 36 hours without any actual sleep.  Plus I wouldn't trust my camera, even in a camera bag, in my checked luggage.  Good lenses are really expensive.


And good lenses are not prohibited, not even by this inane order. You can carry them on board and just bag checkthe camera. Then, the TSA slime farks and filthy fingered baggage handlers will only be able to steal your camera, you'll still have your lenses.
 
2017-03-20 09:20:49 PM  
From what I understood, the ban was for 96 hours, not a permanent ban that the affected airlines had to comply with in 96 hours.
 
2017-03-20 09:21:04 PM  

drjekel_mrhyde: Vegas and Disney won't take this stupid shiat on the chin for too long.


Anectotally, I'm seeing the effects. Went on a Disney (California) vacation this past Feb. with the fam. Two years ago, the hotel we stayed at was absolutely packed with huge families visiting from the Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, etc. This time, the hotel was at, max, 50% capacity and the room rate was $40/night lower than it had been just in December, when I first booked.

The travel bans along with trickling stories of massive harassment at the border by enabled a-hole CBP agents is having a very noticeable effect on areas previously visited by folks from the ME and Africa. There was supposed to be an African trade summit in socal this week but none of the ~100 African delegates could get an entry visa. None of them; mull that over. The effect has been dramatic and is likely to get worse.
 
2017-03-20 09:21:25 PM  

That Guy...From That Show!: BumpInTheNight: Oh yah, keep enticing me to visit your vile ass-country with benevolent and well-thought out policies like this.

We are trying to keep you out, hello?


Trump's slaughter of the domestic tourism industry will be amusing, as someone mentioned above:  You don't fark with Disney.

/white guy
//with a moral compass that isn't pegged south
 
2017-03-20 09:23:24 PM  

pendy575: And how will they enforce this exactly on foreign carriers flying from outside the US?


Often, when I travel overseas, there are TSA agents at the jetway, so I go through a check at the security line and then another at the gate as I am boarding the plane. Those checks are typically random with about 1 in 3 or 4 being checked; I am sure that they can change procedure to check everyone.
 
2017-03-20 09:24:01 PM  
Dang! Just when I got my Switch and the new Zelda. THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!
 
2017-03-20 09:28:28 PM  
I can trust my laptop, camera, and other expensive electronics in my checked luggage? LOL right. I guess no more traveling outside the country for me.
 
2017-03-20 09:28:50 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2017-03-20 09:30:19 PM  

BumpInTheNight: Oh yah, keep enticing me to visit your vile ass-country with benevolent and well-thought out policies like this.  Thank a deplorable appropriately for this absolute garbage.


img.memesuper.com
 
2017-03-20 09:31:11 PM  

FormlessOne: optikeye: But, allow them in the check luggage?

This is probably the worse place for a potential fire. At least in a cabin you can put it in a fire bag.

Yep. This isn't about "lithium battery safety concerns," though. The real question to ask is "which 13 countries?" See, I'm thinking that there are rather more countries included here than in the two-time loser Trump travel ban, and I'm wondering why...


Brown ones.

12+ Middle East and African airlines flying to U.S. covered new security procedures. -U.S. Official.
 
2017-03-20 09:41:44 PM  

BumpInTheNight: Trump's slaughter of the domestic tourism industry will be amusing, as someone mentioned above:  You don't fark with Disney.


Tourism isn't Disney's cash cow, Disney makes far more with products, media, and entertainment.

Disney could shut down Disney World and Disney Land and not even flinch.  They're not about foreign tourism, they're about domestic.
 
2017-03-20 09:44:31 PM  
I didn't know about the exploding Samsung thing until this article. Now the three Samsung commercials about their battery safety I saw tonight make sense.
 
2017-03-20 09:44:37 PM  
The long standing rules require spare lithium batteries to be below 100 watt hours, and require you to have them in your carry on luggage.

Electronic devices with a lithium battery can be checked or carried on.

Large batteries are limited to two per passenger.
 
2017-03-20 09:47:06 PM  

That Guy...From That Show!: Tourism isn't Disney's cash cow, Disney makes far more with products, media, and entertainment.


I don't know, when they open Avatar and Star Wars Land that might not be true.
 
2017-03-20 09:48:15 PM  

siennaskye: i like how this was a secret order.. that the public - probably american, wasnt supposed to know about it... which we woulda anyways after the 96 hours was up...

also how it only affects non american airlines to and from those countries. i dont even know what to say here....


This. A secret order... which the public will know about the exact first time a passenger is denied a device.

If the logic is a tablet sized device could carry a suitably energetic payload to bring down an aircraft, once (if?) battery tech catches up, a friggin pacemaker will be considered an explosive device.
 
2017-03-20 09:53:04 PM  

ThatBillmanGuy: Jesus. Why would anyone travel by plane ever? It's getting more ridiculous than it already was. I've probably been charged a fee by American Airlines for typing "travel by plane" in this post.


I was on the way to the airport to go back home on 9/11. Drove the rental car back home.(1000 miles) Have not flown since.

/Still have the ticket
 
2017-03-20 09:56:39 PM  
The TSA and the fearmongers will stop at nothing to destroy the US tourism industry.
 
2017-03-20 09:56:54 PM  
Thanks Putin.


assholes
 
2017-03-20 10:01:55 PM  

That Guy...From That Show!: BumpInTheNight: Trump's slaughter of the domestic tourism industry will be amusing, as someone mentioned above:  You don't fark with Disney.

Tourism isn't Disney's cash cow, Disney makes far more with products, media, and entertainment.

Disney could shut down Disney World and Disney Land and not even flinch.  They're not about foreign tourism, they're about domestic.


So basically just accept the inevitable surrender of your personal identity then, the state wins.  Good play.
 
2017-03-20 10:02:54 PM  

TedCruz'sCrazyDad: optikeye: But, allow them in the check luggage?

This is probably the worse place for a potential fire. At least in a cabin you can put it in a fire bag.


Most cargo holds are not pressurized. Lack of oxygen would put out the fire*.


*assuming oxygen generating devices are not on fire as Valujet crash.


The pressurization of the aircraft is a structural feature.
 
2017-03-20 10:03:35 PM  

RandyJohnson: ThatBillmanGuy: Jesus. Why would anyone travel by plane ever? It's getting more ridiculous than it already was. I've probably been charged a fee by American Airlines for typing "travel by plane" in this post.

I was on the way to the airport to go back home on 9/11. Drove the rental car back home.(1000 miles) Have not flown since.

/Still have the ticket


Please. Like 9/11 is going to happen again.

/well the date 9/11 will happen again, meant the terror attack
 
2017-03-20 10:08:01 PM  
My peaceful protest is that my cell phone has been on and not in airplane mode for the entirety of more than 100 flights going back more than ten years. It was stupid long before they relaxed the rules and it's still stupid now.

Protip: if there was even a smidgen of an inkling of a possibility that your little electronic thing could take the plane down they would not rely on the honor system to police it.
 
2017-03-20 10:08:30 PM  
...But you can't check into luggage anything with a farking lithium battery... Soooo....
 
2017-03-20 10:14:21 PM  

Spikescape: drjekel_mrhyde: Vegas and Disney won't take this stupid shiat on the chin for too long.

Anectotally, I'm seeing the effects. Went on a Disney (California) vacation this past Feb. with the fam. Two years ago, the hotel we stayed at was absolutely packed with huge families visiting from the Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, etc. This time, the hotel was at, max, 50% capacity and the room rate was $40/night lower than it had been just in December, when I first booked.

The travel bans along with trickling stories of massive harassment at the border by enabled a-hole CBP agents is having a very noticeable effect on areas previously visited by folks from the ME and Africa. There was supposed to be an African trade summit in socal this week but none of the ~100 African delegates could get an entry visa. None of them; mull that over. The effect has been dramatic and is likely to get worse.


Las Vegas doesn't seem to be hurting... yet. I'm getting nervous, as there are 2 million of us in the county who rely in some way, directly or indirectly, on the tourism industry. I rode out the housing crash but it was a pretty terrible time that we're only now recovered from.
 
2017-03-20 10:17:31 PM  

naughtyrev: "Saudi Arabia's Saudia Airlines and Royal Jordanian airlines are among the affected countries; the full list has not been revealed to the affected airlines themselves."

Don't worry, people. In a few years, once the details are hammered out bribes hit the bank accounts, Trump air will gladly fly you from the affected countries to the US with a special prescreening already in place, at on 3 times the cost.


He's one heck of a negotiator, isn't he?
 
2017-03-20 10:18:02 PM  
Guess I won't point out that the Lockerbie bomb was in the checked luggage, not in the cabin.
 
2017-03-20 10:18:55 PM  

Madman drummers bummers: theToadMan: How doomed is the US tourism industry with all of this?

It's all part of the War on Tourism.


It's part of the Republican laser-like focus on jobs.
 
2017-03-20 10:25:48 PM  

Mugato: I didn't know about the exploding Samsung thing until this article. Now the three Samsung commercials about their battery safety I saw tonight make sense.


What's it like on the international space station? That's a pretty old global strory man. I'd put it above just international, like global
 
2017-03-20 10:27:13 PM  

That Guy...From That Show!: BumpInTheNight: Trump's slaughter of the domestic tourism industry will be amusing, as someone mentioned above:  You don't fark with Disney.

Tourism isn't Disney's cash cow, Disney makes far more with products, media, and entertainment.

Disney could shut down Disney World and Disney Land and not even flinch.  They're not about foreign tourism, they're about domestic.


Not for long.  The brand has placed too much identity on having a magical place to visit, even if a fan never goes.
 
2017-03-20 10:27:52 PM  

TorpedoOrca: Mugato: I didn't know about the exploding Samsung thing until this article. Now the three Samsung commercials about their battery safety I saw tonight make sense.

What's it like on the international space station? That's a pretty old global strory man. I'd put it above just international, like global


What can I say, if it's not about movies I'm not really a current events guy.
 
2017-03-20 10:28:47 PM  
TSA may be on to something with Samsung lol
 
2017-03-20 10:30:24 PM  
This is reminiscent of the GWB era of keeping people scared.  Whenever something went ugly in politics and Karl Rove needed to keep the base scared, all of a sudden there was a "new threat" and the TSA "needed" to do extra security measures.
 
2017-03-20 10:31:46 PM  
I Predict A Riot

planetill.com
 
2017-03-20 10:32:37 PM  

That Guy...From That Show!: BumpInTheNight: Trump's slaughter of the domestic tourism industry will be amusing, as someone mentioned above:  You don't fark with Disney.

Tourism isn't Disney's cash cow, Disney makes far more with products, media, and entertainment.

Disney could shut down Disney World and Disney Land and not even flinch.  They're not about foreign tourism, they're about domestic.


I think the owners of all the half-empty hotels and restaurants in Anaheim and Orlando might have something to say about it.  Convention center booking offices, cab drivers, other them parks, you name it.  I bet we'll see local sales tax revenue evaporating in these places.  Look out for Great Recession 2.0.
 
2017-03-20 10:33:52 PM  
And funny how those countries where Donnie does business wasn't on his Muslim travel ban list, and now Saudia Airlines is among the 13 airlines.
 
2017-03-20 10:34:40 PM  

LessO2: This is reminiscent of the GWB era of keeping people scared.  Whenever something went ugly in politics and Karl Rove needed to keep the base scared, all of a sudden there was a "new threat" and the TSA "needed" to do extra security measures.


I think we're at "Orange Alert".

img.fark.net

/At least since 1.20.17
 
2017-03-20 10:35:22 PM  

whatisaidwas: That Guy...From That Show!: BumpInTheNight: Trump's slaughter of the domestic tourism industry will be amusing, as someone mentioned above:  You don't fark with Disney.

Tourism isn't Disney's cash cow, Disney makes far more with products, media, and entertainment.

Disney could shut down Disney World and Disney Land and not even flinch.  They're not about foreign tourism, they're about domestic.

I think the owners of all the half-empty hotels and restaurants in Anaheim and Orlando might have something to say about it.  Convention center booking offices, cab drivers, other them parks, you name it.  I bet we'll see local sales tax revenue evaporating in these places.  Look out for Great Recession 2.0.


And a lot quicker than people thought.
 
2017-03-20 10:37:07 PM  
The only people regularly flying Saudi Air are middle managers and higher at oil and financial companies and Saudi royalty. So this ban will basically last an hour, until the first guy with a 7-figure salary and actual shiat to do gets inconvenienced.
 
2017-03-20 10:37:49 PM  

whatisaidwas: That Guy...From That Show!: BumpInTheNight: Trump's slaughter of the domestic tourism industry will be amusing, as someone mentioned above:  You don't fark with Disney.

Tourism isn't Disney's cash cow, Disney makes far more with products, media, and entertainment.

Disney could shut down Disney World and Disney Land and not even flinch.  They're not about foreign tourism, they're about domestic.

I think the owners of all the half-empty hotels and restaurants in Anaheim and Orlando might have something to say about it.  Convention center booking offices, cab drivers, other them parks, you name it.  I bet we'll see local sales tax revenue evaporating in these places.  Look out for Great Recession 2.0.


Looks like the point was about The Mouse, not the hotels nearby.  But yes, that's true about the collateral damage.

The Mouse is already losing enough money with ESPN.  Slower park attendance would mean less $30 Mickey Mouse ears sold, and after awhile they WILL say something.
 
2017-03-20 10:39:24 PM  

whatisaidwas: LessO2: This is reminiscent of the GWB era of keeping people scared.  Whenever something went ugly in politics and Karl Rove needed to keep the base scared, all of a sudden there was a "new threat" and the TSA "needed" to do extra security measures.

I think we're at "Orange Alert".

[img.fark.net image 620x350]

/At least since 1.20.17


You mean "Ernie"

img.fark.net
 
2017-03-20 10:40:10 PM  

JohnBigBootay: My peaceful protest is that my cell phone has been on and not in airplane mode for the entirety of more than 100 flights going back more than ten years. It was stupid long before they relaxed the rules and it's still stupid now.

Protip: if there was even a smidgen of an inkling of a possibility that your little electronic thing could take the plane down they would not rely on the honor system to police it.


Have they ever said that a plane could be taken down that way? Could it be that, apart from a "OMG! You're gonna crash the plane! TURN THAT OFF!" reason, there might be a simpler, less crashy reason having to do with communications, etc?

I'm not trolling...I honestly don't know why they do it...but I've never exactly heard that it threatened the ability of the plane to stay airborne. And it's probably not due to spite or stigginit, as they will do anything to keep their first-class customers first-class customers.
 
2017-03-20 10:42:01 PM  

JohnBigBootay: My peaceful protest is that my cell phone has been on and not in airplane mode for the entirety of more than 100 flights going back more than ten years. It was stupid long before they relaxed the rules and it's still stupid now.

Protip: if there was even a smidgen of an inkling of a possibility that your little electronic thing could take the plane down they would not rely on the honor system to police it.


You should rethink that.  The plane is fine, but do you know how much battery you're going to waste pinging every cell tower from NY to LA?
 
2017-03-20 10:44:14 PM  
By Monday afternoon, a US official had briefed Reuters that the ban followed a "terrorism threat" and was expected to be announced on Tuesday.

Given the news today with the Russia hearing, I find that timing very interesting. What better way to divert attention, well, other than an actual terrorist attack.

Last time I flow out of Dubai into the US, all carryon luggage was opened and thoroughly searched at the gate. I'm guessing that's what'll happen for all flights coming in from those countries. That's bullshiat.
 
2017-03-20 10:44:18 PM  

seelorq: JohnBigBootay: My peaceful protest is that my cell phone has been on and not in airplane mode for the entirety of more than 100 flights going back more than ten years. It was stupid long before they relaxed the rules and it's still stupid now.

Protip: if there was even a smidgen of an inkling of a possibility that your little electronic thing could take the plane down they would not rely on the honor system to police it.

Have they ever said that a plane could be taken down that way? Could it be that, apart from a "OMG! You're gonna crash the plane! TURN THAT OFF!" reason, there might be a simpler, less crashy reason having to do with communications, etc?

I'm not trolling...I honestly don't know why they do it...but I've never exactly heard that it threatened the ability of the plane to stay airborne. And it's probably not due to spite or stigginit, as they will do anything to keep their first-class customers first-class customers.


The "logic" and reason was always with communication and navigation.   The communication with the radios (even though they're on an entirely different frequency), and navigation when they are doing an ILS approach and landing.

JohnBigBootay has probably experienced a lot of several drained batteries because cell phones hurtling at ~525 mph seven to eight miles above the surface somehow can't latch onto a cell tower and properly hand off to the next tower.
 
2017-03-20 10:46:44 PM  

seelorq: JohnBigBootay: My peaceful protest is that my cell phone has been on and not in airplane mode for the entirety of more than 100 flights going back more than ten years. It was stupid long before they relaxed the rules and it's still stupid now.

Protip: if there was even a smidgen of an inkling of a possibility that your little electronic thing could take the plane down they would not rely on the honor system to police it.

Have they ever said that a plane could be taken down that way? Could it be that, apart from a "OMG! You're gonna crash the plane! TURN THAT OFF!" reason, there might be a simpler, less crashy reason having to do with communications, etc?

I'm not trolling...I honestly don't know why they do it...but I've never exactly heard that it threatened the ability of the plane to stay airborne. And it's probably not due to spite or stigginit, as they will do anything to keep their first-class customers first-class customers.


According to my sister the pilot, the first cell phones had the potential to interfere with certain flight instruments during pre-takeoff which could have endangered the takeoff procedure.

That is no longer true, with better cell phone shielding and different electronics in the cockpit, so who knows why they do it now.
 
2017-03-20 10:50:45 PM  

EmmaLou: Last time I flow out of Dubai into the US, all carryon luggage was opened and thoroughly searched at the gate. I'm guessing that's what'll happen for all flights coming in from those countries. That's bullshiat.


The last few times I flew out of LHR, I got the TSA-issued pat down (I know it's not TSA out there, but they're the assholes who ordered it).  Probably because when American Airlines processed my upgrade, they had to re-ticket my itinerary, and there's likely a red flag for <24 hour ticketing to the U.S. from London.

I used to avoid going through Heathrow when they were doing the one bag carry-on nonsense.  When they unpuckered their butt cheeks and allowed the usual two, then I reluctantly flew through there again.  Then this apparent glitch with the upgrades on AA.  Screw them, the LHR fees are some of the most outrageous in the world.  Those who fly Speedbird and try to redeem miles know well about redeeming miles for "free" flights.
 
2017-03-20 10:56:15 PM  

DammitIForgotMyLogin: "Bomb threats" aside, i'm sure it has nothing at all to do with giving border agents the opportunity to covertly check said electronic devices.

Nope. I'm not paranoid at all.


It's not paranoia if the government has a recorded history of doing this.
 
2017-03-20 11:07:37 PM  

Action Replay Nick: Seems like a totally pointless dick move to discourage brown people from visiting the US, or to put it another way, "what half the country wants".


They've been turning back a bunch of [white] Canadians the last few weeks too, Nearly all of the Canadians (of nearly all the colours) that I know are taking a pass on unnecessary US Travel and all they can to get out of the necessary until these shenanigans are undone by a President with some semblance of common sense...
 
2017-03-20 11:08:55 PM  

scandalrag: JohnBigBootay: My peaceful protest is that my cell phone has been on and not in airplane mode for the entirety of more than 100 flights going back more than ten years. It was stupid long before they relaxed the rules and it's still stupid now.

Protip: if there was even a smidgen of an inkling of a possibility that your little electronic thing could take the plane down they would not rely on the honor system to police it.

You should rethink that.  The plane is fine, but do you know how much battery you're going to waste pinging every cell tower from NY to LA?


I don't think it pings shiat over a certain altitude. But it didn't matter anyway. 90 percent are sea-sjc, two hour flight.
 
2017-03-20 11:14:19 PM  
I tried to get by the lithium battery thing by having my laptop powered by hamsters on exercise wheels, but now I've got the ASPCA and the TSA giving me a hard time.
 
2017-03-20 11:20:58 PM  

seelorq: JohnBigBootay: My peaceful protest is that my cell phone has been on and not in airplane mode for the entirety of more than 100 flights going back more than ten years. It was stupid long before they relaxed the rules and it's still stupid now.

Protip: if there was even a smidgen of an inkling of a possibility that your little electronic thing could take the plane down they would not rely on the honor system to police it.

Have they ever said that a plane could be taken down that way? Could it be that, apart from a "OMG! You're gonna crash the plane! TURN THAT OFF!" reason, there might be a simpler, less crashy reason having to do with communications, etc?

I'm not trolling...I honestly don't know why they do it...but I've never exactly heard that it threatened the ability of the plane to stay airborne. And it's probably not due to spite or stigginit, as they will do anything to keep their first-class customers first-class customers.


Well, look at it this way. Even if accidentally, or failure to understand English, or on purpose like me I think we can all agree that over the last decade millions of phones have been left on during flights many many thousands of flights. At least. (I think there are over a million people in the air every day in the US). How many, 'something went wrong with the flight because a guy left his cell phone on?' stories have you seen? Never heard of one but I'm not saying there's none. I'm saying it's sure as hell is not common and if it ever was a problem it's not now. Because they let you leave your phone on now. Do you think they just completed some huge technological achievement that now makes it safe? Or maybe just that it's been safe as houses for years but huge industries move very slowly when it comes to lifting inane restrictions.
 
2017-03-20 11:24:22 PM  

Gyrfalcon: seelorq: JohnBigBootay: My peaceful protest is that my cell phone has been on and not in airplane mode for the entirety of more than 100 flights going back more than ten years. It was stupid long before they relaxed the rules and it's still stupid now.

Protip: if there was even a smidgen of an inkling of a possibility that your little electronic thing could take the plane down they would not rely on the honor system to police it.

Have they ever said that a plane could be taken down that way? Could it be that, apart from a "OMG! You're gonna crash the plane! TURN THAT OFF!" reason, there might be a simpler, less crashy reason having to do with communications, etc?

I'm not trolling...I honestly don't know why they do it...but I've never exactly heard that it threatened the ability of the plane to stay airborne. And it's probably not due to spite or stigginit, as they will do anything to keep their first-class customers first-class customers.

According to my sister the pilot, the first cell phones had the potential to interfere with certain flight instruments during pre-takeoff which could have endangered the takeoff procedure.

That is no longer true, with better cell phone shielding and different electronics in the cockpit, so who knows why they do it now.


Because between babies crying (thinking their heads are going to blow out their ears)and the fat person next to you having their fat rolls taking over the armrest, do we really need to factor in all the assholes talking on their phones too?
 
2017-03-20 11:28:39 PM  
Wait! Galaxy s7 explodes? Either I missed the memo or subby is making shiat up.
 
2017-03-20 11:34:18 PM  

Mister Buttons: Gyrfalcon: seelorq: JohnBigBootay: My peaceful protest is that my cell phone has been on and not in airplane mode for the entirety of more than 100 flights going back more than ten years. It was stupid long before they relaxed the rules and it's still stupid now.

Protip: if there was even a smidgen of an inkling of a possibility that your little electronic thing could take the plane down they would not rely on the honor system to police it.

Have they ever said that a plane could be taken down that way? Could it be that, apart from a "OMG! You're gonna crash the plane! TURN THAT OFF!" reason, there might be a simpler, less crashy reason having to do with communications, etc?

I'm not trolling...I honestly don't know why they do it...but I've never exactly heard that it threatened the ability of the plane to stay airborne. And it's probably not due to spite or stigginit, as they will do anything to keep their first-class customers first-class customers.

According to my sister the pilot, the first cell phones had the potential to interfere with certain flight instruments during pre-takeoff which could have endangered the takeoff procedure.

That is no longer true, with better cell phone shielding and different electronics in the cockpit, so who knows why they do it now.

Because between babies crying (thinking their heads are going to blow out their ears)and the fat person next to you having their fat rolls taking over the armrest, do we really need to factor in all the assholes talking on their phones too?


The assholes are way ahead of you man.

img.fark.net
 
2017-03-20 11:35:12 PM  
Whatever.  I'll be in a wheel-well with all the snacks and devices I can carry.
 
2017-03-20 11:36:19 PM  
JohnBigBootay:
Well, look at it this way. Even if accidentally, or failure to understand English, or on purpose like me I think we can all agree that over the last decade millions of phones have been left on during flights many many thousands of flights. At least. (I think there are over a million people in the air every day in the US). How many, 'something went wrong with the flight because a guy left his cell phone on?' stories have you seen? Never heard of one but I'm not saying there's none. I'm saying it's sure as hell is not common and if it ever was a problem it's not now. Because they let you leave your phone on now. Do you think they just completed some huge technological achievement that now makes it safe? Or maybe just that it's been safe as houses for years but huge industries move very slowly when it comes to lifting inane restrictions.

Agreed. I don't know how many (if any) incidents may have happened in the past, but there was enough of something that they got an entire industry to add "airplane mode" to their devices (as noted by Gyrfalcon upthread). And since then, it has been apparently reconciled by, well, significanttechnological achievement.
 
2017-03-20 11:42:05 PM  

seelorq: And since then, it has been apparently reconciled by, well, significanttechnological achievement.


Of course, I meant, Significanttechnologicalachievement, from the German, Grossefettetechnologischleistung.
 
2017-03-20 11:50:02 PM  
HOw about banning all fatness that pours over into your seat.
 
2017-03-20 11:54:02 PM  

seelorq: JohnBigBootay: My peaceful protest is that my cell phone has been on and not in airplane mode for the entirety of more than 100 flights going back more than ten years. It was stupid long before they relaxed the rules and it's still stupid now.

Protip: if there was even a smidgen of an inkling of a possibility that your little electronic thing could take the plane down they would not rely on the honor system to police it.

Have they ever said that a plane could be taken down that way? Could it be that, apart from a "OMG! You're gonna crash the plane! TURN THAT OFF!" reason, there might be a simpler, less crashy reason having to do with communications, etc?

I'm not trolling...I honestly don't know why they do it...but I've never exactly heard that it threatened the ability of the plane to stay airborne. And it's probably not due to spite or stigginit, as they will do anything to keep their first-class customers first-class customers.


The ban actually isn't because of problems with the plane at all.  The ban isn't from the FAA - which actually has no policy about cell phone usage on planes - it's from the FCC, and the original rationale had to do with a phone rapidly moving between base stations or trying to connect to multiple base stations at once.  They didn't think it would potentially disrupt airplane electronics, they thought it would potentially disrupt the cellular network.
 
2017-03-21 12:10:16 AM  
Ah. More rules to address the paranoia of hideously overpaid old white males in suits.
 
2017-03-21 12:22:27 AM  

Sum Dum Gai: Damn, glad I was traveling last month and not this one.

If I wasn't allowed to bring my Kindle I would have been a very unhappy camper since at that point I'd already been traveling more than 36 hours without any actual sleep.  Plus I wouldn't trust my camera, even in a camera bag, in my checked luggage.  Good lenses are really expensive.


Someone should invent a way to bring reading material in a non-electronic form with you.
 
2017-03-21 12:25:23 AM  

LessO2: This is reminiscent of the GWB era of keeping people scared.  Whenever something went ugly in politics and Karl Rove needed to keep the base scared, all of a sudden there was a "new threat" and the TSA "needed" to do extra security measures.


Maybe they are enraged over a youtube clip.  Your prophet Barack Hussein Obama PBUH liked to use that one ...........
 
2017-03-21 12:26:36 AM  

ThatBillmanGuy: Jesus. Why would anyone travel by plane ever? It's getting more ridiculous than it already was. I've probably been charged a fee by American Airlines for typing "travel by plane" in this post.


Charlie checked his bags in Austin, flew to New York City,
And connected for Bangor, Maine.
When he got there, the attendant told him, "ninety more dollars" --
Charlie couldn't get off that plane!
But did he ever return, no, he never returned,
And his fate is still unlearned.
He may fly forever in the skies of America,
He's the man who never returned.
 
2017-03-21 12:35:59 AM  

Camus27: Sum Dum Gai: Damn, glad I was traveling last month and not this one.

If I wasn't allowed to bring my Kindle I would have been a very unhappy camper since at that point I'd already been traveling more than 36 hours without any actual sleep.  Plus I wouldn't trust my camera, even in a camera bag, in my checked luggage.  Good lenses are really expensive.

Someone should invent a way to bring reading material in a non-electronic form with you.


I was out backpacking for two weeks, so the Kindle had the advantages of being lighter and smaller than a comparable amount of books, and I could use it after dark without wasting valuable battery life on my headlamp.
 
2017-03-21 12:38:44 AM  

Sum Dum Gai: seelorq:
The ban actually isn't because of problems with the plane at all.  The ban isn't from the FAA - which actually has no policy about cell phone usage on planes - it's from the FCC, and the original rationale had to do with a phone rapidly moving between base stations or trying to connect to multiple base stations at once.  They didn't think it would potentially disrupt airplane electronics, they thought it would potentially disrupt the cellular network.


OK...thanks to you and the other farkers who addressed this upthread.
 
2017-03-21 12:53:25 AM  

robert byrd non-racist democrat: LessO2: This is reminiscent of the GWB era of keeping people scared.  Whenever something went ugly in politics and Karl Rove needed to keep the base scared, all of a sudden there was a "new threat" and the TSA "needed" to do extra security measures.

Maybe they are enraged over a youtube clip.  Your prophet Barack Hussein Obama PBUH liked to use that one ...........


I always liked B. HUSSEIN Obama, personally.

Well, that and Fartbongo.
 
2017-03-21 01:04:32 AM  
Excellent news. Also, David Rockefeller died.

(wink)
 
2017-03-21 01:12:46 AM  
Ugh, once this sets in, the rest of the world will soon follow suit.
 
2017-03-21 01:14:36 AM  

LessO2: robert byrd non-racist democrat: LessO2: This is reminiscent of the GWB era of keeping people scared.  Whenever something went ugly in politics and Karl Rove needed to keep the base scared, all of a sudden there was a "new threat" and the TSA "needed" to do extra security measures.

Maybe they are enraged over a youtube clip.  Your prophet Barack Hussein Obama PBUH liked to use that one ...........

I always liked B. HUSSEIN Obama, personally.

Well, that and Fartbongo.


It's really sad that trolls are recycling the old memes.
 
2017-03-21 01:57:13 AM  

robert byrd non-racist democrat: LessO2: This is reminiscent of the GWB era of keeping people scared.  Whenever something went ugly in politics and Karl Rove needed to keep the base scared, all of a sudden there was a "new threat" and the TSA "needed" to do extra security measures.

Maybe they are enraged over a youtube clip.  Your prophet Barack Hussein Obama PBUH liked to use that one ...........


Ooooo!!! B.HUSSIEN is a scary Moozlum. So edgy. So bold. Suck that little Cheeto harder, and maybe you'll MAGA.
 
2017-03-21 02:02:19 AM  

ThatBillmanGuy: Jesus. Why would anyone travel by plane ever? It's getting more ridiculous than it already was.


Part of implementing a successful totalitarian regime is convincing the ordinary citizens that they have no good reason to leave the country, or that it would be too much of a hassle.  I imagine most North Koreans say the same thing about air travel.
 
2017-03-21 02:18:08 AM  

Plant Rights Activist: ThatBillmanGuy: Jesus. Why would anyone travel by plane ever? It's getting more ridiculous than it already was. I've probably been charged a fee by American Airlines for typing "travel by plane" in this post.

I only travel by dirigible.


img.fark.net

Smoke 'em if you've got 'em!
 
2017-03-21 02:22:26 AM  

LessO2: whatisaidwas: That Guy...From That Show!: BumpInTheNight: Trump's slaughter of the domestic tourism industry will be amusing, as someone mentioned above:  You don't fark with Disney.

Tourism isn't Disney's cash cow, Disney makes far more with products, media, and entertainment.

Disney could shut down Disney World and Disney Land and not even flinch.  They're not about foreign tourism, they're about domestic.

I think the owners of all the half-empty hotels and restaurants in Anaheim and Orlando might have something to say about it.  Convention center booking offices, cab drivers, other them parks, you name it.  I bet we'll see local sales tax revenue evaporating in these places.  Look out for Great Recession 2.0.

Looks like the point was about The Mouse, not the hotels nearby.  But yes, that's true about the collateral damage.

The Mouse is already losing enough money with ESPN.  Slower park attendance would mean less $30 Mickey Mouse ears sold, and after awhile they WILL say something.


Exactly, the others completely missed the point.
 
2017-03-21 02:31:46 AM  

Sugarbombs: That Guy...From That Show!: BumpInTheNight: Trump's slaughter of the domestic tourism industry will be amusing, as someone mentioned above:  You don't fark with Disney.

Tourism isn't Disney's cash cow, Disney makes far more with products, media, and entertainment.

Disney could shut down Disney World and Disney Land and not even flinch.  They're not about foreign tourism, they're about domestic.

Not for long.  The brand has placed too much identity on having a magical place to visit, even if a fan never goes.


That is incorrect.  Disney owns far to much to worry about the loss of Disney World and Disney Land.  They are useful for domestic advertisement but not foreign.  It's not like everyone in China wakes up in the morning and thinks 'my life would be complete if i visited Disney Land.'

You're being totally silly believing that to be true Sugarbombs.
 
2017-03-21 02:33:46 AM  

ThreadSinger: siennaskye: i like how this was a secret order.. that the public - probably american, wasnt supposed to know about it... which we woulda anyways after the 96 hours was up...

also how it only affects non american airlines to and from those countries. i dont even know what to say here....

This. A secret order... which the public will know about the exact first time a passenger is denied a device.

If the logic is a tablet sized device could carry a suitably energetic payload to bring down an aircraft, once (if?) battery tech catches up, a friggin pacemaker will be considered an explosive device.


Then you'll have to check your pacemaker before boarding.  Simple!
 
2017-03-21 04:13:58 AM  

Spermbot: cyberspacedout: interstellar_tedium: midigod: TedCruz'sCrazyDad: Most cargo holds are not pressurized. Lack of oxygen would put out the fire*.

Yes, they are both pressurized and temp controlled, because of some of the "live" cargo they carry (pets, live animals for restaurant menus). Also, some of the larger wide-body aircraft have galley facilities in the cargo hold area that flight attendants have to access during flight.

Not only that there are plenty of simple things that can go off with no oxygen, which I know because I have been helping someone design a rocket (don't ask)

Considering your screen name, I'm sure the answer would be boring.

Rockets are never boring.


Depends which way they're pointing.
 
2017-03-21 05:36:45 AM  

That Guy...From That Show!: Sugarbombs: That Guy...From That Show!: BumpInTheNight: Trump's slaughter of the domestic tourism industry will be amusing, as someone mentioned above:  You don't fark with Disney.

Tourism isn't Disney's cash cow, Disney makes far more with products, media, and entertainment.

Disney could shut down Disney World and Disney Land and not even flinch.  They're not about foreign tourism, they're about domestic.

Not for long.  The brand has placed too much identity on having a magical place to visit, even if a fan never goes.

That is incorrect.  Disney owns far to much to worry about the loss of Disney World and Disney Land.  They are useful for domestic advertisement but not foreign.  It's not like everyone in China wakes up in the morning and thinks 'my life would be complete if i visited Disney Land.'

You're being totally silly believing that to be true Sugarbombs.


Given that MCO is full of families, some still dressed in pajamas, at 5 am trying to make their jump to JFK/BOS for points east of the pond, I'm going to have to pull the physical evidence card on you.  It's a pain in the butt when trying to do business travel, but it is kind of hilarious to see princess wands being placed on the belt for screening.  The security bump from gold status is kind of worthless, too, since many international connections get to go through the first class line as well.
 
2017-03-21 07:42:49 AM  

pendy575: And how will they enforce this exactly on foreign carriers flying from outside the US?


A few months ago American carriers in airports in other countries had already been cordoned off.  You get your ID checked by "security" aka as the army Before you get to the checkin counter and then once again to get In the gate.  They are in their own section of the airport now.  I bet they did the same thing for the parts of the airport you can't see.

And I live on an island so I'm not sure how I get to Point B without flying when I don't own a damn yacht?
 
2017-03-21 07:43:45 AM  
More f**king amateur hour.
Thanks. Drumft.
 
2017-03-21 08:46:20 AM  

That Guy...From That Show!: Sugarbombs: That Guy...From That Show!: BumpInTheNight: Trump's slaughter of the domestic tourism industry will be amusing, as someone mentioned above:  You don't fark with Disney.

Tourism isn't Disney's cash cow, Disney makes far more with products, media, and entertainment.

Disney could shut down Disney World and Disney Land and not even flinch.  They're not about foreign tourism, they're about domestic.

Not for long.  The brand has placed too much identity on having a magical place to visit, even if a fan never goes.

That is incorrect.  Disney owns far to much to worry about the loss of Disney World and Disney Land.  They are useful for domestic advertisement but not foreign.  It's not like everyone in China wakes up in the morning and thinks 'my life would be complete if i visited Disney Land.'

You're being totally silly believing that to be true Sugarbombs.


In the first quarter of 2016 the collective parks accounted for 28% of total revenue - not a complete reliance but a pretty important component of their operating model.  Of course, if anyone here has a hundred bucks in their wallet (or in mom's purse) I'm happy to take $28 off their hands since it's not that big of a deal.

https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/the-walt-disney-company-reports-reco​r​d-quarterly-earnings-for-the-first-quarter-of-fiscal-2016/
 
2017-03-21 10:40:34 AM  

dentalhilljack: In the first quarter of 2016 the collective parks accounted for 28% of total revenue - not a complete reliance but a pretty important component of their operating model.  Of course, if anyone here has a hundred bucks in their wallet (or in mom's purse) I'm happy to take $28 off their hands since it's not that big of a deal.


Exactly.  Once someone has that much profit/wealth, them losing 1 out of 4 dollars isn't a huge deal.  They already have far more money than they need.

Well said.
 
2017-03-21 04:32:36 PM  
This seems like such a trivial inconvenience for laptop-bomber terrorists. Now they'll have change planes on a layover in a non-banned country if they want to detonate in the passenger compartment. Since they strike once every, what, never happened before? They'll inconvience maybe one terrorist by a couple hours once a century, while inconviencing hundreds of millions of non-terrorists every year.
 
2017-03-21 05:07:14 PM  

T Baggins: This seems like such a trivial inconvenience for laptop-bomber terrorists. Now they'll have change planes on a layover in a non-banned country if they want to detonate in the passenger compartment. Since they strike once every, what, never happened before? They'll inconvience maybe one terrorist by a couple hours once a century, while inconviencing hundreds of millions of non-terrorists every year.


Actually there was one, they think it was his laptop... Guy blew a whole not quite big enough for a person in the side of the plane, and went through it anyway, because (science!) cabin pressure.
No one else was even injured, the plane landed safely.
 
Displayed 127 of 127 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report