STOCK UP: Don't say you weren't warned! (US)

[Ghoul]

They're still not identifying specific materials at the molecular level. They're identifying the density of a material and the relative absorption of high and low level xrays. Yes, it can be tuned to identify materials, but it can also be defeated. The manufacturer is pretty specific that this device is tuned to identify explosives and is marketed at baggage handling. It's in the name of the products themselves, "Explosives Detection System".

It's quite a large logical leap to presume that this technology will stem the flow of packages into the US any time in the near future. Sure, the de minimis ruling allows for direct shipments of packages to individuals in the US via air freight. At some point, that may be compromised, but that's years away and once compromised we're presuming that the technology can't be defeated or that there aren't alternative ingress routes.

Ultimately, I think the real issue is that importers are avoiding duties, which leads me to wonder whether simply declaring something on the declaration "cosmetics" and paying a nominal duty would avert a great deal of scrutiny.

Here's how I expect it will go:

It's not a logical leap at all. It's not "tuned" to anything, as if explosives all share some signature the machine is detecting. Half the banned liquids aren't even explosives, like bleach, acids, poisons. It detects whatever algorithms it's loaded with, and it's not as if that's limited in any serious way. While TSA may not be looking for drugs. and as a matter of policy not load the "cocaine algorithm" that hardly means it's not capable of it.

I'm not sure where you get "they can be fooled" from, because if you know that's possible, so would an attacker intent on blowing up an aircraft, setting up the switch to these machines to be a colossal disaster.

But those relatively simple machines, are a non-sequiter, since that's not what customs would use. In fact, the video points out checked baggage scanners are more advanced, using SPECTRAL CT. Instead of 2 x-ray powers, those are capable of switching between thousands of power levels, along with backscatter detectors capable of identifying the relative proportions of mixed powders in a bag. They can easily discern varieties of beer.

The fact that even without spectral power hundreds of substances that are 97-99% water can be discerned from each other doesn't constitute "identifying materials at the molecular level" according to you just shows how much in denial you are.

Using the more
sophisticated units equipped with spectral power, backscatter, density, 3d modeling, and AI analysis I'd love to hear what it is you think can't be detected with that rich set of data and why.

Just a short while ago you insisted a vial of steroids in castor oil could not possibly be identified by X-rays, a liquid with 25% testosterone content for instance, and would at best be seen as castor oil and nothing else. Yet even the lowest end machines for carry ons can discern 97% water, in a steel container, with just 3% hydrogen peroxide, from the same bottle with 3% fruit juice, or 3% Sulfuric acid.

Look, even the guy who made this video, an engineering expert, was taken aback by the capabilities of these devices and how quickly things have progressed. Most people, including myself were unaware of what these devices can do. Just 3 years ago papers were discussing these capabilities as some future tech still on the drawing board. Yet today, many companies are advertising their machines as having these capabilities ready to use, and it's happened at a very surprising pace.

Not just for uses like customs, that's actually a minor use relative to everything else, but pharma is using it to test tablets for the amount of active ingredient. Hospitals are beginning to analyze the content of blood samples with spectral x-rays and AI.

 

[iris]

Ohh okay!

Lol.
I hope you stick around if only because you keep Ghoul busy.
Like a little chihuahua chasing him around and driving him mad.

 

[Ghoul]

Lol.
I hope you stick around if only because you keep Ghoul busy.
Like a little chihuahua chasing him around and driving him mad.

MESO members seem to allow a week from join date for Tren to wear off and newbies to settle down into a more respectful mode, before really laying into them if they keep spouting off. We'll see how things are on Tuesday...

 

[iris]

MESO members seem to allow a week from join date for Tren to wear off and newbies to settle down into a more respectful mode, before really laying into them if they keep spouting off. We'll see how things are on Tuesday...

I bet there's no tren there.
Lexington is #nattyforever.
And that's your problem.

 

[bigMoJo]

Ok @Ghoul , you win... so what now? This is the kind of sh** that caused unnecessary toilet paper shortages during covid. Sh**ing yourself wasn't a vid symptom. Anyone who watched "Contagion" (good movie by the way), was out buying up all the medical supplies and TP. I didn't spend too much time researching Smith's Detection, but it looks like the TSA approved this tech back in 2014... is that your read too?

 

[egruberman]

It's not a logical leap at all. It's not "tuned" to anything, as if explosives all share some signature the machine is detecting. Half the banned liquids aren't even explosives, like bleach, acids, poisons. It detects whatever algorithms it's loaded with, and it's not as if that's limited in any serious way. While TSA may not be looking for drugs. and as a matter of policy not load the "cocaine algorithm" that hardly means it's not capable of it.

The product as manufactured is oriented to a specific use case, which is what I mean by "tuned". The technology could be applied to material detection for customs purposes, but so far, it has not. The logical leap is to suggest that this technology will make it more difficult or more expensive for the folks on this forum to source their gear. It's plausible, for sure, but years away at minimum.

What is also some years away, is the failure of China as a nation state. An economic collapse is imminent. The country as a whole is leveraged by an order of magnitude or more greater than the US during the 2008 financial crisis. The country is wholly dependent on imports to feed its population and sustain growth. I fear that'll have a greater impact on supply than any tech implemented by customs.

I'm not sure where you get "they can be fooled" from, because if you know that's possible, so would an attacker intent on blowing up an aircraft, setting up the switch to these machines to be a colossal disaster.

There's plenty of anecdotes about people able to defeat detection by these machines. There's also plenty of anecdotes about them breaking down. I'm not debating whether or not the technology itself can be used to precisely identify materials. My assertion is that the implementation will likely be lacking.

They can easily discern varieties of beer.

Yes, they can easily discern two different containers of liquid with different densities. Can they tell me what hop variety was used?

Instead of 2 x-ray powers, those are capable of switching between thousands of power levels, along with backscatter detectors capable of identifying the relative proportions of mixed powders in a bag.

Yes, with enough time and in the right conditions, a great deal of precision can be achieved with this technology.

The fact that even without spectral power hundreds of substances that are 97-99% water can be discerned from each other doesn't constitute "identifying materials at the molecular level" according to you just shows how much in denial you are.

Again, it can identify the density of materials with a degree of precision, which of course is dependent on the atomic number of the elements from which the material is comprised. With enough resolution it can identify the density of components in a heterogenous mixture, like a tablet with fillers or whatever. But a material can be homogenous and be comprised of a number of different components of varying densities in an endless combination that will alter the density of the final product. A clever person could use this information to evade detection, though of course there would be limitations.

Look, even the guy who made this video, an engineering expert, was taken aback by the capabilities of these devices and how quickly things have progressed.

You're impressed, I get it. The engineer that made the video is impressed as well, looks like he's in love with the technology. I for one am not impressed. The capability has existed for quite some time, a little over 50 years. Frankly, I'm surprised it took this long, which is why I am not concerned. The people building this stuff move very slowly and their customers even more so. The TSA has been fucking up air travel for folks in the US for over two decades. There has been an incredible demand and available funding for this sort of thing for that entire time and yet, here we are, over twenty years later, we can finally take our fucking water bottles on the plane. Maybe. If the machine is not down.

So if the economic forces at play really do want to stem the tide of de minimis packages in the US and they employ some technology like this, it'll have to get developed and deployed, which is years away. From there, a clever UGL will throw a couple crates full of raws into different shipping containers and enjoy a market advantage when one of them makes it through.

 

[Ghoul]

Ok @Ghoul , you win... so what now? This is the kind of sh** that caused unnecessary toilet paper shortages during covid. Sh**ing yourself wasn't a vid symptom. Anyone who watched "Contagion" (good movie by the way), was out buying up all the medical supplies and TP. I didn't spend too much time researching Smith's Detection, but it looks like the TSA approved this tech back in 2014... is that your read too?

In my opinion, the only sensible response to all the noise in the media, the clear moves by government to do something about all the fentanyl pouring in through international mail, is to stock up with whatever you'd rather not go without. I mean, we've seen delays from time to time anyway, so it was always sensible to have a few months supply on hand.

Luckily gear is still dirt cheap, and lasts a long, long time. 5+ years. Cheap insurance.

If nothing changes, great. Use up your surplus and carry on as normal.

If things suddenly dry up, something already being seen with certain international purchases (india pharma is a disaster at the moment), you'll be glad you've got enough on hand until someone figures out how to supply demand.

No way would stocking up cause a shortage. Plenty are convinced either it can't happen, won't happen, or if it does, new sources offering the same variety and prices will immediately replace any interrupted supply.