Comments on: 86%: Would you buy an IDS this good?

By: anonymous

anonymous — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 15:51:05 +0000

This is an important point that many people didn’t get, especially those who congratulated the authorities for “doing their job”. Silent evidence suggests that they were in fact remiss in doing their job the multiple times he entered under similar circumstances and so instead of congratulating them, they should be reprimanded for allowing somebody to enter the country illegally multiple times in succession.

By: Darn furriner

Darn furriner — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:38:36 +0000

You are probably thinking that there is a purpose to all this, and that it is possible to metricize whether the objective is met.
There is no purpose to border guards. They are simply the combination of multiple conflicting angsts coming together in a positive correlation. Today they are working efficiently (in the sense of randomly knocking out lots of people) but until 9/11, the US ran probably the most successful secretly inefficient border control system in the world. Ask any Californian.

By: rybolov

rybolov — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:40:06 +0000

You see, it’s all part of our deception plan–”maskirovka” if you will–designed to keep the bad folks from figuring out our master plan, like hanging camouflage netting on buildings like during the Great Patriotic War. =)
If we can’t figure out how to enter the country legally, neither can the terrorists. Or some trollop along those lines.

By: David Brodbeck

David Brodbeck — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:54:41 +0000

Maybe they’re like the TSA, and consider inconsistency a feature because it keeps terrorists “off-balance.”

By: Nicko

Nicko — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:49:23 +0000

“I do know that I’m upset that our border agents aren’t consistent.”
Just think of it as stochastic monitoring; it’s all the rage in the high-thoughput IDS market :-)