Hey everyone, welcome back to My Weird Prompts. I am Corn, and I am joined as always by my brother.
Herman Poppleberry, at your service. And we are coming to you from our home in Jerusalem, which is actually quite relevant to today's topic.
It really is. Our housemate Daniel sent us a fascinating audio prompt this week. He was reflecting on his experiences traveling through different airports and noticed the stark contrast between how things are handled here in Israel versus what he sees in the United States or Europe. He is specifically curious about the intersection of security, privacy, and technology in aviation.
Daniel always has a knack for catching those subtle differences in how a system operates. He asked about the concept of visible and invisible security perimeters. It is a brilliant way to frame it because, in the world of high stakes security, what you do not see is often far more important than the guy with the metal detector wand.
Right, and he mentioned that Israel is often seen as a leader in this field, but for reasons that are sometimes controversial, like the heavy reliance on human intelligence and in person screening. But he wants to know how technology is evolving to make those perimeters invisible, potentially reducing the need for the invasive stuff like physical frisking or emptying your entire bag into a gray plastic bin.
It is a massive topic. We are talking about a shift from security theater, where the goal is to make people feel safe through visible shows of force, to a more data driven, technological approach that identifies threats before they even reach the terminal.
Let us start with that Israeli model since we live right in the middle of it. When people think of Ben Gurion Airport, they think of the questioning. You know, the famous short conversation with a young security officer who seems very interested in who you know and where you stayed. But Herman, that is just the visible tip of the iceberg, right?
Exactly. The Israeli approach is built on what they call concentric circles of security. The first circle actually starts miles away from the airport. If you are driving to Ben Gurion, you pass through a checkpoint where cameras are doing license plate recognition and sometimes even weight sensors in the road are checking to see if a vehicle is unusually heavy, which could indicate a large amount of explosives.
I remember reading about that. It is that idea of the invisible fence. By the time you even pull up to the curb to drop off your luggage, the system has already screened your vehicle and your identity against various databases.
And then you have the behavioral analysis. This is where the human intelligence comes in. The security officers are not just looking for weapons; they are looking for anomalies in behavior. They are trained in a version of what is called the suspicious sign and tracking method. They look for physiological responses to stress that are out of place for a normal traveler.
But that is where the privacy concerns really ramp up, isn't it? Because behavioral profiling can easily slip into racial or ethnic profiling. That is the tension Daniel was hinting at. If the security is invisible and based on human judgment, how do we ensure it is fair?
That is the million dollar question. The Israeli defense is that they profile based on risk, not just race, but the results often look very similar to the people being screened. However, what is interesting for our discussion today is how the industry is trying to replace that subjective human element with objective technology. They want to create that same level of security without the intrusive interrogation.
So, what does that look like in practice? If we are moving toward invisible perimeters, what are the technologies leading the way?
One of the most fascinating developments is something called distributed fiber optic sensing, or D F O S. There are companies, including some here in Israel like Prisma Photonics, that are doing incredible work with this. Essentially, you take the existing fiber optic cables that are already buried around an airport's perimeter for telecommunications, and you turn the cable itself into a sensor.
Wait, how does a glass cable sense anything?
It is wild. They send a pulse of laser light down the fiber. When something vibrates the ground near the cable, like a person walking or a vehicle moving, it causes tiny changes in how that light reflects back. By analyzing those reflections with artificial intelligence, the system can tell the difference between a guard dog running by, a person trying to cut a fence, or even someone digging a tunnel.
That is incredible. So, you do not need thousands of cameras or motion sensors that can be easily spotted. The very ground becomes the sensor.
Exactly. It is completely invisible. And it provides real time alerts with incredible precision, often down to within a few meters. That is a huge step up from traditional fences which can be bypassed or monitored for gaps.
Okay, so that handles the outer perimeter, the physical boundary of the airport. But what about the terminal itself? Daniel mentioned the inconvenience of the checkpoint. We have all been there, taking off our shoes, which, by the way, is still a requirement in the United States for most passengers as of today in early twenty twenty six, despite years of talk about changing it. How does technology make the checkpoint invisible?
The goal is what the industry calls frictionless or walk through security. We are seeing a move away from those old metal detectors and toward more advanced millimeter wave scanners. You might have seen the ones from companies like Rohde and Schwarz. The newer models are much faster. Instead of the hands up, don't shoot pose, you can just walk through a portal at a normal pace.
And those use non ionizing electromagnetic radiation to see through clothing, right?
Right. They are looking for the reflection of those waves off the skin versus off an object. The key advancement recently has been in the automated target recognition software. In the past, a human agent had to look at a generic avatar to see where a suspicious object was. Now, the artificial intelligence is getting so good that it can identify the specific material of the object. It can distinguish between a bag of sugar and a plastic explosive based on the dielectric constant of the material.
So, if the A I can reliably tell that the thing in my pocket is just a pack of gum, I do not even have to stop.
That is the dream. And when you combine that with biometrics, the whole process starts to disappear. Many airports are already trialing systems where your face is your boarding pass and your security clearance. You walk into the airport, the cameras identify you, link you to your flight and your background check, and as you walk through the security portal, the sensors scan you for threats. If everything checks out, you just keep walking straight to the gate.
It sounds like science fiction, but I know we are getting closer. However, I have to play the skeptic for a second. If we have these invisible perimeters and automated systems, aren't we just creating a different kind of risk? Like, what happens if the A I is biased or if the data gets hacked?
You are hitting on the exact trade off. When security becomes invisible, it also becomes less transparent. In the old days, if a security guard was being a jerk, you could see it. You could report it. If an algorithm silently flags you because of some obscure data point in your travel history or a glitch in the facial recognition, you might not even know why you are being pulled aside for a secondary search.
It reminds me of what we discussed back in episode two hundred and seventy one regarding diplomatic protocol and the invisible rules that govern behavior. In aviation, these invisible rules are being written into code.
Precisely. And there is also the issue of false positives. If a system is too sensitive, it slows everyone down. If it is not sensitive enough, it misses a threat. The Israeli model relies on the human to make the final call because humans are still better at sensing intent. A machine can find a knife, but a trained interrogator can find a person who intends to do harm even if they are not carrying a weapon yet.
That is a really important distinction. The intent versus the implement. Most airport security worldwide is focused on the implement, finding the gun, the bomb, the liquid. But the Israeli philosophy has always been that the weapon is the person.
Exactly. And that is why they are so interested in technologies that can sense physiological markers of intent. There is research into remote sensors that can detect heart rate, respiration, and even micro expressions from a distance. Imagine walking through the terminal and a camera is subtly measuring your pulse. If your heart is racing and your skin temperature is elevated, but you are not running for a flight, the system might flag you for a chat.
That feels very Minority Report. It is getting into the realm of pre crime. If I am just a nervous flier, am I going to be harassed by an invisible A I every time I travel?
That is the fear. And it is why the implementation of these technologies has to be balanced with very strong privacy regulations. But from a purely security perspective, it is much more effective than just looking for metal. Think about the move to C T scanners for carry on luggage. We are seeing these rolled out in more and more airports. They use computed tomography, the same tech as medical C T scans, to create a three dimensional image of everything in your bag.
Right, and that is why in some airports now, you do not have to take out your laptop or your liquids anymore. The machine can rotate the image and see through everything.
Exactly. It can even calculate the density of liquids to see if they match the profile of explosives. That is a huge reduction in friction for the traveler. It is a visible piece of tech, but it makes the security process feel more invisible because it requires less action from you.
It is interesting how the definition of invisible changes. Sometimes it means the sensor is hidden, like the fiber optics. Other times it means the process is so smooth that you barely notice it.
I think the most effective invisible perimeter is actually the digital one. Long before you arrive at the airport, your data is being screened. This is something the United States has pioneered with the Secure Flight program. They compare passenger information against watchlists maintained by the federal government.
But that is also where we see a lot of the errors, right? People with the same name as someone on a list getting stuck in limbo for years.
Yes, the no fly list and the selectee list. It is a digital perimeter that can be incredibly difficult to escape if you are wrongly included. But from the perspective of an airport operator, it is a vital tool. If they can prevent a high risk individual from even buying a ticket, that is one less threat they have to worry about at the physical perimeter.
So, we have these concentric circles. The digital screening, the road checkpoints, the perimeter sensors, the behavioral analysis, and finally the technical screening at the gate. Herman, how does this all come together to create a best practice? Is there a country or an airport that is doing it perfectly?
I do not think anyone is perfect, but Singapore's Changi Airport is often cited as the gold standard for integrating tech and experience. They use a lot of what we have talked about, facial recognition, automated bag drops, and very sophisticated backend screening, but they wrap it in an environment that feels like a luxury mall or a garden.
Right, they have that massive indoor waterfall and the butterfly garden. It is almost like they are using the environment as a distraction from the security.
It is a form of environmental psychology. If people are relaxed and happy, they are easier to screen because their baseline behavior is predictable. Someone who is trying to smuggle something or commit an act of violence is going to stand out much more in a calm, beautiful environment than in a chaotic, stressful one.
That is a brilliant point. Stress is the enemy of good security screening. When everyone is stressed, everyone looks suspicious.
Exactly. So by making the airport a place where you actually want to be, they are actually making it more secure. It is the ultimate invisible perimeter. You are being watched by hundreds of A I powered cameras and screened by invisible sensors, but you are too busy looking at the orchids to notice.
It is a fascinating paradox. To make us safer, they have to make us forget we are being screened. But as we move toward twenty twenty seven and beyond, I wonder where the limit is. At what point does the invisibility become a threat to our civil liberties?
That is the debate that is happening in parliaments and congresses around the world right now. In Europe, the Artificial Intelligence Act has very strict rules about how biometrics can be used in public spaces. In the United States, it is a bit more of a patchwork. And here in Israel, the security imperative often overrides privacy concerns in a way that wouldn't be tolerated elsewhere.
It is a cultural thing, too. People here are generally more willing to trade privacy for security because they perceive the threat as more immediate. But in a place like Scandinavia, the pushback against facial recognition in airports has been much stronger.
And that is why there won't be one single global standard. What works at Ben Gurion might not be acceptable at Oslo Airport. But the underlying technologies, the fiber optic sensors, the C T scanners, the A I analytics, those are becoming universal.
So, for someone like Daniel, who is looking for a more pleasant travel experience, the news is generally good, right? The trend is toward less physical contact and fewer interruptions.
Generally, yes. If you are a low risk, law abiding traveler, your experience is going to get much smoother. You will walk through the airport, your face will be scanned, your bags will be checked by A I, and you might never have to talk to a security officer. But the flip side is that you are being monitored more closely than ever before. The perimeter isn't gone; it is just everywhere.
That is a sobering thought. The perimeter is everywhere. It is not a line you cross; it is the atmosphere you breathe.
That is exactly right. And we have to decide as a society how much of that atmosphere we are comfortable with. One of the takeaways for our listeners today is to be aware of these invisible layers. When you see a fiber optic cable or a high tech camera, realize it is not just for the internet or for catching shoplifters. It is part of a much larger, very sophisticated ecosystem.
And if you are interested in the technical side, I highly recommend looking into the physics of distributed fiber optic sensing. It really is one of the most elegant engineering solutions I have seen in a long time. Turning a simple glass thread into a miles long microphone is just brilliant.
It really is. And for the policy nerds out there, keep an eye on how different countries are regulating biometrics in aviation. That is going to be the major battlefield for privacy over the next few years.
Absolutely. Well, this has been a deep dive. Daniel, thank you for that prompt. It really forced us to look at our own backyard here in Jerusalem with fresh eyes.
It did. It is easy to take the security here for granted, but the level of thought and technology behind it is truly staggering.
Before we wrap up, I want to remind everyone that if you are enjoying these deep dives into the weird and the technical, please leave us a review on your podcast app or on Spotify. It genuinely helps other curious minds find the show.
It really does. We love seeing the community grow. And remember, you can find all our past episodes and a contact form to send us your own weird prompts at myweirdprompts dot com.
We are also on Spotify, obviously. We will be back next week with another topic from the mind of Daniel or perhaps one of you.
I am looking forward to it. There is always something new to learn.
This has been My Weird Prompts. I am Corn.
And I am Herman Poppleberry.
Thanks for listening. We will catch you in the next one.
Until then, keep asking questions.
So, Herman, do you think we will ever get to a point where we don't even have to show a passport?
Oh, I think we are closer than you think. Some terminals in Dubai and Singapore are already essentially passport free for their citizens. Your face is your identity, your ticket, and your proof of citizenship all in one.
It is amazing. But I still like the stamps in my passport. There is something romantic about the physical record.
Spoken like a true old soul, Corn. But I suspect the next generation will look at a paper passport the same way we look at a rotary phone. A charming relic of a much slower time.
You are probably right. But until then, I am keeping my little blue book.
Fair enough. Alright, let us go see what Daniel is cooking for dinner. I think it is my turn to do the dishes anyway.
It definitely is. See you later, everyone.
Bye now!
One last thing, Herman. Did you mention the specific frequency for those millimeter wave scanners? I think people would find that interesting.
Oh, right. They usually operate in the thirty to three hundred gigahertz range. It is that sweet spot where the waves are small enough to provide high resolution but large enough to pass through most fabrics. It is the same part of the spectrum that is being eyed for six G telecommunications in the future.
So our phones might eventually be able to scan us?
Theoretically, yes. But let us save that for another episode. That is a whole different rabbit hole.
Good point. Alright, now we are really going. Thanks again, everyone.
Take care!
And don't forget to check out episode one hundred and fifty one if you want to hear more about how gigabit internet works, which ties back into that fiber optic discussion.
Oh, that was a good one. We went deep on the signal to noise ratio.
We certainly did. Okay, for real this time, goodbye!
Goodbye!
