Clear wants to scan your face at airports – privacy experts are worried

But to you first point, I definitely fly less than I would if we got rid of TSA. They're a fucking nightmare in my city.

This reduces my flying by a potential 4-8 round trip flights per year for me personally.

It was really good, as someone who flew pre 9/11. I remember reaching Logan airport 20 minutes before my scheduled flight in 2001 thanks to Boston's traffic. I walked to the gate unimpeded (nothing to check in). Zero stress.

Part of it is also that flights used to be much less overbooked and the overall experience was better and this isn't just nostalgia.

However I don't think it's completely fair to blame the TSA for the worsened experience. The threat model has changed since then. Add to that shrinking seats, worse customer service, more crowded airports, and the experience is much worse.

A few years back, we decided to minimize air travel and take a lot more local vacations. Yes, we miss flying but at some point the hassle exceeded the desire to visit exotic locales.

There have been quite a few flights I've not taken because of the security gauntlet. I really only fly when there is no other realistic option -- which means I that I only rarely do it recreationally anymore at all.

Getting to the plane has become utterly horrible.

I routinely flew for business before 9/11 and would typically show up about 15 minutes before boarding time at one of the three busiest airports in the US and typically got through security and would then had to wait 5-7 minutes before boarding would start. Air travel is radically different than it was pre-9/11.

Security is worse everywhere, even if you have PreCheck.

For starters, the rules for PreCheck are completely arbitrary and up to both the airport, terminal, and the whims of whoever is in charge that day. Even using the same checkpoint at the same terminal, sometimes you'll have to take your laptop out, sometimes you won't, sometimes you'll have to go through the scanner, sometimes you'll be able to use a metal detector, etc. Before 9/11, it was much more consistent (in large part because they didn't care about most of those things).

In addition, the inability to take arbitrary liquids (and more recently powders) is a huge inconvenience that wasn't in place before 2006 (and 2018).

> It's also been my experience that American airlines are pretty bad across the board. The European and Asian ones are typically much nicer, and even their regional/budget airlines have very nice accommodations and check-in experiences compared to United, etc.

This is a common perception, but having flown a lot within Europe and Asia, I disagree with this. One reason people perceive this is because they're used to comparing European airlines on international routes (where they are often, but not always, better), and because of the geography. Many of the popular US domestic flights are coast-to-coast, which results in a six hour flight. There's nowhere in the EU where you'll get a six-hour domestic flight - LIS to HEL is only 4.5 hours, and that's about as long as you'll get[0]. If you fly, say, AMS-WAW or AMS-BER, even on KLM, you'll get pretty minimal service on a narrow body with no in-flight entertainment or WiFi. And that's considered acceptable because it's a pretty short flight. But it's not exactly a step up from what you'd get on a comparable length in the US.

This isn't to excuse US airlines - as a frequent flyer, I'd really love better service on domestic flights. But it's an apples-to-oranges comparison: flights within the EU are shaped differently from flights within the US, and if you compare flights of similar lengths and similar levels of competition, the gap is pretty small.

As for the regional/budget airline difference... I don't know if I'd agree with that either. Is Spirit really worse than Ryan Air?

[0] You can stretch further by going as far as KEF, but at that point you're flying FI, and even though they've gotten a little better now that they have to compete on their international flight routes, I would not want to fly them for any long-haul flight if there's another option.

In 1991 a friend needed to fly home. She was anxious about flying. I went with her to the gate until loading, to help her keep her calm. Not possible now. You could also meet people at the gate when they arrived.

In 1998, working for a startup, my boss came in on a late flight. I volunteered to pick her up. I got to the airport about 15 minutes early. It's late, and not busy. I park right in front of the terminal and wait. While waiting, I cleared up some trash from my car. Now, due to concerns about possible car bombs, the airport prohibits parking in front of the terminal.

In the early 2000s I flew from New Mexico to Sweden pretty regularly. The group I visited had a weekly sauna. I would bring a 6-pack of Modelo, tortilla chips and salsa as my contribution. Not possible now, due to the liquids rule put into place a few years after 9/11.

You say with PreCheck and Global Entry security is easier than before, but in the 1990s it was easy. Luggage in the X-ray machine, walk through metal detector, and done. No pulling out of laptops, liquids, no TSA id check. And I think even that security wasn't done 100% of the time.

There was still an id check at check-in but that was because in th early 1990s the airlines wanted to prohibit the ticket resale market. In the 1980s if you had a New York/LA ticket and couldn't make the flight, you could sell the ticket to anyone else. Even with the id check, a partial match was accepted - my mother and I have the same initial, so either of us could fly with "A. Dalke".

I heard from older people that in the 1980s kids who were plane enthusiasts would go to the terminal just to watch the planes. Back then there was no security check at all.

Each of these are small things, but they add up.

As a consequence, many people have signed up so…now Clear sometimes has a big line.

The TSA-pre line wraps around but goes super fast, almost walking pace. The clear line barely moves.

Clear has become a gimmick that makes you believe you are going through faster because the line is shorter.

i.e. Clear lets you jump straight to the security part. Many airports will have a dedicated Precheck+Clear lane, which would typically be faster than either Precheck or Clear on their own.

The middle security checkpoint (near gate 12) also has a Clear entrance, and that has always been empty every time I've been there. The Precheck line might be empty, or it might be longer than the regular line -- I've seen both types of situations, on multiple occasions.

The West checkpoint (near gate 27 and above) is one I'm not as familiar with. I don't know if they have a Clear line or a Precheck line. We almost never go through there.

It's just their lame way to appease rich people and business travelers after the increased security after 9/11.

And yeah, outsourcing some of that security to a private company -- and a single one at a that --just seems like rampant corruption. Wouldn't expect any less from the US gov.