I read about this scanner a couple of months ago (Popular Science?) and they can “back it off” to less resolution. I believe the developer is in the process of fine tuning this for different applications.
“It’s as graphic as showing a picture of your skeleton,”
Do you think they might have edited it a little so no details are shown so they could reprint in the paper?
What about little kids?
shudder I actually find this quite disturbing.
Also, since it’s the government testing this, doesn’t it go against the Fourth Amendment?
would that be in “small claims” court? 
That looks fishy. I am not aware you can get x-ray with low enough energy to not go through flesh.
It’s for real. See more on technology in post by Fern Forest in this thread.
Lead panties could be a hot item soon.
I’m pretty sure that they don’t want to see me naked, but if they do want to, well, more power to 'em…
I don’t care I guess.
I think it would be funny to write some silly message on your skin with special paint like, “ASK ABOUT THE DEAL I GOT ON MY TIMESHARE” I see a whole new world of advertising popping up…
[cynical wireless]
Like that means anything nowadays.
[/cynical wireless]
Probably use that “volunteering to travel/don’t have to if you don’t want to be scanned” argument…
I wonder if it would work if I wrote “Bite me” on my stomach…
Well, I was a bit unnerved by this post, but now I figure I’ll get over the embarrassment. With the shape my body is in now, the scanner person will be scarred for life . . .
They would consider you a provocateur and subject you to a body cavity seach.
Well, my objection is that if any other male technicians saw through my clothes, they’d all go home in despair. 
if the screener can handle a view of Moby, then it wouldn’t bother me.
So, how long before they get the technology scaled down enough to fit in a pair of glasses?
“So, how long before they get the technology scaled down enough to fit in a pair of glasses?”
It’s been around a long time, I saw Xray specs in the 70s you could buy for a dollar 
Y’know… having been in a situation where I’ve seen lots of naked people at once, I can tell you that it gets old in short order. I can only imagine that it would be pretty much the same for anyone operating a backscatter scanner like this, only moreso.
I sort of imagine them going home, and saying to their SO, “Honey, if I see one more…”
Seriously, I have no problem with it.
I don’t like it because they haven’t yet explained how this device reacts nor what the protocol would be for those with medical devices and implants. Is a traveller’s pacemaker/penile implant/insulin pump/skull plate/breast implants really something that needs to be openly revealed to a $10/hour screener before they’re safe to board a plane?
And while this is a “low level” of radiation, that’s for an adult. What about children? How about pregnant women?
If each image will displayed with an “electronic fig leaf” what’s to stop someone from boarding a plane wearing a plastique tampon or buttplug?
Seems like a huge loss of privacy that can still be countered with any number of getarounds, if someone is determined to engage in an act of terrorism. If the backscatter x-ray detects the pound of C4 I’ve attached to the small of my back, why wouldn’t I just blow myself up there in the terminal, killing everyone waiting in the mile-long security line and do vast damage to the building?
Already in Use wrote:
I wish they had a similar image of a man so we could compare the level of, um, explicitness.
C’mon, you can clearly see a shadow made by the woman’s vaginal cleft in the photo, how is it NOT gonna show a guy’s cock?
that said, I’m with those who are unconcerned. Whatever sex the operator is, the images just aren’t that sexy and lookng at them all day will get very old, very fast. Until the Hooters jet lands, anyway. My concern will be people “guesting” to view the screens, and sooner or later, you know some tabloid or degenerate website’s gonna offer some screener a shitload of money if they can get a recognizable image of a naked celeb.
Hmmm …