If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LA Times)   Report says school has turned kids into high-tech guinea pigs   (latimes.com) divider line 456
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

17928 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Feb 2005 at 1:48 PM (9 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



456 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2005-02-22 04:24:15 PM
jst3p:

Only if you allow the scanner to be the authority. Have you ever questions the price of something at the grocery store that scanned wrong? In my experience the manager can override the scanner if a mistake was made.

But in this case, the scanner is the authority, because teachers are absolved from taking attendance. You can't compare a grocery purchase (something easily verified) with a child who goes to class, but the RFID scanner says otherwise. Who do you think people are more likely to believe?

It is a data collection device, it is not the "authority". Kids understand this better than most adults.

It conditions them to believe that authority is the ever-seeing eye that knows every move they make. Children have a right to privacy, and also have the right to not have their data collected without their consent. RFID's violate that right, and then make it seem like it's supposed to be normal.

PS, we already have national barcodes... they are called SSN's.

SSN's are not national barcodes. It's one thing to have information that can be stored in a database, but it's entirely another to have to carry a personal identifier everywhere you go. The gov't probably has my SSN on several databases, but that still doesn't tell them where I am this very second.
 
2005-02-22 04:25:28 PM
derangedlunatech

DrZombie: Let me easily destroy your argument:



Not easily at all. Your initial (and poorly thought out) arguement was that people were able to get educated (and go on to do great things) without RFIDs.

By that same argument, people for decades were able to get educated (and go on and do great things) with each of the things I cited - and many many more.

So you are using a flawed argument to support your personal paranoia. I was trying to point out the fallacies in your (il)logic.


Actually, you didn't. You posited that those things you suggested did not provide any value added to the education process, like I have posited that RFID tags do not. I just refuted easily all of your arguments.

Don't fight back against your poorly thought out arguments with more poorly thought out arguments.
 
2005-02-22 04:25:35 PM
ant:
It's not the RFID tags themselves that I object to. What I object to is the indoctrination of children (who will believe almost anything an authoritative adult says) into the mindset that there is nothing wrong with being electronically surveilled.

RFID tags may have a short range and may not be very good for Big Brother type monitoring, but something better and more efficient will definately come along soon, and when it does, the young adults will be ready to accept it thanks to the indoctrination they received as children.



When I had my children in a daycare facility, they had cameras mounted in each room, and you could sign in to their website and actually see what was going in the classroom. (I thought that was a great feature, and it was one more reason why I wanted to pick that facility.) But, by your logic, for enduring such an invasion of privacy, my kids will simply "accept" having a camera over their shoulder at their eventual place of employment as a natural thing and would think nothing of it.
 
2005-02-22 04:26:41 PM
what happens when you go to work one morning and realize that you forgot your badge?

I just tailgate -- one one cares. My wife needs the badge for her time card so she drives home to pick up her badge. Will there be a bus waiting to take kids home to get their badges? I doubt it. They'd just let a kid without a badge through the scanner. Now what kind of security do we have, none.

RFID badges solve no problem.
 
2005-02-22 04:26:46 PM
It costs more than the teacher simply taking attendance.

Remains to be seen. There is no price set by this particular company as of yet. Assuming it saves every teacher 5 minutes per class, and a school has what? 50 teachers? 5 classes a day? Thats almost 21 hours saved daily.

At 37,000 a year that works out to around $25 per hour if we assume the teacher works 9 months a year.

Thats $525 a day or $94,500 over a school year. At 100 grand for the system it would pay for itself in the first year.

It solve no problem.


It saves taxpayers money and is likely to be more accurate.


It introduces new problems (i.e. kid leaving badge at home).

Valid point.
 
2005-02-22 04:27:03 PM
hecticthe13th - You are missing the point!! Jefferson founded the University of Virginia, not a federal school system. Public schools did not exist en mass in the U.S. until the late 19th century. Also, just because Thomas Jefferson may or may not have said something, it dosen't make it a right.

If the U.S. Constitution does not grant the Federal Government a power, the Government does not have that power and education IS NOT MENTIONED IN THE CONSTITUTION!!!!
 
2005-02-22 04:27:09 PM
forditude:

but that still doesn't tell them where I am this very second.

Yeah, they have to use the PATRIOT act to do that.
 
2005-02-22 04:27:13 PM
I wonder how many of these Luddite parents are worried about the (easily trackable, actively broadcasting, radio wave producing, unknown health risk radiating) cellphones they make their kids carry?

Or the cellphone that they carry themselves.

Pretty much these same Luddite arguments were brought up (and subsequently ridiculed) when the telephone was first making it's appearance. After all, since the invention of the telephone I can now pick up this thick book and find just about everyone's name and address.

I think it is a matter of personal convenience. Since the cellphone is convenient to the individual they are willing to overlook the privacy and health concerns. Since the school badges have not been perceived by the parents of affording any benefits they are quick to rally against the "mark of the beast".

The real mark of the beast (your Social Security number) has been tatooed on your (financial) soul a long time ago.
 
2005-02-22 04:27:28 PM
forditude SSN's are not national barcodes. It's one thing to have information that can be stored in a database, but it's entirely another to have to carry a personal identifier everywhere you go. The gov't probably has my SSN on several databases, but that still doesn't tell them where I am this very second.

RFID don't tell anyoen where you are right this second either.
 
2005-02-22 04:28:17 PM
As someone who hates children, I'm for anything that infringes upon their rights.
 
2005-02-22 04:28:26 PM
DrZombie


This one's a little small, but I'm sure I could find something.

I carry it all the time. That's because I lose no privacy by carrying it.

So how much of a pay cut should I be willing to take in order to find an employer that doesn't make me carry an RFID?
 
2005-02-22 04:29:31 PM
EverCompromised "So, to take your argument to its logical extreme, kids should receive no supervision whatsover. Why does that sound like a bad idea to me?"

I didn't say that. I didn't imply that. I won't defend that. I certainly wasn't talking about thoughtless permissivness.

I'm saying that automated monitoring, or trying to intellectually desensitize children with regards to being monitored, is a violation of their privacy. Even children are human and can be made to feel unduly oppressed and controlled. I don't think the costs of supplanting a feeling of trust with a feeling of distrust, and replacing the need to teach personal responsibility with electronic monitoring, are offset or outweighed by the fantasy of "safety and security" or by the outcome of those people being trained to obey through fear.

People should be taught responsibility, not absolute authoritarian control. People should be enstilled with a sense of being trusted, not brainwashed into total and complete mutual distrust. People should be given the skills they need to make the right decisions for themselves, not psychically beaten into a generalized submissive state, incapable of making enlightened decisions for themselves.

Tagging children with electronic tags and getting them used to having their every movement watched is a horrible, horrible thing for adults to be inflicting upon them.
 
2005-02-22 04:29:49 PM
DrZombie:

Actually, you didn't. You posited that those things you suggested did not provide any value added to the education process, like I have posited that RFID tags do not. I just refuted easily all of your arguments.



No, I didn't. I stated that using your same argument, since decades of education was possible without them, then they weren't necessary. I used your same exact argument with other relatively recent developments in education to point out the stupidity of your argument.

Please don't try to make other people who use your own flawed logic against you, in an attempt to demonstrate the flaws in your logic, as "poorly thought out." In essence, by doing that, you have stated that your own argument is poorly thought out.

Wait...well that was my point in the beginning. I'm glad you have finally realized it.

/Thinks he should open up a tin-foil hat shop...
 
2005-02-22 04:30:24 PM
astrnomr:

When I had my children in a daycare facility, they had cameras mounted in each room, and you could sign in to their website and actually see what was going in the classroom. (I thought that was a great feature, and it was one more reason why I wanted to pick that facility.) But, by your logic, for enduring such an invasion of privacy, my kids will simply "accept" having a camera over their shoulder at their eventual place of employment as a natural thing and would think nothing of it.

The cameras aren't as intrusive as having to wear a badge on the front of your shirt. Your children may have not known about the cameras, which may arguably be WORSE than surveillance with prior knowledge.
 
2005-02-22 04:30:53 PM
 
2005-02-22 04:30:55 PM

It started with a girl who went home from junior high saying she felt like an orange.


They have RFID's on produce now? When did this happen?
 
2005-02-22 04:31:00 PM
An rfid tag is benign it does not transmit it responds to transmissions.

Transmissions from divices that can now be added and/or changed to gather additional information without informing the students or parents of the additional monitoring.

This is an expensive fix to a problem that doesn't exist that "just happens" to open the door for exploitation. But of course that would never happen. Individuals in power never use the tools of power beyond their intended reach.
 
2005-02-22 04:31:06 PM
When i was in university, my mother called me and asked me why "roger that" was so funny. Counter strike was getting popular around then and some kid had said "roger that" during attendance and cracked half the class up (I'm guessing he used the corny CS voice). Who is to say this doesn't actually provide an actual service.
 
2005-02-22 04:32:21 PM

Laszlo Fark --
Hyperbole and hysteria do not help your case. Imposing these tags does -not- constitute brainwashing or totalitarianism.


It does, however, provide rebellious geeks a motivation to learn about radio-jamming technology.

 
2005-02-22 04:32:40 PM
It saves taxpayers money and is likely to be more accurate.

You assume RFIDs eliminate a teachers need to take attendance. They don't. Teachers would still have to confirm the student is in the class (no one brought in their buddies badge).

RFID solve no problem, and introduce new ones.
 
2005-02-22 04:32:56 PM
But, by your logic, for enduring such an invasion of privacy, my kids will simply "accept" having a camera over their shoulder at their eventual place of employment as a natural thing and would think nothing of it.

What they will accept is an innumerate evaluation of risk. Those cameras have nothing to do with the safety of your children. Your child is safer there than at home. Incidents of child abuse are extraordinarily rare at pre-schools. The incidence of false claims of child abuse is higher but still rare. Those cameras are protecting the day care workers.

If we wanted to spend our money monitoring the perpetrators of child abuse, quite frankly, we should watch the parents.
 
2005-02-22 04:33:41 PM
Laszlo Fark:

I'm saying that automated monitoring, or trying to intellectually desensitize children with regards to being monitored, is a violation of their privacy. Even children are human and can be made to feel unduly oppressed and controlled. I don't think the costs of supplanting a feeling of trust with a feeling of distrust, and replacing the need to teach personal responsibility with electronic monitoring, are offset or outweighed by the fantasy of "safety and security" or by the outcome of those people being trained to obey through fear.

People should be taught responsibility, not absolute authoritarian control. People should be enstilled with a sense of being trusted, not brainwashed into total and complete mutual distrust. People should be given the skills they need to make the right decisions for themselves, not psychically beaten into a generalized submissive state, incapable of making enlightened decisions for themselves.

Tagging children with electronic tags and getting them used to having their every movement watched is a horrible, horrible thing for adults to be inflicting upon them.


Dude, you don't want the government to have control! You're a terrorist!!

WHY DO THE TERRORISTS LOVE FREEDOM?!?!
 
2005-02-22 04:34:15 PM
Sid_6.7: The cameras aren't as intrusive as having to wear a badge on the front of your shirt.



How is that intrusive? Millions of us who have jobs do it every day. Perhaps they don't make you do it at McDonalds - but many of us who have real jobs do it every day. I have yet to see it as being "intrusive."
 
2005-02-22 04:34:19 PM
Transmissions from divices that can now be added and/or changed to gather additional information without informing the students or parents of the additional monitoring.

This is an expensive fix to a problem that doesn't exist that "just happens" to open the door for exploitation. But of course that would never happen. Individuals in power never use the tools of power beyond their intended reach.


how can the device that collects the information be changed to collect different info? all it collects is a number. rfids are cheap and i refuse to comment on sarcasm.
 
2005-02-22 04:35:16 PM
Just consider the possibilities. If you can say for 100% certain, absolutely no doubt, not even the slimmest glimmer of a chance that this could possibly lead to greater acceptance of active monitoring, then you are either the world's greatest predictor, or a fool.

I've known many more fools than I have accurate fortunetellers. I, myself, am much better at being a fool than I am at predicting with 100% accuracy the future.
 
2005-02-22 04:36:21 PM
But in this case, the scanner is the authority, because teachers are absolved from taking attendance. You can't compare a grocery purchase (something easily verified) with a child who goes to class, but the RFID scanner says otherwise. Who do you think people are more likely to believe?

I don't see it coming down to jimmys word vs the computer.

"The computer said I wasn't there but you gave a test that day and I got a B"

Who are they going to believe?

IF you give the authority to the computer you have a point, it is possible to use automation to assist those in authority and it is done every day. I see no problem in preparing children for this.

It conditions them to believe that authority is the ever-seeing eye that knows every move they make. Children have a right to privacy, and also have the right to not have their data collected without their consent. RFID's violate that right, and then make it seem like it's supposed to be normal.

How does it violate their right to privacy any more than taking attendance manually?

And last I heard children don't have "rights" they only have "protections". There is a vast difference.
 
2005-02-22 04:36:42 PM
Egoy: RFID don't tell anyoen where you are right this second either.

So the security gates at stores that alarm when you steal merchandise with RFID tags work how? Mind reading? They smell fear?
 
2005-02-22 04:36:42 PM
Being forced to respond to the teachers call of your name isn't active monitoring?
 
2005-02-22 04:37:04 PM
I wish I had those chips taking my attendance back in school. You could skip so easilly. Can't trick a teacher, but you could gum the card under your desk while you're out enjoying life instead of enduring the hell that is school.
 
2005-02-22 04:37:39 PM
The whole thing is stupid. How do the RFID badges keep children safer? If some kid wanders off at recess, the badge won't help people find him. Badges don't keep "bad people" out of the school either. It's not like an alarm goes off then someone walks in and DOESN'T have an RFID.

The article mentioned that because attendence is linked to funding, using RFID will somehow boost attendance or make a more accurate count. In my schools the teacher took attendace at the start of every class. If you didn't show up at all and didn't have an excuse, your parents were called and you were given detention. If the records showed that you were there for some classes, but not for others, your parents were called and you get given detention.

Giving sensitive electronics to kids is a great idea. I'm sure that none of the badges will ever break. Who knows how long that will go on before someone realizes that the badge is broken and the kid actually was in school?

That said, giving these kids an RFID badge doesn't make it any more likely that they'll be kidnapped.
 
2005-02-22 04:38:29 PM
gluestick
No they can tell when a specific item passes through a specific location...this is no knowing where it is at all times.
 
2005-02-22 04:38:51 PM
I thought this bit was pretty telling:

School administrators said the program was mandatory and threatened to discipline even expel students who didn't wear their badges.

Since it's virtually impossible to get rid of new policies once they've been implimented, I wouldn't even try. Instead, I'd push hard for an addendum: Teachers and school administrators MUST have the same technology applied to them as well. In addition, make them pee in a cup at random times thru the school year. After all, it's the only way to make sure the kids are really safe. And it's efficient, and that's good, right?
 
2005-02-22 04:39:01 PM

ctenidae --
There's also a *glimmer of a chance* that Drew is actually sending posting histories and contact information to the FBI. Using your logic, you should stop posting immediately.


Policy is -not- a random event. You do, in fact, have the ability to allow a school administration latitude to go this far -- and to refuse them when going further. If you choose to abdicate that future responsibility, then why should you have a say *now*? It's not likely the school's being run by a military junta imposing its will on the the helpless community; if you draw a red line and they cross it, get rid of them and encourage the replacements to pay more attention.

 
2005-02-22 04:39:54 PM
derangedlunatech:

How is that intrusive? Millions of us who have jobs do it every day. Perhaps they don't make you do it at McDonalds - but many of us who have real jobs do it every day. I have yet to see it as being "intrusive."

First off, there's no reason to go into ad hominem attacks, you stupid jackass twit. I don't work at McDonalds, I'm a college student double-majoring in Business Admin. and Philosophy.

By intrusive, I mean it's much more personal and obvious when you have to wear the badge as opposed to when it's just a camera overhead. You are physically responsible for putting the badge on. It's not completely passive on your part.

You should have been able to figure that much out from the context of my statement, but I guess you're too busy working at your ultra-critical superjob while reading Fark to pay close attention to every little insignificant comment from a peon like me.
 
2005-02-22 04:39:58 PM
If this technology is used only as intended, for good and productive uses, and never for criminal, immoral, or anti-human purposes, then it will be the first such technology. Pull your heads from your asses.*

(I can tell they are there because I linked my database of rectum RFIDs to my database of head RFIDs)
 
2005-02-22 04:40:00 PM
The new high tech RFID passports don't work.

High Tech RFID Passports
 
2005-02-22 04:41:08 PM
First off, there's no reason to go into ad hominem attacks, you stupid jackass twit.

I'm hoping that was just sarcasm.....
 
2005-02-22 04:41:14 PM
Laszlo Fark

The problem with kids, is that they're kids. They aren't responsible for their own actions. If your kid causes property damage, guess who's paying. Your contention that "automated monitoring, or trying to intellectually desensitize children with regards to being monitored, is a violation of their privacy" is false because kids don't have a right to privacy. That right comes with responsibility. Since the school is responsible for the kid while he's in school, the school has the right to monitor where they are.

If I could be with my kids 100% of the time, that would be close to ideal. In the real world, there's some teacher with 45 minutes to teach 45 kids about whatever. Anything that can be done to reduce that teacher's administrative burden, especially during class time, is worth considering.
 
2005-02-22 04:42:24 PM
Weaver95: I'm hoping that was just sarcasm.....

It was meant to be absurd and show how useless attacking the other person is. As was most of the rest of the post.
 
2005-02-22 04:42:24 PM
Sid_6.7:

First off, there's no reason to go into ad hominem attacks, you stupid jackass twit. I don't work at McDonalds, I'm a college student double-majoring in Business Admin. and Philosophy.

My apologies. Perhaps I should have said "Millions of us who actually have jobs."



You should have been able to figure that much out from the context of my statement, but I guess you're too busy working at your ultra-critical superjob while reading Fark to pay close attention to every little insignificant comment from a peon like me.

Then I misunderstood, and I apologize. But hey - I gotta have something to do during boring training sessions that no-one gives a crap about.
 
2005-02-22 04:42:24 PM
2005-02-22 04:39:01 PM Korovyov

Hell, if they want to lock me up for expressing an opinion, there's not much we can do about it.

I agree 100% with you. Absolutely. Get rid of them if you don't like it. I don't like this, and I'd want to get rid of them.
 
2005-02-22 04:43:08 PM
I can quit my job any time I want and work for someone else who doesn't require me to wear a name badge. That's the difference you farking retard. Sheesh!
 
2005-02-22 04:43:11 PM
" I have yet to see it as being "intrusive.""

Some of us are already desensitized. I'm so glad for you that you have a "real job" as opposed to a job that doesn't require you wear a security badge. wtf?

But there is a HUGE difference between choosing to work at a company that requires you to wear a badge and being a child and being told by "authorities" that you MUST wear an electronic cattle marker or else you'll be denied an education.
 
2005-02-22 04:44:29 PM
derangedlunatech:

Then I misunderstood, and I apologize. But hey - I gotta have something to do during boring training sessions that no-one gives a crap about.

$10 says people at McDonalds work harder than you.
 
2005-02-22 04:45:19 PM
A child can choose through the virtual power of attourney given to their gaurdians to quit public school and goto a private school or home school if the don't like it. They have as much choice as you do leaving your jobs not everyone has the financial freedom to choose jobs either your arguments are invalid
 
2005-02-22 04:45:20 PM
Strikitrich

You're absolutely right. No where does the US constitution guarantee the right to an education. Or that women should get paid the same as men. Or a right to blow bubbles during your gramma's funeral. Or a bunch of other things. It DOES however, state that that any "powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people".

Which means the states have to manage it.

In my lovely home of Massachusetts, it's been the responsiblity (since the 17th century!) of the every community over a certain size to hire teachers, and if of sufficient size, to build and maintain public school facilities from municipal funds. This was done so that everybody, men and women alike, could get a proper education.

So they could read the Bible themselves.

No joke.

Who knew the Puritans could be so damn progressive?

Now, I don't know what the rules were as the rest of the states organized, but I suspect it was something not far off for the Massachusetts model. So it IS a right, a provided by the state (Meaning the one of 50 you happen to reside in), but not the STATE, as in the Feds.

/Thomas O'connor is a helluva neat guy, and a god among teachers.
 
2005-02-22 04:45:26 PM
Sid_6.7:

It was meant to be absurd and show how useless attacking the other person is. As was most of the rest of the post.



Actually - the irony is that I did not say that *you* work at McDonalds. The "you" in that oroginal phrase was that generic "you" - kinda like the nameless, faceless "they."

But that's ok :)
 
2005-02-22 04:45:35 PM
You know, maybe it's just the techie in me....but I think i'd be teaching my kid how to hack this system. I doubt the security is all that tight. Shouldn't be TOO hard to counterfit the signal. I think it'd be pretty cool if one day student #3476a showed up in 8 different places at the same time.
 
2005-02-22 04:46:12 PM
EnormousJuan

I can quit my job any time I want and work for someone else who doesn't require me to wear a name badge. That's the difference you farking retard. Sheesh!

Would you?
 
2005-02-22 04:46:26 PM
I can quit my job any time I want and work for someone else who doesn't require me to wear a name badge. That's the difference you farking retard. Sheesh!

But you don't, so how bad can they be?

P.S. You know any similar job would require the same thing, you just don't care.
 
Displayed 50 of 456 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report