Toronto Escorts

Big Brother at Work

irlandais9000

Member
Feb 15, 2004
637
0
16
USA
Parents Protest Student Computer ID Tags

Thu Feb 10
By LISA LEFF, Associated Press

SUTTER, Calif. - The only grade school in this rural town is requiring students to wear radio frequency identification badges that can track their every move. Some parents are outraged, fearing it will take away their children's privacy.


The badges introduced at Brittan Elementary School on Jan. 18 rely on the same radio frequency and scanner technology that companies use to track livestock and product inventory. Similar devices have recently been used to monitor youngsters in some parts of Japan.


But few American school districts have embraced such a monitoring system, and civil libertarians hope to keep it that way.


"If this school doesn't stand up, then other schools might adopt it," Nicole Ozer, a representative of the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites), warned school board members at a meeting Tuesday night. "You might be a small community, but you are one of the first communities to use this technology."


The system was imposed, without parental input, by the school as a way to simplify attendance-taking and potentially reduce vandalism and improve student safety. Principal Earnie Graham hopes to eventually add bar codes to the existing ID's so that students can use them to pay for cafeteria meals and check out library books.


But some parents see a system that can monitor their children's movements on campus as something straight out of Orwell.


"There is a way to make kids safer without making them feel like a piece of inventory," said Michael Cantrall, one of several angry parents who complained. "Are we trying to bring them up with respect and trust, or tell them that you can't trust anyone, you are always going to be monitored, and someone is always going to be watching you?"


Cantrall said he told his children, in the 5th and 7th grades, not to wear the badges. He also filed a protest letter with the board and alerted the ACLU.


Graham, who also serves as the superintendent of the single-school district, told the parents that their children could be disciplined for boycotting the badges — and that he doesn't understand what all their angst is about.


"Sometimes when you are on the cutting edge, you get caught," Graham said, recounting the angry phone calls and notes he has received from parents.


Each student is required to wear identification cards around their necks with their picture, name and grade and a wireless transmitter that beams their ID number to a teacher's handheld computer when the child passes under an antenna posted above a classroom door.


Graham also asked to have a chip reader installed in locker room bathrooms to reduce vandalism, although that reader is not functional yet. And while he has ordered everyone on campus to wear the badges, he said only the 7th and 8th grade classrooms are being monitored thus far.


In addition to the privacy concerns, parents are worried that the information on and inside the badges could wind up in the wrong hands and endanger their children, and that radio frequency technology might carry health risks.


Graham dismisses each objection, arguing that the devices do not emit any cancer-causing radioactivity, and that for now, they merely confirm that each child is in his or her classroom, rather than track them around the school like a global-positioning device. The 15-digit ID number that confirms attendance is encrypted, he said, and not linked to other personal information such as an address or telephone number.


What's more, he says that it is within his power to set rules that promote a positive school environment: If he thinks ID badges will improve things, he says, then badges there will be.


"You know what it comes down to? I believe junior high students want to be stylish. This is not stylish," he said.


This latest adaptation of radio frequency ID technology was developed by InCom Corp., a local company co-founded by the parent of a former Brittan student, and some parents are suspicious about the financial relationship between the school and the company. InCom plans to promote it at a national convention of school administrators next month.





InCom has paid the school several thousand dollars for agreeing to the experiment, and has promised a royalty from each sale if the system takes off, said the company's co-founder, Michael Dobson, who works as a technology specialist in the town's high school. Brittan's technology aide also works part-time for InCom.

Not everyone in this close-knit farming town northwest of Sacramento is against the system. Some said they welcomed the IDs as a security measure.

"This is not Mayberry. This is Sutter, California. Bad things can happen here," said Tim Crabtree, an area parent.

___



Scary stuff, here. 20 years ago, people would have been shocked at such a story, but not anymore.
 
Y

yychobbyist

If you live in a violent culture in which the media preys on your every fear, this is what you get. How very unfortunate. And that it was done without any parental input is unfathomable.
 

irlandais9000

Member
Feb 15, 2004
637
0
16
USA
Agreed. And once people become comfortable with doing this with the kids, adults are next. It's a vicious cycle, and the ID tag company could make huge amounts off it, then probably buy off some politicians, which will in turn enable it to spread even more.
 

irlandais9000

Member
Feb 15, 2004
637
0
16
USA
That is great news, JW, thanks for the link. But, it may be back someday, or at least something similar. Nevertheless, this is good news.

By the way, regarding this quote from the link:

In answer to the accusation that the board had under-handedly and forcefully enacted the experiment without the knowledge of parents, Earnie Graham, principal of Brittan and superintendent of the one-school district, said that the decision to allow InCom to test the technology was made in a public session late last year, but that virtually no members of the public attended.

----------------------------------

Big deal if the decision was made in a public session. Did they announce ahead of time what was going to be discussed? IMHO, it would be a little more relevant if the public was fully informed about the nature of the proposal beforehand.
 

Hard Idle

Active member
Jan 15, 2005
4,959
23
38
North York
Kids don't need bar codes, they need parents! It is precisely because so many parents are asleep on the job that such a proposal could even get so far. But the sad truth may be if parents were given a choice between being accountable for their own childrens conduct and safety, or having them tagged and letting a corporation do the work, they may well choose the collars.

The Oscar for Best Corporate Shill and Product Rep goes to Earnie Graham! Boss Hogg himself couldn't have done better! I'm impressed he could get the words out with InComm so far down his throat!

No wonder people in the 'States join cults, militias and pull their kids out of school!
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
26,131
6,340
113
Room 112
I'm all for student safety but this was pushing it a little too far.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Precisely what privacy does an elementary student require? While I can't understand why they'd do this without parent consent (although it looks like they asked and no one bothered to attend the meeting) I don't see why such a panic. I think people jump to the big brother hysterics without thinking first.

OTB
 

irlandais9000

Member
Feb 15, 2004
637
0
16
USA
onthebottom said:
Precisely what privacy does an elementary student require? While I can't understand why they'd do this without parent consent (although it looks like they asked and no one bothered to attend the meeting) I don't see why such a panic. I think people jump to the big brother hysterics without thinking first.

OTB

"Big brother hysterics" happen in a climate in which government chooses to disregard our Constitutional rights and freedoms.

Many Democrats believed in trusting government with powers limiting our civil liberties during the Clinton years, and Republicans cried foul and demanded restraint on the powers of government. Well, power changes hands, and lo and behold, Democrats discover they don't like powerful government, at least while Bush is in office, and Republicans discover that government should have practically unlimited power since Bush is in office.

There are principled minorities in both parties who are consistent in their philosophy no matter who is in office, but for the majority, philosophy depends on who is in power.
 

irlandais9000

Member
Feb 15, 2004
637
0
16
USA
Peeping Tom said:
What part of private causes your comprehension difficulty?

What causes your difficulty? Are you naive enough to believe that prvate schools wouldn't adopt the same technology once it is widespread?
 

Asterix

Sr. Member
Aug 6, 2002
10,025
0
0
onthebottom said:
Precisely what privacy does an elementary student require? While I can't understand why they'd do this without parent consent (although it looks like they asked and no one bothered to attend the meeting) I don't see why such a panic. I think people jump to the big brother hysterics without thinking first.

OTB
Were you ever a kid OTB? Sometimes when I read your posts you sound like you popped into this world already halfway to middle age. Children are self conscious enough as it is without them having to worry about somone monitoring their every move. Teach them suspicion and we will reap what we sow. Why the idiots who came up with this idea didn't consider how this would effect these kids reaction to society later in life is beyond me.
 

Asterix

Sr. Member
Aug 6, 2002
10,025
0
0
Peeping Tom said:
If privacy is an issue parents always have the option of choosing private schools.
Translation being, if you are rich enough you can still buy the privacy once taken for granted. I don't understand why our conservative friends on the board aren't outraged by such an intrusion of our rights by government. I thought that's what you guys were all about. Or does that not apply unless it directly affects you?
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Asterix said:
Were you ever a kid OTB? Sometimes when I read your posts you sound like you popped into this world already halfway to middle age. Children are self conscious enough as it is without them having to worry about somone monitoring their every move. Teach them suspicion and we will reap what we sow. Why the idiots who came up with this idea didn't consider how this would effect these kids reaction to society later in life is beyond me.
Yeah, that's it, I was hatched at the age of 30 :rolleyes:

You know, my kids are not allowed to lock their doors, they have to tell me where they are going, who they will be with, what they will be doing and when they will be back. It's a little thing known as parenting. If you can automate it (trust and verily was the Reagan term) so much the better. When my kids go off to school I have to trust that the school will take care of them, if they've got better technology to do all of the above, good by me.

And since we’re asking immature stupid questions, do you have kids? If not you don’t know what the fark you’re talking about.

OTB
 
Y

yychobbyist

onthebottom said:
Yeah, that's it, I was hatched at the age of 30 :rolleyes:

You know, my kids are not allowed to lock their doors, they have to tell me where they are going, who they will be with, what they will be doing and when they will be back. It's a little thing known as parenting. If you can automate it (trust and verily was the Reagan term) so much the better. When my kids go off to school I have to trust that the school will take care of them, if they've got better technology to do all of the above, good by me.

And since we’re asking immature stupid questions, do you have kids? If not you don’t know what the fark you’re talking about.

OTB
I have kids so I know what the fark I'm talking about and what the school did was still wrong.
 

Hard Idle

Active member
Jan 15, 2005
4,959
23
38
North York
Slippery slope

onthebottom said:
Precisely what privacy does an elementary student require? While I can't understand why they'd do this without parent consent (although it looks like they asked and no one bothered to attend the meeting) I don't see why such a panic. I think people jump to the big brother hysterics without thinking first.

OTB
I'd certainly agree with you about being a vigilant parent, but the school shouldn't have all the privelages parents have, and InComm sure as hell shouldn't be filling any part of that role. From the board's point of view, this is an ill-advised attempt to minimize their liabilty and bad PR regarding safety, with the side benefit of being able to cut hours and save money by phasing out monitoring by staff.

The remote tracking of those kids wherabouts will be an attractive employment goal to individuals with an unhealthy interest in children. What better way to learn their patterns. The risk of it happening in one school is remote, but you just know if the precedent slips under the radar, it will be a model for expanding the concept.

It wouldn't surprise me if there was fine print in the service agreement releasing the security compny to sell the kids' traffic patterns to companies who will use the intelligence to place ads and vending machines.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts