Pennsylvania School District Accused of Spying on Students via Web-cam

[Gawain 0]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_laptops_spying_on_students

Never mind my disgust that the school "issues" Apple laptops to its students, all 2300 of them. That's $2M+ right there for two high schools. In an affluent neighborhood, how about using that purchasing power to allow the students or their parent to buy the laptops rather that spending that kind of money.

But, the point of the story is that school apparently uses remote activation software to turn on the cameras to "locate" lost laptops. There are less expensive PC based laptops that have location aiding software that don't rely on turning on a camera in someone's home.

If the kid is under 18, the Constitutionality still applies since he/she is a dependent of the parents (and their home), not the school.

So, my rant is a double "wtf".

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[lurch 0]

If I were this kid I would have DETONATED. Schools are already out of control, psychotic reactions to kids with sharp objects or even butter knives, "zero tolerance" treating kids caught with toy guns as if they represented exactly as much threat as real ones, "thought control" where they get punished for even DRAWING a gun, and now we're down to full blown sneaky surveillance for "inappropriate behavior".
This is off-the-top-of-the-scale insane.
Coming soon:
Mandatory electric collar cameras, so their behavior can be monitored and controlled in realtime 24/7, and "corrective action" applied at the push of a button.

Read Cory Doctorow's "Little Brother". Up till now, this was science fiction written as a warning about where we're headed. It just came true. We're there.
We just made it to authentic Dystopia.
Next week the kids will discover the snitch chips hidden in their books and clothing to track their movements and will start getting in trouble for nuking them in the microwave in defiant attempts to escape being treated like lab rats. You're not supposed to resist surveillance...its for your own good.
When the fuck did schools turn into Supermax prisons? And where the FUCK do school admins get off doing this shit to kids? What the fuck is WRONG with these people?

-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

When the fuck did schools turn into Supermax prisons?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_nKa-dM7PvEo/SGPtmUK2uwI/AAAAAAAAB28/zJsCvwceYkA/s400/nun%2Bwith%2Bruler.jpg

[kallend 2,117]

Big Brother is alive and well, 26 years after 1984.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[fasted3 0]

Quote

[the story is that school apparently uses remote activation software to turn on the cameras to "locate" lost laptops.

Yes, that's their story, however, this laptop was not lost or stolen.

But what do I know?

[redlegphi 0]

I'm kinda curious if they bothered to ask legal counsel for an opinion on this before they decided to just go turn the cameras on.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

I'm kinda curious if they bothered to ask legal counsel for an opinion on this before they decided to just go turn the cameras on.

I don't know; but 4 out of 5 dentists would have advised against it.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

If the kid is under 18, the Constitutionality still applies since he/she is a dependent of the parents (and their home), not the school.

Not sure that's true, what do you base that upon?

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

If the kid is under 18, the Constitutionality still applies since he/she is a dependent of the parents (and their home), not the school.

I don't think (federal) constitutionality even comes into play here, because - even though it's a public school - the school's act was not done "under color of law". It was clearly wrong, but in my opinion it's because of garden-variety "invasion of privacy" standards (as well as wiretap laws).

[Calvin19 0]

wiretap laws, minor drug abuse, tax spending, and civil law lameness asside,

I am glad they bought macs instead of some shitty windows based plastic POS. Apple wins.

-SPACE-

[Airman1270 0]

This all makes sense once you begin to understand that the purpose of public education is to turn students into little secular socialists who respond to emotion rather than logic, and who grow up to provide knee-jerk votes for Democrats. They're already being taught to accept warrantless searches and constant police supervision as a normal part of life in America. This is a perfectly logical next step.

The solution to the public education scandal is to cut these people off at the root and allow the system to wither on the vine: Repeal compulsory attendance laws, then sit back and watch the schools fix themselves.

If you disagree, please name one thing that is going on in the schools that is so important that parents should risk being shot by police if they choose not to participate.

Cheers,
Jon S.

[billvon 3,090]

>This all makes sense once you begin to understand that the purpose of
>public education is to turn students into little secular socialists who
>respond to emotion rather than logic, and who grow up to provide
>knee-jerk votes for Democrats.

The perfect SC post. All the fear, none of the content, and 100% fact free. Bravo.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

wiretap laws, minor drug abuse, tax spending, and civil law lameness asside,

I am glad they bought macs instead of some shitty windows based plastic POS. Apple wins.

Uh huh.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Airman1270 0]

Quote

>This all makes sense once you begin to understand that the purpose of
>public education is to turn students into little secular socialists who
>respond to emotion rather than logic, and who grow up to provide
>knee-jerk votes for Democrats.

The perfect SC post. All the fear, none of the content, and 100% fact free. Bravo.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Actually, the facts are voluminous. I was simply employing brevity. The matter has been studied to death, and some of these facts have been expressed here in past conversations. One must expose oneself to news sources which actually report this stuff in order to be informed. Operations like CNN give low priority to such stories. Meanwhile, I spent years listening to, and working at, a radio station which carried programs in which these things were discussed and facts & details were provided.

Here's one example: The origin-of-life discussion. If the goal is education, then students would be exposed to both sides of the debate. However, based on previous conversations I know that you oppose this. As a secular humanist/atheist, you think the schools should support your religious viewpoint at the expense of any other.

You guys love to throw around the word "science" to justify your bigotry, as in "Teach one side in science class, but teach the other side in a religion class." Two problems with this: If there really WAS a "religion" class you'd complain bitterly about it, especially if attendance was mandatory. Secondly, if there were such a class it would be the perfect place to teach evolution because it is, after all, nothing more than an unproven, unproveable secular humanist religious belief.

However, you (and the Democrats) get what you want. By exposing students to a one-sided discussion of the topic, and by dragging it out for weeks at a time, you get them to conclude that there is no serious alternative view. They graduate and are cut loose into the world with this belief lodged in the back of their minds. Never mind that you can't explain how life began. The point is that people who believe there is no God are far more likely to fall for hysterical ideas & claims (such as the belief that humans can actually change the climate by driving certain cars, using certain light bulbs, etc.) These are people who are more likely to vote for the very Democrats who push this nonsense. Ever wonder why one of the biggest political action groups participating in Democrat politics are teacher's unions? Ever think about why Democrats were the driving force behind the creation of the federal Department of Education under J. Carter? Do you actually believe it had nothing to do with placing our kids' education under the control of the left for the purpose of securing a voter base made up of people who have never been taught critical thinking skills and who have been brainwashed into believing that there is no God and that people who think there is are not quite as "intelligent" as everyone else?

Just one example.

Cheers,
Jon

[redlegphi 0]

Quote

Quote

>This all makes sense once you begin to understand that the purpose of
>public education is to turn students into little secular socialists who
>respond to emotion rather than logic, and who grow up to provide
>knee-jerk votes for Democrats.

The perfect SC post. All the fear, none of the content, and 100% fact free. Bravo.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Actually, the facts are voluminous. I was simply employing brevity. The matter has been studied to death, and some of these facts have been expressed here in past conversations. One must expose oneself to news sources which actually report this stuff in order to be informed. Operations like CNN give low priority to such stories. Meanwhile, I spent years listening to, and working at, a radio station which carried programs in which these things were discussed and facts & details were provided.

Here's one example: The origin-of-life discussion. If the goal is education, then students would be exposed to both sides of the debate. However, based on previous conversations I know that you oppose this. As a secular humanist/atheist, you think the schools should support your religious viewpoint at the expense of any other.

You guys love to throw around the word "science" to justify your bigotry, as in "Teach one side in science class, but teach the other side in a religion class." Two problems with this: If there really WAS a "religion" class you'd complain bitterly about it, especially if attendance was mandatory. Secondly, if there were such a class it would be the perfect place to teach evolution because it is, after all, nothing more than an unproven, unproveable secular humanist religious belief.

However, you (and the Democrats) get what you want. By exposing students to a one-sided discussion of the topic, and by dragging it out for weeks at a time, you get them to conclude that there is no serious alternative view. They graduate and are cut loose into the world with this belief lodged in the back of their minds. Never mind that you can't explain how life began. The point is that people who believe there is no God are far more likely to fall for hysterical ideas & claims (such as the belief that humans can actually change the climate by driving certain cars, using certain light bulbs, etc.) These are people who are more likely to vote for the very Democrats who push this nonsense. Ever wonder why one of the biggest political action groups participating in Democrat politics are teacher's unions? Ever think about why Democrats were the driving force behind the creation of the federal Department of Education under J. Carter? Do you actually believe it had nothing to do with placing our kids' education under the control of the left for the purpose of securing a voter base made up of people who have never been taught critical thinking skills and who have been brainwashed into believing that there is no God and that people who think there is are not quite as "intelligent" as everyone else?

Just one example.

Cheers,
Jon

Since you appear to be a good, God-fearing Christian man, I'll go out on a limb here and assume that you go to church every Sunday. I'll also assume that, during that service, for however long it lasts, nobody gets up on the alter and teaches the theories of evolution, relativity, or how basic chemistry works. Why? Because church is where religious instruction happens. Similarly, science class is where science instruction happens. If you would like to continue to teach your children that the Flintstones was a documentary film, please feel free to do so on your own time or in church. Science class is for people who actually want to improve their knowledge of the world.

Also, this has absolutely nothing to do with a school distrcit abusing their powers to spy on children and their families.

[Ion01 2]

Quote

Similarly, science class is where science instruction happens.

And as soon as they start teaching actual science instead of un-scientific, untestable, un-falsifiable, made up ideas such as dark energy, or falsified ideas such as intrinsic redshift, there won't be a problem.

[jakee 1,571]

Quote

Quote

Similarly, science class is where science instruction happens.

And as soon as they start teaching actual science instead of un-scientific, untestable, un-falsifiable, made up ideas such as dark energy, or falsified ideas such as intrinsic redshift, there won't be a problem.

And exactly how many high school science classes have dark energy and intrinsic redshift on the curriculum?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[billvon 3,090]

>If the goal is education, then students would be exposed to both sides
>of the debate.

"Both" sides? There is one side from a science perspective; dozens from a theological perspective. And that's no problem; teach the science in science, teach religion in a religious history course. The Norse creation theory is a good one.

(Now, if you want only YOUR creationist theory taught, and want to exclude everyone else's, there's going to be a problem.)

> If there really WAS a "religion" class you'd complain bitterly about it,
>especially if attendance was mandatory.

Nope, I'd be fine with it. Heck, I took four years of religion. It would be useful for today's kids - all too many think that Chrisitanity is the only real religion out there, that Islam is a religion of violence, that Hindus are all superstitious nuts etc.

>Secondly, if there were such a class it would be the perfect place to teach
>evolution because it is, after all, nothing more than an unproven,
>unproveable secular humanist religious belief.

Well, so is gravity, Newtonian mechanics and thermodynamics - but those things are all taught in science class. Most people consider them science.

>The point is that people who believe there is no God are far more likely
>to fall for hysterical ideas & claims (such as the belief that humans can
>actually change the climate by driving certain cars, using certain light
>bulbs, etc.)

Right. They just believe rational things, like a zombie took away an evil force put inside all men by a supernatural being trying to doom us.

>Ever wonder why one of the biggest political action groups participating
>in Democrat politics are teacher's unions?

No, I don't. Traditionally democratic leaders increase school funding. People like to keep their jobs. Sorta the same reason military types like republicans.

>Do you actually believe it had nothing to do with placing our kids'
>education under the control of the left for the purpose of securing a
>voter base made up of people who have never been taught critical
>thinking skills and who have been brainwashed into believing that
>there is no God and that people who think there is are not quite as
>"intelligent" as everyone else?

I like it! That's better than the Truther conspiracy theories! But be careful - I hear evil brainwashing secular humanists like to hide under your bed at night.

[pirana 0]

How likely is it that turing on the camera will help them find a lost computer - unless it is pointing simultaneously at the house number and street sign of it's current location.

I mean, if the intended user is using it, then it's not lost, is it?

If it has been stolen, seeing the face of the person currently using it is useless unless the viewer just happens to know the thief.

If it is lost, say buried in a pile of laundry, what good does the camera do?

Only use for this that I can see is if someone reports the computer stolen. An admin can maybe activate the camera and maybe in one in a million case recognize the thief.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

>Ever wonder why one of the biggest political action groups participating
>in Democrat politics are teacher's unions?

No, I don't. Traditionally democratic leaders increase school funding. People like to keep their jobs. Sorta the same reason military types like republicans.

Moreover the RW nutters in military arms (acft, helicopter, etc) producing factories. Military personell will have a job if they want, but the peopel who make good money to keep pumping them multi-million dollar toys are constantly on the worry for fear of a Democratic cutback from congress.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Big Brother is alive and well, 26 years after 1984.

Funny, isn't it, how so many people scoffed at the concept back when the book was written.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[billvon 3,090]

>Funny, isn't it, how so many people scoffed at the concept back when the book was written.

Like who? One of my English professors was telling us back in 1983 that "1984 is here." I don't know of anyone who "scoffed at the concept."

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

>Funny, isn't it, how so many people scoffed at the concept back when the book was written.

Like who? One of my English professors was telling us back in 1983 that "1984 is here." I don't know of anyone who "scoffed at the concept."

Conservatives rallied about the black helicopters, inferring false paranoia, now that they are not in power, they are the ones who are realistically crying 'conspiracy.' I think it has a lot to do with who's party/ideologies are in power as to how many black helicopters are circling overhead.

[billvon 3,090]

>Conservatives rallied about the black helicopters, inferring false paranoia

That sentence makes no sense whatsoever.

[Airman1270 0]

...the... and...

...Now, if you want only YOUR... theory taught, and want to exclude everyone else's, there's going to be a problem...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

WHICH HAS BEEN ... Sorry. Don't mean to shout. Which has been my point all along. I say the schools should present a fair, balanced discussion of the issue, then move on to more important things. You defend the current practice of spending several weeks (or more) of classroom time on a one-sided presentation of the matter.

I suggest a compromise: Allow the schools to teach whatever they want, and give parents the right to decide whether they want to get their kids involved.

Freedom. Liberty. Choice.

Cheers,
Jon