Civil liberties thread

[O Really]

I've got no problem with it, given that it's well established law that students have to park a lot of their rights at the door when they go into the school. (Not that that's necessarily a good thing).

The chips do no more than could be (and might already be) done through visual observance or video. Does the school have the right to monitor where a student is in school? Can they look out the door and see Emily in the hallway, late to class? Can they say, "yo, Emily - get to class!" Could they be looking for Emily and when somebody says "she's in the girls' room" go to the door and yell, "yo, Emily - you OK in there?" Which is more intrusive, a chip in your ID card that tells the school you're in the restroom, or a video camera that recorded you going in?

[O Really]

It's interesting to look at Rutherford Institutes website. A lot of their issues are similar to those of the ACLU. But here's what's funny - they are pursuing this case from a "right to privacy" basis, yet also are adamantly anti-choice, apparently without bothering to notice that Roe v. Wade was actually decided on a right to privacy basis.

[Boatrocker]

Why not force RFIDs on teachers? When they are seen to be in the same broom closet with a student, they can be apprehended on the spot.

[Boatrocker]

I'm in. Sounds good to me.

[homerfobe]

What about putting a tracking chip in all guns? It's less intrusive than putting them on people.
Law-abiding gun owners shouldn't mind, right?

Change the name of this thread to The Fear Mongers Thread.

Suppose you've got some pissed-off air-head student hiding in the can loading his AR15? How intrusive is that?
Who's rights are about to be violated?

[O Really]

I guess the problem I have with those who oppose the school's use of RFIDs is that the concern seems to be over what could be, rather than what is. What is, is that the school is using mainstream technology to keep track of what students are inside the school, and the school has a reasonable purpose or purposes in doing that. One could hypothesize that sure, they could start using a different chip with different capabilities and stored information, and they could sell access to those chips to Abercrombie and Fitch, and they could do contact and association analysis to see who's hanging with the popular crowd and who's an outcast. Or, they could get a quick headcount if a fire or some other emergency breaks out. Point being, in the present use, there doesn't seem to be any potential harm to anyone, nor any information available via the chip that the school isn't otherwise entitled to. Lots of places track entrance and exit in a variety of ways, including handprint, for example. They know who's in the building. What is different if they know you're in the hallway instead of class?

[Boatrocker]

I guess the problem I have with those who oppose the school's use of RFIDs is that the concern seems to be over what could be, rather than what is. What is, is that the school is using mainstream technology to keep track of what students are inside the school, and the school has a reasonable purpose or purposes in doing that. One could hypothesize that sure, they could start using a different chip with different capabilities and stored information, and they could sell access to those chips to Abercrombie and Fitch, and they could do contact and association analysis to see who's hanging with the popular crowd and who's an outcast. Or, they could get a quick headcount if a fire or some other emergency breaks out. Point being, in the present use, there doesn't seem to be any potential harm to anyone, nor any information available via the chip that the school isn't otherwise entitled to. Lots of places track entrance and exit in a variety of ways, including handprint, for example. They know who's in the building. What is different if they know you're in the hallway instead of class?

The whole issue of armed goons in schools is based what "could" happen. RFIDs on kids COULD certainly make it easier for a pedophile to see that Johnnie or Susie is alone in the little girls'/boys' room, or any other room, for that matter.
If the kids have to wear RFIDs, so do the staff.

[O Really]

According to the article the only reason they're using it is for am attendance. Since this can and has been done with roll call for decades it's reasonable to assume that they have other motives. Plus, it's not a matter of the type of chip. If it can place a particular student in a particular room for class #1, then the central software can find a student in the building anytime, anywhere, and ID which other students they are associating with. This is quite different from monitoring "entrance and exit".

Your "quick headcount if a fire or some other emergency breaks out" argument is valid, but that's a reason for all buildings to require locator chips for all adult residents, workers and visitors, too. Would you like to defend that policy?

Actually, according to the article, because of the peculiar way Texas tracks attendance by counting who's in the classroom when the bell goes off (imagine - Texas with a strange education policy! No!) they really are losing a lot of revenue if kids are en route in the hallway, or just hanging back at the locker. Estimated $1.7 mill. Probably exaggerated, but still.. .

Chips are used in some nursing homes, particularly for dementia patients. A lot of places don't require any ID to enter or walk around. For those that do, I wouldn't mind the ID having a chip.

[O Really]

Sorry, I just can't get excited enough to join your soap box on this one. I've worked in or had clients in places where you get let through a double door by an armed guard who gives you a visitor card and you wait for an escort to take you through other locked doors. They have you sign a non-disclosure agreement for anything you might see. They have to give you a card or a passcode to get into the restroom. I say give me a chip and let me go to the restroom by myself.

Point being with the dementia patients isn't whether or not they (or the students) are competent, it's that there are reasonable uses for the chips that don't manage to get both the ACLU and the Rutherford Institute screaming in unison. I think there are enough instances where school administration actually is stomping all over students' civil rights to deal with without getting too wrapped up in what they might do.

[O Really]

It will be interesting to see how this is decided on appeal. I say it will be upheld. Want to guess?

[O Really]

It will be interesting to see how this is decided on appeal. I say it will be upheld. Want to guess?

I don't know, you're more expert than me and the ACLU is probably more expert than both of us on this specific. As you say, student civil liberties have been crushed in many other ways, so I won't bet the farm on what I'd like to see happen.

Having served on an ACLU case selection committee, it's my view that the ACLU takes some cases they believe need to be fought, not necessarily just those it thinks it can win. I'm sure they will give the case their best effort, but what I think is missing is evidence of actual harm and/or evidence that the school has undisclosed and different reasons for the chips than they have stated thus far, or that the chips will do something other than has been stated.

[Boatrocker]

. . . so I won't bet the farm on what I'd like to see happen.

Especially on a wackadoodle planet like Texass.

[Crock Hunter]

But, we live in wackadoodle Amerika.

Indeed. . ...

When you're born you get a ticket to the freak show. When you're born in America, you get a front row seat.
-Carlin

[bannination]

... and when someone plans something bad..... I'm sure they won't dispose of the chip.

Fail.

I'm sure they'll be some interesting hacks besides that.

[O Really]

So suppose this nefarious person was able to park out in the street and hack the chips. What data is s/he going to get? Name? Class year? Assuming the answer is something like name or student ID, exactly what nefarious deeds might this person contemplate?

[O Really]

OMG, we better quit accepting the shoe chips for races.
Gotta do better than that, ol' friend. McKayla is not impressed.

[mike]

OMG, we better quit accepting the shoe chips for races.
Gotta do better than that, ol' friend. McKayla is not impressed.

I'll accept a shoe-chip for a race. That is a conscious choice and is tossed away after the run (or at any desirous interim thereof).

Kids can do the same ... i.e. toss the chip to a friend, accidentally leave it at home, the dog ate it ... you name it.

Next step, chip the kids like we do our pets.

[O Really]

Think a school will give just anyone a student list? There's a reason.

.

A lot of them do, although they usually call them "annuals" or "facebooks"

[rstrong]

Think a school will give just anyone a student list? There's a reason.

A lot of them do, although they usually call them "annuals" or "facebooks"

Usually around the end of the year. And not in search and database friendly electronic form.

[O Really]

More on the story from a local SA source...http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/educat ... 176148.php

Turns out her main objection is that the chip represents the "sign of the beast" and the school district is the antichrist. The school offered to let her wear the ID without a chip, but she was having none of it. A couple of schools in Houston have used chips for several years without problem.