19 ms·

I'm not sure I see the difference between this program and a company that distributes a similar system for employees to track all the same information?

jivatmanx 14y ago
Employment is voluntary, and in most contexts minors aren't capable of consent to contracts.
betterunix 14y ago
Minors are more easily indoctrinated into accepting that sort of thing. Employers who do this are being just as antisocial and psychopathic as this school district; the difference is that adults are mature enough to say, "This is not right," whereas children will grow up thinking, "This is how the world works, I better accept it."
- philwelch 14y ago
  I don't know if you've ever worked at a company that used ID badges, but I don't know anyone who's refused employment over the issue.
- antonID 14y ago
  "Employers who do this are being just as antisocial and psychopathic as this school district" Because using rfid badges to unlock doors at an office building/control and log access to server rooms, etc is a psychopathic and antisocial thing to do
  - freehunter 14y ago
    As an information security professional, I am so glad we use RFID badges. I want to know who is getting into my secure datacenter and when, and be able to revoke that right with the click of a button if things start going pear-shaped with their activities.
    - betterunix 14y ago
      ...because as we all know, an RFID badge is so terribly difficult to clone.
      - freehunter 14y ago
        RFID is a broad spectrum, not necessarily one technology. Some are more secure than others. Even with the most basic, though, it's pretty easy to clone a key or a keycode as well. Keys can't be revoked if you don't know where they are, and keycode changes require everyone to learn the new keycode. It's a game of give and take.
  - betterunix 14y ago
    Most uses of RFID badges for access control have nothing to do with building control or server rooms (and why would you want something as poorly secured as RFID when a smartcard would be equally convenient and far more secure?). Most uses of RFID are based on the same reasoning that leads to the installation of keystroke logging software, MITM devices, etc. -- the idea that employees should be watched at all times, and that the more detail you have about your employees work habits, the better (and you should never have know how to judge the products of their work; after all, that is not the job of a top-level manager).
babblefrog 14y ago
Well, for one thing, the school is an arm of government, not a private party. We allow private parties to do all sorts of things we don't allow governments to do.
- freehunter 14y ago
  But it's a magnet school which means the student is choosing to be there. She could attend the public school that does not have RFID readers.
  - lutusp 14y ago
    This doesn't change the legal issue in dispute -- whether someone can be compelled to give up a basic civil right in exchange for attending the school she wants to attend.
    - freehunter 14y ago
      Is it a basic civil right? To not be monitored in school? Schools have cameras, they have security guards, they have teachers watching you constantly, they have screen monitoring software on the computers, they have locker searches, and all of these have been upheld as Constitutional because in a school, students have no right to privacy. Whether this particular case (which admittedly is different from other privacy cases I've seen), the girl is choosing to be at this school. The school gave her the option to opt out of the program and just have a normal card, and she refused. The school then gave her another option, which is to return to the school she is legally required to attend rather than the one she is choosing to attend. That seems more than reasonable to me.
      - lutusp 14y ago
        > Is it a basic civil right? A very good question. The answer is that courts decide this sort of thing, and the notion of "civil rights" is a moving target over time. But if her civil rights are violated, then the fact that she volunteers to be there instead of another school should not be allowed to interfere with the judgment. How am I so sure? Well, as one example, African-Americans must be allowed to attend the school of their choice, and the argument that they have alternative schools is (in the eyes of the law) insufficient. The south famously argued that African-Americans had their own schools and shouldn't be arguing for admission to other schools. The Supreme Court disagreed. > The school then gave her another option, which is to return to the school she is legally required to attend rather than the one she is choosing to attend. That seems more than reasonable to me. Read the history of the U.S. Civil Rights movement, from beginning to end. Then ask yourself whether what you've just said is fair and reasonable.

jivatmanx 14y ago

Employment is voluntary, and in most contexts minors aren't capable of consent to contracts.

betterunix 14y ago

Minors are more easily indoctrinated into accepting that sort of thing. Employers who do this are being just as antisocial and psychopathic as this school district; the difference is that adults are mature enough to say, "This is not right," whereas children will grow up thinking, "This is how the world works, I better accept it."

philwelch 14y ago
I don't know if you've ever worked at a company that used ID badges, but I don't know anyone who's refused employment over the issue.
antonID 14y ago
"Employers who do this are being just as antisocial and psychopathic as this school district" Because using rfid badges to unlock doors at an office building/control and log access to server rooms, etc is a psychopathic and antisocial thing to do
- freehunter 14y ago
  As an information security professional, I am so glad we use RFID badges. I want to know who is getting into my secure datacenter and when, and be able to revoke that right with the click of a button if things start going pear-shaped with their activities.
  - betterunix 14y ago
    ...because as we all know, an RFID badge is so terribly difficult to clone.
    - freehunter 14y ago
      RFID is a broad spectrum, not necessarily one technology. Some are more secure than others. Even with the most basic, though, it's pretty easy to clone a key or a keycode as well. Keys can't be revoked if you don't know where they are, and keycode changes require everyone to learn the new keycode. It's a game of give and take.
- betterunix 14y ago
  Most uses of RFID badges for access control have nothing to do with building control or server rooms (and why would you want something as poorly secured as RFID when a smartcard would be equally convenient and far more secure?). Most uses of RFID are based on the same reasoning that leads to the installation of keystroke logging software, MITM devices, etc. -- the idea that employees should be watched at all times, and that the more detail you have about your employees work habits, the better (and you should never have know how to judge the products of their work; after all, that is not the job of a top-level manager).

babblefrog 14y ago

Well, for one thing, the school is an arm of government, not a private party. We allow private parties to do all sorts of things we don't allow governments to do.

freehunter 14y ago
But it's a magnet school which means the student is choosing to be there. She could attend the public school that does not have RFID readers.
- lutusp 14y ago
  This doesn't change the legal issue in dispute -- whether someone can be compelled to give up a basic civil right in exchange for attending the school she wants to attend.
  - freehunter 14y ago
    Is it a basic civil right? To not be monitored in school? Schools have cameras, they have security guards, they have teachers watching you constantly, they have screen monitoring software on the computers, they have locker searches, and all of these have been upheld as Constitutional because in a school, students have no right to privacy. Whether this particular case (which admittedly is different from other privacy cases I've seen), the girl is choosing to be at this school. The school gave her the option to opt out of the program and just have a normal card, and she refused. The school then gave her another option, which is to return to the school she is legally required to attend rather than the one she is choosing to attend. That seems more than reasonable to me.
    - lutusp 14y ago
      > Is it a basic civil right? A very good question. The answer is that courts decide this sort of thing, and the notion of "civil rights" is a moving target over time. But if her civil rights are violated, then the fact that she volunteers to be there instead of another school should not be allowed to interfere with the judgment. How am I so sure? Well, as one example, African-Americans must be allowed to attend the school of their choice, and the argument that they have alternative schools is (in the eyes of the law) insufficient. The south famously argued that African-Americans had their own schools and shouldn't be arguing for admission to other schools. The Supreme Court disagreed. > The school then gave her another option, which is to return to the school she is legally required to attend rather than the one she is choosing to attend. That seems more than reasonable to me. Read the history of the U.S. Civil Rights movement, from beginning to end. Then ask yourself whether what you've just said is fair and reasonable.