4 ms·

I'm sure the students of the Montgomery County, Maryland public school system, who are affected by this problem, will take your advice into consideration when s

by stonogo 10y ago

I'm sure the students of the Montgomery County, Maryland public school system, who are affected by this problem, will take your advice into consideration when submitting resumes to other public schools.

x1798DE 10y ago
They should lobby the school board not to do this nonsense.
- acdha 10y ago
  Think about how that conversation would go. They're driven by concerns that kids will look at porn – and remember that if they don't try to stop that, the local Fox News applicate will be running a loop 24x7 saying they're trying to force godly children to watch it – or that someone will breach a staff member's computer and steal PII, compromise the security cameras, etc. Against that, making life hard for Chrome engineers’ aggressive upgrade campaign is pretty hard sell. “Buy a better box” perhaps but I don't see a viable argument for “don't monitor”.
  - habitue 10y ago
    Just an FYI, local fox affiliates don't have the ideological bent of the cable station. They're often run by entirely different companies
    - acdha 10y ago
      True. In the areas where I've lived they were reliably the most breathless of local TV news cycle but that's a limited sample size.
- bgc 10y ago
  The Board doesn't have a choice, under CIPA[0], content filtering is a requirement for the FCC's E-Rate program[1] in which the government pays some of the cost of the school's internet connection. [0]https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/childrens-internet-protection-act https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/childrens-internet-prot... [1]https://www.fcc.gov/general/universal-service-program-schools-and-libraries-e-rate https://www.fcc.gov/general/universal-service-program-school...
  - schoen 10y ago
    Could they try to find an alternative source of funds (as the San Francisco Public Library did), or adopt an interpretation of CIPA under which they don't have to use this particular feature?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - fulafel 10y ago
    Of course they have a choice. It's not very princinpled to sell your children's online privacy in exchange for some "grant" money going to an oppressive-dictatorship supporting company like BlueCoat. (Also it's possible can do server address based blocking without MITM)
    - akx 10y ago
      Sure, it's possible, if you're willing to blanket block all sorts of elastic IP ranges such as all of AWS.
      - fulafel 10y ago
        You can do it based on DNS.
  - bradleyjg 10y ago
    >> content filtering is a requirement for the FCC's E-Rate program in which the government pays some of the cost of the school's internet connection. I'd be interested to see the cost of compliance versus the subsidy. The federal government puts an awful lot of strings on financing for schools given the relatively low percentage of overall funding they pay. I'd like to see some state somewhere turn down the money and see what they can do with the extra flexibility.
    - trome 10y ago
      IIRC the E-Rate program is a high double digit by percentage subsidy, such that Wireless ISPs will lose business by not having an E-Rate certification because the school will just stick with polky, 6mbps DSL for their 200+ kids at a rural school.

by stonogo 10y ago

x1798DE 10y ago

They should lobby the school board not to do this nonsense.

acdha 10y ago
Think about how that conversation would go. They're driven by concerns that kids will look at porn – and remember that if they don't try to stop that, the local Fox News applicate will be running a loop 24x7 saying they're trying to force godly children to watch it – or that someone will breach a staff member's computer and steal PII, compromise the security cameras, etc. Against that, making life hard for Chrome engineers’ aggressive upgrade campaign is pretty hard sell. “Buy a better box” perhaps but I don't see a viable argument for “don't monitor”.
- habitue 10y ago
  Just an FYI, local fox affiliates don't have the ideological bent of the cable station. They're often run by entirely different companies
  - acdha 10y ago
    True. In the areas where I've lived they were reliably the most breathless of local TV news cycle but that's a limited sample size.
bgc 10y ago
The Board doesn't have a choice, under CIPA[0], content filtering is a requirement for the FCC's E-Rate program[1] in which the government pays some of the cost of the school's internet connection. [0]https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/childrens-internet-protection-act https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/childrens-internet-prot... [1]https://www.fcc.gov/general/universal-service-program-schools-and-libraries-e-rate https://www.fcc.gov/general/universal-service-program-school...
- schoen 10y ago
  Could they try to find an alternative source of funds (as the San Francisco Public Library did), or adopt an interpretation of CIPA under which they don't have to use this particular feature?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- fulafel 10y ago
  Of course they have a choice. It's not very princinpled to sell your children's online privacy in exchange for some "grant" money going to an oppressive-dictatorship supporting company like BlueCoat. (Also it's possible can do server address based blocking without MITM)
  - akx 10y ago
    Sure, it's possible, if you're willing to blanket block all sorts of elastic IP ranges such as all of AWS.
    - fulafel 10y ago
      You can do it based on DNS.
- bradleyjg 10y ago
  >> content filtering is a requirement for the FCC's E-Rate program in which the government pays some of the cost of the school's internet connection. I'd be interested to see the cost of compliance versus the subsidy. The federal government puts an awful lot of strings on financing for schools given the relatively low percentage of overall funding they pay. I'd like to see some state somewhere turn down the money and see what they can do with the extra flexibility.
  - trome 10y ago
    IIRC the E-Rate program is a high double digit by percentage subsidy, such that Wireless ISPs will lose business by not having an E-Rate certification because the school will just stick with polky, 6mbps DSL for their 200+ kids at a rural school.