12 ms·
Welcome to the K-12 Surveillance State
- csours 7y agoIf you ask the government to do something impossible, such as provide COMPLETE safety and security, they will try to do that. I think the news media bears some responsibility in this regard, as they always blame or call out whatever agency that fails to maintain safety and security, thus leading to severe measures to try to mitigate the previous failure.
- FrozenTuna 7y agoAbsolutely. Even in this thread there are arguments about there being dark areas where the cameras can't see so they won't be effective enough. Nothing was learned from no child left behind. 100% policies don't work.
- masswerk 7y agoArchived article: http://archive.is/nD0O9 http://archive.is/nD0O9
- LocalH 7y agoIt's interesting the parallels that can be drawn to tobacco addiction, of all things. Hook 'em while they're young, and they won't think anything about expanding the surveillance when they're in power, because it's what they're used to, so why not if it can protect people?
- artificial 7y agoWhy not examine it from another perspective? Risk and reward? Are more people served by it or harmed? For example look at how useful dashcams and bodycams are to situations! Oh and an anecdote! I was parking at work and the building security cameras witnessed the collision (driver was on their phone and tboned me) making the insurance claim open and shut. We have security camera inside as well with displays throughout the building making finding people in a building with multiple floors easy.
- moorhosj 7y agoI think the point is that once the cat is out of the bag it’s hard to put it back. For example, at first more people were helped by opiates than harmed. As time passed, by the time we realized that relationship had changed, we already had a bunch of addicted citizens. It isn’t too much of a stretch to imagine an authoritarian government using our own surveillance video for nefarious purposes.
- Rainymood 7y agoI don't want to use the word "literally" too much but ... China is literally doing this.
- DocTomoe 7y agoThen you get filmed with something that looks awfully like the joint they found in the trashcan on that grainy security footage, and you're in prison for the next five years, lose your job, your home and your family. It is easy to opt for more surveillance until it comes around to bite you.
- SamuelAdams 7y agoReminds me of this answer: https://security.stackexchange.com/a/33471 https://security.stackexchange.com/a/33471
- simplify 7y agoThat story is entirely fiction: http://www.throwcase.com/2014/12/21/that-five-monkeys-and-a-banana-story-is-rubbish/ http://www.throwcase.com/2014/12/21/that-five-monkeys-and-a-...
- nlarew 7y agoI don't think the message of the story relies on whether or not scientists actually put a bunch of monkeys in a room or not.
- panzagl 7y agoSince I can't read the article I can only go with story time here- my wife has cameras in her room and she loves them. Fights about 'who started it' are ended with the words, 'Ok, let's look at the video'. And when some little bully gets called on the carpet and their bullying parent comes in all set to steamroller administration with 'that's not what my child said happened why are you picking on them' the principal just rolls the footage and watches as the realization that their kid is a little shit dawns on the parent.
- asdf333 7y agothanks for the real life anecdote. just like in startups, its helpful to hear from the actual users instead of what some armchair critics feel is happening. however, i do worry about fights and bullying being taken to 'the dark corners of the school' such as the bathroom or some unused stairwell
- magduf 7y ago>however, i do worry about fights and bullying being taken to 'the dark corners of the school' such as the bathroom or some unused stairwell 1) They did that a lot back in the "old days" anyway, since it was away from other people 2) bullies usually have poor impulse control and don't think immediately about the consequences of their actions, so they frequently won't think about the cameras, so at least some of the time they'll do their bullying in view of the cameras.
- leetcrew 7y agoregarding 2) that may be true of many bullies, but I would expect at least some of them to learn how to get away with it. I could certainly imagine that some bullies would start exclusively tormenting their victims in camera deadzones and the victim finally stands up for themselves in view of the camera. all the evidence would show that that kid started a fight unprovoked.
- ticmasta 7y ago
- cj 7y agoThe paywalls on all major news sites are driving me crazy. Not because they cost money (I am willing to pay), but because it's not practical to buy an online subscription to 10+ major news sites individually. Is there a service that lets you pay 1 monthly fee for a subscription to the top 10 major (paywalled) news sites?
- jbigelow76 7y agoThe closest you'll get is Apple News but even that won't include the entirety of the NY Times or WaPo since those publications don't want to cede control of the customer relationship with their readers.
- runwerks 7y agoapple news + seems to fit some of that.
- xfitm3 7y agoPaying for news only rewards paywalls.
- jedberg 7y agoWhat's wrong with that? They work hard to bring you that news. They should be paid.
- logfromblammo 7y agoThe problem is that no news source is good enough to be anyone's only news source, and since most consumers don't have vendor relationship management software to keep them all straight, we can only keep track of a limited number of subscriptions, across all forms of media, regardless of what each costs in money. Individually subscribing to 10 different paywalled news sites is not going to happen among the general public. Paying exactly the same aggregate monthly price for all ten, via just one redistributor, is more tolerable, especially if the customer can individually select subscriptions without forced bundling. Subscribe by checking this box; unsubscribe by unchecking it. If I can sign up online, but have to cancel with at least one phone call guaranteed to last 30 minutes or more, I don't care if it's only $0.05 a month; I'm not buying it. It's not always the money cost. Sometimes it's the cognitive overhead or transaction friction. My use of the Internet lately seems to be governed more by the number of accounts I am willing to manage than by how much I am willing to pay, and the fragmentation is going to kill some of the sites that can't solve that problem. When the NYT is in full control of its own paywall, you get nonsense like described here: https://dannysullivan.com/new-york-times-subscription-3480 https://dannysullivan.com/new-york-times-subscription-3480 [2014], where it's cheaper to buy the print version and just throw it away to get past the paywall, than to get the unlimited digital subscription. And this is likely fueled by a dark pattern: in order to get a price for print delivery, you have to call a phone number during NYC business hours, whereas you can just click to get an offer for all-digital access. It's only $8/4 weeks right now, which seems like a good money value, but I'm just not in the mood to worry about yet another website login.
- opwieurposiu 7y agoCurrently trying to decide how to school my kids ages 3yr and 1yr. Public, private or homeschool. Parents who have been there, How did you choose?
- alistairSH 7y agoHomeschool: Not a viable option for us. Both of us worked, with high salaries, but not high enough to easily forgo either income. Plus, neither of us felt qualified to teach some middle-school and many high-school level courses - so we worried about a transition from home-school into a school during adolescence. Private: We didn't see an upside in our region. Public schools are excellent. The local private schools don't perform materially better (once you adjust for public schools being required to serve low-income and special needs students). Downtown private schools would have had an upside, but at great expense ($35k+/year) - we thought saving that money for college was a better idea. Public - we chose to live in an area with excellent public schools (both because of the schools, but also proximity to jobs, liked the area, etc). Public schools have their problems. But most can be mitigated by "voting with your feet", paying attention to local politics, and being actively engaged with the school.
- dTal 7y ago>Public schools have their problems. But most can be mitigated by "voting with your feet" I would like to note that this is tantamount to voting with your wallet. Areas with more expensive housing will have better public schools.
- mavhc 7y agoIn USA, because they're funded by house taxes
- astazangasta 7y agoNot always; in California, for example, property taxes were vitiated by Prop 13, and so the state budget covers most of education costs (60%), which in theory should mean less local variation. In practice it means schools in wealthy districts hold "bake sales" where rich parents make sizeable donations (like auctioning off their timeshare in Tahoe) to their kid's school. The result is the same - schools full of rich kids have plenty of money, schools full of poor kids don't.
- thatfrenchguy 7y agoIs there any data on how being recorded at all times affects the behavioral development of those children ? Adults definitely behave differently when they know they are monitored (I personally know I do), so I wonder what kind of mental health issues would hide in those children if they are monitored at all times... I also feel like using this to prevent bullying or suicides is the wrong option, as educating kids themselves would probably be a more sensible idea (but hey you need teaching personnel that’s decently paid for that !). It’s interesting that this surveillance is banned in France because teachers and pupils have « a right to privacy »: https://www.cnil.fr/fr/la-videosurveillance-videoprotection-dans-les-etablissements-scolaires https://www.cnil.fr/fr/la-videosurveillance-videoprotection-...
- tokai 7y ago>Is there any data on how being recorded at all times affects the behavioral development of those children? The literature list from this paper[0] might be a good place to start looking. [0] https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137308863_4 https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137308863_4
- thatfrenchguy 7y agoThanks, exactly what I was looking for :-)
- bilbo0s 7y ago>Is there any data on how being recorded at all times affects the behavioral development of those children ?... I don't have any data or anything, but I think that brain development is not even complete until well after 12th grade in humans. In particular, I think the ability to self regulate is compromised. So here's the thing, the people doing all this are child development experts, so they would know all about brain development. A lot more than myself. In a very real way, these guys have made it a policy to monitor children who they know very well will likely not change their behaviors due to being monitored. So you have to wonder if this is just more about attribution and the ability to justify punishments? Just administrators playing CYA? "No ma'am. We know it was your son who assaulted that girl. Here's the video for your perusal." "No son. We know you said so and so to that other student over there. Here's the video." "No sir. That was definitely your daughter fighting over there. Here's the video." Etc etc etc. So in answer to your question, "No." Children will not change their behavior. Certainly not at the mean. Welcome any corrections from any child dev experts on HN if I'm wrong about brain development in children.
- klodolph 7y agoBefore we had children misclassified as threats by errant algorithms, we misclassified them with people. There were a bunch of zero-tolerance policies passed in the early 2000s, and they often provided no path to understand or appeal the decision to label a child as a threat.
- zeulhex 7y agoWhat kind of society will we live in when the generation raised in this environment is in charge?
- atm0sphere 7y ago1984.
- Nasrudith 7y agoI can see two possibile outcomes named after the stereotypical age of the reaction. The "child" outcome where it is accepted as the norm or the "teenaged" one where they tear it down and call previous generations terrible/stupid people for being responsible for it. Essentially that seems to be the pattern of resolution of changes - sometimes applied recursively in a cyclic way. One example is baroque vs austere in church design and iconoclasm. I am hoping for teenaged ones to gain dominance since the people who look at the surveillance and say "What the fuck is wrong with you - you are literally acting like antagonists in a young adult science fiction dystopia!" seem to be a minority in influence currently.
- tastygreenapple 7y agoThe surveillance is less than worthless when schools are so constrained in their ability to meter out discipline. I went to one of the first surveillance schools in my state and I was bullied relentlessly, despite the video evidence the school was reluctant to suspend my attacker. This may be because my bully was black and from the hood and my school was sued by the NAACP to accept more black kids and keep the suspension rate 'racially equitable' - which amounted to different punishments depending on the race of the rule breaker.
- Nasrudith 7y agoThe truth is it isn't there ability to hand it out as you would find out if you did wrong. The issue is they don't care if it doesn't go against their fucked up social order.