6 ms·

Kids Are Back in Classrooms and Laptops Are Still Spying on Them

13 points by asix66 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
AinderS 4y ago
Given that these laptops are paid for by tax dollars, and the monitoring continues at home, outside school hours, doesn't that make it unconstitutional search? That it's part of mandatory education only makes it worse. Do only families that can afford a second laptop (for each child) deserve privacy? Is the 4th amendment only for those who can afford to pay (in dollars, in addition to the price in blood and lead that getting rights in the first place requires)? If not, why? If the police required their own monitoring software on each school-issued laptop, that would be an obvious search. But schools have less authority than the police, not more! If a mere school can do this, that makes the infringement even more egregious!
- foxyv 4y ago
  Schools have always been a constitutional red zone. Unwarranted searches, surveillance, seizures, and prior restraint. The claim is that they are in loco parentis of the children and have nearly unlimited power over the kids unless they have parents that will advocate for them. Children's rights have always been a very contentious topic.
  - AinderS 4y ago
    But now the searches are extended into homes. I'm sure schools will argue that the laptops are school property and therefore children (or parents) have no rights on them, but let's think through what is happening here. I hate to use libertarian phrasing, but it will paint the clearest picture: The state takes money from parents. Money the parents now can't use to buy laptops for their children. Instead, the state buys the laptops, but now families have no rights on the laptops their money bought.
    - foxyv 4y ago
      > The state takes money from parents. Money the parents now can't use to buy laptops for their children. Not just parents, in fact, but everyone pays for those laptops. This is including people without children and federal funding which is paid for by everyone in the USA. (Except billionaires apparently) The state is just the people in this case. > But now the searches are extended into homes. Yes, and the parents would have a 4th amendment right here against unreasonable search and seizure, but the children will not because of the way the law views children as under the custody of their guardians and people entrusted by their guardians to care for them. At home, if a child is attending school virtually, the school may have custody of the child at that point. A child has similar legal rights to a prisoner in a jail. However, the custody of a child that is being taught remotely could be a source of contention. Especially if a parent is present.
love2read 4y ago
This is very unlikely to stop from my pov, the schools do own the laptops so they install whatever software they seem fit, spyware or otherwise. Until lawmakers say its illegal, nothing will change. It might be cynical but does anybody see any other way this ends in a different way?
ianmf 4y ago
These devices are funded by government/school systems. When you receive them, you have to sign a TOS or User agreement, where highly likely contains a verbage similar to "This device is subject to monitoring". This is the magic statement; it notifies you that they could be watching, and you are aware and agree to the search. The consent banner is typically mandatory on all government IT systems. Here is the one for the DOD: https://dso.dla.mil/ https://dso.dla.mil/
- waste_monk 4y ago
  I vaguely recall some (possibly apocryphal) story about someone who beat criminal charges back in the early days of computing by arguing that since the equipment they hacked in to did not have such a banner, it was clearly intended to be for public use.
LinuxBender 4y ago
One idea I have seen proposed to solve this would be to instead of funding public schools, create savings accounts for every student and allocate money to that account. Parents then decide the allocation. Public school, charter school, private school, structured accredited online home schooling, Offset the cost of a montessori school or whatever best fits the learning structure and style of the student. If the student has special needs then the funds could also be used to cover those costs. This could also go to school supplies from approved online vendors. This would put more pressure on public schools to choose 3rd party software vendors more carefully and more carefully consider what they are subjecting our children to, in my opinion. Optionally parents could contribute to that savings account as a tax deduction up to a limit, similar to a health flexible spending account. Philanthropists could also get a tax break by contributing to a batch of savings accounts in one or more localities with stipulations that the schools receiving funds not participate in categorical Orwellian or Totalitarian behavior and the organization would be hit with serious monetary penalties for violating the contracts.

13 points by asix66 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Given that these laptops are paid for by tax dollars, and the monitoring continues at home, outside school hours, doesn't that make it unconstitutional search? That it's part of mandatory education only makes it worse. Do only families that can afford a second laptop (for each child) deserve privacy? Is the 4th amendment only for those who can afford to pay (in dollars, in addition to the price in blood and lead that getting rights in the first place requires)? If not, why? If the police required their own monitoring software on each school-issued laptop, that would be an obvious search. But schools have less authority than the police, not more! If a mere school can do this, that makes the infringement even more egregious!

foxyv 4y ago
Schools have always been a constitutional red zone. Unwarranted searches, surveillance, seizures, and prior restraint. The claim is that they are in loco parentis of the children and have nearly unlimited power over the kids unless they have parents that will advocate for them. Children's rights have always been a very contentious topic.
- AinderS 4y ago
  But now the searches are extended into homes. I'm sure schools will argue that the laptops are school property and therefore children (or parents) have no rights on them, but let's think through what is happening here. I hate to use libertarian phrasing, but it will paint the clearest picture: The state takes money from parents. Money the parents now can't use to buy laptops for their children. Instead, the state buys the laptops, but now families have no rights on the laptops their money bought.
  - foxyv 4y ago
    > The state takes money from parents. Money the parents now can't use to buy laptops for their children. Not just parents, in fact, but everyone pays for those laptops. This is including people without children and federal funding which is paid for by everyone in the USA. (Except billionaires apparently) The state is just the people in this case. > But now the searches are extended into homes. Yes, and the parents would have a 4th amendment right here against unreasonable search and seizure, but the children will not because of the way the law views children as under the custody of their guardians and people entrusted by their guardians to care for them. At home, if a child is attending school virtually, the school may have custody of the child at that point. A child has similar legal rights to a prisoner in a jail. However, the custody of a child that is being taught remotely could be a source of contention. Especially if a parent is present.

love2read 4y ago

This is very unlikely to stop from my pov, the schools do own the laptops so they install whatever software they seem fit, spyware or otherwise. Until lawmakers say its illegal, nothing will change. It might be cynical but does anybody see any other way this ends in a different way?

ianmf 4y ago

These devices are funded by government/school systems. When you receive them, you have to sign a TOS or User agreement, where highly likely contains a verbage similar to "This device is subject to monitoring". This is the magic statement; it notifies you that they could be watching, and you are aware and agree to the search. The consent banner is typically mandatory on all government IT systems. Here is the one for the DOD: https://dso.dla.mil/ https://dso.dla.mil/

waste_monk 4y ago
I vaguely recall some (possibly apocryphal) story about someone who beat criminal charges back in the early days of computing by arguing that since the equipment they hacked in to did not have such a banner, it was clearly intended to be for public use.

LinuxBender 4y ago

One idea I have seen proposed to solve this would be to instead of funding public schools, create savings accounts for every student and allocate money to that account. Parents then decide the allocation. Public school, charter school, private school, structured accredited online home schooling, Offset the cost of a montessori school or whatever best fits the learning structure and style of the student. If the student has special needs then the funds could also be used to cover those costs. This could also go to school supplies from approved online vendors. This would put more pressure on public schools to choose 3rd party software vendors more carefully and more carefully consider what they are subjecting our children to, in my opinion. Optionally parents could contribute to that savings account as a tax deduction up to a limit, similar to a health flexible spending account. Philanthropists could also get a tax break by contributing to a batch of savings accounts in one or more localities with stipulations that the schools receiving funds not participate in categorical Orwellian or Totalitarian behavior and the organization would be hit with serious monetary penalties for violating the contracts.