>GoGuardian, a company that monitors students’ internet searches, that a student was doing a Google search for “how to kill myself” late one evening.
How is it monitoring searches done at home in the evening?
How is it monitoring searches done at home in the evening?
If the alarm is triggered at a higher level, the school direction will gasp and remove the program in a hurry for fear of being signaled as a conflictive place with low score. If not the disruption and massive lose of time and calling to annoyed parents would taint or nuke the stupid data collecting bussiness.
Obviously being watched all the time will cause distress and strange behaviour in students, something that psychologists will understand perfectly with just an innocent sad look.
I worked in a school district for a couple years where we did this. Certain keywords in searches would prompt email notifications too.
That is so unbelievably disgusting. This kind of abusive invasion of privacy should be a crime.
We locked the devices down so that student's couldn't get to certain kinds of apps, parts of the web, and had to be used with school issued Apple IDs. We (as the school district) were wholly responsible for what the student's did on these school owned devices. It's no different than monitoring what goes on in a school's computer lab, except the iPads are mobile devices.
That something is 'government owned' is no excuse for such a disgusting violation of privacy. Services paid by taxes should serve, not act as means to control people.
> We (as the school district) were wholly responsible for what the student's did on these school owned devices.
Why?? By what legal theory?? If person A gives item X to person B, why would A be responsible for what B does with X? Maybe if B was a minor and did not get parental consent - but that was not the case, was it?
If you assume that for every decision they make the #1 concern is to make it as difficult as possible to personally blame them for anything, that'll be a good guide to understanding their behavior.
Giving devices to kids is not saving on educational costs, and it's not making their backpacks any lighter. Books don't require tech support lines, chat bots, or surveillance tech to keep it all humming smoothly.
But worse of all, it's totally outside the proper purview of our education systems. Public schools don't implement, monitor, and protect a new mailbox on every student's property just for school-related mail delivery. Why should they be giving kids email addresses and expecting them to use those addresses?
School-issued Apple IDs? I cannot be the only one who reads that with extreme disgust and concern.
Bring back Apple IIs in the classrooms. And the TV/VCR combo on the wheeled cart.
if it's unreasonable to expect a child to clear this bar, then they are not yet responsible enough to be entrusted with their own computing device.
This makes sense in a corporate or military environment, but is simply not reasonable for home use. You're claiming that one can never allow anyone else to have unsupervised physical access to the machine (regardless of whether it's locked, powered off, etc)
I know of at least one country in Eastern Europe where this is true. If someone steals your car and kills someone with it, you are in serious trouble. I do not agree with the law.
Are the users expected to store their machines in fort Knox under armed guard?
>if you are doing even the bare minimum to secure the computer, you should not be vulnerable to these kind of pranks from siblings/classmates.
This is a statement that reads to me like "implementation is left as an exercise for the reader" type proclamation of how easy it is to secure things. Followed up with a snide remark about children not being ready for the machines.
Adults are constantly getting their machines compromised so it really seems like you're just applying a greater standard to people with less experience
of course not, that's an incredibly uncharitable reading of "reasonable", not even an intelligence agency would set such an impossible standard.
keep in mind this whole thread started with a comment about "what if your brother googles something bad as a prank?" I'm literally just talking about setting a password that isn't "password" and locking the computer when you walk away from it. this will protect you from attacks by the vast majority of schoolchildren. if a child can't prevent their friends from misusing their school account, they really shouldn't have one. I'm not sure why this is considered snide or controversial at all.
Actual adults have terrible security practices. Are you seriously trying to hold kids, who had no choice in the matter, to the same security standards? They’re kids, and likely won’t even understand the gravity of the situation we’re discussing here.
These aren’t grown adults working at a company. They’re kids who had laptops foisted upon them.
> Actual adults have terrible security practices. Are you seriously trying to hold kids, who had no choice in the matter, to the same security standards? They’re kids, and likely won’t even understand the gravity of the situation we’re discussing here.
> These aren’t grown adults working at a company. They’re kids who had laptops foisted upon them.
this is my point. I'm not holding the kids to any standard; I'm just saying this is a fundamental precondition to being entrusted with an account at an organization. if it's not reasonable to expect this of them, the school should not be issuing computers/accounts. the ultimate responsibility absolutely lies with the school.
>if it's unreasonable to expect a child to clear this bar, then they are not yet responsible enough to be entrusted with their own computing device.
There is no English interpretation of this that comes across as you saying it's the schools responsibility. It 100% sounds like you put the onus on the children
I don't think most organizations would hold you at fault if someone stole your computer and used a hardware exploit to gain access to your account. but if you have a blatantly terrible password or just leave the machine unsecured in a cafe, they will probably hold you accountable for whatever happens. I know my employer would.
When do they get clearance to use their brains?