Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Judge Issues Temporary Order Blocking Expulsion For Refusing To Wear RFID Tag

Unknown Lamer posted about 2 years ago | from the dang-terrorist-judges dept.

Education 305

An anonymous reader writes with an update about the student refusing to wear an RFID badge in Texas. From the article: "A district court judge for Bexar County has granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) to ensure that Andrea Hernandez, a San Antonio high school student from John Jay High School's Science and Engineering Academy, can continue her studies pending an upcoming trial. The Northside Independent School District (NISD) in Texas recently informed the sophomore student that she would be suspended for refusing to wear a 'Smart' Student ID card embedded with a Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tracking chip."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

From the original article... (2, Insightful)

History's Coming To (1059484) | about 2 years ago | (#42074893)

The student was offered a security card with no battery and chip, but still refused. I'd have some sympathy if the college hadn't offered this option, but as it stands it's simply refusal to wear an ID badge and has nothing to do with RFID tracking...good luck to her when it comes to finding a job with any company that uses ID badges of any description.

Re:From the original article... (5, Informative)

L1mewater (557442) | about 2 years ago | (#42074941)

Keep reading the article. The father claims that they would remove the RFID from her badge only if they ceased criticizing the program and publicly endorsed it or something. If she had just gone along with that offer, plenty of other folks would be complaining about her not standing up for her principles.

Simple Science (4, Interesting)

Roger W Moore (538166) | about 2 years ago | (#42075343)

Given that the school claims to be a "Science and Engineering Academy" surely it isn't that hard for the students to figure out how to disable the RFID chips either by passive screening, hammer or quick zap in the microwave? That way the idiots in charge can go on in blissful ignorance and the students don't get tracked remotely but still have the ID card functionality.

Re:Simple Science (5, Insightful)

qbast (1265706) | about 2 years ago | (#42075733)

And get expelled for destruction of school property, great idea.

Re:Simple Science (5, Funny)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 2 years ago | (#42075897)

I'm sorry sir, I left my ID card in my pants while trying to dry them off in the microwave oven, I was in a hurry this morning.

Re:Simple Science (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075921)

They're doing the best they can do at the moment while staying legal, rather than be a complete moron like you and frying property that isn't theirs. You're just as bad as the "idiots in charge", except they seem smarter than you...

Re:From the original article... (3, Insightful)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 2 years ago | (#42075433)

Exactly. It's all about removing the chip, not ditching the lanyard/card thing. Nowhere did they mention not putting adhesive Faraday screen on the back of it and in the lining of their jacket, lol. Try reading that chip now. I'd be more than happy to leave it in there in that case.

Re:From the original article... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075641)

Her principles are stupid. I mean it: with a gps tracker in your cell phone which can be remotely-activated in "emergencies", RFID in any toll-road card, RFID in every modern credit card, GPS tracking in most modern cars... it's beyond stupid to be making this stand. Not only is it a good thing to be able to track student attendence and whereabouts more accurately -- and make no mistake, this has been part-and-parcel of educational institutions from gradeschool to university for a hundred years -- it's also an unavoidable facet of modern life in any technically-advanced society... and being a "Science and Engineering" student, living life in a technically-advanced society is a foregone conclusion for this young woman.

Then is there never a time to say "enough?" (5, Insightful)

Press2ToContinue (2424598) | about 2 years ago | (#42075805)

Is it always a good idea then to stay at the back of the bus? Just because it happens ubiquitously throughout society, then we should never make a stand?

Re:From the original article... (4, Informative)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 2 years ago | (#42075913)

You can chose to not have a cellphone. You can chose not to have a credit card.

But this RFID card is mandatory, which is the problem.

Re:From the original article... (1)

detritus. (46421) | about 2 years ago | (#42075801)

[..] about her not standing up for her principles.

And standing up to her Principals.

Re:From the original article... (5, Informative)

Paran (28208) | about 2 years ago | (#42074947)

Except the conditions on removing the chip required endorsement and giving up the right to criticize the tracking program.

Re:From the original article... (5, Insightful)

Penguinisto (415985) | about 2 years ago | (#42074971)

You missed the part where the school also required that the parents and student must vocally support the RFID program, even with a crippled badge.

You also missed the part where wearing said badge -crippled or not- implies acceptance of the program to the other students, forcing compliance.

Re:From the original article... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075953)

Uhm... I can't imagine a school forcing students, let alone parents, vocally to support ANYTHING, and if they do, the court will surely rule against them.

However, if they disable the badges, if the school actually uses them, seems to me it will be real obvious, and the kids who do this will be obligated to pay for the replacements. I worked somewhere once where I had to wear an access badge, that had an RFID chip in it. It was mandatory because you had to display the badge (it had a photographic ID on it that let anyone you pass in the hallway, security forces, etc., know that you're allowed to be where you are,) and also it functioned as the key for getting into various secured areas of the building.

If you disable it, you can't open the fucking door, you'll be late for work, you'll get fired. So don't disable the badge. Presumably the school is using them (or should be) the same way, namely students have to have them, have to have NOT destroyed or disabled them, or they won't be able to get to class.

Case closed. As for the school tracking their "movements," THEY'RE IN FUCKING SCHOOL! I SHOULD GODDAMNED HOPE THE SCHOOL KNOWS WHERE THE FUCK THEY ARE WHILE THEY'RE... AT SCHOOL!

Re:From the original article... (4, Interesting)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 2 years ago | (#42075007)

Well I think at this point it is the principal of the matter.
I imagine she would of been perfectly fine wearing the normal ID badge, but after encountering so much opposition she has dug in her heels.

And she is right to. She is guaranteed a high-school public education and I doubt that it is legal to force things like this onto children and then expel them when they refuse. She is not disrupting other children's educations nor being violent of otherwise harmful, so the public education system does not have grounds for expulsion.

Re:From the original article... (5, Informative)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 2 years ago | (#42075063)

She is not disrupting other children's educations nor being violent of otherwise harmful, so the public education system does not have grounds for expulsion.

Well, technically by not being "in attendance" they do, because thanks to some stupid laws (NCLB, I think?) high school funding is based on attendance. If a student is absent more than X days, the school is denied funding for that student (and it's easier ot just expel them and wipe their hands clean than anything).

Which leads to solutions like this, where they don't care if one student swipes 10 RFID cards entering a class - they just want the record to state that said student was "present" at that class for that money.

And of course, if a parent wonders where their kid is, they can always point to the RFID record, oh-you-mean-someone-else-stole-their-ID-not-our-problem.

Re:From the original article... (5, Insightful)

TubeSteak (669689) | about 2 years ago | (#42075215)

If a student is absent more than X days, the school is denied funding for that student (and it's easier ot just expel them and wipe their hands clean than anything).

They schools also play games where students get transferred to another school, so that they don't count on the rolls and the clock is reset for the second school.

Ultimately, education starts at home.

Re:From the original article... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075137)

Well I think at this point it is the principal of the matter.
I imagine she would of been perfectly fine wearing the normal ID badge, but after encountering so much opposition she has dug in her heels.

And she is right to. She is guaranteed a high-school public education and I doubt that it is legal to force things like this onto children and then expel them when they refuse. She is not disrupting other children's educations nor being violent of otherwise harmful, so the public education system does not have grounds for expulsion.

I think you meant the principle of the matter. Here's the principal of the matter: https://nisd.schoolnet.com/outreach/jjhs/admin/harris/

This is the guy responsible for trying to expel her because she stood up for her rights.

Re:From the original article... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075945)

She would HAVE been.

There's no such thing as "should of", therefore the rest of your comment is the result of a deranged imagination.

Re:From the original article... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075047)

no one gives a shit about your sympathy. it's not about sympathy. tell your mom to stop fucking goats.

Re:From the original article... (4, Informative)

PlusFiveTroll (754249) | about 2 years ago | (#42075103)

>tl:dr is the internet equivalent of sticking you fingers in your ears and going "lalala". We don't need to know.

tl:dr is what you did with the original article, and you didn't put any further research in to it. They told her she could have one with no battery if she didn't talk bad about the program. From other news sources (from before the infowars one) they state students that didn't have the fully working RFID card were not allowed to participate in student voting and other functions. Also not stated is that this is a pilot program for 100 other surrounding schools. Someone wants to to shut up so they can get rich implementing this at all the schools in the area.

Re:From the original article... (5, Insightful)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 2 years ago | (#42075221)

A lot of people don't stand up for their rights just for themselves, they stand up for the rights of all. "We'll give you an exception because you made some noise, but we're still going to press ahead with this utterly pointless scheme to chip every student" is not really a victory.

And, as others have pointed out, it would require them to endorse it.

Re:From the original article... (4, Insightful)

mysidia (191772) | about 2 years ago | (#42075503)

The student was offered a security card with no battery and chip, but still refused. I'd have some sympathy if the college hadn't offered this option

And you'd have some sympathy for Rosa parks, if the driver hadn't offered her the option of standing, instead of leaving the bus?

It might be work, if the college promised to have no battery, chip, or RFID in the cards of all students.

Otherwise, it's just a continuation of the status quo.

Attempting to work out an exception for the person with the courage to refuse and mount a legal challenge with great personal cost, without changing the rules for everyone, doesn't rectify the social injustice; it just results in a situation that is even more unfair,....

Oh, and also.... if you have one or two people with no RFID chip, they will be easy to track.

I'm surprised they don't work out a deal with that company that lets business monitor foot traffic in their stores by tracking individual cell phones.

Re:From the original article... (1)

mpe (36238) | about 2 years ago | (#42075589)

The student was offered a security card with no battery and chip, but still refused.

If the device contains a battery then it will have a much longer effective range compared with a passive RFID. At least until the battery fails. Wonder if anyone has considered what to do when that starts happening. There's also the issue of what to do when bullies and criminals find out what the effective range of these devices is.

An idea (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42074901)

Tin foil wrapping... just saying.

Number (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42074929)

Why not just make the ID a number tatooed onto the forearm, papers please, Oh Godwined

What's the big deal? (2, Insightful)

cob666 (656740) | about 2 years ago | (#42074955)

I personally don't see any problem with students having to wear RFID badges while they are at school.

Re:What's the big deal? (5, Insightful)

Kingofearth (845396) | about 2 years ago | (#42075009)

Yes, let's condition our children to be treated like cattle. I'm sure that will do wonders for our free society!

Re:What's the big deal? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075209)

Yes, let's condition our children to be treated like cattle. I'm sure that will do wonders for our free society!

LOL. Have you ever BEEN to a school, or a hospital for that matter?
You have to manage people this way, or staff much much higher in these institutions. So sorry, be willing to pay for 3x as many teachers/TA's or drop your argument.

Honest question, how many people does your manager have reporting to him, and how many to you? Think about 30:1 for a minute, and that these are CHILDREN.

A visible ID badge is a requirement at almost all of the best places you'd want your child to be employed at, and hell, even most other places or is a nametag all that different to you?

Re:What's the big deal? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075839)

Lol, kill yourself

Re:What's the big deal? (1)

mysidia (191772) | about 2 years ago | (#42075549)

Yes, let's condition our children to be treated like cattle. I'm sure that will do wonders for our free society!

Sure... I wonder why they aren't implanting the RFID tags though?

RFID badges are easily traded/held by friends, zapped with a microwave, or blocked with RF blocking.

And they expel you for damage to (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075933)

And they expel you for damage to their property.

As to "they won't abuse this", remember the School who gave laptops to kids and turned on the laptop webcam to spy on the children? And one child had it in her bedroom.

Webcam.

Being accessed by a school employee.

When in a girl's bedroom.

Remember that?

Re:What's the big deal? (4, Insightful)

Paran (28208) | about 2 years ago | (#42075027)

Then allow them to chip your children and stay away from mine.

Re:What's the big deal? (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075051)

Also, they should have serial numbers tattooed on there arms.

You know, to go with the theme.

Re:What's the big deal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075057)

I personally don't see any problem with students having to wear RFID badges while they are at school.

You are free to post your ss#, mother maidens name, and your birthdate online, if you have nothing to hide. But just because you fail to see the problem, with this or being tracked in general don't make the rest of us suffer for your blind ignorance.

Re:What's the big deal? (0)

guitarMan666 (1388859) | about 2 years ago | (#42075189)

I don't get this ultimate desire for privacy. Who the hell cares where you go? What does it matter if you aren't committing a crime? You are no one. The government has bigger fish to fry. Just because they can track you doesn't mean they are the least bit interested in doing so until you pop up on their radar.

Re:What's the big deal? (5, Informative)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about 2 years ago | (#42075397)

I don't get this ultimate desire for privacy.

It is not the government's business what you do - provided you are not committing terrorism etc. This is a fundamental principle. It has nothing to do with whether you have done anything it is simply that the government has *no business* looking into your private life without certain exceptions that citizens have acquiesced to for the common good (eg. certain government agencies may carry out investigations but this requires checks and balances to prevent it being misused [eg. judicial oversight]).

It is sad that you don't get it. Unfortunately many many people just don't grok the concept that the government is by us and for us, we are not servants of it (yet). It simply has no justification to probe our private affairs - that is not what governments were created for.

In this case the school has taken a leaf out of the government's book and is completely mistaken in it should be doing. Yes, reducing truancy is a good thing. However, *enforcing* invasive tracking is completely wrong. It shows how detached from reality the school governance is - they simply don't understand they down 'own' their students. Although this is by no means unusual, many in the teaching profession are using to ordering their wards around exactly as they see fit (I've seen it for myself).

Unfortunately, there are too many people who don't get the desire for privacy and use the "don't worry if you have nothing to hide" and "you are too small for the government to worry about" fallacies. The truth is that the government is usurping powers that it has not been granted and we should not go along with it - citizens have not granted the government these powers. Notice how that works, the legitimate authority flows from the citizens to the government, not the other way around. By usurping these powers the government (or school, in this case) is overstepping its permitted authority (that is, committing what would be a crime if a citizen did it). This must be pointed out and resisted (as the student so courageously did, despite probable peer pressure from mistaken sheep).

Can you at least get that? She has the right to defend her rights. The government and school have no business *forcing* her to provide her whereabouts with RFID. If she is absent from school then that can be noted and action taken - this does not mean they have carte blanche to force tracking on her or anyone else. It should be unacceptable to even suggest this, yet the sheeple even support the illegitimate demand against someone standing up for their right not to be tracked. Surely you can understand that, yes?

Re:What's the big deal? (1)

guitarMan666 (1388859) | about 2 years ago | (#42075685)

RFID is close range. If she isn't at school her whereabouts won't be noted. The RFID would simply monitor location while on school property so if she passes an exit (which could theoretically also be against her will) it will be noted and intervention could be implemented. Tracking on school grounds is not invasive. At all. I don't care if my location is traced because I'm not committing a crime and (more importantly) if I were to be in an emergency situation, I'd want to be found swiftly. I understand that government is by us and for us I also understand that there are implied powers that the government can take. Location tracking for public schools and emergency response seem like appropriate use of implied powers.

Re:What's the big deal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075883)

But reliance upon such is at least as bad. If a kid is reported missing and someone trusts the badge that says the kid is in a hallway or a room somewhere when in reality it is only the badge that is there after being pulled off, then it actually delayed response. And it will happen, just as people have been thrown in jail for committing arson when it turned out it was their kid that used their store rewards card to buy the matches and lighter fluid. People make stupid assumptions about technology all the time, both about how it actually will be used and how reliable it is.

Re:What's the big deal? (1)

mpe (36238) | about 2 years ago | (#42075917)

RFID is close range.

Even for a purely passive RFID this can be tens of metres.

If she isn't at school her whereabouts won't be noted. The RFID would simply monitor location while on school property.

Only the badge itself stays on school property. It's basically a transponder which will send out a reply whenever it receives an appropriate signal.

At all. I don't care if my location is traced because I'm not committing a crime

What if a criminal wants to know your location so they can commit a crime against you?

Re:What's the big deal? (2)

Fjandr (66656) | about 2 years ago | (#42075399)

until you pop up on their radar

That's the problem. You never know when you're going to pop up on their radar, but if you ever do they have the capability to fuck you in many more ways than they would without any semblance of privacy rights.

Re:What's the big deal? (4, Insightful)

Jethro (14165) | about 2 years ago | (#42075441)

I fear that your attitude will be the prevailing one. In the future I foresee myself being the outcast because I /don't/ share everything about my entire life on Facebook/Twitter/Whatever, because I don't let my cellphone announce where I am at all times.

I'm not worried about the government tracking me. Hell, if they want to, they will. There's not a lot I can do about it. It's everything ELSE tracking me. It's vast databases containing vast amounts of information about all of us. It's large corporations who use you and I as products.

Look, I hate getting those things in the mail addressed to "Resident". But I hate even more the ones addressed to me directly, from people I've never heard about. And how do those happen? Because someone somewhere took YOUR privacy and sold it.

You say "you are no one". Untrue. You are data. Data people can use. Data people can make money off. If you're ok being treated as a product, that's your business. I am not.

Re:What's the big deal? (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 years ago | (#42075469)

Read more fiction, think, and then extrapolate. We are being slowly boiled.

Re:What's the big deal? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075607)

Just because they can track you doesn't mean they are the least bit interested in doing so until you pop up on their radar.

This assumes several things:
1) The government is the only one with access to the data
2) The government is as friendly as you believe
3) There are no subsections of the government that aren't as friendly
4) No party will ever be elected that isn't. (See the rise of every fascist/dictator government in history).

Re:What's the big deal? (2)

mpe (36238) | about 2 years ago | (#42075667)

Who the hell cares where you go? What does it matter if you aren't committing a crime? You are no one. The government has bigger fish to fry. Just because they can track you doesn't mean they are the least bit interested in doing so until you pop up on their radar.

People interested in kidnapping, robbing or raping you can be very interested in knowing where you are. Similarly criminals using identity fraud want identities of "nobodies". From the point of view of a criminal (or "intelligence" operative) they have more time to escape if the cops are after you instead!

Re:What's the big deal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075673)

Trolls aren't very creative nowadays, are they?

Re:What's the big deal? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075079)

your opinion on this topic at this late date, is irrelevant.

tell your mom to stop fucking goats.

Re:What's the big deal? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075101)

That's courageous of you to have no problem with someone-who-isn't-you being required to wear a badge. But what's the upside of making them wear the badge?

Turns out the school had no problem with the student not wearing the badge, too! There is no upside; the conflict is about nothing. They outed themselves as requiring the badges for no reason and .. shit, you just can't make up stuff this crazy. If the father of the student is to be believed...

“He told me in a meeting that if my daughter would proudly wear her student ID card around her neck so everyone could see, he would be able to quietly remove her chip from her student ID card,” Steve Hernandez told WND. “He went on to say as part of the accommodation my daughter and I would have to agree to stop criticizing the program and publicly support it."

.. the school is being just plain evil here. If they really made the above offer, fuck them with fire. Make people lose jobs over this. Please oh please, Hernandez, tell us you have a recording of that offer.

Re:What's the big deal? (2, Interesting)

guitarMan666 (1388859) | about 2 years ago | (#42075161)

Because there isn't one. Tracking student attendance is commonplace and has been for many years. Tracking student location is also commonplace. This device simply automates it. Now if she can make a case based on her religion then good on her but the right to privacy is usually suspended while on campus. In my district, this took the form of a signed agreement form by parent and student agreeing that, while on school property and/or time, the Code of Conduct superseded legal rights. You can sign away legal rights in a contract. It isn't dehumanizing and many workplaces use RFID cards to restrict access to sensitive areas and to keep track of who is coming into the building. There is a lot of FUD surrounding this kind of thing and so long as these are limited to schools and workplaces I fail to see any problem.

Re:What's the big deal? (4, Insightful)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 2 years ago | (#42075255)

, the Code of Conduct superseded legal rights. You can sign away legal rights in a contract.

Utter bogus bullshit. You BELIEVED that nonsense? It's been ruled, again and again, that you cannot sign away any of your rights with a contract. No TOS, no code of conduct, no contract, no employer's regulations, NOTHING supersedes your rights as established by law. Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, the right to be secure in your person and your home, all of that is LAW, and nothing supersedes it.

Good God, how can ANYONE roll over and play dead, just because some arrogant bastard tells them to? This is America, not some warlord's regime in the outback of Africa.

Re:What's the big deal? (1)

guitarMan666 (1388859) | about 2 years ago | (#42075305)

I was taught this at college by a lawyer in Legal Issues for the Musician 1 - Contract Law. Unless you're a lawyer too or can provide proof of what you're saying I will continue under that assumption. Also, I don't appreciate your tone. Let's keep it civil, thanks.

Re:What's the big deal? (1, Insightful)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 2 years ago | (#42075395)

The lawyer taught you wrong. You cannot sign away your rights. Tone? Did you say tone? Try this: do some loan sharking. Get some chump to agree that if he doesn't pay you back, you can break his knees. Get it in writing. Get a nice, legal contract, get it notarized, witnessed, get all the trimmings for your contract.

When he fails to make a payment or two, go visit him. Bring your ball bat, or whatever, and inform the police that you may need some protection while enforcing your rights under the contract. Tell the cops that you expect your client may resist having his knees broken.

Try it. The contract supersedes his rights, isn't that what you just said?

If your claim about a lawyer teaching you that shit is true, you need to get your tuition back. The rat bastard LIED TO YOU!!

Re:What's the big deal? (3, Informative)

Xeno man (1614779) | about 2 years ago | (#42075651)

There are some rights you can sign away and some you can't. Happens all the time in settlements. You can sing a paper stating that in exchange for receiving payment you waive your right to sue but you can't sign away human rights. You can sign an agreement that failure to pay back a loan in 30 days results in your becoming a slave to the other party but it's completely unenforceable.

Re:What's the big deal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075645)

It entirely depends on what rights your talking about.

Legal Issues for the Musician

This suggests they were talking about Intellectual Property rights to your music. Copyright, royalties etc. Can you sign away IP rights in a contract? Absolutely you can.

Human rights, privacy rights. These are completely different in law and you cannot sign those away.

Any contract attempting to do so either invalidates that section of the contract or the entire contract as a result (depending how written and how enforced).

Re:What's the big deal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075309)

Because there isn't one. Tracking student attendance is commonplace and has been for many years. Tracking student location is also commonplace. This device simply automates it. Now if she can make a case based on her religion then good on her but the right to privacy is usually suspended while on campus. In my district, this took the form of a signed agreement form by parent and student agreeing that, while on school property and/or time, the Code of Conduct superseded legal rights. You can sign away legal rights in a contract. It isn't dehumanizing and many workplaces use RFID cards to restrict access to sensitive areas and to keep track of who is coming into the building. There is a lot of FUD surrounding this kind of thing and so long as these are limited to schools and workplaces I fail to see any problem.

You're quite correct: There isn't a problem with taking attendance without these cards. Schools have been doing it for decades. Any student that simply doesn't want to have to carry one of these things for no other reason than they don't want one has every right to immediately toss the ID in the garbage in front of whoever hands it to them. Any school admins or principals that get their panties in a wad and decide to make a bigger deal out of a student's refusal to carry a school ID than just doing their jobs and focusing on education should lose said jobs.

Robert Harris should be fired, along with anyone else who participated in the move to expel that student.

Re:What's the big deal? (5, Insightful)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 years ago | (#42075515)

Work is not school. They are not equivalent and you would do very well to remember that. What adults CHOOSE to do when they enter the workplace is VASTLY different from forcing it on a child. I dont know about you, but i have always had the ability to walk away from a job i dont like, kids dont have that option. Are you starting to see the fundamental difference?

Re:What's the big deal? (1)

jitterman (987991) | about 2 years ago | (#42075201)

Slippery slope starts now...

Re:What's the big deal? (1)

MitchDev (2526834) | about 2 years ago | (#42075579)

And people like you are a large part of what's wrong wth America. The founding fathers would start a new American revolution against the current government if they were alive and saw the shit government pulls these days...

Re:What's the big deal? (2)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 2 years ago | (#42075725)

And people like you are a large part of what's wrong wth America. The founding fathers would start a new American revolution against the current government if they were alive and saw the shit government pulls these days...

Being not an American, articles like this remind me why I want to laugh hysterically when someone claims the USA are "the freest country in the world".

Get them started while they're young . . . (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42074973)

. . . and they won't mind being tracked by the government when they are adults.

I can understand her (-1, Offtopic)

MindPrison (864299) | about 2 years ago | (#42075015)

It's not easy for her, she has probably heard all this fuzz about RFID tags and who knows what she thinks those things are. Yes they can transmit a radio signal, yes they can contain and ID number, heck they can even contain a complete picture of the girl, including name, address and anything else you want to put on a ROM/Ram chip in there.

But I've experimenting with RF (radio transmissions basically ALL my life as a radio amateur, yes...I'm one of those that build and construct my own gear, so I know a bit about this stuff), and I can tell you...any ID badge of this size, will not - and CAN not - due to laws of physics and much more, transmit a signal over any significant distance, not to mention battery capacity in a small badge like that (trust me on this one, I've been building and constructing record breaking bugging devices that can reach over 1km over 3 weeks on a 3v battery) and I know for a fact, you simply - can not - break the laws of physics when it comes to burning energy and emissions etc. reach that far with those badges, it just isn't possible. YET.

But I can understand her, she's a layman, she have NO clue if this is possible or not, given that scenario - I think myself...I'd refuse to carry any sort of RFID badge, if I suspected that it would do me no good, and would be of no use to me. Who knows? I've worked at several schools - and we do have RFID badges to open doors, usually accompanied with a 4 digit code we need to enter after exposing the badge to the reader surface. Even so, this RFID signal is read and transmitted several inches if not less, of no use to any sniffers or spies nearby. So no worries there. But then again, understanding this, requires knowledge, of which I suspect - she has none.

Re:I can understand her (4, Insightful)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | about 2 years ago | (#42075049)

You took the ball and ran the wrong way. This has nothing to do with fear of radio transmissions of any kind. It is about privacy and principle

Re:I can understand her (-1, Flamebait)

Splab (574204) | about 2 years ago | (#42075097)

Since you obviously spend all your time in a basement out in the hicks, I'd like to introduce you a fancy concept - doors. They keep things out and in, depending on where you want them, and one nice nifty part of a door is they are rather small and a quite easy to control area, where you can herd your cattle err... students through and track them nice n dandy.

Re:I can understand her (1)

zyzko (6739) | about 2 years ago | (#42075173)

RFID passports have been demonstrated to be read from meters away, in 2004 someone I trust on this one gave a number of 20 meters. [schneier.com] . The tag in question seems to include personal information embedded so it is not just an electronic key and given that even passport RFID security has been show to have weaknesses, even so much that US now includes built-in shielding [practicalhacks.com] in passports I would not automatically trust my personal info on $randomcompany's RFID implementation.

Re:I can understand her (2)

jitterman (987991) | about 2 years ago | (#42075219)

You've either posted a successful troll comment, or have truly misunderstood the girl's points of objection.

Re:I can understand her (3, Informative)

hypergreatthing (254983) | about 2 years ago | (#42075303)

It's also extremely easy for me to point out that you didn't read the article(s) and understand why she objects to wearing it. As a fellow amateur radio "expert" I'd like to point out that the badge's transmit capability was never in question. Let alone you forget that the reader is the part that's plugged into the outlet pumping out any discernible wattage which you didn't take into consideration. Even that withstanding, it's not about radio transmissions at all. It's about privacy, the invisible man in the sky, and first amendment rights, and an overreaching school board.

Re:I can understand her (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075373)

Stop saying 'build and construct'. Those are both the same thing; you don't have to use them both.

Re:I can understand her (1)

Sloppy (14984) | about 2 years ago | (#42075471)

due to laws of physics and much more

Remember we're talking about religious freedom. Ergo, your "laws of physics" are lies from the pit of hell.

Re:I can understand her (1)

wvmarle (1070040) | about 2 years ago | (#42075545)

The reason this student objects against wearing an id is religious, see previously linked articles.

Interestingly, the religious aspect would apply to having an ID rather than having an RFID chip in that ID, at least that's my interpretation of how they state the objection.

And besides, people that protest so vocally against RFID are most likely people that actually know about how it works quite well. After all it's hard arguing your point if you don't know what you're talking about.

Re:I can understand her (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075687)

Even so, this RFID signal is read and transmitted several inches if not less, of no use to any sniffers or spies nearby.

They still transmit in all directions with a given power. Yes that's low, but the signal's still there. It also *must* be stronger than the reader can detect, as if it was at the threshold you'd have lots of problems with the reader failing to detect the card half the time or in a noisy environment.

From a greater distance all you need is a sensitive enough receiver and the ability to filter out background noise. That's the limit far before laws of physics. 100m away has been demonstrated. A km is beyond today's technology but perhaps not in 1-2 years. The laws of physics probably don't prevent reading from 100km away, given a good enough receiver.

Re:I can understand her (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075731)

Yes, well, good points, but all that is required is to put readers all over the place, and that's coming. They already have cameras scanning licence plates in many cities, a complete picture of ones movements can be made easily.

They are NOT doing this for our own good.

hm? (1)

etash (1907284) | about 2 years ago | (#42075023)

what's with the sudden outbreak of intelligent judges' decisions in the US ?

Re:hm? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075113)

Generally, because the elections are over, so it's politically more convenient to not have to be as ideological.

WE CAN'T ALLOW THIS BEHAVIOUR !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075091)

What would John Jay think ??

There must be some faulty logic at stake. (1)

cripkd (709136) | about 2 years ago | (#42075145)

Had she mentioned the invasion of privacy in the first step and the "the number of the beast" maybe they would have listened and people would have given her more credit.

The problem with religion is that people who believe in certain things will always argue that it's their right to belive in something and that the value fo truth of the said religion it's a matter of personal belief, hence it cannot be proved correct or otherwise from outisde nor do they want to listen to those arguments (granted, it's their right to do so).
Then why is some form of authority guilty of infringing those beliefs from outside buy implementing something that one religion interprets in some way inside it's system of beliefs?
Trying to explain, in this case, that the RFID tag is not the number of the beast is a dead-end (and I don't even care if IT IS the number of the beast) but in this way a religion could reject anything.
Some parts of the society can decide that they cannot function unless they implement a certain mechanism and some individuals will decide unidirectionaly that those mechanisms be dropped because some scriptures can be interpreted in such a way. (The Christian church has not decided in it's totality that barcodes and rfid tags are the mark of the beast nor are they unequivocally identified as such in the Bible.)

Re:There must be some faulty logic at stake. (1)

cripkd (709136) | about 2 years ago | (#42075185)

Replying my own post here...
TFA only presents the father's opinion which, I'm sorry to say so, seems to be very subjective. I seriously doubt that the school literally asked the girl to proudly wear the tag around her neck. Something in the way he "sais" it makes me think he's a bit ... well, subjective.
Why isn't TFA presenting the schools reasons for implementing this systems, what are it's goals, what was the process by which this solution was chosen, how were the students informed about this etc.
Oh, blogs are not journalism (not that journalism is real journalism this days anyway).

Re:There must be some faulty logic at stake. (4, Informative)

bondsbw (888959) | about 2 years ago | (#42075261)

Some parts of the society can decide that they cannot function unless they implement a certain mechanism

The fact that our society has managed to function for ages without having already implemented such a mechanism disproves your argument entirely.

Re:There must be some faulty logic at stake. (1)

cripkd (709136) | about 2 years ago | (#42075331)

Yes, our "society" has "functioned" for ages without basic commodities too.
So possibility of living without a certain comfort or rule doesn't make that rule wrong or that comfort a whim.
Again, did anyone care to look into this school's reasons and rules to implement this program?
I'm not from the US so I don;t know, is this a public or a private school? If it's a public school, were they notified in advance of what will the campus life involve?
Are they free to join another school?

Re:There must be some faulty logic at stake. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075263)

Part of the problem is that the actual PRIVACY concerns would never have been taken seriously. Its not something our society values. By framing her objections as religious ones, she turned it into a first-amendment fight, which get taken a lot more seriously.

Re:There must be some faulty logic at stake. (1)

cripkd (709136) | about 2 years ago | (#42075347)

Does the first amendment allow you to interpret anything in your own way based on YOUR beliefs and then decide that someone else is evil because they don't follow the same interpretation? This is what I understand from what you're saying.
I agree on the privacy concerns.

Yes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075599)

And whether your assertion is taken as overriding is by judicial assessment of the rights of one vs the rights of another.

However, despite this you seem to be deluded when you claim "This is what I understand from what you're saying." Because there's no way to get from what the GP was saying to what you idiotically proclaimed.

Given how wacky my high school was (3, Interesting)

NotSoHeavyD3 (1400425) | about 2 years ago | (#42075229)

Trying to keep tabs on us at all times, even considering it was over 20 years ago, I've got to side with the kid this time.(Especially given how much data they could get now with this tech. They'll probably abuse it.)

Re:Given how wacky my high school was (2)

mysidia (191772) | about 2 years ago | (#42075567)

They'll probably abuse it.)

Data on when the student enters and exits the classroom?

In what manner is it even possible to abuse that; which doesn't exist with normal manual attendance taking?

good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075233)

She shouldnt accept that! Who cares if they arent powerful enough to track long range now. They will be! And accepting it now means having it forced on all of us later. There is no reason for rfid tracking devices and don't let any institution try to force one on you. The illusion of liberty is slowly fading.

Why do we even bother with schools anymore? (2)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#42075287)

Let's just send the little delinquents straight to prison.

Re:Why do we even bother with schools anymore? (2)

Penurious Penguin (2687307) | about 2 years ago | (#42075427)

The prison industry is thriving and set to continue growing. I'd actually not be surprised to see that happen. I could think of a dozen reasons, but here's one. [cnn.com]

Re:Why do we even bother with schools anymore? (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about 2 years ago | (#42075785)

The difference is shades of gray.

Don't know who to side with (0)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about 2 years ago | (#42075371)

Overbearing authority or religious nutjobs...

Re:Don't know who to side with (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about 2 years ago | (#42075509)

Overbearing authority or religious nutjobs...

Kudos on actually reading the story (despite what my sig says).

However I retract those kudos for being unable to see beyond broad stereotypes to see the actual issue at hand.

Re:Don't know who to side with (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about 2 years ago | (#42075713)

No I know where I side with the actual issue at hand. The religious nutjobs happen to be on the right side here. But handing them victory here is not clearly a good thing because it would further entrench and legitimize the special treatment of religious beliefs. Will atheists who just don't want to wear these things get to turn them down or will you have to say that Sky Dad doesn't want you to wear them?

Why to me.... (0)

negativeduck (2510256) | about 2 years ago | (#42075385)

In one way is this not a failing of the school system but I see it in a way as a Brat bitching. Just reading the linked article and the "note" that was scanned into it they received she's not being denied an education but being said she can "go back to" her home school. On one hand this is like an employee refusing to wear the badge of their employer or uniform. If you don't like it don't go there you have that choice and can make that decision.

  Maybe I am over simplifying this but yea to me this is pretty cut and dry people say "your school is your job" to kids all the time. I heard it, yes the system can be defeated but that's not the issue at hand. It is an issue that this helps to perpetuate and start even younger if you don't like a simple policy SUE!

And yea really "Mark of the Beast" it's her name... so.... I hope she never gets a drivers license, a Library card, or a Passport! I simply can't see her side.

Nice to know school districs really do. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075445)

Have a lot of money to waste.

I'm sorry.... I don't see the problem. (3, Insightful)

mark-t (151149) | about 2 years ago | (#42075457)

If the student's religion requires that they not wear such articles, then I think it's a pretty clear case that the student should not be going to that school.

Schools, even public ones, are permitted to have dress codes, and wearing a specially issued id tag on your clothes while you are on school property is really not that big a deal. There's shouldn't be concern about being tracked off of school property because because one's location through RFID can only be tracked if they are in close proximity of an RFID reader that understands what the tag is, and who it belongs to. The RFID readers which are connected to the database of RFID tags owned by the school aren't going to be anywhere but on school property, so that's the only place where one is ever going to be tracked.

There should be no more concern that this could be used to invade somebody's privacy than an RFID card issued to an employee to get into a company building during non-office hours could reasonably represent a privacy invasion for that employee.

Re:I'm sorry.... I don't see the problem. (2)

avandesande (143899) | about 2 years ago | (#42075621)

Schools, even public ones, are permitted to have dress codes, and wearing a specially issued id tag on your clothes while you are on school property is really not that big a deal.

It isn't? How did my generation survive in high school without ID badges or cards?

Re:I'm sorry.... I don't see the problem. (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 2 years ago | (#42075765)

Schools, even public ones, are permitted to have dress codes,

And where I was brought up, not one parent and not one kid would put up with that bullshit.

Don't be too sure (2)

ugen (93902) | about 2 years ago | (#42075831)

It's only a pilot program. As all things of the kind, their purpose is not only to test the process, but to acclimatize people to the new reality. In a little while new reality becomes "it's always been that way", and then they can move for wider application. And what better way to do so than to begin with school students. Why, you could then combine RFID databases between schools "for improved information sharing", then perhaps offer local malls, movie theaters etc. data for them to better gauge their audience or, better yet, "better protect children from inappropriate material" (oh, now we are talking). Then, as they grow up and graduate - why not join forces with a local college or university, public transportation, sports venues - you name it :) It's just a matter of time.

This type of tracking needs to be nipped in the bud, before it becomes the "new normal".

And btw, there is nothing reasonable about employees being tracked en-masse at office either. Technically, though, employees are there voluntarily and can leave at will. There is no such choice at school.

Re:I'm sorry.... I don't see the problem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075863)

You're a pretty sad individual then, if you believe everyone should be tracked an monitored. It's called conditioning and spending money that can be used productively elsewhere.

It has nothing to do with religion, that's just a damn fine thing to throw at a backward state like TX to get what you want. After all, god knows all, why is RFID tracking of children even required? Oh yes, a company that's a friend of someone on the education bored gets to make a ton of money.

Texas, where ppl are cows (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075473)

and cows are ppl.

Microwave it (1)

lophophore (4087) | about 2 years ago | (#42075715)

RFIDs don't react well to the microwave oven. I'm just sayin'.

ORU (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42075795)

Send the bitch to Oral Roberts University; she'll fit right in.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?