Live data from Hacker News

Welcome to the K-12 Surveillance State

nytimes.com

91–100 of 169 posts

Re: Welcome to the K-12 Surveillance State

#91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A wise teacher can offer a bit more dignity by choosing what they notice and draw attention to, or not.

Perhaps the same is true when choosing how to use video recordings?

Maybe. They're more ubiquitous, and almost certainly available to more parties. Can I really exercise my own judgement when my boss can watch the tape too?

Re: Welcome to the K-12 Surveillance State

#92
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it helps, this is a very realistic portrayal of how privacy is degraded over time. Invading privacy has all sorts of practical applications. You can fight crime more effectively, and measure trends, and generally be more effective at all sorts of capitalism and statecraft. But, problems, and risks just pile up over time. Just think of what we could do for just one small sacrifice!

But what privacy is there in a classroom? Theoretically the teacher could capture the same information by being more observant.

I agree with you (my wife is also a teacher) but good luck with this crowd.

Some of the HN commenters are counting down the days until someone founds a libertarian utopian moon colony.

Re: Welcome to the K-12 Surveillance State

#93
post #39
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. Not worth it. There are mountains of evidence demonstrating that people change their behaviors when they know they are being watched. Do we really care about the automatic resolution of petty squabbles between children, or even the coercion of children to never engage in petty squabbles? Do we really want to rob children of mischief, conflict resolution, and making a case for themselves in a way that cannot alw…

No one actually watches the video, unless something happens. And this is an elementary classroom- resolution of petty squabbles means 28 kids don't get to learn while 2 others yell 'he did it first'. They can be beasts to each other at recess.

> No one actually watches the video, unless something happens

You're right. Now, nobody watches unless something happens.

And then some shifty SV startup starts selling ML studentcams that determine what "bad" is. Of course, questioning the ML is verboten. It made the decision and you cannot ask why.

Re: Welcome to the K-12 Surveillance State

#94
post #39
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. Not worth it. There are mountains of evidence demonstrating that people change their behaviors when they know they are being watched. Do we really care about the automatic resolution of petty squabbles between children, or even the coercion of children to never engage in petty squabbles? Do we really want to rob children of mischief, conflict resolution, and making a case for themselves in a way that cannot alw…

No one actually watches the video, unless something happens. And this is an elementary classroom- resolution of petty squabbles means 28 kids don't get to learn while 2 others yell 'he did it first'. They can be beasts to each other at recess.

Having the other 28 kids see how to resolve petty squabbles is likely more valuable than their regularly scheduled elementary school lessons.

Re: Welcome to the K-12 Surveillance State

#95
post #76
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one actually watches the video, unless something happens. And this is an elementary classroom- resolution of petty squabbles means 28 kids don't get to learn while 2 others yell 'he did it first'. They can be beasts to each other at recess.

> No one actually watches the video, unless something happens. You must do PR for the NSA.

Or a school has fewer resources than the NSA.

And don't think I don't see the potential for abuse, but I see the potential for abuse in basically everything. You have to give organizations the benefit of the doubt the same way you do individuals.

Re: Welcome to the K-12 Surveillance State

#98
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All three. We have 4 kids (3 of them now adults). We re-assessed every year and decided with the kids what their education environment would look like each year. One of them, our extremely musical daughter flipped between homeschool, private and public school several times until we found a university model school that worked well with her needs (lots of schedule flexibility to do extra-curricular music things). You d…

From a logistics point of view, how did you handle having multiple children going to/moving between multiple different schools? Is the age difference such that traveling to different schools for drop off/pick up was already assumed? I admire your thoughtfulness, but the time associated with shuttling to multiple locations each day seems challenging.

That's a really good question, and reminds me that school choice was never JUST about what the kid(s) wanted. Logistics was usually part of the planning.

Usually at least two of them were in the same school. The oldest three were each 18 months part, and the youngest was three years younger than the next oldest sibling.

I took some, wife took others, ride share, public transportation (the kids in public school rode the city bus). The kids also learned to be okay with the idea that they might not get picked up as soon as school let out, or they might have to get dropped off half an hour (or more) before school started. They learned to deal with it the same way my wife and I did when we were their age.

All of which became phenomenally easier as they got old enough to drive themselves (and their younger siblings).

It was a lot of juggling, but it was still less work than homeschooling all four of them (which we did for a couple of years), and they generally didn't start going completely separate directions until they hit high school age.

Re: Welcome to the K-12 Surveillance State

#99
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, there is a camera in the classroom itself, always on? The footage is saved somewhere and can be viewed by who knows who or what algorithm, judging by whatever standards the person or algorithmy applies at that time? ...justified by "solving" various conflicts in the classroom, conflicts that have root causes like large class sizes, social issues, stressful environments, overbearing parents, disrespected teacher…

The footage is only kept at the school. My wife's job is not to be the total arbiter of social justice for her students, it is to provide them with an education.

She would probably quickly change her opinion if a principle started regularly watching recorded videos, instead of doing in person teach evaluations...

Re: Welcome to the K-12 Surveillance State

#100
post #39
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. Not worth it. There are mountains of evidence demonstrating that people change their behaviors when they know they are being watched. Do we really care about the automatic resolution of petty squabbles between children, or even the coercion of children to never engage in petty squabbles? Do we really want to rob children of mischief, conflict resolution, and making a case for themselves in a way that cannot alw…

No one actually watches the video, unless something happens. And this is an elementary classroom- resolution of petty squabbles means 28 kids don't get to learn while 2 others yell 'he did it first'. They can be beasts to each other at recess.

> No one actually watches the video, unless something happens

- Algorithms do (or will pretty soon )

Post reply on HN