I can't imagine being a kid in this type of environment. Then again, many of the kids who will be unwillingly subjected to this probably aren't informed enough to understand the potential long-term consequences of pervasive surveillance, which makes it all the more evil.
It's appalling that they spent $1.4 million (so far) on this rather than putting the money towards more useful things like teacher salaries or after-school programs. Maybe if they improved the overall school experience they wouldn't need to monitor the kids like prisoners?
"What bothers me is not that the kids are kept in prisons, but that (a) they aren't told about it, and (b) the prisons are run mostly by the inmates."
To me this looks like an openly hostile act.
[1] Fine, almost all, there will be exceptions, but the goals of the education system should include making exceptions as rare as possible. At the very least I'll claim a belief that achieving a low enough rate of exceptions so as to make them negligible in practice.
At least, I sure hope they will.
Somehow I haven’t seen anyone actually be negatively affected by this supposed record.
I can assure you, the teams of PhDs from Stanford and MIT will address those cases. Just like how Google knows if you're clicking random ads.
New York's MO is "screw over people now and settle out of court in 10yr if you think the precedent isn't gonna go your way."
A lawsuit or twenty won't stop them. It's not their money.
Nowadays it will.
We already have legal precedent for paying reparations for undisclosed tests against civilians.
The backstory of how this came about would surely be interesting.
Nothing like a refreshing beverage and discussing pervasive surveillance technology for the youth of America.
The time has come to teach your chilluns the virtues of laser pointers, spray paint, and civil disobedience.
It won't take long, I guarantee you.
