Slashdot Mirror
Virginia Becomes First State to Mandate Internet Safety Lessons
kaufmanmoore writes "The Commonwealth of Virginia has become the first state in the nation to require that students in all grade levels receive a form of internet safety lessons. The story is scant on details about the lessons, but describes one recently at a high school where the presenter showed a social-networking profile of a convicted sex offender posing as a 15 year-old girl. "
This is a fine idea - The internet is a treacherous place for children.
But I'd rather see mandatory parenting.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
from the nanny-state dept.
I know the usual kneejerk reaction here to any government act taken in regards to children is to immediately stick one's fingers in one's ears and shout NANNY STATE until one is hoarse, but I really don't see anything especially forbidding about teaching some basic internet safety skills in school.
I think a course in basic economics would be far more useful to far more people than Internet Safety.
Klingon programs don't timeshare, they battle for supremacy.
or maybe it is better to keep all the mommy and daddy basement dwellers in a single location to keep an eye on them.
Spelling and grammar mistakes specifically left in to give the grammar and spelling nazis a meaning to their life.
The lessons will take an "abstinence only" approach, and will feature a videotape titled Internet: A System of Tubes of Terror showing the like-true story of an 18 year old whose accepts an invitation to a slumber party that turns out to take place in the basement bedroom of a 320 lbs., 48 year old furry fan.
If teens stop running up huge credit card debt that there parents end up shouldering, the economy could become dangerously understimulated.
You know the kind of "Safety" lesson that will be provided. Sin, Shame, and everybody in the intertubes is a kiddy fiddler. I guess it makes a fine substitute for actually supervising your children when you are a lazy bastard....
I'm a sophomore in high school in Maryland. My school has had people give speeches on Internet safety multiple times. Typically these lessons serve more to teach inaccuracies about the internet (as the people who teach them tend to know nothing about the internet) and scare people away from the internet based on those falsehoods, then actually teach people how to be safe on the internet. Obviously my experiences are not a guarantee of what will happen in Virginia, but as I said, I have been through these things multiple times and they have never turned out well.
any excuse to get our of working in school is fine by me. I hope this is a mandatory college class I can get credits in.
If what's taught is at all reasonable and accurate, this makes sense to me.
I imagine today's parents are probably young enough to figure it out, but not all of us are necessarily internet-aware in the way the current generation of children is.
This is a case where centralized teaching really does make more sense than parent-by-parent teaching, due to levels of experience and technological literacy needed. As long as it's just passing information, I'm all for it.
If I pass my internet safety class, do I get an internet license? And must I present proof of license to get internet service?
I mean, I actually like the idea of some sort of internet safety education (which I hope will also include teaching people how NOT to get their machines pwnt), I just don't see how it'll be enforced.
No, I don't want to see the state require what parents must teach their kids. Basic liberty and even biological diversity depend on parents exercising the maximum freedom possible in teaching their kids.
There is a good case for holding parents responsible when their kids break laws their parents should be responsible for teaching them not to break.
But schools should teach kinds the minimum that makes them safe. Kids whose parents already taught them will have it easy, and thereby get a reward, as well has see reinforced the stuff their parents teach them that most kids think is just their own parents' weird hangup, so they're more secure in following it.
And kids whose parents disagree with what the school teaches them can also teach their kids to ignore what the school teaches them, which is probably the most important lesson.
--
make install -not war
I wish schools would teach people about things they need to do in life such as how to get a house and all the necessary utilities, how to rent an apartment, how to open a bank account and what you might want to do to prepare your finances for the future, how to look for a job, etc.
Twinstiq, game news
Don't forget to wear a condom when you are surfing on the interwebs!
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
It was found that the convicted sex offender was, in fact, a 15 year old girl.
Soon schools will also have to teach kids to dress: "Now remember class, you can't wear a striped shirt with plaid pants".
It does seem that school is getting to be less about education and more about daycare (so that parents can go and have careers instead of raising kids).
Engineering is the art of compromise.
But can we also make illiterate adults show up for them? Maybe stick it in as a requirement to take college courses or renew your insurance? So long as its not sponsored by certain major software companies or evangelists.
Given the number of scams done via porn, that might actually work in this instance, assuming they would actually follow it.
Then again, don't pay for porn and don't install programs they claim you need to view porn are much more practical.
Not being greedy helps you avoid scams, too, for that matter.
Internet illiterate?
Pray tell, what does the Internet have to do with this:
"Hey kids! Don't go meet anyone you haven't met before and haven't spoken to on the phone, alone, in a non-public setting, without telling anyone where you're going."
This has nothing to do with the Internet, sorry. If they had mandated 'Internet safety', they'd be teaching kids not to browse porn sites with Internet Explorer and then do their online banking. And not to install WICKED COOL SCREENSAVER.EXE, despite how cool it sounds. And to mouse over links in their e-mail, and not to click on them if they show a strange mix of four distinct numbers instead of an actual domain name.
Internet safety my arse. Marcus Aurelius had a dream that was Internet safety, Proxmio, and this is not it. This is not it. What this is, is doing the jobs of dumbass trailer trash who squirted out brats after a night of drunken lust in the parking lot of a Taco Bell. Not that I'm against it - someone has to fight against the level of stupid that's infecting our society, but call it what it is.
Teaching kids about the internet is a great idea. Unfortunately, being aware of adults seeking to trick them into sexual situations is NOT an internet issue, it is a social issue that has basic rules that should apply to all types of communication and interaction, no matter what the channel or method of communication might be (if you don't know what the basic rules are that I speak of, then you are probably a child molester). Health class is the area to address issues of adult/child abuse.
The real issues that teens and pre-teens need to be taught about in regards to the internet are:
1. If you post text, a picture, or video on the internet it will be there indefinitely, and everyone will potentially have access to it. This works for pics of all types, from sexually inappropriate things to pics from a party where people are drinking to social networking 'interests' lists. We've all heard stories of people getting turned down from a job b/c of a facebook profile. Young people need to know about this early.
2. Cyber bullying. For crying out loud, this is huge, and young people are the most vulnerable. Kids need to know that what gets put online has real consequences, and conversely, to not take rumors or gossip posted online seriously. We've all seen the story about the girl who killed herself b/c a neighbor (parent posing as a teen!) was saying hateful things about her.
3. What the internet is...a computer network. No more, no less. It's a powerful communications tool, just like a car is a powerful transportation tool. If you don't understand and respect what it can do, you or someone else will pay for it.
I know I kinda sound lame and schoolmarm-ish on that last one, but it's true...damn I'm getting old.
The Virginia school classes are nothing more than ignorant reactionary bs meant to calm the irrational fears of soccer moms who watch too much Dateline.
Thank you Dave Raggett
They require internet safety belts, internet air bags, and internet car seats!
propaganda. just a thought. let yOUR conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071229/ap_on_sc/ye_climate_records;_ylt=A0WTcVgednZHP2gB9wms0NUE
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080108/ts_alt_afp/ushealthfrancemortality;_ylt=A9G_RngbRIVHsYAAfCas0NUE
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A
is it time to get real yet? A LOT of energy is being squandered in attempts to keep US in the dark. in the end (give or take a few 1000 years), the creators will prevail (world without end, etc...), as it has always been. the process of gaining yOUR release from the current hostage situation may not be what you might think it is. butt of course, most of US don't know, or care what a precarious/fatal situation we're in. for example; the insidious attempts by the felonious corepirate nazi execrable to block the suns' light, interfering with a requirement (sunlight) for us to stay healthy/alive. it's likely not good for yOUR health/memories 'else they'd be bragging about it? we're intending for the whoreabully deceptive (they'll do ANYTHING for a bit more monIE/power) felons to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather', as well as a # of other things/events.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying
dictator style micro management has never worked (for very long). it's an illness. tie that with life0cidal aggression & softwar gangster style bullying, & what do we have? a greed/fear/ego based recipe for disaster. meanwhile, you can help to stop the bleeding (loss of life & limb);
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/28/vermont.banning.bush.ap/index.html
the bleeding must be stopped before any healing can begin. jailing a couple of corepirate nazi hired goons would send a clear message to the rest of the world from US. any truthful look at the 'scorecard' would reveal that we are a society in decline/deep doo-doo, despite all of the scriptdead pr ?firm? generated drum beating & flag waving propaganda that we are constantly bombarded with. is it time to get real yet? please consider carefully ALL of yOUR other 'options'. the creators will prevail. as it has always been.
corepirate nazi execrable costs outweigh benefits
(Score:-)mynuts won, the king is a fink)
by ourselves on everyday 24/7
as there are no benefits, just more&more death/debt & disruption. fortunately there's an 'army' of light bringers, coming yOUR way. the little ones/innocents must/will be protected. after the big flash, ALL of yOUR imaginary 'borders' may blur a bit? for each of the creators' innocents harmed in any way, there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile, will not be available. 'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet, & by your behaviors. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi glowbull warmongering execrab
Perhaps giving them multiple websites (real or not) with which they are trying to acheive the same goal: buy something, or maybe make a social networking profile. There would be bad websites, trying to steal your identity and whatnot, and good websites, which would be the goal to use.
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Kids, this is Goatse. Avoid Goatse at all costs. Oh... wait...
What would be really useful is a required course in basic computer security (e.g. always enable file extensions, don't run arbitrary programs that arrive in your email inbox, don't trust the website that says "download this for free smilies in AIM!").
What kind of predator would pretend being a 15-year-old girl? One trying to trap a straight guy?
It sounds like a Craigslist posting.
Let's start by mandating them for adults, too!
Seriously, if you have more than, say, five toolbars in your browser, I will not help you with anything other than a full format and reinstall. Learn to not download spyware.
Also, spam obviously works, or there wouldn't (still!) be so much of it. Stop paying these fuckers!
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
...if in exchange we quit passing laws intended to save children from the internet.
Now they can start teaching kids how to pass the No Child Left Online test...
At first I thought, "Great! Kids should be taught how not to get caught by phishing, how to be safe about viruses and spyware, and how not to spread their own (and my) email addresses to spammers. If everyone got on the same page with privacy and security, the overall problem would be greatly diminished."
Then I kept reading and groaned. I suspect kids (and everyone else) are far more likely to be threatened by the above than to ever even chat with a sex predator. Huzzah for fear mongering!
Television is far more damaging to youngsters. But of course, the industry and advertisers would never allow television safety classes since they want kids watching destructive content and buying junk food, becoming perfect little consuming sheep.
Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.
Is this going another failure like our stupid abstinence program?
I remember the sex ed. teacher saying: "These condom things, they just don't work. They break all the time. You'll get sick. And die. Just don't have sex at all."
Newsflash: 1/4 US teens has an STD...
I can see it now: "This internet thing, it just is so dangerous. There's all kinds of nude pictures, controversial information and videos, none of which you hormonal, impulsive teenagers would ever be interested in. You'll get sick. And die. Just don't use the internet at all."
I'm guessing it will be taught by completely inept teachers who have no clue, just like the rest of those non-core classes in HS
It's probably going to be the equivalent of "Duck and Cover", rather than "Stop, Drop and Roll"...
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
Do you think they are going to make this an online course?
By the same principle, you're going to excuse "non automobile savvy parents" from being the failures they are because they were too incredibly stupid to teach their kids "don't hitch rides with strangers" (unless of course the kid aces the local IDPA pistol course and packs everywhere she goes, but that's impossible in modern countries, since only free men and women have access to any means of self defense at all. Modern countries discourage non institutionalized methods of self defense, and their denizens obey these discouragements.)
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
From the VA Department Of Education. They even have some nifty power points. /grumble
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
I mean, it could be done so badly, like abstinence-only sex education. But, IMHO, this kind of thing could be handled well and be extremely useful.
Censoring things is the option most people seem to have chosen, and that's a horrible, horrible choice.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
Certainly, this is just another "think of the children" program, intended to scare kids shitless with the idea that everyone in the world is on a mission to touch their naughty bits. But why not also teach them about some more useful bits of Internet safety, like techniques for avoiding malware, phishing, and other scams? Such a lesson will serve these kids for the rest of their lives.
Have a class where the kids all get fake identities, and try to get on the network and steal the fakes from each other.
Give the kids a lesson about phish, you bore them for a day. Teach the kids to phish, and you could educate them for a lifetime.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
If the "lessons" are as well thought-out and written as TFA, then yeah, as most people suspect, we have Another Empty Gesture To Feel Morally Sup- Uh I Mean Save The Children (and TFA shoulda used the Preview button... sheesh :P ).
On the other hand... i teach at a tech school... and you gotta remember that all the info we steep ourselves in daily and take for granted is not sought out by most people. Its existence, i would even assert, is not really even GUESSED at by most people - judging by the reactions of students when i go into Spam, Malware, identity theft, internet scams, botnets... most people have NO idea about 99% of the stuff we just assume is part of reality.
I'm serious, and i was midly surprised at first - Students range from late teens to un- or underemployed adults seeking retraining - but it turns out, reading tech websites isn't a popular pastime with urban teens and young adults.
Amazingly, also, even though most teens to 20somethings are well known for believing themselves indestructible and invincible, they don't stop and pause in the face of sobering anecdotes about how Bad Things Happen To (other) People, even when it happens on the internet.
Bottom line: we keep whining about the "ignorant users." Okay. We hate when they make stupid choices. All right. We roll our eyes when they display their ineptitude. Fair enough.
Hmm, maybe they should... take a class or something?
Gotta start somewhere. And if this program manages to pound through the collective skulls of just a FEW of these kids that they need to be as careful on the internet as they should be anywhere else, i'll call it a GOOD start.
That which does not kill us makes us... st
That's my profile they talk about in the article! :\
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
I can't bear to imagine what bureaucratic monster this will become in 5 years. Or did some union just find a way to add .2 teachers to every school in the state?
Get off my lawn!
Have some teenage girl, maybe 14 or 15 start up an online relationship in this class with a supposed cute boy. Then later on towards the end of the Internet education session, the "cute boy" is brought in and he kind of looks like Meatloaf.
Which is ok to do, if you work for Chris Hansen...
People who run into trouble with people they meet online generally do so because they're stupid about it. They don't tell their friends about the meeting in advance, they don't first meet in a public area to make sure that 16 year old girl isn't actually a 60 year old guy, etc. No matter how much you try, there's always going to be some people that ignore common sense and do it anyway, but an education program can definitely lower the rates of this stuff happening, and that's a good thing.
As for system security, that's another skill that really should be a standard lesson in a technological society. There's WAY too many spyware programs, virii, botnet zombies, etc, and learning to keep yourself mostly invulnerable really isn't all that difficult. Get a firewall (ideally on a router, but at least a software one if not), have an AV program, keep your OS patched, be wary of suspicious downloads... all of this is common sense to any experienced computer user, but it DOES need to be taught by some means, and you can't assume everyone will take the time to learn it on their own. Again, schools can definitely step in here.
Identity theft is the other big one, and this too is something that could be drastically reduced with simple education - make sure the URL says what you think it does, be wary if you save passwords in your browser and the site you opened isn't automatically finding your password, etc. Again, the warning sites are (if you're looking) usually quite obvious, but a lot of people simply don't think to look, or make mistakes like not realizing how ridiculously easy it is to spoof email so the address line says their bank sent it. Again, simply education can fix this problem.
It's safe to assume that computer use is pretty much a mandatory skill in modern society, and much like with any other skill, training generally does - and should - include safety. In that regard, Virginia mandating a computer program that includes safety isn't just a good idea - it's common sense.
That being said, there's a LOT than can be done horribly wrong with such a program, so it's important that some standards are followed - and indeed mandated by law:
1. Make sure your advice is age-appropriate. If you tell a high schooler he should never meet an online friend by any means, you can pretty safely assume your advice will be flat-out ignored, and for good reason. There's no reason someone at that age can't meet someone they met online, so long as they're not stupid about it - initially meet in a large public place, make sure others know what you're doing in case you're not back on time, etc.
2. Make sure the advice is actually sound. Recommending a software firewall for instance, is good practice for people not already sitting behind a firewalled router... but it's pretty silly for those that are.
2. Make sure the program promotes safety, common sense, and awareness, not fear, paranoia, and stunted growth. If it sounds like it was written by DHS, it needs to go in the trash. It's usually quite clear what crosses the line and what doesn't, but there needs to be a review board where people can examine the curriculum and get stuff removed that does cross it.
3. Make sure the program is reviewed by security professionals, so anything on a list of options actually works. There's a lot of fake security software that does precisely the opposite of securing your system, and it would truly suck to see a licensed program telling people to download it. Likewise, some software is just plain worthless, and recommending it would just give a false sense of security.
3. Make sure it's independently reviewed and approved, to make sure no corporation gets to manipulate the system - the MPAA/RIAA/BSA/MAFIAA obviously comes to mind here, but so does more regular corporate greed - I could easily see Norton trying to push their bloated, overpriced security products for instance, and they'd be quite happy to help fund a school program in exchange for that free endorsement... that needs to be preven
This is a fine idea - The internet is a treacherous place for children.
Actually given the number of adults that don't understand what they are doing and getting themselves caught it cons, I think general education would be better. Maybe someone can prepare a one page guide on internet safety. Any longer than that and it won't be read.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
This is one more class that can't be jammed into an already overly-mandate curriculum. The schools are required to "teach the SOLs" and this takes up all available time. They'd reach a much wider demographic if they'd tape fliers to the cans from the soda machine in the lounge.
You're probably right, but it's a significant event just the same. It's the first step in treating the public interest.
For the past ten years I've been only-half-jokingly advocating for an Internet usage license. Substantially, this would be a way to educate about security. It would be nice if it also makes people less vulnerable themselves when they go on the net, though I wouldn't presume to impose my idea of their safety on them. I think that's the weakness you've pointed out in the approach of teaching people how to protect themselves. It will be like Guidance class in high school. I don't know about you, but it took me a lot of recreational drugs to get through the tedium of those classes.
But licensing, on the other hand, I think is a proper starting point to assure that other users of the net, and the network infrastructure itself, are protected. It's a way of reducing risk to others. What does a driver's license do? It unfortunately doesn't guarantee that all drivers on the road are courteous and competent, though it raises the baseline. However, it does allow us to presume that drivers are responsible for a certain body of knowledge. That premise in turn allows us to create a legal framework for identifying drivers, ticketing offenses, assigning liability, transferring vehicle ownership, and entering into insurance agreements. You don't tie up the courts with arguments that split hairs about what you knew and didn't know. Your license stands as proof that you do know, from having passed both a written exam and a road test.
As Bruce Schneier points out, it's the insurance industry in particular which will raise the profile of information security and drive improvements to both software and user behavior. You'll notice that it's not possible to insure a vehicle for use on public roads by an unlicensed driver. I expect that the equivalent, eventually, will be true on the net. It's too high a risk. Nobody wants to insure it. But once network users are licensed and can be presumed to know what they're doing, those become managed risks, and insurers will compete for your business.
On the other main risk front, do you want to use an operating system that's prone to viruses? Sure, we've got a policy which covers specified perils. It would be cheaper to use a more secure system, but we'll cover a higher risk for a higher fee. That gives vendors a strong incentive to be concerned about security. If a system cannot be operated securely at the level of skill established for a licensed user, the vendor takes the heat.
Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
I never said that, or made any statements that insinuate it either. Your logical fallacy is called the straw man.
You construct a widely exaggerated statement (kids should learn how to deal with inappropriate adults face to face first vs. over the net), then attribute it to me, then unleash an argument against it that sounds good but is actually completely meaningless, b/c I never said anything like that.
I said:
And that's exactly why your argument is a straw man. My point was that ALL age-inappropriate issues are essentially the same, the difference is the method of communication, therefore, internet issues should be addressed in the same arena as other issues: health class. I'm actually advocating the opposite of what you falsely attribute me of advocating.
I know we're not supposed to feed the trolls, but it feels good to just let loose with a torrent of simple, provable logic every now and again.
as to your point about cyber bullying...
that holds a little more water, but I still think it's different. Adult/child sexual abuse is different than bullying b/c bullying is done between peers (by definition, if it was not between peers, then it would just be assault or abuse). It might be good to include a lesson on bullying in health class that covers the topic as you suggest, incorporating all forms of bullying. I'd buy that idea.
thanks for your comment
Thank you Dave Raggett
Surely internet abstinence should be taught.
Our government is playing parent again...watch out nanny net is coming!
Trying to install linux on my microwave, but keep getting a kernel panic...
Don't forget, kids aren't the only people to get involved in as victims of identity theft and other various dangers from the interent.
If they're having the kids go to these lessons, I certainly hope that they force all of the faculty to similar lessons before having the kids go to the lessons.
I agree that parents should have more time to spend with their children for many reasons, possibly the least of which is that they can forewarn them about future calamities, including predators.
But honestly, is it really fair to blame parents directly when the jobs or careers they have involve them working overtime with no extra pay, sometimes 10 to 12 hours a day? Lets also consider the fact that having a family without a twin income is probably going to be next to impossible in the near future.
I'm not going to rush and blame corporate society either, but if we all worked say, 7 hours a day (like they do in some companies in Germany), then wouldn't we all have a little more time to spend with our children? Last I checked, Germany is kicking our (the US's) ass in right now. So more hours does not equal more productivity. Furthermore, if the corporate climate can't facilitate the needs of parents, then I believe one of two things must happen: 1) the government must intervene to change this climate for the benefit of the children and the parents, or 2) the government must meet this need for the parents through one of its preexisting institutions.
I love the idea of mandatory parenting, but I'm not going to get into the potentially sexist implications of voiding a career for one partner in a marriage for the sake of the children, especially when it may become economically intractable for the majority of the populace. In the future, you will see more and more working couples, and fewer and fewer "house wives" or "house husbands".
All I can say is thank god. If the parents wont do it someone has to. While there at it make get some education for the parents as well, if parents knew what was happening children would be a lot safer and so would there bank details etc. Education is paramount, teach them about the world we live in.
So what? I pose as a 500 year old Italian model. I'm on the internet and I pose as the first Italian supermodel. So shoot me. I needed an Internet avatar pen-name and was researching the life of Simonetta Vespucci at the time. You've seen her; she's the near-naked girl on the half-shell in Botticelli's Birth of Venus painting done in 1484. She was a real person and one of the most beautiful women in history. All the painters at the time (1470-1500) and place (Florence and Tuscany) were totally blown away by her elegance and style. She set the beauty standard until Raphael and Leonardo da Vinci started painting near-photographic images of a more down-to-earth form of beauty for women.
And what's all this about sex offenders? Hold on, I'm not defending the freaks and perverts here. But, ( and we're talking a big Spinal-Tap-sized -but- here) any schmuck who gets caught urinating outside a bar at 3am or caught swimming naked in a mountain lake by the Park Rangers gets classified as a 'sex offender'. If it's below the belt and above the knees and the police see it for any reason, then the poor guy is a 'sex offender' forever. Same for an 18-year-old guy caught kissing a 17-year-old girl (in many places). Or an 11 year old boy who puts his arms around a 10 year old girl and squeezes her while making 'kissy' noises. We had a case just like this in Oregon recently. It took a lot of public indignation to get the mad-dog district attorney to back off and be reasonable.
So yeah, teach your kids that anyone can pose as anyone on the social web sites. Then teach them about the Turing test - How can you tell if other party is what they claim to be? Teach your kids logic, reason, doubt, and due-process.
That would be really threatening to the public school administrators!
The United States is becoming more and more a Nanny State.
What's next? Lessons on:
Not talking with your mouth full?
Not running with sharp objects?
Not teasing animals?
Eating all of your vegetables?
Not farting in elevators?
How to blame other people for your own stupid actions?
I know this sounds harsh, but protecting people from themselves is like 'Reverse Evolution'. If they are too stupid to make the right choice, which is unbelievably SIMPLE, then why the hell should they contaminate the gene pool? I mean, why should I have to put up with the knee-jerk and bleeding-heat 'think of the children' laws whenever somebody makes a bad choice?
It's kinda like that retard in Chico, CA. Matthew Carrington wanted to get into a fraternity, so he chugged gallons of water because he answered trivia questions in a VOLUNTARY hazing ritual wrong, while doing calisthenics. Of course, when he inevitably died as the result of his own actions, his mother, who couldn't accept the fact that her "intelligent" son died wholly as the result of his own stupid choices, blamed everybody else for his death. He had every chance to say 'NO', but was to dumb (yet he got into Chico State) to figure it out. His fault entirely.
Here is a law idea: PROTECT US FROM KNEE-JERK LEGISLATORS, AND MAKE STUPID PEOPLE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR ACTIONS, AND NOT EVERYBODY ELSE!
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
How do you teach safety lessons -- or even design a curriculum -- on a product that is, by its very nature, constantly changing?
Even if they create lessons in the most broad strokes imaginable, the entire thing will be outdated in 5 years at the most.
Can anyone please explain how this plan is supposed to work?
You know, how not to fall for spam (last I heard they were making huge profits), how to check if it's really your bank's website before you enter your password, how not to get infected with enough malware to make a grown tech cry, stuff like that...
Or does that not qualify as 'internet safety'?
"It's important for us to explain to our nation that life is important. It's not only life of babies, but it's life of children living in, you know, the dark dungeons of the Internet." --George W Bush, Arlington Heights, Ill ,Oct. 24, 2000
Having read dozens of comments, it seems that you guys all have great ideas about what should and should not be part of such a curriculum. And we're all pretty sure that most teachers haven't the foggiest clue. So why you don't you approach your local school board and offer to give a presentation on the subject either to educate the teachers or to the students directly? You'll probably get further if you approach them as a representative of some group (e.g. your local LUG or your company) so they don't think you're a psyhco trying to get access to children.
The masses are the crack whores of religion.
To the mandatorium!
If there was ever a time for a SuddenOutbreakOfCommonSense tag this would be it.
Well, this clinches it for me. As a Virginia resident with a child about to enter grade school, my only option now is private school. I'm tired of public education in this state, and in this country as a whole.
This has nothing to do with the teachers, who do a wonderful job with what they're given, but the way they're forced to teach. Which is to say the government won't let our teachers teach in public schools. Gone are the days where children were allowed to explore a topic that interested them, now they need to stay on-track to regiments of "The Standards of Learning". And honestly, when you think about it, all that the "No child left behind act" has done for us is forced schools to teach to the lowest common denominator.
Anyway, this is just another case of politicians with too much time and not enough understanding. Get the politics out of our schools, get the government out of our schools, and let the teachers teach. Until then, private education is our only hope (until the government fucks that up too).
http://www.accelerateglobalwarming.com
Internet safety lessons to me are akin to road safety lessons, would you argue against them too?
At any rate this should hopefully be good thing, I just hope they teach actual useful skills such as avoiding viruses rather then just the usual scaremongering about online paedophiles.
Is it just me, or do people here in the states lack spines nowadays? People have been calling each other foul names and playing crude pranks on each other for literally centuries, yet only now it's being considered a "major" problem. Did the entire internet suddenly become populated with emo-kids just waiting to go columbine on the world?
Next thing you know, they'll be telling us that cyberbullying causes terrorism. (Which might be true now, only because we're all clinically "depressed" according to the pharmaceutical companies...)
Perhaps if stores stopped selling solid black clothing and cosmetics, perhaps cyberbullying wouldn't be such a concern for these uppity, think-of-the-children bleeding hearts out there.
8==8 Bones 8==8
I have a lot of respect for Heinlein. I think that his listing is a bit off for 'modern' society, but does have a core truth. For example, I won't include the butchering & building design, or pitching manure. Programming a computer in his list would translate to 'operate a computer' today.
Oh, and it made me think of another couple courses for the class - first aid & disaster preparness, survival.
Hmm...
Change a diaper/feed a baby, drive a car&at least one other vehicle type, survive a disaster without aid for at least 3 days, balance accounts, build a wall/shelter, perform first aid&CPR, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, operate a computer, read, cook a tasty meal, clean laundry, shoot a gun accurately/fight efficiently, die gallantly.
I don't read AC A human right
How about making computer literacy mandatory. It should solve a lot of problems.
Although VA's ideas for implementation may have some fundamental flaws, it could work if done properly. How about if we have college/university grad students (as part of their graduate work for CompSci or CompSec) provide the training to the local schools. This way, the curriculum would be as up-to-date as the coursework that the grad student is studying and hopefully better than what a teacher attending some training course would be able to teach. The internet is a great resource/tool, but can also be a dangerous place with many mal-intentioned folks waiting to harm, scam, disrupt, or otherwise negatively affect the majority of users. While I do believe that education (be it practical real-world or academic in nature) should be something both in the classroom and out, most parents are ill equipped to cover a broad range of topics in this area. As a side note, but somewhat in the same context, these kids should also be taught about what is and isn't legal on the internet. As a senior network security engineer, I have seen interns that had exceptional technical skills that I couldn't use because they had been involved with questionable activities (IE: hacking/phishing/illegal file sharing/etc.) and they couldn't get a clearance. There is a market for those skills, but some of these kids will never get to use them because they went about it in the wrong way. In summary, there are dangers out there and we should find any and all ways of articulating this information to our kids (as well as adults), but responsible use should be in there as well.
"but describes one recently at a high school where the presenter showed a social-networking profile of a convicted sex offender posing as a 15 year-old girl. "
As opposed to the undercover police officer doing the same thing... ?