Slashdot Mirror
Irish Gov't Seeks To Rein In Cyber Bullying
An anonymous reader points out a story on the Irish Times that says "the Irish government is looking for ways to combat 'cyber-bullying' after data indicated that a significant percentage of young children are subjected to this kind of abuse via their mobile phone and popular social network accounts. The industry has been asked to come up with solutions for this problem and a government office is due to publish a guide on the issue in the near future. Surely this is a problem faced by children in all developed countries these days." Add "for the children" to the list of reasons to track the Web-site habits of mobile web users in Ireland.
As an Irish person I'm glad that something is being done about bullying. I was bullied at school a lot and when not being beaten was subject to horrendous psychological bullying.
The main point here though is that so-called "Cyber-bullying" is just bullying. Various organisations have been sensationalising this issue by prefixing [i]cyber[/i] and pretending it's a new issue. What about when I was receiving phone calls at all hours? Was that cyber-bullying? It was just called bullying in my day.
I really think that this whole issue is doing more to harm the reputation of the internet/computers/phones than it is to resolve the larger issue of bullying. All I expect to see from this is a large set of draconian yet ineffective restrictions placed around communication media and this is something that disgusts me for a lot of reasons.
I never get used to these constant resurrections
Irish kids are taught NOTHING about manners, and manners are what lead to common-decency.
The writer says, "Surely this is a problem faced by children in all developed countries these days." I would think that it's actually worse here because people seem to become more and more rude in real-life with every passing second.. and the (falsely) perceived anonymity of "hiding behind" a social networking engine or a mobile phone tends to exacerbate the issue.
Another part of the problem is that most Irish kids are shuttled to and from school in big feckin' SUV's [which should be banned in this country anyway..especially UK-made Range Rovers], and rarely actually socialise with other kids outside of school. This lack of socialisation isolates kids from seeing the pain inflicted by their actions. If they don't see the pain caused, then they have no empathy for the "victim." Here as in the U.S. children are almost completely isolated from adults in the name of "keeping them safe from perverts" and never learn any social skills from adults either.
In true American style, the Irish, instead of addressing the problems being generated by people, want to enact idiotic, ineffectual regulations and monitor the tools these people use. This approach will not work.
Why are the people in charge always so fucking stupid and clueless?
Perhaps because the people who put them in charge (being a democracy and all that) are even more stupid and clueless? After all, half of the population have below-average IQs.
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
Paradigm shift. Next maybe comes eBullying, iBullying, meta-bullying, cloud-bullying,,,,,? Kind of like patenting thousands of years old business practices done on a computer.
Half the people have under median IQs you mean.
Not average. For an extreme example, 9 people have 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104 IQ respectively and #10 has 150. The average IQ in that room would be 105, and 9 out of 10 would have below average IQ.
tag. This isn't like paedophiles preying on targets, using the internet as the means of finding their victims in hopes of targeting them in real life.
This is the opposite. The bully already knows his victims, and uses the internet just as another avenue to further that bullying.
I don't know a definite answer, but attaching cyber to it seems nothing but a way to get people's fears up to pass stupid laws.
Well since filtering and heuristic analysis is probably impossible, I suggest TattleText(TM). The poor child can simply forward the offending text to a central authority. The central authority can then call the bully's mom.
Problem Solved.
It stopped when I was legally able to drive. Nothing concentrates the mind of someone who beat you up in the playground as much as seeing you accelerate towards them and swerve away at the last second later in the day.
The GP would be correct if the population was evenly distributed. This is not likely in a population of 10, but is probable in a population of 5,000,000.
(This obviously doesn't apply in Cork, where they're all thick.)
Genesis 1:32 And God typed
This is true, any law that can be bypassed by using the mail instead of email is pretty stupid.
Yes, that would be true for that particular sample, but the IQ of a population is defined in terms of the distribution of intelligence - and 100 is defined as the median intelligence. Since intelligence follows a normal distribution, median coincides with mean (average), and half the people have below average IQ.
Your sample represents a skewed distribution, but if we take your numbers to be the score an arbitrary intelligence test used to rate IQ, the median score is 123. So to have a 100 IQ, you'd have to score 123, placing the lower 9 in your group firmly under the wire.
The main reason we have a lot of bullying is that we have policies that don't allow students to ever confront bullies and use force to defend themselves when attacked. If a student punches a bully in the face for trying to do some sort of nasty physical bullying, like locking them in a locker, they can get suspended/expelled and arrested.
Let the victims of bullies stand up for themselves. It used to work in this country. When my dad was bullied at an early age back in the 1950s, he and the bully got into a fight and the bully got beaten up. The principle not only didn't care about the harm done to the bully, but hauled him into his office and called his parents to let him know that he had gotten beaten up by a kid who he had severely bullied. Back then the courts would have laughed any lawsuit over that out of court and would have probably awarded legal fees to my grandmother if she had to hire a lawyer to defend my dad.
The solution to bullying isn't "education," it's letting them get subjected to the consequences of their actions. I would consider it poetic justice if in a modern incident like what happened to my dad, the kid not only beat up the bully, but posted the video to Youtube for the whole world to mock the shit out of the bully.
Don't give me that "oh they're hurting on the inside" argument for treating them like a wounded animal, instead of a predator. Most people choose to not become like those who hurt them. Those that do choose that path shouldn't be shown any particular mercy by society or the legal system when their victims put them harshly in their place.
Ah... my shoddy mastery of the English language made me read the headline as 'Irish government seeks to reign in cyber bullying', which to me seems to be a much more attainable goal.
If the same behavior - one kid bullying another or saying unkind things - was occurring in a non-electronic medium, we usually would consider it the sort of thing where it's a matter for the kids to settle among themselves, or at most, by the kid's parent talking to the bully or the parent, which then usually stopped it. But now, we're going to add the ISP, school authorities, police and courts into the mix and create a tempest in a teapot.
The most someone can do electronically is say things; they can't strike you, or hurt you, or do anything to you unless you accept their comments about you as valid. Kids have had nasty cliques against other kids for dozens of centuries. We need to allow kids to learn to toughen up a bit, if we coddle them too much, they won't get through the real world, and when something comes along that mummy and daddy can't protect them against, they're going to be in a lot worse trouble.
You want to do something against physical threats, fine. You want to do something against extortion ("give me your lunch money or else"), that's something that should be taken care of. But if you're going to treat mere communication of meanness or cruelty as more serious than mere taunts in the absence of an actual threat of violence, then what you're effectively doing is treating words the same as actions. A dangerous path that ends up usually producing stupid overreactions, as a number of incidents here on Slashdot have been reported, where some kid is given an assignment to write a story or some report, but does so in an edgy or unconventional way, is considered a criminal or terrorist and is treated that way for doing nothing more than doing his classwork as he was asked to do it.
I remember one I did. We were asked to give a report in class on how to do something. Well, having read once how too many people cut their wrists the wrong way, I decided to be edgy and unconventional, and write a report on the correct way of how to commit suicide by slitting your wrists. When I stood up to read it, the kids in the class thought it was great, and the teacher even pointed out I drew in examples of how to correctly position the wrist so you cut the vein properly. (Most people bend the wrist inward; that's wrong, you should bend the wrist so it is pushed outward.) And that's all that happened (other than I think I got an A for being thorough). The teacher understood it was simply a student doing a report he knew would be different in order to have fun in class, not some "cry for help" of a depressed kid who was planning to kill himself.
Today, if some kid had done the same thing, I suspect that instead of taking it as the joke it was, he probably would have been called to the principal's office and maybe gotten detention for it, or possibly have to go see a shrink before being allowed to go back to school.
The lessons of history teach us - if they teach us anything - that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us.
"Average" can be used to refer to either the mean or the median. More often than not, however, it us used to mean "the mean". If you want to be more specific, you can use "median" or "mean" rather than "average". Seems the GP decided not to.
Most people bend the wrist inward; that's wrong, you should bend the wrist so it is pushed outward.
It's been so long since I've done the report, that I think I wrote it backward in the example above, most people bend their wrist forward which pushes the vein inside and makes the suicide attempt less likely to be effective, you're supposed to bend your hand so the hand leans down so the wrist is bent inward, allowing better access to the veins to be cut.
I mean, I wouldn't want someone trying to commit suicide to use the original example wrong, have it fail to work and then sue me for giving them bad advice! :)
The lessons of history teach us - if they teach us anything - that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us.
Thank you.
Not that I'm normally mean or anything, but what's the use of a subtly insulting joke if those it insults, don't understand what the terms that one employs mean? That's as good a reason as any to use the more generally understood and colloquial term.
And then there are some that thought that post was all about statistics.... >:->
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
The article mentioned how someone bullying someone else by causing their phone to ring "all hours of the day and night."
We have laws in the U.S., at least, that make it illegal to harass someone without a legitimate purpose of communication, by either excessively calling them or otherwise disturbing them for the purpose of making them upset. If they have this, then the victim of someone being called at all hours already has legal protections to stop this sort of thing if it's occurring, and no new laws are needed. If they don't, then perhaps this is what should have been done.
In fact, I like the way they're written here. If you call me, and use foul language to insult me, I can have you arrested for harassing me. On the other hand, if you call me, and irritate me so badly that I curse you out and insult you with the most degrading and harshest profanity I can think of, you can't do anything to me. Which makes sense: I didn't call you, you called me; if you disturb me, then you have to put up with my response to you. If you hadn't called me and bugged me, you would never have gotten the insult in the first place.
These are just attempts to grease the skids for more draconian restrictions on the Internet, using the boiling frog analogy. You can't drop a frog in boiling water, he'll jump out, but gradually increase the temperature and he'll sit there and allow himself to be boiled to death, or so the analogy goes. Make a huge grab for people's rights and they will squawk; nibble away in little pieces and they'll never notice until they're all gone, and by then it's too late, unless the "canary in the coal mine" starts screaming Chicken Little style at the beginning and refuses to allow even the first bite. (Talk about mixed metaphors!)
The lessons of history teach us - if they teach us anything - that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us.
> manners are what lead to common-decency.
Untrue. Manners can be a way to express common decency, but there's nothing to stop a bright and manipulative asshole using them.
> t's actually worse here because people seem to become more and more rude in real-life with every passing second.. and the (falsely) perceived anonymity of "hiding behind" a social networking engine or a mobile phone tends to exacerbate the issue.
Also untrue. Vicious discussion on a social networking engine can wise you up to the rampant trollage and desensitise you to the things people say. It's possible to develop an immune system. It's different for different people.
> This lack of socialisation isolates kids from seeing the pain inflicted by their actions. If they don't see the pain caused, then they have no empathy for the "victim."
If they have no empathy, do they care about the pain, even when they perceive it? And what about sadism? Cats are sadistic - it's part of a cat's nature. Can't it also be part of human nature? After all, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that it might be. I think you harbour an implicit assumption that people have a better nature. I'd say *some* people, maybe most, have a better nature. And then again, every so often, you encounter a werewolf.
It's ironic the person who says bullying doesn't exist and you should learn to deal with it hasn't got the courage to post with even a slashdot identity, but as anonymous coward.
Suggests they are too scared to stand by their posting, are frightened of being bullied?
Here! Who the fuck do you think you are spouting that kind of shite! I was raised to sit up straight, and be polite, and peel me spuds before aeatin' 'em. I'm as polite and well mannered a Irishman as ever you'd meet. So feck off with yourself!
May the Maths Be with you!
Bullying is bullying, whether it happens by means of computers or not, and it is never a pretty sight. The thing about computers and the internet is that they enable people to have a far longer reach and a greater impact; and it doesn't just enable "the good guys", unfortunately. So when they talk about cyberbullying, it isn't just some lame excuse for imposing new censorship, there is actually a very real problem. In the days before the internet, bullying in the school at least stopped when you got home; but now it is on your telephone and on the internet, and with the use of simple scripts you can make it go on non-stop without any effort at all.
And the other thing about doing things on the internet is that it is more anonymous - it is so much easier to be cruel to a person you don't have to watch, unless, of course, you get a kick out of seeing others in pain, and it is a lot easier to avoid getting caught. At least right up to the point where some kid chooses to end their life, which is a problem on the increase.
I don't think the schools or service providers can do anything about the problem on their own. It is something that requires the whole of the community to work together against it; and that is yet another thing the internet has has an influence on: there isn't a lot of community feeling left. On the up-side, however, the internet could potentially be used to mobilize the community against this kind of thing.
People keep droning on about the nanny state and how everything would be better if the government just stayed out of everything; but how would that be better, when nobody in the community are willing to get off their soft arses and solve the problems? We get a nanny state because we, with our inaction and unwillingness to take part in a community, ask for it. I think it is verging on the contemptible to whine and complain about state interference when people don't even try to do it better themselves.
Use the damn block/ignore button!
Irish kids are taught NOTHING about manners, and manners are what lead to common-decency.
American kids are taught NOTHING about manners, and manners are what lead to common-decency.
British kids are taught NOTHING about manners, and manners are what lead to common-decency.
German kids are taught NOTHING about manners, and manners are what lead to common-decency.
French kids are taught NOTHING about manners, and manners are what lead to common-decency.
ALL kids are taught NOTHING about manners, and manners are what lead to common-decency.
Honestly it's a problem of parenting, it has existed for 75,000,000 years when Ugh bullied Snoo near the bubbling tar pits. Most parents don't care to force their kids to be polite and have manners let along teach them respect. Most of these parents tailgate the cars in front of them and break the law at will teaching the kids that you only act civilized when you have to.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
what the governments are doing to prevent bullying in schools ? what CAN they do ?
little. since most of the kids wont inform anyone that they are bullied, out of shame.
same goes for internet. internet is no different than 'real' life.
seems like another bullshitty excuse to try censorship.
Read radical news here
Umm... most other forms of harassment are already illegal(enforcement aside). They want a law about cyber-bullying because it is the loophole in the current law.
They want to fix the type of problem you describe, by creating a new law to govern the new medium.
You've got it backwards.
But one of the things you need to remember is that in many cases a predator will back away from prey that turns savage and violent when cornered.
Another thing... if a nerdy victim of bullying strikes first, they'll often get the upperhand against a more athletic opponent; the human body is nowhere near as immune to physical harm and the psychological shock from it as the movies present. I scared the ever loving shit out of a bully in school by suddenly grabbing him by the shirt and slamming him full force into a wall. You know what he knew could happen if he tried to punch me, then? I could have pulled him forward a little bit and slammed his head hard into a very hard surface, possibly giving him a concussion. A move that lasted a few seconds, caused him to leave me alone permanently after that.
My advice to any high school age nerd who is bullied is very simple:
1) Get more protein in your diet.
2) Find access to a place where you can quietly do strength training, starting out modestly at first. This will take you about 20 minutes a day, 3 days a week.
3) Be firm in dealing with others.
Are there regional specialties to bullying?
I never had real trouble with gangs. In my youth it was always the scary Lone Wolf. Built like a Coal Loader and psychotic to boot. My best defenses were always playing the clown and doing his homework.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
A bunch of people used to always give me a really hard time until they realized I'm the most chill person on earth
Parent says:
"
All these stories of geeks being bullied in high school via the internet is rather pathetic.
The idea that someone is traumatized by not being able to visit facebook properly and they get bad texts makes you seem so soft that I don't know when to begin.
Bullying is when you fear for your safety. When the big kid(s) push you against a wall and threaten to beat your sorry ass. Although a soft geek may be loathe to admit it, there's a lot to be said for growing a set of balls and physically confronting someone.
Might as well confront the person sending you bad messages because if they were actually tough kids, they would threaten you with a beat-down to your face.
But I fear most of you are so spineless that you won't even get it. Bullying is something that is as old as man (and even older). Primates establish a pecking order. If you're being picked on, you get in the other person's face, even at the risk of taking a beatdown yourself. Fear is far worse than the reality of getting punched in the face. Although like I said, the idea that someone who is into sending you "bad" messages could deliver a beatdown is pretty small.
Learning self-defense skills is vitally important in this world. Always was, always will be."
I'm not sure I agree with this, although I see the logic.
In true American style?
Remember, anonymous asshole, we came from your country to escape the persecution your pretty much talking about now.
So, anon ass, seems Irish and English bullying have been going on longer than whats that? AMERICA HAS BEEN IN EXISTANCE?
Stop with the veiled assinine attempts at throwing stones. Yes, it's a major problem, but it's not a problem for legislation, it's a problem for people to grow a pair of nads and actually take some personal responsibility.
In true American style, you coward, fuck you.
--Toll_Free
Didn't pretty much ALL of us watch Back to the Future?
Didn't we see how to deal with Biff?
Fuck him up while he's trying to rape the girl you love. At that point, the entire future changes, music taste changes, and the bonus is, you get a time machine.
So, nerds, get some balls!
wait, I beat up a bully in jr high school.. WTF is MY time machine.
DOC!!!!
--Toll_Free
but something something something.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Here in North Carolina if you make a public threat and more than one person hears it, it's considered to be terrorism. So why not extend that to online. Make a threat or insult online and it's terrorism. A straight up felony. We really don't need the quaint 18th Century notions of free speech. The risk of offending or scaring someone is just too high.
"and half the people have below average IQ."
sigh, no that doesn't follow.
Don't let a comedian lack of mathematical skill fool you.
The Gaussian distribution(aka normal distribution) you describe is used for probability, not average.
In that case the sampling size can impact where the distribution occurs giving you a nice pretty bell curve.
In reality, if you measured everybody and did an average, half of all people would not be below average. Probable 90% of everybody would be below average.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I used to be bullied a lot when I was kid and I seriously hated every day I had to go to school because of that. However, what do nerds do whenever evil villains try to prevail? They seek revenge! I got my revenge and it felt good. I even got in trouble with my school but I knew that school policy wasn't going to help me so I didn't really care. To eliminate my bully-problem for the rest of my school had a much higher priority. I ask every kid who is being bullied in school, on the playground, at home or on the net to suck it up and fight back! Use your mind, cook something up, face your problem and make an impact. I know it sounds primitive but it works. This is surely not an issue for a government to take care of.
It's called life people. It's part of us, just like it is in many simian groups. It's our social programming, there is a psychological and scientific reason for every aspect of bullying. If you don't like it, take it up with good old Mother Nature, it was all her idea. It's like getting mad at Killer Whales for playing with their food before they kill and eat it(seals). Life isn't a walk in the park, so learn to adapt.
Castes are a form of socio-economic collusion in India since 12th century. Hinduism's caste system is a religious-based system of separating groups and keeping one class (the Brahmins) over everyone else.
In America there is no system in place today that forces people to remain separate or keeps one class subservient to another. If you were born the son of a street sweeper, but excelled, you could become a doctor or lawyer or some celebrity or entrepreneur - and at the same time you would be fully accepted by your peers.
Not so in India. The caste system freezes everyone in place. It is extremely difficult - almost impossible - for someone from the lowest caste to rise in education and social status.
A Dalit would never be allowed to marry into one of the higher castes and would never be accepted as an equal. And for a Dalit to make it into medical school or become a member of high society in India is very rare indeed. Only by escaping from the grasp of Hinduism do they have much of a chance....
And as of today only 1% of marriages in India are Inter-Caste or Inter-Religious.
I'd like to buy homeland for our 10 million people. http://twitter.com/mahadiga