Slashdot Mirror
Judge Issues Temporary Order Blocking Expulsion For Refusing To Wear RFID Tag
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."
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.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
Why not just make the ID a number tatooed onto the forearm, papers please, Oh Godwined
I personally don't see any problem with students having to wear RFID badges while they are at school.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law - Aleister Crowley
what's with the sudden outbreak of intelligent judges' decisions in the US ?
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
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
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.)
Curiously yours, crip.
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.. 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 in passports I would not automatically trust my personal info on $randomcompany's RFID implementation.
You've either posted a successful troll comment, or have truly misunderstood the girl's points of objection.
For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
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.)
Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
Let's just send the little delinquents straight to prison.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
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.
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.
Have a lot of money to waste.
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.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Remember we're talking about religious freedom. Ergo, your "laws of physics" are lies from the pit of hell.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
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.
#DeleteChrome
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.
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?
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
RFIDs don't react well to the microwave oven. I'm just sayin'.
there are 3 kinds of people:
* those who can count
* those who can't
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?
Sent from my ENIAC
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.
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?
Don't forget that if each kid is required to carry their RFID card whenever they are in school they will also carry that card the vast majority of the time. Now I own a store and want to know when a certain student enters my store what prevents me from installing RFID readers in my store and reading the cards and developing a database from there.
For example: when ever card number NNNNN is in the store I have more shoplifting so I ban the student carrying that card from my store with no proof they stole anything.
We could go on from there.
I'm a senior in the same Science and Engineering program that Andrea is a member of. Some points: 1. Microwaving the cards causes visible burn marks. 2. The school has also blocked student led petitions against the ID cards, circulated during passing and free periods, on the grounds that they "disrupt the learning environment". 3. Thus far, the only students who have gotten in trouble for not wearing the ID cards are the vocal ones, like Andrea, or those who get in trouble for something else. However, the administration is starting to enforce the ID rules more heavily. I sincerely hope Andrea succeeds, and that this doesn't set an alarming precedent for the removal of student rights. Please let me know if you have any questions about the IDs or the program.
One of the things John Jay (US Supreme Court Justice) is known for is telling jurors that they are responsible for judging the law (the rules as handed down).
I suspect he'd be proud of the student for deciding that this particular school rule is unjust and standing up for herself.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Ok, I'll explain.
Is she forbidden to exercise her religion by wearing the number of the beast? IS there a number of the Beast? What is this beast? Can you name the existing and recognized religion where it is a known and universally accepted fact that that RFID tag is the identification mark of said Beast? Reading the bible in your own way is not exercising religion. Always doing what the bible says might be exercising religion but do you want me to get into the bible telling people to kill homosexuals?
So using the first amendment I can get out of anything by saying it's my religion?
Is the term so vague?
Regarding the free speech part in the first amendment... If she would have just told people that the rfid tag IS the number of the beast that would have been fine and punishing her for this would have been wrong.
But she chose to act. And that makes her in the position to PROVE she is exercising her relgion, she would need to describe that religion.
Can you please answer these questions before calling me an idiot?
In my opinion having the word religion in the Constitution is tricky and these times it will lead to this. Religious and ignorant people using their imaginary system of beliefs as leverage to bend the socitety around them except the other way around.
You should be free to exercise any religion. But once YOU decide you NEED and WANT to be part of a multicultural and diverse society it's your responsibility to obey those rules, because no one forces you to be a part of it.
If you want in don't force us to bend the already existing rules for your own personal reasons and most of all it should be mandatory that you're not supposed to feel offended in your religious beliefs because of a
NON-RELIGIOUS act! You cannot decide by your self what is a religious act. I really don't see how this is discrimination.
The school making you wear RFID tags is not a religious act so you shouldn't be able to bring up that argument. The modern state shouldn't care about people's religion. It's their right, but that shouldn't make the state responsible to tip-toe around 200 million religious views when they decide what colour should roads be, for example. Freedom of speech doesn't mean the other party you're criticizing has ANY obligation to obey what you say.
Curiously yours, crip.
I thought the attorney made a good point ...
"Regimes in the past have always started with the schools, where they develop a compliant citizenry," Whitehead continued. "These 'Student Locator' programs are ultimately aimed at getting students used to living in a total surveillance state where there will be no privacy, and wherever you go and whatever you text or email will be watched by the government."
Poor girl. She just wants to live in freedom. I wonder where she got that idea?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#School_speech
This is what I mean. Free speech is one thing ( expressing an opinion using speech, clothes, drawings etc). But if a system is put in place by a school for whatever reasons (and I'm sure they can easily prove increased eficiency of various administrative activities by using these tags) and you choose to not follow it I could call that undue interruption.
Curiously yours, crip.
.... in Politicians and other public servants
I think I misread it. Too much work, too much beer. Beer + commenting on slashdot doesnt mix well, lesson learned ;)
(I hope)...
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
Sorry that was my AC - forgot to log in. Cheers!
For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
Cheers,
Well...I guess when you start misreading slashdot and ends up a bunch of people calling you troll, then it's a pretty good sign you had enough to drink, eh? ;)
It's kind of like at the bar, when you're rambling tin foil theories and your friends have long left the table...
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
If it were my child i would demand she not ware it and i would demand that the school board,teachers janitors be forced to wear them. I want to know what they do and where they go after school as well. I want to know what church they go to if any or at all? do they frequent strip bars? Do they visit the local drug corners parts of town. I also say they have mandatory web cams turned on as well i don't want a cam whore teaching my kids or a cam whore dude cheating on his wife at paltalk.lol Ya that's a great idea much better then students i think. I wonder how many idiots will give me a troll rating? lol i think they need one as well.
Jack of all trades,master of none
After all it's hard arguing your point if you don't know what you're talking about.
You're new here, aren't you?
You cannot decide by your self what is a religious act.
If you can't decide by yourself what is a religious act, then you have no freedom of religion.
You're right the freedom of religion in the first amendment is vague, but it is there. It does at times require some accommodation such as during wars when members of some religious groups aren't required to kill people during wars.
The burden of proof you speak of should be proportional to the accommodation required and the potential for abuse. In the case I mention of allowing people to avoid killing during a war, the burden was pretty high because so many people would likely try to avoid the draft by claiming religious exemption if the burden weren't set high. People were required to show that their religion had long-standing prohibitions on all killing, and that they had been a well-established member of the religion (i.e. that they didn't 'convert' when war broke out). However if all you want to do is avoid a school dress code that forbids wearing a hat so that you can were a yarmulke, the burden shouldn't be nearly so high.
In this case there is no reason to suspect that the young woman is attempting to abuse the first amendment by claiming a religious belief she doesn't really hold. The accommodation of the teacher simply noting whether she is in class, or having her sign an attendance book, is not overly burdensome.
I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
If this point doesn't drive it home, let me give ya a true story.
Back in the day, I did stupid shit and got put in jail. This is county jail, not prison. I was down waiting to see the judge and other people were there waiting also. One of the guys was going before the judge because he keeps destroying the wrist tag they give you. Now the wrist tag has your picture and info about you, so they know who you are, and that they are releasing the right person, transferring the right person, etc. So we asked the guy why he keeps destroying the wrist tag and he says, "It's the Mart of the Beast, and as a christian, i can not wear it." Most of us spent the next 5 mins laughing. Ends up this guy, who would of been out that night, is spending extra days in jail because he thinks something is the mark of the beast.
Stupid people don't understand stupid shit. Her understanding of her religion is going to lose her a good education.
Be seeing you...
.. once they work out that they can open the loos of the opposite sex.
You'll never see a more popular game of swap-the-tag then, that is, if they are the normal kind of teenager I know.
A tag can have benefits, but this is plain vanilla tracking. Expect the sales of foil packed crisps to go through the roof there, because I'd wrap the tag as soon as I was past a door. (and fire regulations say you cannot bar an exit).
Insert
It should be noted that if the student carries the student ID at all times, they can be secretly read in other locations.
For example it would be easy to find out which students are at a bar, a location where a suspicious group hangs out, in a bathroom, at a game, in church, at another school, etc. Anywhere there is electrical power, or even anywhere someone carries a mobile reader.
However it is not going to help someone if they are kidnapped. It isn't about security. Small children are sometimes given phones that can be tracked in case of kidnapping and that is far different.
This on the contrary could be aimed at a bus or school gate to see when a target leaves. It is a vulnerability.
Yes, it is illegal, because it causes avoidable and irreparable damage to school property. And is it really harmless if it is deadly for any living being inside of the microwave?
Why are you limited to microwaves? There is a bike path near where I live that passes underneath some high voltage power lines. The induced EMF across the gap in a small, insulated metal ring wrapped around one of my handlebars is enough to generate a mild electric shock. This is very likely enough to damage an RFID device and is only one example where any member of the public can encounter what are normally harmless EM fields.
Swap cards, often.
Tracked, yes. Identified, no.
--
Peace is relatively easy to achieve -- liberty is harder.