Slashdot Mirror


Texas High School Student Loses Lawsuit Challenging RFID Tracking Requirement

Chris453 writes "Earlier today, a Texas High School student named Andrea Hernandez and her family lost the first round of the lawsuit filed to prevent her school district from forcing its students to wear RFID badges for tracking purposes. The judge in the case declared that the district's compromise for the student (a badge without the battery) was sufficient and dismissed any First Amendment issues. The badges are RFIDs powered by built-in batteries and one of the concerns was that the badges would be used to track students off-campus. Interestingly enough, the school district claims in court documents that 'The badges do not work off campus (PDF).' However, on their website, the school district confirms that it is conceivable that an off-campus RFID reader could access badge serial numbers, but tries to downplay the significance: 'Therefore, an intruder or "hacker" can only learn that the tag serial number is, for example, #69872331, but that does not provide any useful information. Has the district committed perjury by claiming that the active RFIDs magically deactivate themselves when off school property?"

412 comments

  1. U$A, the land of "freedom"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    NOT.

  2. Sorry dude by dyingtolive · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're under 18, so not a human being in the eyes of the state, and as such subject to being tracked like cattle.

    If it's any consolation, the rest of us are only marginally human beings in the eyes of the state, and are still subject to being tracked like cattle if we go out to anywhere public, or use any service or product. On the bright side, you're getting indoctrinated to it early.

    --
    Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    1. Re:Sorry dude by dyingtolive · · Score: 1, Informative

      ...and before any pedant gets ahold of my post: Yes, I know it's a chick. Yes, I call women "dudes" sometimes. No, that does not represent any sort of confusion upon my part.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    2. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, just students. In Saudi-Arabia, every woman is tracked via her cellphone. If she is found to try leaving the state, her male guardian (every woman has a mostly legally responsible guardian like a husband, brother or father) is notified by SMS. Of course, that's just a compromise as, strictly speaking, women are not allowed to move without their guardian's supervision in public at all, at penalty of flaying.

      We're ok with all that because Saudi-Arabia has a whole lot of oil.

    3. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      It's okay, she's not that hot anyway. I'd probably call her a dude, too, without mistaking her sex. Some people explicitly reserve the work "chick" for hot girls only.

    4. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We're ok with China's government because of their money and products too. Our interests and playing sides are directly responsible for this country being hated worldwide.

    5. Re:Sorry dude by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      You're not a human being in the eyes of the state, and as such subject to being tracked like cattle.

      FTFY

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    6. Re:Sorry dude by itof500 · · Score: 2

      Corporations are people with rights. Why not us?

    7. Re:Sorry dude by kilfarsnar · · Score: 2

      Well, just students. In Saudi-Arabia, every woman is tracked via her cellphone. If she is found to try leaving the state, her male guardian (every woman has a mostly legally responsible guardian like a husband, brother or father) is notified by SMS. Of course, that's just a compromise as, strictly speaking, women are not allowed to move without their guardian's supervision in public at all, at penalty of flaying.

      We're ok with all that because Saudi-Arabia has a whole lot of oil.

      We're okay with lots of stuff if there's a whole lot of oil involved.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    8. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's guess.. It has something to do with money?

    9. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      No problem, broad.

      (I like to call men "broads" sometimes.)

    10. Re:Sorry dude by Scragglykat · · Score: 1

      Equal opportunity right?

    11. Re:Sorry dude by dyingtolive · · Score: 1
      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    12. Re:Sorry dude by tnk1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not to take away from the gravity of the punishment, but they don't get flayed, they get flogged. Still very painful, and dangerous, but not quite as extreme.

      And we're not okay with it, they just happen to have the rest of the world by the balls, at the moment. That will change, soon enough.

    13. Re:Sorry dude by fermion · · Score: 1, Insightful
      And presumably you want children to be human from conception, so that if you accidently kill a 2 week pregnant woman you will charged with two murders, one of a child.

      Or perhaps we should treat kids like full humans and allow them to work. There are many right to work states that would love to give 10 year old children the right to work. After all we are violating their basic rights by not allowing them to work.

      or how about the right to bear arms. Right now even the NRA would violate the child's basic right to protection herself.

      I am not a fan of badges, but badges are a fact of work life so we might as well train the kids to wear badges. After all, if the kids are full human they should be encourages to do the same things as other human. And more and more badges are RFID.

      To get more serious, this lawsuit seems to go more from the paranoid delusions of someone who does not understand the physics and reality of RFID rather than any rational objection. For instance, presuming these are not self power tags, the distance would be measured in inches rather than feet or miles.so any tracking outside of school would be prohibitively expensive. And there would be no way to force kids to wear school ids outside of school anyway. Any delisional paranoid could do what any delusion paranoid would do. Wear a tin foil hat.

      And do underestimate the delusions of texas. We are the site of the Waco terrorist religious attack on america back in 1993, and the FLDS affiliated teen sex farm in Brazoria County back in 2008.

      Any infringement on right have to balanced. Young children in school are required to stay with a teacher even to go the bathroom. This is acceptable to most people. In high school, there is more freedom but you are required to be in school. Frankly, RFID tags are less invasive method and more accurate to insure the student is where he or she is supposed to be. There are many cases in which a student claims to be somewhere, but the records show they weren't. With an RFID tag teachers mistakes will not put the kid in jeopardy. Sure, kids switch and give badges to others, so the system is not perfect, but it will do more to protect students who operate in good faith.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    14. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Tinker vs DesMoine School district
      "constitutional rights do not stop at the schoolhouse gates"

      While minors have some restrictions compared to adults, they're clearly humans in the eyes of the state (too much so in some cases, where the state seems to think that a fertilized egg is a human).

      This is an interesting case at a higher level. Today it's RFID tracking, with an explicit object needed. But the technology is not too far from just doing the tracking using image processing. It's already being done in airports and stadiums, as well as shopping malls, with varying degrees of performance. If all you do is want to get rough statistics about how many people stand in front of the store more than once, you don't need "passport control" kinds of accuracy.

      The school, here, can argue pretty convincingly that they have a need to know who's in the school, and whether they choose to use teacher visual/auditory identification (calling roll) or swiping a badge or RFID or fingerprint scanners or image recognition is immaterial.

      The question is about the big world and all the adults. Is the vague "right to be left alone" infringed by the advent of private and public surveillance with ever increasing performance and accuracy, and largely unhindered by law or regulation. To be honest, I would worry about private companies doing this rather than the government. The government may do dumb things, but overall, the folks in government tend to have a fairly well developed sense of privacy entitlements. Private industry, on the other hand, seeks to monetize as much as they can, and if they can sell the id information, they will.

    15. Re:Sorry dude by Talderas · · Score: 4, Informative

      I like the fact that Slashdot is conflating this to a tracking complaint when the case is more of a "freedom of religion" case than anything else. The tracking bit is tangential to the meat of the case.

      Summation. Student thinks RFID chip is the "mark of the beast" and refuses to wear badge on religious grounds. School offers badge without chip. Student's parent instead wants entire program removed because wearing the badge is "compelled speech" supporting the program and by extension supporting the "mark of the beast".

      There's some other complaints in the case but that's what it revolves around and none of the complaints have to do with tracking.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    16. Re:Sorry dude by mariox19 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      [W]e might as well train the kids to wear badges.

      Shame on you.

      --

      quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.

    17. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I am not a fan of badges, but badges are a fact of work life so we might as well train the kids to wear badges.

      I have never worked at a place were I needed to wear a badge and I doubt that I ever will.

    18. Re:Sorry dude by dyingtolive · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I am not a fan of badges, but badges are a fact of work life so we might as well train the kids to wear badges. After all, if the kids are full human they should be encourages to do the same things as other human. And more and more badges are RFID.

      Right, get them accustomed to it early, like respecting authority and always doing what you're told without question. Fact of life.

      For instance, presuming these are not self power tags,

      From TFS: "The badges are RFIDs powered by built-in batteries..."

      Any infringement on right have to balanced. Young children in school are required to stay with a teacher even to go the bathroom. This is acceptable to most people. In high school, there is more freedom but you are required to be in school. Frankly, RFID tags are less invasive method and more accurate to insure the student is where he or she is supposed to be. There are many cases in which a student claims to be somewhere, but the records show they weren't. With an RFID tag teachers mistakes will not put the kid in jeopardy. Sure, kids switch and give badges to others, so the system is not perfect, but it will do more to protect students who operate in good faith.

      It's been a long time since I was a minor, and I don't have children, so I suppose my perspective is skewed, but at the risk of sounding like one of those "must reject technology or anything that's not the old ways" people, children have managed to survive to adulthood without RFID tags. Sure, some kids have had terrible things occur to them, but I do not believe you can legitimately solve societal issues with technological mandates.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    19. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "You're under 18, so not a human being in the eyes of the state, "

      So then why the uproar over the Newtown massacre?

    20. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No problem, broad.

      (I like to call men "broads" sometimes.)

      I resemble that remark!

    21. Re:Sorry dude by dyingtolive · · Score: 2

      I'm not really an expert on religion, especially Christianity, but wasn't the point of the "mark of the beast" that it was basically a tracking number? I agree that it's silly on those grounds, especially since it would be much more likely that the "mark of the beast" would be the social security number that the kid (and probably the parents) undoubtedly have.

      Way to try to come off with the objectivity when we're trying to rally and foster our own personal agenda in something loosely related, BTW.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    22. Re:Sorry dude by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      Corporations are people with rights. Why not us?

      We're not corporations.

    23. Re:Sorry dude by Talderas · · Score: 1

      I'm not going to try to analyze the mind of a Christian but I was just summarizing the complaint. The complaint also extended to bits saying that by only having the mark you can participate in the economy and that by not having the RFID chip the child was being burdened by not being able to participate in the school economy.

      The complaint itself is basically filed under the 1st Amendment, 14th Amendment, and a Texas religious freedom law. For the court to examine the legality of the tracking, it would need to be a 4th Amendment styled complaint. For the court to make any ruling or judgment outside of the cited laws, it would overreaching its scope.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    24. Re:Sorry dude by tnk1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You have a lot to learn if you think that nuclear weapons can do very much to make the Saudis give up their oil.

      All they need to do is prevent us from getting it. And since Europe and China use more than we do from the Mideast, we'd then have to deal with them becoming very angry at us.

      And let's be fair, it's their country. The fact that they can flog women isn't really our problem directly. It is something they need to work out themselves, and they will, like we are.

    25. Re:Sorry dude by ninjagin · · Score: 1

      Thank you very much for pointing out the religious origins of the suit. If I had the points I'd mod you informative.

      --
      .. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
    26. Re:Sorry dude by punman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ... I do not believe you can legitimately solve societal issues with technological mandates.

      Nor with legislation.

    27. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      For the first 30 years of its use in the 1800s, dude was a nongendered term used to mock how someone dressed(today, we use the term "metrosexual" in much the same way, albeit only referring to men).

      Gradually it changed to mean "an idiot from back east who has no clue", and then to "those city slickers who are paying us to to let them play cowboy".

      Its appropriation by the surfer culture in the 60s and their feminization of the word "dudette" created the perception that dude is a gendered term, but general usage still supports its equal usage.

    28. Re:Sorry dude by The+Moof · · Score: 4, Informative

      It seems there's a new "Mark of the Beast" every decade or so. Back when I was a kid and went to church every week with my parents, I remember reading an article in one of the missals how bank account numbers are the "Mark of the Beast" - and this was 20 years ago.

    29. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> The district had offered Hernandez a compromise, allowing her to wear the ID card with the chip removed. She and her father refused, saying that would amount to >> showing support for a program that violates their religious convictions.

      So why do they not accept this?

    30. Re:Sorry dude by ah.clem · · Score: 1

      5 seconds in a microwave. Problem solved.

      --
      "Life is not magic." Dr. Ron Weiss - "If we don't play God, who will?" Dr. James Watson
    31. Re:Sorry dude by Sarius64 · · Score: 1

      And do underestimate the delusions of texas. We are the site of the Waco terrorist religious attack on america back in 1993

      Seeing as your quote appears delusional in retrospect, I doubt your input on trusting the state should be considered either. Here (no terrosits attacking America at all amazingly): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege

    32. Re:Sorry dude by dyingtolive · · Score: 1

      That's another technical solution to the societal problem they're generating by trying to create a technical solution to the perceived societal solution that children need better monitoring and control placed upon them.

      In other words, it won't fix the underlying issue that when you won't scan they just issue you another badge. You'll only be able to trash so many of them before something starts getting huffy.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    33. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I got bad news for you... It doesn't magically stop at 18.

    34. Re:Sorry dude by dyingtolive · · Score: 0

      I prefer "toots", "hun", or "sugartits". That way you're not, like, objectifying me, or something.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    35. Re:Sorry dude by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      They're not humans, they're The Children! Think of THEM!

    36. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a Student #24601 joke in here somewhere.

    37. Re:Sorry dude by Mitreya · · Score: 1

      You're under 18, so not a human being in the eyes of the state, and as such subject to being tracked like cattle.

      That may be, but her parents are over 18. Do parents (who are human beings in the eyes of the state) get any say in this?

      School is not optional, so I was hoping that parents retain some rights here in how their children are treated.

    38. Re:Sorry dude by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2

      Gradually it changed to mean "an idiot from back east who has no clue", and then to "those city slickers who are paying us to to let them play cowboy".

      Or to those losers who pay for a reverse cowgirl at a "ranch" in Nevada.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    39. Re:Sorry dude by Mitreya · · Score: 1

      The school, here, can argue pretty convincingly that they have a need to know who's in the school, and whether they choose to use teacher visual/auditory identification (calling roll) or swiping a badge or RFID or fingerprint scanners or image recognition is immaterial.

      Oh, the school can argue that -- but can they also convincingly argue that RFID badge WILL track students? It's ridiculously easy to have your friend take the badge while you skip school

      Unless they are planning to implant it under student's skin eventually -- let's see if the court will oppose to that practice when it starts.

    40. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very true! The real issue is that the school can't control the students and have them in their seats when they are supposed to be. So they spend way more money to slowly indoctrinate people to accept tracking and infringing on their rights. It is one of the first steps toward the state tracking everyone. We have to stop it now before it goes too far.

    41. Re:Sorry dude by dyingtolive · · Score: 1

      School is not optional, but state-run school is (or at least used to be). I know it's not for a lot of people for various reasons, but is home-schooling a legal option in Texas?

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    42. Re:Sorry dude by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      The complaint also extended to bits saying that by only having the mark you can participate in the economy and that by not having the RFID chip the child was being burdened by not being able to participate in the school economy.

      You don't have to read very far into the actual complaint pointed to by the "claimed it did not work off campus" link in the summary to see that the superintendent told the family that the girl would not lose ANY ability to participate in school services. There was no burden. She would be wearing essentially the same ID she's already been wearing and accepting, doing the same things as before.

      In fact, if you do read the complaint, you'll find out that the father refused to accept the un-chipped ID because his acceptance would prevent him from filing a complaint that his daughters freedom of religion was being abridged. Yes, if you aren't forced to do something that violates your freedom of religion, then yes, you don't have a reason to complain about being forced to do something that violates your freedom of religion. So, in fact, the trivial solution to the problem is unacceptable simply because the father wants to have something to complain about.

      If wearing the ID itself was already a violation of her freedom of religion, then the complaint should not bother mentioning the RFID aspect, since it is irrelevant, and it should have been filed years ago, and the girl should have long ago refused to wear the id at all. Since none of that happened, then we know the real complaint has nothing to do with the "mark of the beast", because the "mark of the beast" has been acceptable to the father and the girl for a long time already.

      Regarding the summary's implication that the superintended lied about the RFID chip not working off-campus, that's just hyperbole on the summary writer's part. The SYSTEM (Smart ID) truly does NOT work off-campus because any outside RFID readers won't be tied into the Smart ID database that would be required to convert the UID in the chip into student data. No student off-campus will be able to buy coffee at Starbucks using this id; no nefarious evil-doer will be able to know that "Susan Smith, student at XYZ middle school, has walked into the Fuzzy Feather Massage Parlor". Bad guys might know that RFID tag 2029929022938 has just walked by, but that's it. It's the same level of tracking you have if you carry an object you bought at Walmart with an RFID in it around, or your Mobile or other fast-pass, or any of the multitude of other RFIDed things.

    43. Re:Sorry dude by Keith111 · · Score: 1

      It's a tragic state of things when the father things he has a better chance of success by claiming religious reasons for not wearing a privacy invading device instead of actually calling it out for what it is. Sad thing is, I'm pretty sure he's right. Of course there's always the chance that he's just a crazy bastard really thinking its the mark of the beast or whatever. Either way, good luck on the fight.

    44. Re:Sorry dude by Talderas · · Score: 1

      I agree completely with what you said. The only thing I disagree with is that the lying bit being a hyperbole. It's a red herring.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    45. Re:Sorry dude by jjjhs · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps we should treat kids like full humans and allow them to work. There are many right to work states that would love to give 10 year old children the right to work. After all we are violating their basic rights by not allowing them to work.

      "Right to work" means being able to work somewhere without being required to join a union and/or pay union dues.

    46. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact it means the right to work. Yes, the real goal was to cut the funding of unions, but that was not the way it was presented. The justification was that unions would impose arbitrary requirements, or force employers to arbitrarily fire workers who were a threat to the union leadership. So Right to Work really was presented as the right of an individual to work any job that they were qualified for. In that light, ten year old kids are selling lottery tickets in many places around the world. They are very qualified, and even more so as there a places where no one is going to rob a 10 year old kid, where they would rob an adult. Likewise the little hands of girls are very good at assembly. By have arbitrary laws that prevent child labor, we are violating their right to work, and forcing many families into poverty.

    47. Re:Sorry dude by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      if you accidently kill a 2 week pregnant woman you will charged with two murders

      you don't get charged with murder for accidentally killing someone. that's called manslaughter.

    48. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > We're okay with lots of stuff if there's a whole lot of oil involved.

      We're okay with lots of stuff it there's a whole lot of MONEY involved.

      The answer is MONEY. Now, what was the question?

    49. Re:Sorry dude by kenh · · Score: 0

      Unless it involves fracking...

      --
      Ken
    50. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This should be on wikipedia.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dude

    51. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Were ok with that because Saudi-Arabia is a sovereign country. FIFY

    52. Re:Sorry dude by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Well, just students. In Saudi-Arabia, every woman is tracked via her cellphone. If she is found to try leaving the state...

      Damn public school, it taught me that Saudi-Arabia was a nation, not a state!

      --
      Be seeing you...
    53. Re:Sorry dude by Nyder · · Score: 2

      Not to take away from the gravity of the punishment, but they don't get flayed, they get flogged. Still very painful, and dangerous, but not quite as extreme.

      And we're not okay with it, they just happen to have the rest of the world by the balls, at the moment. That will change, soon enough.

      You do realize that there is a lot of Oil in the world and the USA is currently working on using up everyone else's Oil before we dive too far into ours?

      That is part of the USA's long term goal, use up everyone elses Oil so all that is left is OUR oil. When we are the only ones with Oil, then we win or proffit, or something.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    54. Re:Sorry dude by russotto · · Score: 1

      We're ok with all that because Saudi-Arabia has a whole lot of oil.

      Um, Saudi Arabia. Sovereign nation and all that nonsense. Unlike, say, Texas, no matter what they think. Would you prefer we defended the freedom of Saudi Arabia's women by, say, invading the country and installing a puppet government headed by Hillary Clinton?

    55. Re:Sorry dude by Nanosapien · · Score: 1

      Which explains why we hate Cylons so much....

    56. Re:Sorry dude by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      In other words, it won't fix the underlying issue that when you won't scan they just issue you another badge.

      That's not the underlying problem, because the girl and her father were offered an official school ID without an RFID chip in it and HE REFUSED. The superintendent was clear that not having the chip would not interfere with her schooling in any way. That pretty much rules out the "they'll just give you one that does scan" idea.

      The real underlying problem is the litigious nature of the modern citizen. If something bad happens to a child at school because the school loses track of them, there's a lawsuit. The alleged independent nature of children isn't considered when a lawsuit comes around.

      Doubt my claim about litigiousness? This father was offered an option to completely bypass the use of RFID on his child AND HE REFUSED IT specifically so he could still sue.

    57. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why all this uproar over how some chickens are killed to supply $BIG_CHAIN?

    58. Re:Sorry dude by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      I grew up in a Christian home and my parents were seriously into the whole Revelations bit. Basically what the Bible says is that it's a mark on either the right hand or forehead that will be required if you want to buy or sell anything. Of course there are debates as to whether hand and forehead are literal, or whether it's a figurative meaning.

    59. Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's kind of devolved to a matter of constitutional wills against student administrators. Its a power struggle of "how can I force a game of proxy dominance on your child and make you accept it and pay for it".

      The school district itself now has access to more funding from a $300 million education disbursement c/o the Texas Land Commission. So the NISD's claim they are incorporating RFID from a place of need can be challenged. If someone were to challenge the NISD on allowing an opt-out based on having their needs met fiscally, their hard stance might change. If money is really the problem here, someone has already stepped up some resources. But somehow I don't think that's the whole issue.

      If concessions were really made by NISD to take the RFID out and keep the badge "to fit in" for the student, it's about saving face for the egos at the top of the stack. Texas can do better than any elected official who wants to condition their children to standards they would forego. People choose where they work. If an adult doesn't want to wear an RFID badge, they don't have to accept a job where that's a condition. They have tools to mitigate adult life outside of work. Students are minors and so this is more about a proxy battle of consents with the parents and some dick public office over their kids. If that's the case, welcome to Student-Parent-Teacher Admin conflict for the 21st Century.

    60. Re:Sorry dude by cavebison · · Score: 1

      ... I do not believe you can legitimately solve societal issues with technological mandates.

      Nor with legislation.

      So we shouldn't have bothered making rape, murder, etc. illegal then? Just, what, educate people on how naughty it is?

    61. Re:Sorry dude by DirtyLiar · · Score: 1

      I hear you get to pick where it goes, either in your face, or in the back of your hand.

      --

      THINK! It's patriotic

  3. Read the PDF by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Informative
    I think it is fairly clear that it is the ability of staff to track students location that only works when the student is on campus. Of course it would have been better to qualify that with a statement that the card will still respond to other readers:

    ...the chip in the Smart ID badge also enables school staff to locate a student on a campus with a very large student population.16 The campus is equipped with sensors to read the card and school staff can determine the general whereabouts of the student carrying the card.17 The sensors do not give an exact reading or pinpoint the precise location of a student (e.g. a specific classroom), but it would show whether the student is in a certain wing of the school.18 The Smart ID badges work only within the school campus that has been equipped with sensors to read them.19 The badges do not work off campus.

    1. Re:Read the PDF by coinreturn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think it is fairly clear that it is the ability of staff to track students location that only works when the student is on campus. Of course it would have been better to qualify that with a statement that the card will still respond to other readers:

      ...the chip in the Smart ID badge also enables school staff to locate a student on a campus with a very large student population.16 The campus is equipped with sensors to read the card and school staff can determine the general whereabouts of the student carrying the card.17 The sensors do not give an exact reading or pinpoint the precise location of a student (e.g. a specific classroom), but it would show whether the student is in a certain wing of the school.18 The Smart ID badges work only within the school campus that has been equipped with sensors to read them.19 The badges do not work off campus.

      I agree. I think the "perjury" comment was there just for inflammatory purposes.

    2. Re:Read the PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They can track RFID to a very specific location if you have enough sensors to triangulate the position. You can triangulate with anything if you have enough information.

    3. Re:Read the PDF by Sarten-X · · Score: 4, Funny

      An inflammatory statement in a Slashdot story on privacy vs. government? Surely you jest!

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    4. Re:Read the PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The badges do not work off campus."

      This is true for certain values of "work"

    5. Re:Read the PDF by NEDHead · · Score: 1

      I sometimes triangulate with spaghetti but it doesn't sound very good

    6. Re:Read the PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      RFID doesn't magically turn itself off when you are away from a given zone. The moment you enter another zone, "your" tag will light up and respond.

      The Judge (and YOU) bought the bullshit, hook, line, and sinker.

    7. Re:Read the PDF by aurizon · · Score: 4, Informative

      The badges work at all times, the look-up table that correlates the badge number to a person is internal to the school. RFID comes in both short and long range versions - I assume this is a longer range one (it has a battery - the short range ones are usually RF field powered). It may show up up on a Fedex warehouse RFID scanner or other scanner, but as a number with no associated data. I am not sure how widespread RFID response fields are outside of warehouses and malls?
      In any event, the repeated numbers *666* should not be part of the string, just so the petty number of the beast argument can be tossed.
      Many companies use RFID badges for timecards punch-in to work and for access to various doors, both at the entrance and exit and to control access to various areas for assorted reasons.

    8. Re:Read the PDF by artfulshrapnel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well it kind of is perjury. The badges do indeed "work" off campus, in that if pinged by and RFID scanner they respond with their unique ID code.

      A stalker or someone who wanted to do harm to a specific student doesn't need access to their full records, they just need to determine that ID code and use it to track them.

    9. Re:Read the PDF by samkass · · Score: 1

      Well it kind of is perjury. The badges do indeed "work" off campus, in that if pinged by and RFID scanner they respond with their unique ID code.

      A stalker or someone who wanted to do harm to a specific student doesn't need access to their full records, they just need to determine that ID code and use it to track them.

      It is incorrect information. In order for it to be "perjury" it has to be shown to be material to the outcome of the case, which is possible but less clear.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    10. Re:Read the PDF by Theaetetus · · Score: 2

      Well it kind of is perjury. The badges do indeed "work" off campus, in that if pinged by and RFID scanner they respond with their unique ID code.

      A stalker or someone who wanted to do harm to a specific student doesn't need access to their full records, they just need to determine that ID code and use it to track them.

      In context, they're referring to the ability of staff to use them to locate students. Perjury is determined by reading all of a party's submissions and statements to the court, not just one sentence out of context.

    11. Re:Read the PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you can buy the sensors, you can read the tag- period. It's not clear at all to someone who's honestly versed in the practice of RF Identification that it does ANYTHING other than report it's ID. Powered tags have varying extra abilities. Things like faster turn on. Extended range at lower reader powers (tag senses the read pulse and POWERS ON, giving a chirp reply...). That sort of thing.

      The DOD has badge readers that will identify their DOD badge docked into a holder that do this at hundreds of feet from the reader- as an example. These tags? They're IN that class of devices.

      Either the School District's stupid (probable), lying, or both.

      It amazes me to no end just how friggin' stupid the lot is here on /. that they can't even manage to understand that concept and are willing to defend the stupidity we're seeing exhibited here by the District.

    12. Re:Read the PDF by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      If you're agreeing, you're being a tool. The tags don't magically fail to work off campus. If I figure out what brand/model of reader or what protocol the tags use, I can read them OFF campus. If I'm not caring about FCC regs, I can greatly extend the range of the reader.

      They're pathetically stupid, lying, or worse, both.

      To think that it's an empty inflamatory remark without basis is being ignorant.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    13. Re:Read the PDF by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except that staff, who have access to the information regarding which students have which RFID badges, can track the students off campus, they just cannot do so with the school's equipment. It is not the badges which do not work off campus, it is the central tracking system which does not work off campus. This is a violation of "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth." There is a reason that the oath is worded that way, your statements to the court under oath are supposed to be worded so as to be clear as to their meaning. Reading this it looks to me like this was carefully worded so as to make it seem that the badges stopped functioning when the student left campus while leaving the school able to say, "Oh no, that is not what we meant at all."

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    14. Re:Read the PDF by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      If you're agreeing, you're being a tool. The tags don't magically fail to work off campus. If I figure out what brand/model of reader or what protocol the tags use, I can read them OFF campus. If I'm not caring about FCC regs, I can greatly extend the range of the reader.

      They're pathetically stupid, lying, or worse, both.

      To think that it's an empty inflamatory remark without basis is being ignorant.

      Bullshit. At worst, it is ill-informed, not perjury. The plaintiff's objection is the ability of school staff to track them. School staff does not have off-site readers. "Perjury" is clearly used here to inflame.

      From wikipedia: Perjury, also known as forswearing, is the willful act of swearing a false oath or of falsifying an affirmation to tell the truth, whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to a judicial proceeding.[1][A] That is, the witness falsely promises to tell the truth about matters which affect the outcome of the case. For example, it is not considered perjury to lie about one's age unless age is a factor in determining the legal result, such as eligibility for old age retirement benefits.

    15. Re:Read the PDF by Talderas · · Score: 2

      It's not. It's taking one sentence out of the brief and out of context. It's also a rather pointless sentence with relation to the actual issues being viewed by the court.

      As far as the ruling is concerned and tracking and privacy is concerned... they defined working as "on a campus equipped with sensors". The school is not capable of tracking a student that is off campus therefore they do not work off campus.

      The whole case is basically a religious freedom case and has very little to do with privacy or tracking other than what Slashdot is reading into it.

      The TL;DR would be basically that the student believes the RFID chip to be the mark of the beast. School offers an ID badge without the chip. She refuses and parent demands the problem be removed because wearing chipless ID badge constitutes supporting the program which means supporting the mark of the beast.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    16. Re:Read the PDF by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      If you can buy the sensors, you can read the tag- period. It's not clear at all to someone who's honestly versed in the practice of RF Identification that it does ANYTHING other than report it's ID. Powered tags have varying extra abilities. Things like faster turn on. Extended range at lower reader powers (tag senses the read pulse and POWERS ON, giving a chirp reply...). That sort of thing.

      The DOD has badge readers that will identify their DOD badge docked into a holder that do this at hundreds of feet from the reader- as an example. These tags? They're IN that class of devices.

      Either the School District's stupid (probable), lying, or both.

      It amazes me to no end just how friggin' stupid the lot is here on /. that they can't even manage to understand that concept and are willing to defend the stupidity we're seeing exhibited here by the District.

      Just to be clear I was saying that the school district were not committing perjury, not that the cards could not be traced off campus. They were saying that THEIR SYSTEM WOULD NOT ALLOW STAFF to track people off campus, and that's all. That's why I added "Of course it would have been better to qualify that with a statement that the card will still respond to other readers" - what they said was true but did not mean that nobody could track students off-campus

    17. Re:Read the PDF by c · · Score: 1

      > I agree. I think the "perjury" comment was there just for inflammatory purposes.

      Well, you could make an argument that they're full of shit when they say they're tracking students ratehr than whoever is carrying the badges. But that could just be ignorance rather than perjury.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    18. Re:Read the PDF by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well it kind of is perjury. The badges do indeed "work" off campus, in that if pinged by and RFID scanner they respond with their unique ID code.

      Not really - perjury is a willful act intended to deceive. Disagreeing about what constitutes "working" or making a statement you believe is accurate based on your knowledge - i.e. work means able to identify a particular student using data stored in the system's computer and so they don't work to track individual students by identity even if you can still read a RFID code - would not be perjury.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    19. Re:Read the PDF by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      If the school does not understand that the RFID can be used to be used to identify students off campus, then they do not understand the security risks (no matter how small it may be) associated with the devices that they are demanding students carry with them. Thus the tags should not be allowed.

    20. Re:Read the PDF by Talderas · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter because the information wasn't pertinent to the complaints being raised.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    21. Re:Read the PDF by Talderas · · Score: 1

      The plaintiff's objection is that the RFID chip is "the mark of the beast" and that having to wear it or a badge that looks like the RFID badge is compelled speech supporting the "mark of the beast".

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    22. Re:Read the PDF by coinreturn · · Score: 2

      The plaintiff's objection is that the RFID chip is "the mark of the beast" and that having to wear it or a badge that looks like the RFID badge is compelled speech supporting the "mark of the beast".

      Yeah, the RFID chip is the mark of the beast, but the badge without RFID is not the mark of the beast? Riiiiight.

    23. Re:Read the PDF by fatphil · · Score: 1

      "Their system" *includes* the badges themselves, not just the detectors and the centralised server.

      The badges (at least the ones without RFID tags, which seems to be all of them, as a non-RFID one seems to have been offered, but declined), and therefore their system, thus do permit tracking of students off-campus by a sufficiently motivated party.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    24. Re:Read the PDF by Theaetetus · · Score: 1

      Except that staff, who have access to the information regarding which students have which RFID badges, can track the students off campus, they just cannot do so with the school's equipment. It is not the badges which do not work off campus, it is the central tracking system which does not work off campus. This is a violation of "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth." There is a reason that the oath is worded that way, your statements to the court under oath are supposed to be worded so as to be clear as to their meaning."

      And yet, perjury statutes don't create liability for failing to "tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth", but rather lying. The oath itself does not create a legal requirement.

      I mean, come on, think about it for a second... you're saying that lawyers never say anything unclear and never emphasis helpful facts while de-emphasizing unhelpful ones?? I mean, heck, I'm a lawyer (though not a trial attorney), and I didn't think our reputation was that good.

    25. Re:Read the PDF by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      That is a pretty weaselly way of saying it. The School's system can't track a student off campus, but anyone else's can. Any security concerns clearly are not going to be limited to worrying about school staff tracking a student. Any arguments that would indicate the school wasn't lying also indicate that the school does not understand the security ramifications of what they are implementing and thus their program is a danger to the students.

    26. Re:Read the PDF by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      A tin-foil lined pouch should take care of that.

      And for on-campus use maybe a transparent conductive pouch, to have it visible, but only electronically readable when the wearer allows it to.

    27. Re:Read the PDF by Ogive17 · · Score: 1

      Considering you have to be in close proximity to read the card, a stalker would be duplicating efforts by trying to read the card. There are already closely following the student!

      I wouldn't carry that card unless I was at school, probably leave it in my backpack to make sure I didn't forget to take it with me the next day.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    28. Re:Read the PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it is fairly clear that it is the ability of staff to track students location that only works when the student is on campus. Of course it would have been better to qualify that with a statement that the card will still respond to other readers:

      I agree. I think the "perjury" comment was there just for inflammatory purposes.

      If they left out phrase 19 I would follow you that the "perjury" thing is overrated, but that specific phrase is a complete falseness with ramifications to the case.
      Phase 19 specifically states that the badge itself stops working outside school, which is false, to prevent arguments on that ground. When they already established the working of the system and how it is set up to be used with phrase 15-18, why add phrase 19 other than to intentionally block arguments based on it.

    29. Re:Read the PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the school does not understand that the RFID can be used to be used to identify students off campus, then they do not understand the security risks (no matter how small it may be) associated with the devices that they are demanding students carry with them. Thus the tags should not be allowed.

      Out of curiosity, what exactly is the security risk here?

      Without the tracking database all you can get out of the badge is a unique ID number (so you need to find out which ID to track on your own). The badge only goes where the student takes it (probably leave it with their school books so they don't lose it) and you would only get limited tracking data (what scanner they're in range of).

      I'd dare say binoculars are a grater security risk where tracking children are concerned.

    30. Re:Read the PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't call me Shirley.

    31. Re:Read the PDF by MozeeToby · · Score: 2

      The badges work at all times, the look-up table that correlates the badge number to a person is internal to the school.

      But, the same person will always have the same number. Imagine I work at the mall and have access to all the scanners in the mall (probably not a realistic situation granted) and I see a hot girl come in that I would like to stalk. I can, with a bit of effort figure out the ID on her card and set up alerts for whenever she enters the building. More likely, imagine someone is accused of shoplifting, same situation. They can read the card and they can see who they are scanning, there's no need for the school's DB.

      In any event, the repeated numbers *666* should not be part of the string, just so the petty number of the beast argument can be tossed.

      Many interpretations of revelations don't specify 666 as the one and only number that should be avoided. Many interpretations don't have a 'number' at all, but rather a mark of some kind. The defining factor is usually that it is required to buy or sell goods or to go about your daily business without being harassed.

    32. Re:Read the PDF by aurizon · · Score: 2

      This is true, you can stalk a person and build up a data base of students, and in time someone might do this commercially. They should use an encrypted inquiry method, where the card will only answer to the correct interrogation string, which can be robustly encrypted. (these methods are established and secure, the military has established ways to do this, as has the auto and garage door industry).
      With such a method, the school badges would only respond to a secure school inquiry. They may, in fact, have implemented a secure method like this already to prevent external people from building a data base of students and employees of the College, perhaps a slashdotter knows this fact?
      This secure inquiry would also prevent any revelatory utterance that you were marked by the beast, shutting down those whiners.

    33. Re:Read the PDF by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 2

      an intruder or "hacker" can only learn that the tag serial number is, for example, #69872331, but that does not provide any useful information

      I don't think the author/courts understand how RFID works. That is, essentially, all it does: provide wirelessly an ID number for the badge it just scanned. If you can do this anywhere with the right type of scanner, it is no longer secure.

      How hard is it to clone this RFID serial number so you can come and go in the school posing as the student? Almost trivial with the right(rather inexpensive) equipment. Get a programmable RFID fob on the right frequency, program it with that 'serial #' and bam, you are that student.

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    34. Re:Read the PDF by electrofelix · · Score: 1

      Being battery powered suggests that they operate at a much further distance than the standard 5-10cm (or 40-50cm if you decide to create rogue scanner) than the passive version of RFID.

      Also considering they mentioned that it wouldn't tell them exactly which classroom the student was in, but rather in more general terms, which wing of the school, seems like reading distance might more likely to be upwards of 20m.

    35. Re:Read the PDF by Sarius64 · · Score: 1

      No, I'm fairly sure that perjury would be accurate. If you testify to something and it takes a one minute Google search to prove you wrong then you're probably lying. P.S. I wonder if the staff wears the same badges? Would be interesting to see what management has tied to their accounts for retrieval.

    36. Re:Read the PDF by Sarius64 · · Score: 1

      If you're agreeing, you're being a tool. The tags don't magically fail to work off campus. If I figure out what brand/model of reader or what protocol the tags use, I can read them OFF campus. If I'm not caring about FCC regs, I can greatly extend the range of the reader.

      They're pathetically stupid, lying, or worse, both.

      To think that it's an empty inflamatory remark without basis is being ignorant.

      Bullshit. At worst, it is ill-informed, not perjury. The plaintiff's objection is the ability of school staff to track them. School staff does not have off-site readers. "Perjury" is clearly used here to inflame.

      From wikipedia: Perjury, also known as forswearing, is the willful act of swearing a false oath or of falsifying an affirmation to tell the truth, whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to a judicial proceeding.[1][A] That is, the witness falsely promises to tell the truth about matters which affect the outcome of the case. For example, it is not considered perjury to lie about one's age unless age is a factor in determining the legal result, such as eligibility for old age retirement benefits.

      No, you're the one avoiding the issue. IF they believe what they said is true then they have been trained properly and have no business administrating the entire system. I doubt that, and would lean to being trained to lie in court by district mandate.

    37. Re:Read the PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      THEIR SYSTEM WOULD NOT ALLOW STAFF to track people off campus

      Which is inconsequential to the person being tracked.

      Furthermore, its a deliberate attempt to shift focus from the complaint itself (being tracked) to something quite different (not tracked by us). As such I would at least call it a violation of truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

      Also someone who does not have any good grasp of what certain equipment is capable of should at least excuse him/herself from making "this is how it works" statements before a judge.

      My two cents.

    38. Re:Read the PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, being properly trained makes someone ineligable to operate something? ...Guess that explains the quality of drivers on the road these days.

    39. Re:Read the PDF by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      It wasn't? If it was not pertinent, why was it included?

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    40. Re:Read the PDF by Talderas · · Score: 1

      The complaints were grounded in the 1st Amendment (free speech), 14th Amendment (due process), and a religious freedom law of Texas.

      Not a single one of these complaints would deal with the tracking aspect of the RFID. If they did there would be a complaint filed under some other law or the 4th Amendment. Since tracking isn't relevant to the complaints, lying about it isn't relevant to the decision the court makes. Since it doesn't matter to the decision the court makes it cannot be perjury.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    41. Re:Read the PDF by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      I get that lawyers make a living out of lying by omission and have reduced our legal system to accepting that. However, the purpose of wording the oath that way is to let people know that the court considers lying by omission lying just as much a lying by commission (of course, as you point out this is actually a legacy of a bygone day when people actually expected honesty). However, the definition I found for perjury in a legal setting says "1. Law The deliberate, willful giving of false,misleading, or incomplete testimony under oath." The problem is proving that someone deliberately gave incomplete testimony. Even this case, where it is clear to me that they intended to mislead I do not think it would rise above the burden of beyond reasonable doubt.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    42. Re:Read the PDF by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      If you're agreeing, you're being a tool. The tags don't magically fail to work off campus. If I figure out what brand/model of reader or what protocol the tags use, I can read them OFF campus. If I'm not caring about FCC regs, I can greatly extend the range of the reader.

      They're pathetically stupid, lying, or worse, both.

      To think that it's an empty inflamatory remark without basis is being ignorant.

      Bullshit. At worst, it is ill-informed, not perjury. The plaintiff's objection is the ability of school staff to track them. School staff does not have off-site readers. "Perjury" is clearly used here to inflame.

      From wikipedia: Perjury, also known as forswearing, is the willful act of swearing a false oath or of falsifying an affirmation to tell the truth, whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to a judicial proceeding.[1][A] That is, the witness falsely promises to tell the truth about matters which affect the outcome of the case. For example, it is not considered perjury to lie about one's age unless age is a factor in determining the legal result, such as eligibility for old age retirement benefits.

      No, you're the one avoiding the issue. IF they believe what they said is true then they have been trained properly and have no business administrating the entire system. I doubt that, and would lean to being trained to lie in court by district mandate.

      Take the advice of the OP's comment title and Read the PDF. It clearly shows the isolated quote is not perjury, IMHO.

    43. Re:Read the PDF by sjames · · Score: 1

      If the concern is safety and privacy, it would very certainly affect the case. It would render any right the school has to track on campus immaterial unless they provide for the students to leave the ID at school or a way to positively disable even passive use of the card off campus.

    44. Re:Read the PDF by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      Then how did Scooter Libby get convicted of perjury? At the time that the special prosecutor was interviewing him the prosecutor already knew that someone else had released the identity of Valerie Plame, yet Scooter Libby was convicted of perjury because he remembered a telephone conversation differently than the reporter who was on the other end of the phone from him.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    45. Re:Read the PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not sure how widespread RFID response fields are outside of warehouses and malls?

      Very. These fall under ISO/IEC 14443, which includes pretty well all smart cards of any sort. This includes credit card readers, door keys, and SIM cards. Most of the readers will be uninterested in the school's tags, but they're fully capable of talking to them. A more interesting case might be someone with a steerable antenna, they could track an individual student with good accuracy.

    46. Re:Read the PDF by sl149q · · Score: 1

      For active RFID chips there are two operative distances. First how close you have to be to the activation loop. Typically (by design) usually this is relatively short. Perhaps 1-2 meters. Second how close the receiver needs to be to get the transmitted signal (from the rfid transponder to the receiver which will then record the activation.) This (again by design) can be relatively long. On the order of 40-50m is not uncommon.

      We use an active chip system at our local velodrome. Activation is reasonably reliable to within 30cm (chip on front fork of bike, bike travelling up to 60kph) of the activation loop. And the resulting signal can be received up to 60m away (possibly farther, I couldn't arrange an easy test farther than that.)

      One of the minor issues with this is that for some types of systems (e.g. people tracking in buildings, through doorways) you may need to reduce the transmitted power. You only want it to be seen for maybe 2-3 meters. Think in terms of a hallway with many office doors, say at 5m intervals. Each of which has an activation loop and receiver. You don't want any receiver to see the RFID transmission except for the one specific door where the activation occurred. So you need to design the RFID chip transmission to only be readable up to say 2-3 meters. And then design things so that you don't get overlapped areas.

    47. Re:Read the PDF by sl149q · · Score: 1

      If you are not worried about FCC regs maybe you could greatly extend the range by redesigning the RFID transponder chip circuit and somehow covertly replacing your targets RFID tag with your special one.

      You might be able to help the receiver by adding antennas etc. But that is still limited to receiving what the RFID chip design puts out AND wouldn't usually be anything the FCC would worry about (adding an antenna that is.)

    48. Re:Read the PDF by sl149q · · Score: 1

      Once you know the RFID chip family you just buy the prototyping kit from Digikey. Usually those are very cheap ($100).

    49. Re:Read the PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very true. Card numbers will not be associated with anything else outside school grounds... Initailly... But once every student is mandated to have one, you have given others an easy way to tag, catalog and stalk these kids. The real problem is not what the school can do with RFID tagging... It's what everyone else can do with it as well.

      Anyone with enough cash invested can use these cards to track and harass kids in ways that were not intented... all outside school grounds. What's to stop a criminal organization from cataloging kids' profile to sell drugs, or harass them, or blackmail them?

      'Cause let's face it... Kids are usually not responsible, and I can see many of them selling out their personal info (as well as their friend's info) in exchange for some cigarretes or a beer.

    50. Re:Read the PDF by Nexion · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing you have never seen a circuit with an unnecessary etching in it. The "mark of the beast" as they call it, or "666", could be present in the device as such. It could potentially be present in many ways. Decades ago, when RFID technology was still on the drawing board, someone raised the idea that it could be the "mark" required to purchase goods and such, thus forcing it upon the people. As you are aware, there are already RFID tags present in devices used to perform transactions. Whether irrational or founded it really doesn't matter. Why are you so dead set on foisting your beliefs on others? That is just as irritating to me as these damned mindless zealots cramming Jesus down my throat at every turn.

      In reality this should never have even been the point. The use of this technology is an invasion of privacy and at best is just an example of administration mitigating a minor inconvenience on their part by forcing a major compromise on the part of the students. They don't have to be tracked off campus for this to be so. Take going to the restroom for example. This system KNOWS if they dropped a deuce or took a tinkle! They'll have a nice history of it too. What? No RFID pickups in the bathroom? It isn't hard to figure out when students drop into that nebulous zone where the bathrooms are and use time to determine the most likely use of facilities. How about when they visit the school nurse? How tightly are they controlling this data? How long is it kept? Are policies on the use of this data written in stone or is it to be changed on a whim?

      I use RFID tech for work myself, and even give a couple finger prints for door access. I accept it because I like the convenience, but some still have keys. Given that there are cameras at all entrances I somehow doubt my company would disrespect someone's religious beliefs no matter how ridiculous over such a little thing. Oddly enough we are headquartered in Texas.

      I'm an agnostic... I simply can't prove the existence of whatever baseless beliefs people have. Be it of faith in God or belief that there is no god... I'm horrified how disrespectful of each other these two groups are. What we could all use is a little more consideration of other people on items that don't really concern us in the first place. For this school system that would mean implementing policy changes, perhaps decades ago, to get the same result of increased revenue by perhaps allowing someone to sign in at a classroom at any time. Yes, it might take just a tiny bit more effort on their part, but hey... they are PAID to do it. Nope, the lazy administration wasted money to implement an unnecessary system. This resulted in unnecessary litigation. Resulting in unnecessary legislation. Resulting in YOUR lost tax dollars because some little girl's right to her religious beliefs being violated and the carelessness of a lazy overpaid school administration.

      Our forefathers came here to be free. While we can blame the government for what seems to be a long term assault against such freedoms their greatest ally in the cause of eroding our freedoms can all too often be found in the mirror. I don't care if you smoke pot. Don't care if you want to marry a man, woman or a horse. I don't care about anything as long as you are your only victim. I'm sure we could get along well enough if everyone could do the same, but sadly with 95% of us that is just not the case.

    51. Re:Read the PDF by aurizon · · Score: 1

      I have no such belief in the so called number of the beast. The concept is a faith based abstraction.

  4. Leave in locker. by Outthere057 · · Score: 1, Funny

    I would just leave it in my locker at the end of the day and they can track it all they want.. If for some reason I can do that i guess it would be time for a tinfoil wallet

    --
    "Drive Fast Kill Slow"
    1. Re:Leave in locker. by bickerdyke · · Score: 2

      You probably need it to get to your locker in the first place.

      --
      bickerdyke
    2. Re:Leave in locker. by 1u3hr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And how would you get back into the school the next day?

    3. Re:Leave in locker. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I forgot it in my locker"
      They will learn to recognize you very quickly.

    4. Re:Leave in locker. by Outthere057 · · Score: 1

      When i was in school didn't need the badge to get in the school. Honestly I don't believe my id ever left my wallet once I put it there each year

      --
      "Drive Fast Kill Slow"
    5. Re:Leave in locker. by gander666 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      When I was in school (public school, pre-university) there was no student ID. We just went to class, learned, did after school activities (if desired) and then went home. Alas, the public schools have become police states with lockdowns, gates, guards, and metal detectors. No wonder students are not learning.

      Heck, I was trusted enough to be given a physical key to get into our computer lab (8 Apple II's) in the afternoon to work on them.

      --
      Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress ... but I repeat myself. - Mark T
    6. Re:Leave in locker. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My school didn't even have student IDs until my senior year. And even then, the only thing I ever used it for was cutting lines.

    7. Re:Leave in locker. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I was in high school, guys would come with gun racks full of rifles in their trucks so they could go hunting after school.

      Should we still allow that?

    8. Re:Leave in locker. by kenh · · Score: 1

      They aren't used to unlock doors, they are used to keep an accurate inventory of the students, for state funding purposes.

      Apparently teachers at this charter/magnet school have a hard time getting the kids out of the hall and into their first class, and it is that first class that determines state funding for the day. See, the school gets it's funding based on the number of students in the building EACH DAY - on senior skip day (for example) the school gets 1/4th the state funding it normally gets, since 1/4th of the students are out of the building.

      --
      Ken
    9. Re:Leave in locker. by kenh · · Score: 1

      When you went to school, teachers knew how to get kids to come into class - now teachers lack that basic skill. These ID badges are to help the district get it's full funding from the state.

      If the teachers today could do what your teachers were able to do "back in the day" there would be no need for this.

      Remember why schools have metal detectors, guards, gates and practice lockdowns - to protect the children from, among other things, other students. Maybe we need to consider how we are raising our kids?

      --
      Ken
    10. Re:Leave in locker. by gander666 · · Score: 1

      Preaching to the choir. In my 4 years at public Highschool, I remember one visit by police. A student was caught smoking pot in the bathroom, if I recall correctly. No guns, probably knives, but no knife fights.

      Heck, in grade school I walked the 1.5 miles to and from school. Rain, shine, I doubt my parents ever dropped me off at school. The school near my house here has special traffic control to accommodate parents dropping off students.

      --
      Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress ... but I repeat myself. - Mark T
  5. Depends on what the meaning of is is by Qzukk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sounds like any perjury on their part would hinge on what it means to work and whether the judge allows them to make their own definition of the word.

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    1. Re:Depends on what the meaning of is is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If they lied about the tags not working outside of the school, then that's perjury, period. None of this Clinton-esque bullshit.

    2. Re:Depends on what the meaning of is is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If they lied about the tags not working outside of the school, then that's perjury, period. None of this Clinton-esque bullshit.

      Oh, as if the Obama-esque bullshit is any better? Or the idiot before him?

      Politics aside, it won't be considered perjury. They'll come back with some bullshit like "well, technically they could be picked up, but the data is meaningless", which will fly...right up until the point where people realize that the "obfuscated" RFID tag numbers are actually the student ID number, or something equally as blatant and easily traceable back to a person.

      By that point, it will be too late, and RFID-enabled schools will be a Federal mandate, and you'll risk losing Federal funds if you do not participate.

    3. Re:Depends on what the meaning of is is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well... what does it mean to work?

      If I tell you that my computer won't work without electricity, and you very handily demonstrate that it works fine as a blunt object to throw at someone, have then told a lie?

      It is clear to me that "work" means to be used for its intended purpose... in this case, tracking the whereabouts of a student. The fact that a rogue reader can pick up a meaningless serial number doesn't mean it "works" outside of the school. But the school is incapable of tracking the tags outside of school premises, and, notably, the information on the tags is useless without the school's database that ties serial number to student.

      None of this means that the system will be effective, or that it will pay for itself as the district claims, or that it's a good idea... all that has yet to be seen. But it's safe to say that anybody concerned with abuses OUTSIDE of the school is just being paranoid. If anything, the two biggest holes in this is if students pass tags among each other, or they attempt to clone tags.... both of which would be terribly annoying for the school administrators to deal with, but would likely fall into a category of discipline for the student(s) involved, if they're caught.

    4. Re:Depends on what the meaning of is is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would this be one of those things that depends on what the definition of "is" is?

    5. Re:Depends on what the meaning of is is by Sarius64 · · Score: 1

      Yes, because clearly no one ever stalks students nor gleans their information for anything other than legal purposes. We should put you in charge of bank security, too! Sheesh

    6. Re:Depends on what the meaning of is is by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      Oh, as if the Obama-esque bullshit is any better? Or the idiot before him?

      I'm guessing you're very young and therefore don't remember Clinton being on the stand and perjuring himself but getting off on some crazy technicality (fellatio isn't sexual relations). That comment had nothing to do with Obama. Calm down.

    7. Re:Depends on what the meaning of is is by sjames · · Score: 1

      Yes, it really depends on what the definition of "is" is.

    8. Re:Depends on what the meaning of is is by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      Stalk students?

      Why would they use a RFID reader to stalk a student? The RFID tag doesn't contain their name, address, gender, or any of that information unless the supposed stalker also infiltrated the school computers to pair the only piece of information on the tag (an ID number) with the entry in the database.

      Or are you implying a stalker is going to sit on a corner and wait for his reader to go off, notifying him that a student is nearby? In which case is he too blind to merely use his eyes?

    9. Re:Depends on what the meaning of is is by Sarius64 · · Score: 1

      RFID readers are pretty inexpensive. Setting up a network for tracking whatever would take the simplest of systems.

      http://www.ns-tech.co.uk/blog/2010/02/active-rfid-tracking-system/

      Databases an be used by anyone. But I guess it shouldn't matter what information someone collects on you because everyone has only the best intentions in the world.

  6. What a moronic statement... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Has the district committed perjury by claiming that the active RFIDs magically deactivate themselves when off school property?""....EVERY RFID tag works this way. If your credit card has an RFID, it can be read, possibly, by a third party scanner.

  7. This should stop the shootings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Right? I think that's how it works...

  8. propaganda bull by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how can they say that it only will work on campus. The only difference between the slavery days and now is that slavers or the corporate and government enslaves all nationalities. White people are just as enslaved as anyone else now a days

    1. Re:propaganda bull by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      White people are just as enslaved as anyone else now a days

      By which you mean, not a whole lot. Right?

  9. Perjury? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No. If the "system" "works" in such a way, then once you break that way, that system breaks. Now, you may be left with multiple parts of that system, in different places, and maybe another system could use that piece for it's purpose, but it's not perjury to say that those cards do not "work" off campus, because here "work" is defined by being an active part (ID badge) of an active system (school RFID system), with an intended purpose.

    It's sorta weird to see how RFID is associated with privacy. The student is at school, in their physical body, that we all can see with our built-in eyes! Normally, they're accounted for via some "roll-call" in the mornings (or at least that's how we used to do it back in the day), and then that information was sent to the office where it was processed, and a larger set of information was sent to the state, and everyone that was at school that day was accounted for, it's been happening for a long time now. So what if they want to put teachers at all corners of the halls and watch all of the students, what's wrong with that? ...other than it being waaay to expensive for the tax payers to pay the teachers. So instead, they try this idea, and everyone is trying to freak out over a privacy issue. I don't get it, but I'm old and it's probably time that I just move on to yelling at the neighborhood kids about my fine grass.

    1. Re:Perjury? by AlecC · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It makes it easy and inexpensive to automate following you around. To follow a single person using the Eyeball Mk1 takes about ten people. To follow them by RFID takes a few inexpensive readers scattered around. You can track students for good reasons - or for bad ones (stalking etc),

      Not that I want to take a knee-jerk attitude to this and say it must be banned. But it has unintended consequences, which may not have been thought through.

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    2. Re:Perjury? by Jetra · · Score: 1

      That sounds more interesting than 1984. Wonder if our government might be learning something about how to keep track of its people, quash hopes and dreams, and destroy our will, effectively turning us into zombies that are too afraid to talk?

    3. Re:Perjury? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm curious as to why you think we aren't already there...?

    4. Re:Perjury? by mantissa128 · · Score: 2

      "Student RSC-0032Q5, you have been penalized 18 EduKarma as you have been found to be in the top 5% in bathroom break time. WARNING: Your EduKarma is critically low. If your EduKarma falls below 25 these gathered statistics will form part of your permanent employment record. SPECIAL SALE: Buy up to 500 EduKarma for 25% off until March 31!"

      Also, Repent Harlequin Said The Tick-Tock Man.

    5. Re:Perjury? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My highschool opened in 1999, but their academic sections had hallways shaped in a rectangle with classrooms on the inside and outside. They then put cameras in corners diagnal from eachother so they could see all hallways. They didn't have stairwells covered, so vice-principals would periodically check them. If they knew sudents weren't in the hallways or stairs, they weren't in class rooms (the teacher should know they have a student that doesn't belond there), most of the bathrooms where physically locked closed and the open ones had teacher monitoring them (they did it on their planning period and were paid extra), then students had no where to go except their class or be caught. There was one road to leave with a security guard, they had cameras on the exterior of the building, and attendance was taken via a scantron sheet for every class so 10 minutes into class they knew if you had been there but were skipping that class. That seems much better than handing every student an ID they will lose and only knowing what wing they are in.

      Alternatively, they could have the students pickup their ID's at the entrance every day; that seems reasonable to me. Letting them take it home opens to tracking elsewhere and students would frequently lose them.

    6. Re:Perjury? by MozeeToby · · Score: 2

      Let's say I own a mall. I install RFID readers at all the entrances and exits. When someone is caught shoplifting security reads their student ID (without their knowledge) and puts it in my system so that security is called whenever they enter the premises. That's a bit creepy no? Now imagine security is a bit less scrupulous, and they see a hot girl come through the doors, they look at the scanner and see #124785678 just entered, add that to the system so they can follow her around whenever she goes shopping.

      And besides all that, there's a lot of differences between "but they could just have a teacher follow you around" and "they can track everyone in the school". A) No, they couldn't have someone watch you all the time. B) Students would be aware of the constant monitoring vs never knowing when they are or aren't being watched C) An RFID system is more easily fooled and abused so the effort is wasted. Friends carrying a friend's ID so they can skip, enemies stealing an ID so they can frame them up for something, etc.

      The most important one is B though. A system where people are constantly being followed and monitored by other poeple, no matter how much money and effort are invested, merely make privacy difficult to come by. A system that is constantly tracking and monitoring every student makes privacy impossible.

    7. Re:Perjury? by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      It's sorta weird to see how RFID is associated with privacy. The student is at school, in their physical body, that we all can see with our built-in eyes! Normally, they're accounted for via some "roll-call" in the mornings (or at least that's how we used to do it back in the day), and then that information was sent to the office where it was processed, and a larger set of information was sent to the state, and everyone that was at school that day was accounted for, it's been happening for a long time now. So what if they want to put teachers at all corners of the halls and watch all of the students, what's wrong with that? ...other than it being waaay to expensive for the tax payers to pay the teachers. So instead, they try this idea, and everyone is trying to freak out over a privacy issue. I don't get it, but I'm old and it's probably time that I just move on to yelling at the neighborhood kids about my fine grass.

      Yeah, so now they just hand it off to one of their friends and head out. The teacher does the same and the next scandal ensues, but each has an iron clad aliby through the school's RFID tracking.

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    8. Re:Perjury? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've already done that. You just don't realize it because you have nothing to object over which would have you thrown in prison or otherwise significantly harm you (financially for instance).

      I have no problem objecting to the growing or smoking of marijuana for recreational use. However if I was a drug dealer, pot smoker, etc. in a place that has significant penalties (death, or years in prison, etc) I sure wouldn't be speaking my mind on the issue. At least not if I were breaking the law.

    9. Re:Perjury? by Mitreya · · Score: 1

      Not that I want to take a knee-jerk attitude to this and say it must be banned. But it has unintended consequences, which may not have been thought through.

      I think they HAVE thought it through.
      The "official" attendance will go up (due to people hacking the system or lending their RFID to a friends while they skip school). The actual student attendance may drop, but since schools get funding from "official" reports, they will get increased funding.

    10. Re:Perjury? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just leave the card ....anywhere not on your person? I have an RFID that I use to enter my workplace. RFID chips are probably in your credit/debit card(s). They're usually on items that you purchase, in all stores.

      Seriously, if "the powers that be" want to take a big-brother approach to the general public, they'll do so by using more conventional approach, like any of the current social network programs. Who gives a shit where people go? If you know what they want, and/or how they think, you will know where they go, and why.

    11. Re:Perjury? by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Carry a cell phone? You can be tracked already.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    12. Re:Perjury? by Jetra · · Score: 1

      No shit, sherlock.

    13. Re:Perjury? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Someone elsewhere pointed out that the whole RFID in schools thing is a consequence of federal and state education funding that requires documentation of N-many fannies in the seats.

      A teacher doing roll-call wasn't deemed accurate enough?

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    14. Re:Perjury? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      And teaches 'em young that the only way they can have privacy (which is what defines you as an individual, not just a limb of something or someone else) is to become devious. I don't think this is social progress.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    15. Re:Perjury? by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      I could have said the same to your post.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  10. Battery? by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The judge in the case declared that the district's compromise for the student (a badge without the battery) was sufficient"

    Active RFID tags cost a fuckload of a lot more than passive ones, not to mention they occasionally need the battery replaced. Never mind the privacy issues here, why the hell do we allow public schools to waste so much taxpayer money on frivolous BS like this?

    I have two passive RFID badges I use on a daily basis, and they do their thing just fine. Hold it up to the pad next to the door, the door goes "click", done.

    1. Re:Battery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I hope that you realize that passive RFID can also be tracked. What happens when we start having RFID sensors on everywhere in our society? Do we revolt again to overthrow our oppression or do we just let the rich and powerfull enslave us?

    2. Re:Battery? by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 2

      Because they are using them to take attendance and the central computer can detect their presence in most places in the school.

    3. Re:Battery? by SJHillman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think that's his entire point... passive RFIDs can be tracked just fine like the school wants, so why waste all the extra money? He's not saying anything about whether or not it's right for them to be tracked. Besides, most RFIDs can be blocked easily enough, especially those that are embedded in cards.

    4. Re:Battery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, they can, but the distance they need to be from a reader is measured in millimeters, not yards.

    5. Re:Battery? by Ramley · · Score: 2

      I actually went to the website, and if you read the FAQ:

      "Q. What does this pilot cost and what is the projected additional revenue expected?
      A. NISD will spend approximately $261,000 on this pilot for the two schools and expects to realize $2 million in additional revenues."

    6. Re:Battery? by John+Napkintosh · · Score: 1

      I thought this was about making sure students were coming to school on the days they should be, attending the classes that they should be, nor leaving campus during the day, etc. Now we're talking about revenue? From where does that revenue actually come?

      --

      Long signatures suck.
    7. Re:Battery? by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      To whit, the tags can be used outside of the school to locate the children. So...they lied. Seriously. If it can read attendance the way you're describing, it can be used elsewhere. RFID doesn't magically turn itself completely off and not work outside of their schools.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    8. Re:Battery? by Digicrat · · Score: 1

      School funds are typically tied directly to daily student attendance. If they expect the RFID system to give them more revenues, then they somehow believe it will be more accurate than traditional roll-calls -- or at least give them more false positives.

    9. Re:Battery? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      From where does that revenue actually come?

      From you (assuming that you pay federal taxes). The school is projecting that this system will reduce truancy and allow them to report a larger number of students attending class each day. Schools receive federal funds based on the average number of students in attendance (I am not quite sure how the formula works). In part this will allow them to say that "Johnny" was at school today, even though none of his teachers saw him in order to mark him on the attendance sheet (which they will not have to keep anymore because the central computer for this system will do that).

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    10. Re:Battery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...why the hell do we allow public schools to waste so much taxpayer money on frivolous BS like this?

      Uh, because some rich corrupt asshole in the good ol' boy network wants to get...more rich?

      For fucks sake you must be new. We're talking Politics 101 here. You can stop looking for shit like "justification" and "ROI".

    11. Re:Battery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Companies that, ultimately, want to have the contracts to perform this function for every school in every state across the nation and the companies that make the database software that will do it (in many cases, this is the same company and I don't think I need to name names here for you to guess who).

    12. Re:Battery? by logjon · · Score: 0

      They get more money when students actually show up.

      --
      The stories and info posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
      Only fools would take it as fact.
    13. Re:Battery? by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      If they are not lying, then they are not educated enough to handle this kind of technology safely. Either way, there is a problem.

    14. Re:Battery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does your hard drive still "work" if you remove the platter? That would be pretty amazing.

    15. Re:Battery? by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1
      Never mind the privacy issues here, why the hell do we allow public schools to waste so much taxpayer money on frivolous BS like this?

      I have my personal theory. Considering how nasty the school district has been about this; demanding that she not only wear the badge, but publicly support their program, I am absolutely convinced that someone is lining their pockets with a sweet contract. They want to do this on a wide scale and will stoop to any depth to make it happen because of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

      You could have asked the same question about the TSA. Follow the $$$$$$. Always follow the $$$$$$$. Ask who benefits!

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    16. Re:Battery? by phorm · · Score: 1

      That depends on the tag. The tech for longer-range passive RFID has been out for awhile, with read distances of ~ 1 meter (possibly more)

    17. Re:Battery? by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      I hope that you realize that passive RFID can also be tracked. What happens when we start having RFID sensors on everywhere in our society? Do we revolt again to overthrow our oppression or do we just let the rich and powerfull enslave us?

      Based on my observation of recent history, I'm going with letting the rich and powerful enslave us. We're kind of enslaved already and most people don't notice.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    18. Re:Battery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since we went to the Robin Hood method of public school finance in Texas, districts get paid per student. More students in school means more dollars.

    19. Re:Battery? by falcon5768 · · Score: 1

      Because schools have to contend with massive lawsuits thanks to parents who dont parent their kids and feel its the schools job. They also dont cost a "fucktload" more, just a dollar or two more than the passive ones based on what we priced out to track computers internally from being misplaced by staff in desk drawers which may equate to 20-40 grand more on a big non-city school district and is peanuts compared to book costs, computer costs, and the costs of hiring a lawyer to defend why Johnny and Suzie got killed sneaking off campus to play hookie and the teachers didnt notice, never mind it was Johnny and Suzies fault as well as the parents for not teaching their kids right from wrong and not to skip school. Its the schools fault for not making absolutely sure they knew where they were 100% of the time! And having worked in a district 10 years before leaving because I was sick of the publics idiocy when it comes to education, I can guarantee you the parents would win even if they could prove without a doubt there was no way the school could have tracked them down beyond knowing they snuck out.

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    20. Re:Battery? by fatphil · · Score: 1

      Here's a similar situation - the capital city of Estonia, Tallinn, has just announced free public transport for all city residents. This altruistic move will make the city money, not cost them anything. How, I hear you ask? Because the Estonian government finance towns in proportion to their registered population, and amazingly the registered population has just jumped by 10% since the announcement of the scheme. (Which of course means I'm paying more for my free public transport than I ever did when it cost me money.)

      Where does it come from? From tax-payers, via Little Men who like to shuffle bits of paper around.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    21. Re:Battery? by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      Because they are using them to take attendance and the central computer can detect their presence in most places in the school.

      Or the students will get smart, and take turns holding multiple badges so that they can skip classes they don't want to be there for for whatever reason.

      Or one of the Numb3rs episodes in which the school used RFID to track students and a few students when on a killing spree using RFID to track their targets becomes a reality...then what?

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    22. Re:Battery? by Mitreya · · Score: 1

      "Q. What does this pilot cost and what is the projected additional revenue expected?
      A. NISD will spend approximately $261,000 on this pilot for the two schools and expects to realize $2 million in additional revenues."

      Ahahahaha. Will the students be paying fees for using the RFID tags?
      Otherwise any "additional revenues" simply refers to extra taxpayer funding! Which will probably come from the budget of another school. So eventually each school will waste $250K or so on RFID tags and the funding will stabilize to original levels.

    23. Re:Battery? by sjames · · Score: 1

      Yes. They are essentially spending a quarter million taxpayer dollars so they can pull in even more taxpayer dollars to spend on anything but the students.

    24. Re:Battery? by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1

      Don't assume some random Slashdot submitter's summary is accurate. According to the actual court documents, the badge they offered to let her use had the chip and electronic components removed. leaving just the empty shell.

    25. Re:Battery? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      why the hell do we allow public schools to waste so much taxpayer money on frivolous BS like this?

      Because the monied people who run your school system don't have a clue about budgeting -- rich folks don't need to look at price tags, they just whip out the credit card ans say "wrap it up."

      What really REALLY galls me is how the music staff moan and bitch about how they don't have money for decent instruments, then spend tons of money licensing new music when there are hundreds of years worth of excellent public domain classical scores they could have for free.

      It's sad, idiots are educating out children. No wonder so many people say "the Jonse's are good people." Incompetence is like quality; it always comes from the top.

    26. Re:Battery? by sl149q · · Score: 1

      Perhaps. But remember the reason that school boards who distribute the cash are the ones who make that rule. Their concern is that they want to encourage schools to ensure that students attend class. So by tying the funding to attendance it ensures that the school will try and encourage kids to attend. And if $250k will do that cheaper than paying people to run around and do it (i.e. waste time in home room taking attendance) then from the schools perspective that is a win. More money to spend on teachers and more time to spend on teaching.

    27. Re:Battery? by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      To whit, the tags can be used outside of the school to locate the children. So...they lied. Seriously. If it can read attendance the way you're describing, it can be used elsewhere. RFID doesn't magically turn itself completely off and not work outside of their schools.

      No, the tags can be used to locate the TAGS.

    28. Re:Battery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That 'compromise' also came with conditions like the parents agreeing not only to not fight it or publicly denounce it but actually be required to publicly support it.

      That's not compromise, that's extortion and intimidation.

  11. Maybe... by bmo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...just maybe if she didn't include a hypothesis that wasn't absolutely looney-tunes, she would have a better argument.

    Using the bible as a basis for legal argument is dumb. It can be *part* of an argument, to show history, but this whole "mark of the beast" Revelations crap is just crap.

    FTFA:

    "The judge disagreed. In a 25-page ruling, he wrote that the Hernandezâ(TM)s refusal to wear the badge even without the tracking chip undermined her claims that the district was violating her religious freedom. âoePlaintiff's objection to wearing the Smart ID badge without a chip is clearly a secular choice, rather than a religious concern,â Garcia wrote."

    Evangelicals drive around with drivers' licenses with numbers and a photo and other state/work/school IDs. They don't have a religious objection to those. So why is it suddenly a religious objection when it's a high school ID even without an RFID chip?

    Someone's telling tall tales here, and it's not necessarily the school being mistaken about the utility of RFID off campus.

    I want an argument against RFID badges that doesn't include a batshit-insane argument about Satan, because I think there are legitimate privacy concerns about RFID being trackable outside of their intended environments. But this gets drowned out in the herp-a-derp religiosity, which only paints those with real concerns as shiny-side-out tinfoil haberdashers.

    This girl and her dad aren't helping. Not. One. Bit.

    --
    BMO

    1. Re:Maybe... by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      The Constitution and Supreme Court decisions don't agree with you.

    2. Re:Maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because getting one of those other licenses is optional. School is compulsory.

    3. Re:Maybe... by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Let's see some citations for that.
      I don't remember any constitutional clauses backing the apocalypse myths of any religion.

    4. Re:Maybe... by bmo · · Score: 1

      Try going through life without a state issued ID.

      --
      BMO

    5. Re:Maybe... by bmo · · Score: 1

      >The Constitution

      Where? Point this out. It's a relatively short document. This should be easy enough, right?

      >and Supreme Court decisions don't agree with you.

      Name them.

      --
      BMO

    6. Re:Maybe... by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      Doesn't have to tie to apocalypse myths of any religion.

      The First Amendment is explicit.

      Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

      Prohibitions to the free exercise thereof include the following:

      Wisconsin v. Yoder
      Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District
      Rosenberger v. University of Virginia

      There's quite a bit more. Quite simply anything that impinges upon the free practice of religion (actual religion, not cults...) is barred to the Government in whole and the Supreme Court has consistently held this position- it's actually a bit of a non-starter if you have something along these lines going on. Might as well let it go, type thing. Thjs would be a solid example thereof.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    7. Re:Maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who gets to decide what constitutes an "actual religion" again?

    8. Re:Maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it hinged on scores of illegal aliens voting democrat because the dems will give them the most free shit.

    9. Re:Maybe... by bmo · · Score: 1

      Wisconsin v. Yoder
      Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District
      Rosenberger v. University of Virginia

      Absolute non-sequiturs. These are not applicable to the argument at hand - whether an argument can be made to prohibit the issuing of IDs on religious grounds. I don't think you can, as Evangelicals have already accepted state issued IDs as a matter of course in this country even with their reading of the Bible, saying it's the literal word of God. The doublethink with this girl and her dad is staggering - that a driver's license, tax number, or social security number, etc., is not a "mark of the beast" while a school ID is. If you accept the former, saying you don't accept the latter on religious grounds is inconsistent and mere whim, based on an argument where logic has not only flown away, but has completely vanished from this earthly realm, never to be seen again.

      But this is typical. Religion does not require logic, except the self-reinforcing circular kind in a vacuum of un-reality. But if we are to function as a society, we have to base our laws on reason, logic, and practicality, or else we wind up as some hell-hole where laws are much more arbitrary than they already are.

      --
      BMO

    10. Re:Maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) driver licence number
      - only visible after I stop, take out my wallet and get out the drivers licence

      2) RFID badge
      - readable by any equipment close engouh

      for case 1) you will notice when the number is read, and consequently you will notice if you're tracked through it (well more likely you'd proteset being stopped and asked to produce your licence at every turn.)

      for case 2) the number can now be read without your knowledge, and without the expense of a person able to interact with you

      the 2 cases are comparable only in an absolute best case scenario with no bad actors (but in the absence of bad actors why bother at all?)

    11. Re:Maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that's just the doorknob.

      Not surprised that you are confused, they put it on the same side as their hinges.

    12. Re:Maybe... by alexo · · Score: 1

      "The judge disagreed. In a 25-page ruling, he wrote that the Hernandez's refusal to wear the badge even without the tracking chip undermined her claims that the district was violating her religious freedom. "Plaintiff's objection to wearing the Smart ID badge without a chip is clearly a secular choice, rather than a religious concern," Garcia wrote."

      And why would that be less valid?

    13. Re:Maybe... by bmo · · Score: 1

      But #2 is not the argument presented. The argument presented is a religious one, and it's bogus, given the evidence that government issued IDs are just fine with the Evangelicals for a whole host of other activities. I agree that there are privacy concerns. I agree that the ability to read an RFID chip presents a hazard to its holder due to bad actors, a kind of picking of a pocket without having to reach into one's physical pocket to pick.

      But that's not their concern. They don't present the privacy concern, and it just struck me as to why:

      If you present the privacy concern as the main argument, that the People have a right to privacy as per the SCOTUS, then you reinforce Roe V. Wade, which gets Evangelical panties in a severe twist.

      So as Evangelical literalists, as this girl and her dad obviously are, they are kinda stuck. Either make a non-sensical argument, or make a valid argument that reinforces something one dislikes intensely.

      So they chose the derp.

      --
      BMO

    14. Re:Maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Question for you BMO:

      How does a person redress the government when they feel the government has perverted their soul and possibly condemned them to Hell by forcing upon them the Number of the Beast?

      Answer for you BMO:

      Appeal the rulings all the way to the Supreme Court and have the First Amendment reaffirmed.

      Whether or not you agree or disagree is completely irrelevant to issue. This girl has the religious right to not be mandated to do anything, especially anything her religion mandates against.

      As an agnostic I feel terribly sorry for you (you come off like a dickish-Dawkins atheist...) that you need to resort to the Dawkins Dick-move: flying spaghetti monster her beliefs. I cannot possibly know one way or the other, but I find it devilishly (pun intended) delicious to think God is real, and people like you will be spit roasted for eternity just for being dicks intentionally. You literally brought nothing to the philosophical table. Kind of like Dawkins does. Kudos, dick.

    15. Re:Maybe... by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Slight issues with what you've said. For one, driver's licenses (and many other IDs) are entirely optional, not compulsory, which is rather significant. Second, they are not publicly displayed or publicly readable, so they're not exactly a "mark", whereas this ID is being read constantly to track the location of students, thus marking who and where they are, and even without an RFID chip it is still supposed to be worn on a lanyard, thus still marking the student. (Quick note: I'm playing devil's advocate here)

      I do agree that they could have made stronger arguments by using a something other than religion as the basis for their arguments, or else supplementing their religious concerns with technological evidence, but if they're concerned with it being the mark of the beast, then the manner in which the ID is used and displayed are likely factors in that consideration, in which case your suggestion that driver's licenses should have the same issues does not hold water.

      All of that said, even as a practicing evangelical Christian I find their mark of the beast argument to be silly, since the mark of the beast is portrayed as something quite a bit different from a simple and temporary ID that students will have to wear while they're in school. It sounds like their logic basically boils down to, "This ID has trait X and the mark of the beast has trait X too, so it must be bad", ignoring the fact that the mark of the beast also has traits Y and Z, neither of which are exhibited by the student IDs. I've certainly never had any issues with driver's licenses, school IDs, workplace badges, etc., aside from the nuisance some of them posed (e.g. they tried to force us my senior year in high school to wear IDs on lanyards, which lasted about a day since they were so annoying to wear).

      Now, if these were mandatory subdermal RFID chips being used to indicate something more significant than that they are a student, then I think they may have a bit more cause for concern (and even then, I don't know that I'd object on religious grounds, though I probably would on the basis of my other rights being trampled), but we're nowhere close to that yet.

    16. Re:Maybe... by jammer170 · · Score: 1

      Having grown up in the Bible Belt, I can tell you certain religious groups DO have objections to IDs with numbers on them. Specifically, one of the things they mentioned was that such things would be used to justify applying even more numbers to us, exactly as you are arguing here. I haven't checked, but I'm going to guess there was a lawsuit at some point in time (maybe multiple ones, since driver's licenses are state-issued) about the numbers on a driver's license, and it was probably shot down because the license is voluntary. (For the record, I am not religious, and I think the "mark of the beast" is pure quackery, but I equally find it delusional when someone pretends to to know the mind of another.)

      --
      Remember, you can't look dignified when your having fun! Don't take life too seriously, you'll never get out of it alive
    17. Re:Maybe... by bmo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      This girl has the religious right to not be mandated to do anything, especially anything her religion mandates against.

      Prove it.

      Prove that this is against her religion. Prove that state issued IDs are against her religion. Prove that all Evangelicals that rant and rave about the Mark of the Beast, while Evangelicals accept state issued IDs in other contexts, like taxes, jobs, bank accounts, etc.

      PROVE IT.

      PROVE ALL THINGS; HOLD FAST THAT WHICH IS GOOD. - 1 THESSALONIANS 5:21

      I feel terribly sorry for you

      Blow me.

      --
      BMO

    18. Re:Maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then you see the demands that to exercise your constitutional rights, such as voting, you have to present photo ID.

      That is compulsion, at the price of my participation in an election.

    19. Re:Maybe... by bmo · · Score: 1

      If it was a serious issue with Evangelicals, we'd see full blown communities of them without state IDs or SSNs or Tax IDs. There would be enough to make it a Serious Issue (TM), much like how the Amish and Mennonites have their separate societies here in the US.

      But we don't see it, do we? Because it's not really a serious issue. It's only a SERIOUS ISSUE among the true nutters.

      --
      BMO

    20. Re:Maybe... by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      I couldn't help but laugh a bit when I read this. I wish I had mod points.

    21. Re:Maybe... by fatphil · · Score: 1

      > Religion does not require logic, except the self-reinforcing circular kind in a vacuum of un-reality

      But do you really have evidence that SCOTUS is any different? I know people like to *believe* it's *infallible*. But that's what others say about religion too, using identical terms. It's even got an old document, written in several phases, which (apart from revisions) is considered the absolute truth to support itself.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    22. Re:Maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This maybe true, but that is their choice. They can opt out of any of those things by changing the way the interact with the world. The problem comes in that the school forces her to have the badge and the city likely forces her to go to that school. So the only option left is that parents need to home school the child to prevent this from happening.

    23. Re:Maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Social Security Numbers are compulsory if you have any intention on working in the United States and care if the IRS withholds large portions of your income when they find out you don't have a SSN or at the very least a TID on your tax forms.

      The system is not friendly to those who do not have ID. It is technically possible to live unidentified by the system, but it's not comfortable or convenient by any stretch of the imagination.

    24. Re:Maybe... by Sarius64 · · Score: 1

      Ergo, only the Constitutional rights I approve of need protection. The rest of you can die. Funny that you equivocate the right to kill a unborn human with the school's right to track your every movement.

    25. Re:Maybe... by bmo · · Score: 1

      No I didn't equivocate anything.

      It's a privacy issue all the way around and I didn't say that the school has any right to track movement at all. But I will now. The school is in loco parentis, meaning it is in the care of minor children as a surrogate parent of sorts. They are responsible for the child while he or she is there. Whether it is verbally taking attendance or attendance is done with an RFID card, the school should make a basic effort to keep track of the student while he or she is there, because woe be to the school department that doesn't and a child gets hurt wandering off school property. While in loco parentis is being eroded over time, it's still pretty much in force for primary and secondary education in the US. Schools have a duty to make sure students are where they belong while at school. They have the duty to make sure people who don't belong are not allowed to wander the halls randomly. They have a duty to make sure there is a safe learning environment.

      Don't like it? Tough bananas. The rights of the other students trump the right of the religious nutter trying to get a special exception (and I might add, a special endorsement by the state of a particular religion by making the exception). She had the option to go with a non-RFID card, and she declined. Non-RFID cards don't have the same privacy issues, and trying to twist a religious argument to fit this situation is disingenuous at best.

      She could have used a privacy argument as the main thrust and talked about the use of RFID tags for *all* students being a problem, but didn't, even though that was the right one to use. Instead, she wanted to emphasize how people with religions are better than those without and deserve special breaks and it didn't work. Boo. Hoo. Sucks to be her.

      --
      BMO

    26. Re:Maybe... by bmo · · Score: 1

      > I know people like to *believe* it's *infallible*.

      We have a construct that we all agree that the SCOTUS is the last word on whether something is constitutional or not. The arguments before it are usually logically based and not circular for either side, because the trivial cases never actually make it there, it's only the conundrums that actually make it. There has to be an end of the argument somewhere. I know of nobody who calls the SCOTUS infallible, but I know a lot of people who say that whatever the SCOTUS says *today* is "good enough for now."

      Are the arguments before the SCOTUS different from the arguments in religious circles? I'd wager that yes they are and those who say that they are merely gedankenexperiments based in nothing but circular reasoning like much of religion is, that those people are practising the false equivalence fallacy.

      --
      BMO

    27. Re:Maybe... by bmo · · Score: 1

      Revisiting this issue.

      BEGIN RANT

      I think we need to stop giving religions a break. Stop making exceptions for various religions. The First Amendment is about the endorsement of religions and particular religions that government should not do either. Why should we make exceptions for the whacko Evangelical who believes that the end is nigh, and not for the Buddhist, Hindu, Jainist, or a peyote munching Jeff Merkey?

      Fuck them all equally, I say. Tax them all and apply all laws equally to everyone, regardless of belief system. "Respecting" any religion means disrespecting all other religions, because "separate but equal" with religion doesn't work since *someone* is going to be pissed off. "Respecting" religions also means disrespecting people without any religion at all or "seekers" who have not settled on a religion yet, because they don't get the same breaks that the religious get. "Respecting" religion undermines the ideal that we are all equal under the law.

      Those with religion are "more equal" than others, I guess.

      END RANT.

      --
      BMO

    28. Re:Maybe... by kenh · · Score: 1

      Apparently nearly every poor, minority, elderly or young person in the United States has no state-issued ID - at least that is what one political party would have you believe.

      --
      Ken
    29. Re:Maybe... by kenh · · Score: 1

      This girl has the religious right to not be mandated to do anything, especially anything her religion mandates against.

      Except for buying her own healthcare coverage and paying for other people's contraceptives.

      --
      Ken
    30. Re:Maybe... by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Whether or not you agree or disagree is completely irrelevant to issue. This girl has the religious right to not be mandated to do anything, especially anything her religion mandates against.

      And whether or not her and her father's beliefs are nutzo or not, they are being inconsistent and that makes this case ridiculous.

      The complaint was that this girl was being forced to wear an RFID tag. Mark of the beast, cancer causing, whatever reason. Doesn't matter. Ok, the school said she didn't have to wear an RFID tag. That solves the problem, right?

      No. The father turned this offer down because accepting it would prevent him from complaining about being forced to wear an RFID tag. Read the PDF of the case.

      Now, perhaps he also feels that simply wearing an ID of any kind is "the mark of the beast", but that's not what the complaint says, and the complaint wasn't filed when she was forced to wear an ID, it was only after the RFID-based system was installed. So, no "mark of the beast" for just an ID, no religious issues.

      Where's the case? Some people here are complaining that the school is wasting money on this system of keeping track of the students they are required to care for. Where are the complaints about the cost of this specious lawsuit?

      And yes, the schools are required to keep track of the students, and this system (despite the claims that they are treating students like cattle) allows students MORE freedom to come and go where they need to. The school knows they are someplace they are supposed to be; parents who call in to find their kids in an emergency can do so more easily; time isn't taken in every class every day every hour taking roll of who is and isn't there.

      Now, if the students were being treated like cattle, the school would be forcing them to eat antibiotics and then there would be a stun stick at the end of the graduation line.

  12. Micowave Oven by crmanriq · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just pop the tag in a microwave oven for a minute or two. No more RFID.
    "I don't know what happened. Maybe the Lord don't like RFID tags."

    After enough tags go poof, the school administration will probably give up on having you wear one.

    Physical tag with barcode? Sharpie the barcode to another number, maybe. Or generate your own barcode and forge a new tag. There are so many possibilities to screw with the administration that it seems like it would be more fun to see how long until they broke.

    --
    If it's worth doing, it's worth doing for money.
    1. Re:Micowave Oven by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 2

      Then get marked absent every day intil the trusnt officer shows up. great solution.

    2. Re:Micowave Oven by Cigarra · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not about a working tag or not. It's about COMPLIANCE. They will let her use a tag with the batteries removed, as long as she doesn't make waves and looks like she's OK with the system.

      --
      I don't have a sig.
    3. Re:Micowave Oven by crmanriq · · Score: 2

      "It's not about a working tag or not. It's about COMPLIANCE."

      Totally agree. And her religious objection is also about compliance. The school requires compliance, and her religious belief is that compliance endangers her soul.

      So let the school think she is complying. When in reality she is sabotaging. Microwave, altered tag, forged tag. The school officials get to go "See. we get our way. She's being a good-little-citizen." All the while she can also say to herself (and her deity) "Look. I am not allowing them to put a number on me. I am not going along with their system. I am breaking their system."

      And then she can convince a friend or two to "convert" to her church. And microwave/alter their tags. And then they can find friends. And if the school lets them run around with deactivated tags, then a trend starts. And in the end, the whole RFID tag concept goes out the window as an enormous waste of money.

      --
      If it's worth doing, it's worth doing for money.
    4. Re:Micowave Oven by Hatta · · Score: 1

      After enough tags go poof, the school administration will probably give up on having you wear one.

      Or expel you. Yes, school administrators will expel a student over something this petty.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    5. Re:Micowave Oven by mariox19 · · Score: 1

      Compliance is the real lesson being taught here.

      --

      quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.

    6. Re:Micowave Oven by kenh · · Score: 1

      It's a charter/magnet school - just kick the offenders back to the "regular" public schools and backfill with a student from the waiting list.

      --
      Ken
  13. Unique random ID *is* "useful information" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Therefore, an intruder or "hacker" can only learn that the tag serial number is, for example, #69872331, but that does not provide any useful information."

    Joe Stalker sits in a car, watches student walk by, and notes the RFID that shows up on his scanner. From that point on the student is trackable by RFID.

    Sure, the ID# doesn't provide any personal information by itself, but now any personal information that is found (e.g., follows student to home address) can now be uniquely associated with that student and tracked. The exact reason why a unique ID is useful in the school context is also why it would be equally useful in other contexts. If it works at all, then, yes, it does "work off campus". The fact that you can't access the school's database mapping from RFID to student personal information is irrelevant. Someone could build their own database.

    1. Re:Unique random ID *is* "useful information" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But wouldn't it be just as useful if (as in your example, they're following the student to their home address) to just follow them without the RFID.

      The school is right about it being non-useful, because ultimately an internal school number tied back to a physical person doesn't give anyone anything helpful. Yes, they could follow that RFID back to the student's house and use the personal information they find there for sinister purposes, but they could also just follow them in a car. Or on foot. The useful personal information they'll get from there is still there.

    2. Re:Unique random ID *is* "useful information" by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, because in order to follow them without the RFID you need to be able to see them. If you have to follow the student from a location where you can see them, it becomes apparent to others that you are following them much quicker than if all you have to do is stay in range of an RFID tag. Additionally, the RFID badge makes it much harder for a student who becomes aware that they are being followed to lose the follower.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    3. Re:Unique random ID *is* "useful information" by sootman · · Score: 1

      > The fact that you can't access the school's database mapping from
      > RFID to student personal information is irrelevant. Someone could
      > build their own database.

      Or just wait until someone loses a laptop.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    4. Re:Unique random ID *is* "useful information" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The other useful information would be from persistent, not-in-person monitoring, such as determining the typical time that student ID# 135159815 walks by a particular location on their way to or from home. Monday to Friday at 3:45pm+-10 minutes, except Wednesdays (picked up by parent for after-class event?). i.e. detailed scheduling. Set up a passive monitoring station and you'll soon know the optimal time for ... whatever the person had in mind.

      The point is, that kind of tracking information would be difficult to obtain without somebody noticing were it not for the availability of RFID.

    5. Re:Unique random ID *is* "useful information" by cowtamer · · Score: 1

      The other useful information would be from persistent, not-in-person monitoring, such as determining the typical time that student ID# 135159815 walks by a particular location on their way to or from home. Monday to Friday at 3:45pm+-10 minutes, except Wednesdays (picked up by parent for after-class event?). i.e. detailed scheduling. Set up a passive monitoring station and you'll soon know the optimal time for ... whatever the person had in mind.

      The point is, that kind of tracking information would be difficult to obtain without somebody noticing were it not for the availability of RFID.

      mod parent up

    6. Re:Unique random ID *is* "useful information" by sjames · · Score: 1

      It;'s much easier (and less risky) to follow a student once and let the RFID do it for you the rest of the time. That's why the school wants them.

    7. Re:Unique random ID *is* "useful information" by kenh · · Score: 1

      Joe Stalker sits in a car, watches student walk by, and notes the RFID that shows up on his scanner. From that point on the student is trackable by RFID.

      Of course, Joe Stalker has covered the city with his own private RFID readers, all networked into own datacenter where he downloads all the tracking information and is now able to track the student by RFID, right?

      Do you know how asinine that sounds? It's Dr. Evil "Sharks with frickin' lasers on their heads" stupid.

      --
      Ken
  14. This Is How Most RFID Solutions Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Contrary to popular belief, most RFID systems do not store any information on the RFID tags. The tag simply has a unique serial number. The information is all in the back-end database, where they correlate the serial number to something. In this case, a student's record.

    But, reading the RFID tag, without access to the database back-end, off campus will reveal only a number.

    Now, the truly paranoid will note that, let's say, a coffee shop with an RFID reader could read that serial number connect it to a credit card transaction and then build/,maintain their own back-end and tracking capability. That's true, but you already gave them the credit card, they knew who you were without the RFID tag. But, they would be able to see when you were in the shop after that, even if you didn't do a credit card transaction.

    Many Slashdotters have badges for work. The types of badges that have been in use since the 1990's. Many times, these badges are used to open doors and so forth. That's the EXACT same thing. An RFID serial number in the badge and a back-end database that assigns a name and access rights to that serial number.

    1. Re:This Is How Most RFID Solutions Work by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      You can however use it to track location once you know who holds what badge number.

      Most slashdotters do not have these active RFID units, we have passive ones with much shorter useful ranges.

      The student should just remove the battery at the end of each school day.

    2. Re:This Is How Most RFID Solutions Work by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      You can however use it to track location once you know who holds what badge number.

      Most slashdotters do not have these active RFID units, we have passive ones with much shorter useful ranges.

      The student should just remove the battery at the end of each school day.

      Usually, the battery is embeded in the badge and not removable. However, one could just stick it in a metal case as the signal is pretty weak to start with. Then again, there is always the microwave -- just a short burst, not enough to destroy the card, just the electronics.

    3. Re:This Is How Most RFID Solutions Work by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      Schools probably banned metal lunchboxes as potential dangerous weapons.
      If you carry an Altoids tin, they probably assume you're storing contraband drugs (like aspirin) in it.

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    4. Re:This Is How Most RFID Solutions Work by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Schools probably banned metal lunchboxes as potential dangerous weapons.

      If you carry an Altoids tin, they probably assume you're storing contraband drugs (like aspirin) in it.

      They make those aluminum wallets and metal business card holders. As for Altoids, they can assume what they want. They would have to prove it is contraband drugs in it. As for lunchboxes, yes, those were banned because they were considered to be possible weapons. We should have seen that coming when they first banned the extended 30 lunch box clip.

    5. Re:This Is How Most RFID Solutions Work by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      Schools probably banned metal lunchboxes as potential dangerous weapons.

      If you carry an Altoids tin, they probably assume you're storing contraband drugs (like aspirin) in it.

      They make those aluminum wallets and metal business card holders. As for Altoids, they can assume what they want. They would have to prove it is contraband drugs in it. As for lunchboxes, yes, those were banned because they were considered to be possible weapons. We should have seen that coming when they first banned the extended 30 lunch box clip.

      To much of a potential weapon. Banned.

      All kidding aside...that might not be a joke for some schools.

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    6. Re:This Is How Most RFID Solutions Work by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Schools probably banned metal lunchboxes as potential dangerous weapons.

      If you carry an Altoids tin, they probably assume you're storing contraband drugs (like aspirin) in it.

      They make those aluminum wallets and metal business card holders. As for Altoids, they can assume what they want. They would have to prove it is contraband drugs in it. As for lunchboxes, yes, those were banned because they were considered to be possible weapons. We should have seen that coming when they first banned the extended 30 lunch box clip.

      To much of a potential weapon. Banned.

      All kidding aside...that might not be a joke for some schools.

      Yeah, I thought twice about posting my comment giving the recent shooting. But my thoughts were more about the knee jerk reaction to the shooting and that it only takes two seconds to swap out a standard 10 shot clip, so the 30 shot clip is not significantly more deadly than multiple 10 shot clips. Likewise, with the lunchboxes, which were banned, because they can be used as a weapon to hit somebody upside the head - well, I'd rather be hit upside the head with an 8 ounce lunch box than a 4 pound laptop, but nobody is clambering to band laptops at schools. I figure if somebody wants to do harm to another human being, they are going to find a way to do it.

      But I do agree that school violence is a serious issue. I just think, though, that it is a symptom of a bigger underlying problem and until society addresses the real problem, a lot of resources will be expended solving the wrong thing.

      The same could be said about the RFID issue. If the purpose is to ensure the students are their for state funding, the first question to ask is "Why does the state require that?" Why not fund based on registered students? Seems to be a lot simpler and you could do random spot checks in a district to verify accuracy. Besides, if 10% of the kids are missing (2 kids from each class) on any given day, you can't cut staff, you need the same number of teachers, which is your primary cost.

      No, just like gun control won't actually keep our kids from being harmed by somebody intent on harming them (for the record, I am pro gun control), electronically tagging them won't make them attend class, either. To solve a problem, you first need to ask the right question.

    7. Re:This Is How Most RFID Solutions Work by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I thought twice about posting my comment giving the recent shooting. But my thoughts were more about the knee jerk reaction to the shooting and that it only takes two seconds to swap out a standard 10 shot clip, so the 30 shot clip is not significantly more deadly than multiple 10 shot clips. Likewise, with the lunchboxes, which were banned, because they can be used as a weapon to hit somebody upside the head - well, I'd rather be hit upside the head with an 8 ounce lunch box than a 4 pound laptop, but nobody is clambering to band laptops at schools. I figure if somebody wants to do harm to another human being, they are going to find a way to do it.

      I was more thinking of the edge getting turned into a razor - especially for metal business card holders - than used as a blunt force weapon.

      But I do agree that school violence is a serious issue. I just think, though, that it is a symptom of a bigger underlying problem and until society addresses the real problem, a lot of resources will be expended solving the wrong thing.

      Quite agree. They keep trying to tackle this from the wrong side, and the whole "cannot hurt their self-esteem" approach doesn't help anything either as it just ties the hands of the school administration for doing any kind of workable punishment. (And if you think suspension is a workable punishment for many of the kids that don't take the school administration and teachers seriously then I have a bridge to sell you - most of them just show up for the detention or suspension, and then go about what they were going to do anyway.)

      The same could be said about the RFID issue. If the purpose is to ensure the students are their for state funding, the first question to ask is "Why does the state require that?" Why not fund based on registered students? Seems to be a lot simpler and you could do random spot checks in a district to verify accuracy. Besides, if 10% of the kids are missing (2 kids from each class) on any given day, you can't cut staff, you need the same number of teachers, which is your primary cost.

      Again, a misguided attempt on behalf of the school district administration, though also in part of the public school system and those administering the funds for it. In part, due to the reality that not all students are registered (e.g. illegal immigrants have a hard time getting registered) and not all registered students show up for various reason (skipping school, sick, vacation, etc.).

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    8. Re:This Is How Most RFID Solutions Work by kenh · · Score: 1

      If you have access to the database that correlates RFID badge numbers to student records, why would you go through the trouble of installing RFID readers all over town? You have the student's home address, their bus route (if any), their class schedule, etc.

      --
      Ken
    9. Re:This Is How Most RFID Solutions Work by sl149q · · Score: 1

      Actually modern RFID tags can and do have active storage.

  15. This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3

    Andrea Hernandez is the student who refused to wear the badge because she believed it was the 'mark of the beast' and offended her religion. This case wasn't just about privacy. It was also about the boundry when a person's religion conflicts with secular regulations.

    1. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by cigawoot · · Score: 1

      If they're so concerned with it working off campus, have the badge shielded while outside the school, only take it out when needed. If wearing the badge offends their religion, permit them to have it in their pocket, ready for examination upon request.

    2. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by jellie · · Score: 1

      That's the thing about the case that bothers me the most. I'm not religious so I'm a little biased, but what exactly does the ID card have to do with the so-called "mark of the beast"? The school has a right (and well, responsibility) to know where students are during school hours, and takes attendance because it only receives money when students show up. The school even offered to disable the RFID, which should have dealt with the "mark" issue. And like the situation involving the nurse fired for refusing the flu shot, the policy is applied to everyone and isn't narrowly targeted at a small group. I fail to see how this is even a religious issue, other than some random defense against a rule that the girl and her father dislike. Or even another chance to claim "religious freedom!"

      If the Antichrist were so evil, I think there would be more serious ways for he (it?) to make his presence known than as RFID. Business people and lawyers, for example.

    3. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by Cigarra · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't buy that. I think this IS about privacy and individual rights, but they threw the religious nonsense to use the First Amendment in their favor. That's how it looks to me anyway.

      --
      I don't have a sig.
    4. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She used the religion card to get noticed after being blanked. Privacy rights are always ignored, so she used the system to get attention for the bigger issue.

      Try keeping the personal attacks to yourself, you sound like a Fox News fan. Address the issue in hand, not the person raising it. This is very simple in this case: should a school funded by the tax payer be spending all this money on a tracking system that will offer no tangible educational benefits, won't improve standards or reduce costs. The single reason this system has been implemented is a commercial favor (do your own investigation on the decision makers and company concerned, you'll learn a couple of things).

    5. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was also about the boundry when a person's religion conflicts with secular regulations.

      Or is it about the limits to which a person can use their professed religious beliefs to compel and control the state?

      People make these arguments about ID cards all the time, demanding photo-less ID, or to wear face-obscuring headgear in the photos being taken.

      At a certain point, somebody is just being too demanding.

    6. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Andrea Hernandez is the student who refused to wear the badge because she believed it was the 'mark of the beast' and offended her religion. This case wasn't just about privacy. It was also about the boundry when a person's religion conflicts with secular regulations.

      But the compromise was to give her a badge without the chip and the family is still saying it is not acceptable. So, without the id tag, there is no mark of the beast, but evidently it is still a problem. That would seem to imply that some other issue is the real cause.

      I wonder if the parents had her immunized as required by state law to attend school. I only ask, not because of any religious objection to vaccinations, but at the doctor's office, your chart is coded with and id code. Why would the family accept that 'mark of the beast' as acceptable but not this one? Or the mark of the beast imprinted on a drivers license, bank account, social security number, license plate, IP address, postal address, etc.

      I am not trying to ridicule this family's religious views. I am trying to understand what makes this ID badge, particularly with the compromise different than all of the other numbers that identify us/them in a modern society?

    7. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the thing about the case that bothers me the most. I'm not religious so I'm a little biased, but what exactly does the ID card have to do with the so-called "mark of the beast"? The school has a right (and well, responsibility) to know where students are during school hours, and takes attendance because it only receives money when students show up. The school even offered to disable the RFID, which should have dealt with the "mark" issue. And like the situation involving the nurse fired for refusing the flu shot, the policy is applied to everyone and isn't narrowly targeted at a small group. I fail to see how this is even a religious issue, other than some random defense against a rule that the girl and her father dislike. Or even another chance to claim "religious freedom!"

      If the Antichrist were so evil, I think there would be more serious ways for he (it?) to make his presence known than as RFID. Business people and lawyers, for example.

      You fail to see how this is a "religious" issue.

      I fail to see how this is an issue. Period.

      Every single thing you mentioned above that schools have a "responsibility" to perform they have been performing successfully for the last hundred years or more.

      So, what the hell changed to justify any of this?

      Nothing more than FUD and liability scaremongering here. It's all bullshit, and it's all designed to make someone very, very rich. Don't be blinded by bullshit.

    8. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am trying to understand what makes this ID badge, particularly with the compromise different than all of the other numbers that identify us/them in a modern society?

      This ID badge is new and conspicuous. The other things you mentioned were either less visible or have been around long enough for people to get used to them.

    9. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Cost and efficiency. I work at a school, and support an RFID badge system. With it we can handle door security, library book checkout, cashless payment for school lunch, user ID at the printers (One per wing now, rather than one per classroom), and a few other things. Everything except, surprisingly, attendance tracking - though if a student misses registration, we will use the logs from the door access reader to determine if they are really missing or just skipped registration. All these things could be done before the RFID badges, yes - but not so quickly or so reliably. No cash for school lunches eliminates the 'steal the lunchmoney' bullying and allows much quicker payment, keeping queues down. Library book checkout is faster, with no need to type in long user numbers, and the central printing is much more practical. All this adds up to a lot of saved time, which means more time for teaching.

      It's amazing how fast lunch payments are now. Student just holds their badge up to a reader and shows their tray to the caterer, who presses a couple of buttons to record what is on it. Payment done.

    10. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by sjames · · Score: 1

      It is up to interpretation, but a good case could be made that it is a unique positive ID that cannot be hidden without giving up participation in society.

      A good secular argument can be made that such a thing IS an enabler of many dystopian nightmares and that we might be better off not having such a thing.

    11. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the Antichrist were so evil, I think there would be more serious ways for he (it?) to make his presence known than as RFID. Business people and lawyers, for example.

      You assume the Anti-Christ is a literal human-esque being, like Jesus was (according to christians). What if the Great Evil isn't a being, but a mental state? Apathy, in this case.

      Let Jews get killed, I don't care.
      Let brown people get bombed, I don't care.
      Let people who wear religious hats other than mine, get sent to camps (Palestine, Israel, Germany, Rwanda, etc), I don't care.

      Maybe that's the real evil.

      -A Atheist.

    12. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by Sarius64 · · Score: 1

      Well said. Sorry points used up yesterday but you deserve some.

    13. Re:This wasn't about privacy. Not entirely. by kenh · · Score: 1

      It didn't work.

      --
      Ken
  16. Utility Off-Campus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Therefore, an intruder or "hacker" can only learn that the tag serial number is, for example, #69872331, but that does not provide any useful information.

    I'm going to have to disagree with the school district's claim. While a superficial, naive view assumes that a context-free serial number is useless, this issue has come up time and time again when discussing RFID. The problem is that it's still a unique identifier and can be correlated with other data as time goes on.

    1. Re:Utility Off-Campus by AlecC · · Score: 1

      For example, a stalker could quite easily learn, on campus, what his target's RFID tag is, then build a gadget to report when they enter/leave their off-campus flat.

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
  17. Mooo! by halfkoreanamerican · · Score: 2

    Well, they are about as useless off-campus as my thrown away bank documents that anyone with a decent brain could turn into money. People have been concerned about this same issue for years with passports--it just takes one terrorist to find out there's an 'american' in the room by scanning... and, well, you know the end of the story.

    1. Re:Mooo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A proximity mine with RFID triggering. No terrorist even needed to be there.

    2. Re:Mooo! by kenh · · Score: 1

      Well sure, but they'd need a computer with the bomb to make it work - hey, they could use one of those ever-so-inexpensive Raspberry Pi computers... We need embedded computer control laws (like Pseudophed control laws) to try and stop such harmful devices!

      --
      Ken
  18. Re:Slavery wasn't so bad.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know about that, it's looking pretty good now.

  19. So... give them something they WANT! by SomeoneGotMyNick · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'll bet if they gave each student a free cell phone (which "may or may not" contain tracking technology) that they can keep with themselves during school, they'd be ALL over that!

    1. Re:So... give them something they WANT! by artfulshrapnel · · Score: 1

      This. I'd say bundle it with a free android tablet or whatever, and require that tablet be on hand for class assignments and presentations. Social engineering beats legislation every time.

    2. Re:So... give them something they WANT! by kenh · · Score: 1

      Play up the religious angle - Moses had "tablets"... Of course, he smashed them when he saw his people worshiping a false idol...

      --
      Ken
  20. Easy Fix... by kuhnto · · Score: 5, Funny

    Easy Fix... Give her two badges. Once see determines the one that is the Serial number "of the Beast" she can turn that one in.

    --
    "A 'person' is smart. 'People' are dumb, panicky animals and you know that."
    1. Re:Easy Fix... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      kuhnto, you just blew my mind. That's genius.

  21. Re:Slavery wasn't so bad.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Comparing wearing a RFID badge to slavery is insensitive

  22. This is bullshit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If I have the tag's serial number, I can track her so long as she's within a set of zones (which is the REASON the school did this idiot thing in the first place...)- so, I have information about HER.

    Sadly, the Judge was ignorant (as are most of the /. commentors on this subject) of just how it works and why one would want to use this sort of thing. For work, it semi makes sense to regulate access off of a proximity tag. The passive tags in your badges only work with pretty much near-field operation and only place you in time and space at the reader contact point- which acts like a key on steroids. These active tags, they're powered and they've got either greater range, faster turn on times, or both. They're not typically used in an application like this. Seriously. As you enter the field, yeah, you have an ID. If I'm stalking said child, I will work at peeling the serial off the tag and use a ranged reader to find the tag. As long as it's on her, I know PRECISELY where she is.

    The school lied about the tags, and there's no excuses for what they're actually aiming for here. So what if she used a religious reason? It's valid per the Constitution. As is my line of reasoning. And...we won't get into just how expensive this system is and that it doesn't do ANYTHING for protecting the kids- all it does is turn them into cattle. Which is what the Government seems to think we all are.

  23. Just nuke the card... by bleh-of-the-huns · · Score: 1

    Literally, toss it in the microwave and nuke it for a few seconds, that will destroy any electronics in it, leaving the badge in tact (well mostly except for maybe a few burn marks...

    --
    I came, I conquered, I coredumped
    1. Re:Just nuke the card... by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      It's generally not a good idea to wilfully destroy other people's property (such cards normally remain the property of the issuer - not the wearer). Tinfoil pouch is a better solution. Probably available in transparent versions too, if that's an issue.

    2. Re:Just nuke the card... by kenh · · Score: 1

      And your child will be booted out of the school for failiing to attend (the ID takes the place of attendence.

      Explain that you damaged school property, and you'll likely be booted out of the school.

      This is a charter/magnet school - there is typically a long list of applicants willing to wear the "mark of the beast" if it means getting a better education.

      Once booted, the child will simply go to their neighborhood school, just like before.

      --
      Ken
  24. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by jabberw0k · · Score: 1

    I lived in Boston Massachusetts and was 33 before I got a driver's license. I did get a "Liquor ID Card" at age 25, which I used exactly once -- who wants to hang out in a smoky bar with a bunch of drunks? -- and then that "Liquor ID Card" sat in a drawer for years. So, until the late 90s I did not have any "identification papers" -- why would I need them in a free country?

  25. "Has the district committed perjury... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

    ...by claiming that the active RFIDs magically deactivate themselves when off school property?"

    No. They are probably stupid enough to believe it.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re: "Has the district committed perjury... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically, they never turn off, since they broadcast their ID number when ever scanned. That is it.. There is no TRACKING ability within the badges themselves.. All they can ever do is return a serial number.. The tracking comes from what ever is scanning it.. So if Scanner #1 Scans and records the Tag serial, it knows that student is in what ever location Scanner #1 is setup. If Scanner #2 Scans and records the Tag serial then its in that location instead. RFID's are not GPS, there is no Internet connection, no satelite tracking.. All it ever does is say its serial number. Like a Non 'line of site' barcode.

      Now.. don't mistake my need to correct how the technology works with agreeing with the use of it to track the school kids.. Just wanted to inform people on how RFID's work.

  26. Tampering by Korruptionen · · Score: 1

    I wonder what the school's policy is on tampering with the device. Working for a Texas School not to terribly far away, I've wondered quite a bit about this case.

    The school is willing to deactivate the device by taking the battery out... and if applicable to one student it would be applicable to all, no? So why not have all students just remove the batteries. System deactivated. Problem solved.

  27. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by bmo · · Score: 1

    > why would I need them in a free country?

    Because you live in civilization. We do not live in an anarchy.

    But previously....

    >So, until the late 90s

    So you needed a state ID. You couldn't get through life without one at that point.

    The government also assigned you a Social Security number and failing that, you got an IRS tax number, which identifies you in "the system." - because either one of these is mandatory to be able to file your taxes.

    Why are these *not* a "Mark of the Beast" while a school ID *is*?

    --
    BMO

  28. Technology replacing caring by RussellTheMuscle · · Score: 1

    As schools become larger (cost saving), some students get lost in the shuffle. Some are lost because they choose to be lost, and some just cannot connect to the environment. In place of knowing all of the students, these Texas principals have chosen to track them. They are not unique, just cutting edge. I have worked with few principals through the years who roamed the halls and knew the community. Our modern schools are statistical exercises. How much do we have to spend to ensure that the majority of the population receives enough education (standardized tests) so that the district cannot be questioned and can still justify administrative salaries? Currently we have numerous students taking remedial classes at colleges; this article: http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/01/students_can_avoid_remedial_co.html puts the number at 42%. And while it might be a good idea to better prepare students for university, Ohio has decided that that a 430 writing score is sufficient to deem a student ready to produce college level work in an Ohio collegiate English class (that is a 54% SAT score.) In the end the RFID tags are nothing more than a symptom of our current educational woes. They may solve the problem of the student who cuts class, but do not address the problem of what are we going to do with the students in class that will better prepare them to live a quality adult life whether or not they they choose to go on to college.

  29. Student swapping IDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On the first day of the semester, just swap IDs with all your friends.

    Duh.

    The intent for these is probably just to be certain that students are in the building when they should be, not that they are in a specific classroom. The school does have a responsibility to the parents for knowing where the kids are and with the few crazy killings that have happened the last decade, this is what happens in a nanny-state. More tracking all the time thinking this will prevent the 1:1,000,000,000 thing that might happen.

    Or just put the ID in your locker after arrival. Or pull the battery out or put it inside an Altoids tin Or wrap it in aluminum foil. Lots of ways to stop it from working.

    Clearly terrorist could use any RFID tracking to set off selective bombs based on the RFID signatures. There was a popular youtube video a few yrs ago claiming that the new USA passports with RFID could be targetted for tracking overseas and targets of proximity sensitive attacks.

    I should say that I have a metal wallet now that should prevent the RFIDs in credit cards from being read until I open it. That is the idea anyway.

    1. Re:Student swapping IDs by Seumas · · Score: 1

      And have them call the police on you for identify fraud.

    2. Re:Student swapping IDs by mark-t · · Score: 1

      On the first day of the semester, just swap IDs with all your friends.

      Why do you figure that would be helpful? It's a student ID, probably with name and photograph on it. Any teacher would recognize on sight that they were wearing a card that didn't belong to them.

    3. Re:Student swapping IDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rather, what kids would end up doing is giving their badges to the one friend who was going to school that day. The kid keeps them in his backpack and the central system thinks everyone is at school. Meanwhile, teachers are not taking roll and therefore do not log the students who are tardy.

      More than anything, this is a powergrab by the school to increase false positives of roll call and milk more money out of taxpayers by claiming more kids are attending school than really are.

  30. RFID is a wireless barcode by ilsaloving · · Score: 2

    And after all, these kids are a product of their generation!

    *rimshot*

  31. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by fnj · · Score: 1

    why would I need them in a free country

    Let me know when you find that "free country". It's sure as hell none of the countries I know about, including all the western democratic ones, are free.

  32. Well no duh they lost by artfulshrapnel · · Score: 2

    They're being totally unreasonable. According to the legal document linked, the school actually offered to compromise and allow her to wear a badge with no RFID chip at all. They just needed to give her something with a barcode or whatever so she could check out books in the library and pay for school lunches under the new system. The dad still refused because the badge was now "the mark of the beast" and they would not "go against the teachings of the LORD." [emphasis not mine]

    Thing is, she already carries a badge every day under their current system. He's claiming that a simple piece of ID has now become the work of Satan because someone asked to put an RFID chip in it, even if they change their mind and agree not to.

    1. Re:Well no duh they lost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're being totally unreasonable.

      "If you could reason with religious people there would be no religious people." ~ Dr. House

    2. Re:Well no duh they lost by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 3, Interesting

      According to the legal document linked, the school actually offered to compromise and allow her to wear a badge with no RFID chip at all.

      The condition on that "compromise" was that she and her parents would not share their objections to the program with others (my recollection was that it actually went so far as to ask them to endorse the program, but I may be remembering that incorrectly). In addition, they were not allowed to tell anyone else that they had reached this accommodation with the school district.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    3. Re:Well no duh they lost by Senior+Frac · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. That is what the father may have claimed initially. His story, after subsequent interviews by actual journalists who cared to ask the right questions, changed to [paraphrased] "carrying the non-chipped ID would be equivalent to our endorsement of the RFID program." He lied to the initial reporter to get media traction and is backtracking.

      The letter from the district, posted on Infowars, whack-a-doodle site itself, made it quite clear how she could stop disenrollment and outlined the specific steps required. Stop objecting and publicly support the program were nowhere to be found in those conditions.

  33. Define "work" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does the fact that the card's ID can be read off-campus necessarily mean that the card "works off-campus", or is "work" in this context defined more precisely as being able to identify a specific student by that ID and track his/her attendance, which is only feasible when using the database against which those IDs correlate? If the latter, then the badges, indeed, do not "work" off-campus.

    All that aside, the entire argument is bunk. This is a pathetic attempt at attention-whoring, and the plaintiff is lucky that her identity is being shielded -- she would have precisely zero chance of working in any secured environment, in which direction her field of interest will trend, otherwise.

  34. There is a simple solution to this by wcrowe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Every student should refuse to wear the badges. They don't have to destroy the badges or anything like that. Just get together and toss them in a big pile. Problem solved. They're not going to suspend every single student. Of course I come from the tail end of a generation where burning draft cards, holding sit-ins and other acts of civil disobedience were not such a foreign idea.

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:There is a simple solution to this by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Every student should refuse to wear the badges. They don't have to destroy the badges or anything like that. Just get together and toss them in a big pile. Problem solved. They're not going to suspend every single student. Of course I come from the tail end of a generation where burning draft cards, holding sit-ins and other acts of civil disobedience were not such a foreign idea.

      The compromise proposed was a student id without an RFID chip in it. Are you saying that students shouldn't even have to have student IDs or just RFID enabled ones?

    2. Re:There is a simple solution to this by Seumas · · Score: 1

      "Every student should refuse to wear the badges."

      Your esteem for the modern day young person is far to great. There are some fantastic rabble-rousing young people out there with tremendous spirit and capacity for critical-thinking who act on principal, but the overwhelming majority are the sheep that they've been raised to be by the same institution you're not suggesting they counter.

    3. Re:There is a simple solution to this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [...] Of course I come from the tail end of a generation where burning draft cards, holding sit-ins and other acts of civil disobedience were not such a foreign idea.

      Yes. And your peers from the other side of the divide learned much from your antics and built a teflon-coated establishment as a result. Thanks a bunch :)

    4. Re:There is a simple solution to this by geek · · Score: 1

      We're saying people shouldn't be tracked like cattle. The whole purpose of this program is to indoctrinate the kids into thinking it's okay to be tracked. Then when they get older, the whole national ID tracking system isn't such a big deal. Get them while they're young as the Germans once proclaimed.

      There is no need for this system. It is a solution looking for a problem. It does nothing but infringe on the rights of children and indoctrinate them. It has ZERO upside.

    5. Re:There is a simple solution to this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well my opinion is that students shouldn't have student id's if the school officials can't be bothered to learn to recognise the students by sight, then might just as well replace em with kahn akademy recordings of the material, cause if the relating going on is that shallow it isn't of any use anyway

    6. Re:There is a simple solution to this by alexo · · Score: 1

      There are some [young people] who act on principal

      You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    7. Re:There is a simple solution to this by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      That's essentially what happened at my public high school back 10 or 12 years ago. They tried to force us to wear IDs on lanyards my senior year, which lasted for all of a day before every student at all grade levels was leaving them at home since they were a hassle to wear and we weren't used to them. After that, the only time they could actually manage to make us wear them was at events where ID was mandatory (e.g. taking AP tests). I think I heard they wised up by the next year and instead decided to have the incoming freshman (who were already used to wearing them from junior high) wear them, then repeated the process the next year and so on until all four years of high school students were wearing them.

    8. Re:There is a simple solution to this by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      We're saying people shouldn't be tracked like cattle. The whole purpose of this program is to indoctrinate the kids into thinking it's okay to be tracked. Then when they get older, the whole national ID tracking system isn't such a big deal. Get them while they're young as the Germans once proclaimed.

      There is no need for this system. It is a solution looking for a problem. It does nothing but infringe on the rights of children and indoctrinate them. It has ZERO upside.

      Schools have used student IDs for decades, usually with bar codes. Same with libraries, workplaces, drivers licenses, etc. We are already indoctrinated and have been for generations. What is new here is the use of an RFID chip in the ID and then it is only new because it is in a school, not a college or business.

      While I do question the usefulness of doing this, claiming an ulterior motivation or some evil plot by big brother sounds a bit too paranoid. Next thing you know people will think the TV show person of interest isn't fiction but the latest reality tv.

    9. Re:There is a simple solution to this by zzsmirkzz · · Score: 2

      Schools have used student IDs for decades, usually with bar codes. Same with libraries, workplaces, drivers licenses, etc. We are already indoctrinated and have been for generations.

      Yes, we have been indoctrinated into carrying around identification cards/badges that can be used to identify us. However, the fact the we are being identified and by who and for what purpose is known to the holder of the card (i.e. we have to take it out and show it), or if wearing it, we can see those who can see us and our cards. Tracking is not involved in the current system unless you swipe the card for access and again you know and can control what is being tracked. The new system is for ubiquitous identification and tracking, not knowing who is identifying/tracking you or when or for what purpose. This is a different system and one people should NOT be indoctrinated into as it is dehumanizing.

    10. Re:There is a simple solution to this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better idea: every parent that is able should pull their children out of the public school system. It's terrible even without RFID, anyway.

    11. Re:There is a simple solution to this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every student should refuse to wear the badges.

      Yes, I can see the students go out in the hall shouting "Badges? Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges."

    12. Re:There is a simple solution to this by JazzLad · · Score: 1

      You keep using that word

      You once used this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    13. Re:There is a simple solution to this by pseudorand · · Score: 1

      > It has ZERO upside.

      More than that, it has a downside. Ferris could have just had Cameron bring his ID card to school and saved himself a lot of trouble. Having a teacher visually recognize people while taking attendance is simply more reliable. And if my child went missing, I'd want the police to have more to go on than "his ID badge was in class this morning, but we don't know if anyone actually saw him". Of course, I don't remember them taking attendance in high school, so RFID is better than nothing.

      That said, the plaintiffs are just plain stupid. Clearly schools have not only a need but a legal responsibility to keep track of students, both for safety and to make sure parents send their kids to school [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_leaving_age]. If she wanted to mount a meaningful protest, she should have invested those legal fees in a bunch of faraday bags, handed them out to all her friends, hid them when the IT guys came to troubleshoot and convinced the school administration that the system was simply a buggy and unreliable technical failure.

    14. Re:There is a simple solution to this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's also the possibility not even a majority of the students object to these things. I sure don't.

    15. Re:There is a simple solution to this by kenh · · Score: 1

      Sure they will - the next crop of kids at this magnet'charter school will appreciate their sacrifice and happily wear the badges and get a (most likely) superior education. Children apply to be accepted into this school, they can easily be kicked out and replace no problem.

      --
      Ken
    16. Re:There is a simple solution to this by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Yes. That is a huge difference -- with ID cards that have to be physically shown to read anything -- we KNOW who is tracking us, when, and why. With RFID, you may not know who, when, or why.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  35. It's not the RFID at issue here by macshome · · Score: 1

    The family objects to any ID that has a number on it for religious reasons. They were offered a school ID without RFID and they turned it down.

    1. Re:It's not the RFID at issue here by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      The family objects to any ID that has a number on it for religious reasons. They were offered a school ID without RFID and they turned it down.

      What about drivers license, social security, bank accounts, postal address, ip address, etc. I don't mean to mock their religious beliefs, but I am curious at what level they are willing to compromise their values (if any)?

    2. Re:It's not the RFID at issue here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heaven help them if they discover Godel, or ASCII.

    3. Re:It's not the RFID at issue here by macshome · · Score: 1

      Apparently they refuse to carry anything that would identify them with the "mark of the beast".

    4. Re:It's not the RFID at issue here by mark-t · · Score: 1

      So really, it's not the system that's discriminating against them for relgious reasons, it's their religion that's discriminating against the system.

      In other words, she essentially has an imperative from her own beliefs to ignore the blasphemous rules, and to be prepared to face the consequences.

      Because if she's not prepared to face the consequences,whatever they are, for following her beliefs about what God is supposedly telling her to do, even where they come into conflict with rules, then how much of a religion can it be?

    5. Re:It's not the RFID at issue here by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      You don't have to wear those visibly. It seems the tags in question are to be worn, not just carried around in a wallet or so.

    6. Re:It's not the RFID at issue here by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      You don't have to wear those visibly. It seems the tags in question are to be worn, not just carried around in a wallet or so.

      But they didn't make that objection last year when they had to wear the ID badge. It only became an objection once the RFID tag was added to it. The compromise proposed removed the RFID tag, so essentially it is like wearing last year's badge. As such, the visibility doesn't seem to be the issue.

    7. Re:It's not the RFID at issue here by Derekloffin · · Score: 1

      That depends. Just because it let something slide doesn't mean you were okay with such. For instance, one may not feel it is worth the complaint at first. A much more extreme example would be women reporting rape. Often they will not, that doesn't mean it isn't illegal, or that they are okay with it, just that at that time they judge the disadvantages of reporting it to be worse than just trying to deal with it. Obviously this isn't near that extreme, but the point is lack of complaint before does not equate acceptance or that something is okay.

    8. Re:It's not the RFID at issue here by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      That depends. Just because it let something slide doesn't mean you were okay with such. For instance, one may not feel it is worth the complaint at first. A much more extreme example would be women reporting rape. Often they will not, that doesn't mean it isn't illegal, or that they are okay with it, just that at that time they judge the disadvantages of reporting it to be worse than just trying to deal with it. Obviously this isn't near that extreme, but the point is lack of complaint before does not equate acceptance or that something is okay.

      What the school did was give the student the same type of ID that they had the prior year, which was not objectionable the prior year, but is now objectionable. It has nothing to do with rape with is a violent attack expressed sexually. There really is no comparison to be made, either in cause or effect. Again, what the school did to remedy the situation was give the student the same type of ID they had the prior year, which the family did not object to, but now does object to. Obviously, then, something has changed in the parents view of things. The question is what?

    9. Re:It's not the RFID at issue here by Derekloffin · · Score: 1

      And as I said, just because it was let go by before does not mean it was okay, even before. It just means they didn't voice objection till now. I'm not drawing any conclusions as to the merit of this particular complaint, but the argument 'well they didn't complain before' is very weak.

    10. Re:It's not the RFID at issue here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you would be okay with Congress passing a law that says everybody must now be Muslim or Christian or would it be okay to "ignore the blasphemous rules" in that case? Are you "prepared to face the consequences"? In your narrow mind, you missed that this works both ways.

    11. Re:It's not the RFID at issue here by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      And as I said, just because it was let go by before does not mean it was okay, even before. It just means they didn't voice objection till now. I'm not drawing any conclusions as to the merit of this particular complaint, but the argument 'well they didn't complain before' is very weak.

      Actually, the argument that they didn't complain before is very substantial when you are claiming that it is a violation of your religious or moral principals. If every thing is set back to the way it was and it is still a problem, then it would indicate that something else is either the problem or your religious or moral principals have changed.

      Even if the assumption is made that the old way also violated their religious principals, but they chose not to object and now that it has been returned back to the old way and they choose to object, something by definition has had to change, either externally or internally. Until finding out what that is, one doesn't know what the real issue or problem is. Without knowing what the real issue or problem is, one cannot offer a real solution.

      In short, it doesn't matter that it was okay before or not. It was not objectionable before as evidenced by the fact that the family did not object. Now it is objectionable. So, with implying nothing wrong with the change of position, it still leaves the question of what has caused the changed?

  36. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cool story, bro...

    Newsflash: times change. You cannot get away with the same shenanigans today that we got away with even as recently as the 80s. IDs are required for everything from opening a bank account, to turning on utilities, to buying a phone... and just try using that "free country" line when a police officer performs one of those random stops that have become so popular lately. You do need an ID in this country these days to operate within the law at any reasonable level.

  37. Good by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    I'm glad this failed, I'm glad because her entire argument fell back on religion and people have to learn that well you can believe what ever you want you can't use that belief to circumvent the rules. She was offered more then fair alternative and yet she still decided to have a fit, well now maybe she can see that well she has the right to religion, it can stay in the church and not enter everywhere else.

    1. Re:Good by NewWorldDan · · Score: 2

      Counterpoint: I would have liked to see her be successful. There is no reason for government to be operating schools. In an ideal situation, government provides a stipend for education and the student picks an appropriate school. Private schools are not limited by the Bill of Rights and can implement whatever policies they like with the restriction that they're still trying to attract students. The whole point of the Bill of Rights is to limit government.

  38. 17: Only a certain wing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only a certain wing with the *current* sensor setup.

    As soon as they decide to have an extra sensor for the troublemakers' cooldown room, or the AV suite, this is false.

  39. Malicious use scenario by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here is a malicious use scenario:
    1) Malicious user points own RFID reader at target at school, gets ID #

    2) Malicious user then tracks target to time when alone, following that ID#.

    1. Re:Malicious use scenario by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Here is a malicious use scenario: 1) Malicious user points own RFID reader at target at school, gets ID #

      2) Malicious user then tracks target to time when alone, following that ID#.

      It might be even easier than that if RFID numbers are allocated in batches; Identify one student and others in a similar range would also be students.

    2. Re:Malicious use scenario by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sort of like what people do now, with their eyes?

    3. Re:Malicious use scenario by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Yes, except with concealed RFID readers, you wouldn't need to even be looking at someone. Or even to be personally in the area at the time, if you concealed one and left it unattended except for a remote connection.

      You can do that with small cameras now, sort of, but to get a good and immediate ID with those you need to either be monitoring them or have good facial recognition software behind it. With the RFID, you can interrogate it and get a definite identifier back without any guesswork.

      Of course, it's elaborate and possibly a just little dramatic, but this does make that scenario possible. In a world where crazy people have the focus and the desire to create thermite, homemade explosives and intricate trigger devices, this is child's play in comparison for a stalker.

  40. If this were Canada by crossmr · · Score: 1

    They would have declared here a distinct society and built her a special school just for her already..

  41. not untrackable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The mapping of RFID to student exists somewhere. That list can be cracked, viewed by insiders, lost on a USB key, etc.

    Didn't anyone show how this identity stuff gets stolen every day.

  42. The worst part of all this... by Seumas · · Score: 2

    I fall into that heavy geek group of go-fuck-yourself when you want to search me, track me, or otherwise invade my privacy or my right to not be cattle. However, I could do without people like her standing up and taking on that position, publicly. The taint of religious idiocy just contaminates everyone else who actually takes issue with it for real-world concerns and sensibilities that don't involve the battle of two deities and an attempt by some "new world order" to track a human being by some goofy stamp at the behest of the super evil devil guy.

    It's kind of like I'm sure everyone (including myself) felt when they saw Alex Jones "defending" our second amendment. Just a collective shout of "shut the fuck up, you birther, truther, new-world-order, end-of-the-world, religion spewing dipshit -- you are speaking in front of the world and making every other person who gives a shit about gun rights look like a fucking lunatic by association!".

    Why couldn't she just say "hey, I take issue with this on the same grounds that any other person would have the right not; not on some silly religious preclusion"? It's like when I see all these news reports about the shitty behavior of the TSA when it comes to people in wheel chairs, or elderly nuns, or toddlers, or war veterans -- as if somehow it's wrong to violate them, but if you're just a regular every day everybody else, then fuck it.

    Gah. This whole thing is just frustrating as hell. If another student has the guts to stand up to this, I hope they do it without the trappings of crap she came with. Unfortunately, I guess this also sets precedent for whoever the next student is and they won't get anywhere. Meh.

    1. Re:The worst part of all this... by mariox19 · · Score: 1

      Regarding Alex Jones, I have to wonder if he was the only guest they could have gotten on the show. I'm suspicious. Remember, Piers Morgan has been critical of American gun laws. This all reminds me of something I saw on television years ago. It was the first time I noticed this.

      Once upon a time, maybe 20 years ago, I was watching The Ricki Lake Show. The topic of that particular show was affirmative action. (Let's put aside the pros and cons of the issue, for the sake of argument. I'm not talking about affirmative action; I'm talking about how the debate was presented.) There were two sets of guests. On the pro side, supporting affirmative action, were two articulate, educated individuals. On the con side were two redneck, n****r-hating ignoramuses. This is what's called "balance" in popular media. You push your angle by inviting ranting, extremist, all-around deplorable individuals to "defend" the side of the issue that you oppose. It's intentional.

      Once you pick up on that, you see it again and again. Some instances are far more subtle than what you see on daytime talk shows, but it's there. It's no accident that there's a "fucking lunatic" on television. This is how clever people design propaganda. When I see these kinds of things, I always wonder what advocates the producers of the show turned away.

      --

      quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.

  43. Why couldn't she just leave it at school? by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Is there some particular reason that she would be required to have this badge on her person when she goes home after school? If the badge stays in her locker when she's not there, and gets put on in the morning when she arrives, this is not any different than somebody wearing an employee badge while on the job.

    1. Re:Why couldn't she just leave it at school? by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      Depending on the school, she might not be able to get in the door/past a security station without her ID.

    2. Re:Why couldn't she just leave it at school? by cfulton · · Score: 1

      I agree. I can't see how any of this is a problem. I am "Forced" to wear an RFID badge at work. Oh and scary they can track me at work. But, I leave it in my car or on the kitchen counter at night. Why can't a school make her were a badge at school. If they wanted to tattoo it on her arm or inject it under her skin I could see all the number of the beast stuff, but "You need this badge to be with you while you are at school so, we know where you are." seems a reasonable and justifiable request.

      --
      No sigs in BETA. Beta SUCKS.
  44. Request copy of the System Security Review by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We need to ask for copies of the System Security Review of these systems (unfortunately, you probably wont be able to get it due to security requirements).
    The security review should specify how the system handles authorization of the ID reading process.
    This should also include the audit process for unauthorized reads.

    We need to make it clear that a necessary component of these systems is that only authorized readers are able to be used.

    One minimal change to many of these systems (works better with battery powered IDs) is to alert the user to every attempted read of the ID (either a LED or an audio alert). The alert needs to come from the device read, not the device doing the reading.

    This question needs to be asked of all similar systems (Toll Pass responders, etc).

  45. So Whats the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Leave the tag in your locker when you go home. It's clear that this is a $$$ issue to the school, who get paid on the number of students in class. What happens when 3 or 4 students get a buddy to carry their tags so that they can cut class? The school probably don't care, as the students are registered by the tags as being in class, so they get paid for them being there.

    Also what happens when some students take their tags home, and "accidentally" lose them? Repeatedly?

    1. Re:So Whats the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      20+ years ago when I was in school, they just charged $2 for a replacement. I suspect this would happen (adjusted for inflation/cost)

  46. Facial recognition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should just use facial recognition cameras, that way there's no badge for student's to lose or mangle. Security is not really what the school cares about, they want accurate attendance records to make sure they get the money they are owed by the government. Schools in the US really do receive funding of x dollars per student.

    I personally wish schools would also be required to verify all social security numbers and citzenship statuses.

  47. At least the nerds of the school will make money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    its only a matter of time till one of them finds a way to clone the tags.

    "oh hey look, johnny is in wings A and C at the same time"

    and there goes the whole point of the system. if i were in that high-school i would build a bunch of clone tags and have them cycle through different known id's the system would be buggered right up and pointless.

    i do share concern that this could help track students off of the school with two scanners used to get a better location and direction of the student or at least the cards location.

  48. Just a number by dmpot · · Score: 1

    Therefore, an intruder or "hacker" can only learn that the tag serial number is, for example, #69872331, but that does not provide any useful information.

    Yes, it is just a serial number, like SSN, and we are going to use it for authentication. What can possible go wrong?

  49. Faraday by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Construct a small Faraday cage in your book bag, and keep it in there, even while at school.

  50. It's OK. by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    The sooner we let the beast come, the sooner the Lord will return to strike him down for a thousand years.

    1. Re:It's OK. by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      I'd almost like to mark everybody just to prove that wrong. If you really want to destroy a religion, fulfill it's eschatology and watch the believers lose faith as nothing happens.

  51. So the father lost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    considering it sounds like the kid didn't give a crap about the tags,

  52. WTF .... what "battery" ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uhhh my understanding is that RFID tags are powered by the minute current induced in the circuit by the transmission from the RFID reader ... therefore there is no "battery". Is my understanding incorrect? Or are these folks talking out their collective asses ?

    1. Re:WTF .... what "battery" ??? by PPH · · Score: 1

      That may be what raised some suspicions about the capabilities of this badge.

      Yes, most RFID is powered by RF from the reader. As such, it has a limited range. Put a power source in it and that range could (theoretically) approach that of a cellular phone. And that could lead to long range tracking. Nobody is certain.

      Battery power can also overcome many crude shielding techniques (foil lined pouches) allowing for surreptitious on-campus tracking (who's hiding in the can, smoking a joint). RF powered RFID would have to be taken out of such a pouch to be scanned at known checkpoints (entry doors, lunch counter, library, etc.) where students expect to present ID anyway.

      Since a battery creates a significant maintenance cost, the added capabilities it allows must be significant to justify its incorporation.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  53. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

    Try Somalia. You can do pretty much anything you want there.

  54. Pretty happy about this by Improv · · Score: 1

    I don't have much of an opinion on the technology itself, but I'm generally happy to see most of the people angry about this being angry. Either the religious freaks who talk about "numbers of the beast" or the "I have parent issues so any authority is something I'll speak against as a pavlovian response"? Yeah. Good to see them lose.

    I'd be happy to talk with sane, reasoned people who don't generally have a problem with authority and reasonable tracking but who might have legitimate concerns about the specifics of this, but those people are rare, and the more stupid arguments from either of the groups above, the harder it is for me to want to take the issue seriously. Kind of like with gun control; I don't really care one way or other on the issue, but I'd love to see people like Alex Jones shake their tiny fists at the sky as they lose.

    --
    For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
    1. Re:Pretty happy about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have much of an opinion on the technology itself, but I'm generally happy to see most of the people angry about this being angry. Either the religious freaks who talk about "numbers of the beast" or the "I have parent issues so any authority is something I'll speak against as a pavlovian response"? Yeah. Good to see them lose.

      I'd be happy to talk with sane, reasoned people who don't generally have a problem with authority and reasonable tracking but who might have legitimate concerns about the specifics of this, but those people are rare, and the more stupid arguments from either of the groups above, the harder it is for me to want to take the issue seriously. Kind of like with gun control; I don't really care one way or other on the issue, but I'd love to see people like Alex Jones shake their tiny fists at the sky as they lose.

      Not sure if troll...

      Your problem is that you expect courts of law to answer to reason and/or logic. They don't, and as such, if you want some horseshit government tracking of children stopped, you have to appeal to them in a manner that will force them to respond.

      Alex Jones is an entertainer, and as much as he's entertaining you, he isn't losing. The advertisers' money still shows up in his bank account. His job is done, successfully. I think the people who follow him are kooks, but you can't say he isn't winning.

    2. Re:Pretty happy about this by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      I'd be happy to talk with sane, reasoned people who don't generally have a problem with authority and reasonable tracking

      But this is "reasonable tracking" according to some people. In fact, both the TSA and the Patriot Act are completely "reasonable" to a startling number of people. "Reasonable" is not nearly as objective as you make it out to be.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  55. Just swap badges by ebcdic · · Score: 1

    I have to type something here to please the filter.

  56. How Did this Project Come to Be? by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    I wonder which program was used to fund this project for this school? Who stopped and said, "we can create a community of people by having them put on this badge and have a computer track them." And what has me wondering even more is, what event occured that prompted such a reaction?

  57. Pieces of flair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The Nazis had pieces of flair they made the Jews wear." --Peter Gibbons

  58. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    Because you live in civilization. We do not live in an anarchy.

    Not having a number assigned to you don't have civilization and are living in an anarchy? That is way more crazy than "it's the mark of the beast."

  59. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by bmo · · Score: 1

    No you can't.

    You need to have more guns than the other guy. You can't just waltz over to Somalia and declare yourself completely independent from the human race. And not only that, but if you piss enough of the "other guys" off in Somalia (probably likely if you take offense to Islam and show your distaste), it probably won't matter how many guns you do have.

    --
    BMO

  60. Maximum range? by Matt_Bennett · · Score: 1

    With the talk of stalkers and such, what is the maximum range we can read the badges? Passive RFID has to power the badge from the reader- at long range at the frequencies that these run, you're going to need a powerful transmitter and a big antenna, which makes it pretty hard for the stalker to hide at least. I do understand that advancements are being made all the time, but we still can't break the physics and basic information theory with respect to power and signal-to-noise.

  61. The Octopus Card by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 1

    The Octopus Card is a contact-less card used for payments on stores and public transit, and a large number of schools and companies as a mean of tracking check-in / check-outs and attendance issues in various countries since 1997. So far everyone has applaud about their convenience, and very few complains about privacy issues.

    This kid (and their family) probably has listen too much to Alex Jones.

  62. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by bmo · · Score: 1

    We live in a complex society, where the membership is much larger than the 300 person tribe/clans of the paleolithic hunter-gatherer era. Beyond that, it begins to be much more difficult to keep track of everyone. Beyond that, you no longer *personally* know everyone. So we, as a species, decided to organize, create writing and math to keep track of things. Getting a state issued ID is a direct extension of this drive to organize things and make stuff less confusing.

    Organization is part of civilization. If you don't want to be part of the organization, yes, you are an anarchist and basically anti-civilization.

    How well could you do, personally, foraging off the land and depending solely on the goodwill of strangers and living like Diogenes, living in a barrel and masturbating publicly?

    --
    BMO

  63. HIPAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next time she should just slap them with a HIPAA violation.

  64. Battery in Badges by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 1

    Well since the summary states that the compromise that the court finds acceptable is to remove the battery from the badge these are powered RFID tags. That makes it very easy to install a passive reader in any doorway to determine when the tag passes through.

    1. Re:Battery in Badges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you live in a state in which the legislator is going to fund $500 to install a reader in every door outside the school. Or even on every lamppost. You live in a state where the infrastructure is going to be built to collect data from every reader on every lamppost. You live in a state where the funding to collect and analyze this data exists. You live in state where private businesses are going to be compelled to place one of these readers and report the data to the schools. Because in Texas this is not going to happen.

    2. Re:Battery in Badges by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      it is possible to have an RFID tag that is not externally powered and can only actively transmit with an internal power source?

    3. Re:Battery in Badges by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      So you mean that they CAN be read even without the battery?

      Then what is the battery needed for?

      i.e. seems to me it would be much more efficient to have the many badges be passive, and whatever is reading them be active/need the electricity.. Which is I think pretty much what basically all work badges use.

    4. Re:Battery in Badges by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Well since the summary states that the compromise that the court finds acceptable is to remove the battery from the badge

      And if you read the actual filing, you'll find that the superintended had already offered a "compromise" of using an ID that had no RFID in it at all. The father refused that offer because it would ... ready for this? ... give him no grounds for complaining that his child's right to freedom of religion was being violated. Yes, indeed, the fact that his child could go to school without her freedom of religion being violated was not sufficient for this guy.

  65. You people dont get it and just want to argue. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RFID is just the evolution of things. Schools, all schools should require them. Lets look back shall we...

    At first no one had to go to school really. Only the rich kids did.

    Then kids were supposed to go to school.

    Then they had truant officers to make sure kids stayed in school.

    Then schools started sending letters home to make sure kids were going to school when attendance records showed they were going.

    Then schools started keep electronic records of children and calling, sending letters, calling the school board and alerting child services.

    Then schools started putting in closed circut camera systems.

    Then schools started putting in metal detectors in some areas.

    And so on. Basically I skipped a lot of things but an RFID card is just an evolution of keeping children organized and records for the school. A school is basically responsible for 100 to 500 or more kids that are all minors for the vast majority of the week for the vast majority of the year. The legal obligations in this day and age alone are staggering. Look if there is a fire and they can track all the students with the cards they can quickly take note of what kids are where, there is guess work if a kid is passed out in the burning building alone. If there is a school shooting the students can be tracked easily and you know if anyone is inside still that needs help and where they are. Essentially its no different than a more efficient version of cameras in the halls, it helps keep track of the kids for numerous reasons. We live in a technological age, its not unreasonable to expect technology to be a part of our lives. Its not even like they are injecting a tracking chip into the kids, its a damn card they keep on them DURING school, not after school.

    Besides, how come none and I mean NONE of you noticed the fact this has been going in colleges all across the country for a decade now? Sure it might not be a RFID chip but a lot of colleges you have to use your student ID to swipe everywhere which essentially tracks not only where you have been but what you have been doing as well. When I was in college I had to swipe my ID when I went to class, to open doors, to use the printers, access the computers, use my ID to log into computers and everything else but I never cared because its SCHOOL, it isnt like I have to do it 24 hours a day for the rest of my life. Or how about the millions of people who have RFID chips in their badges at work? None of them complain they are being tracked and its an invasion of their privacy. Im also willing to bet a vast majority of you have the GPS on your cellphones on which means you can be tracked.

    The only kids who have to worry about carrying those RFID cards are the kids who want to do bad stuff. If the kid isnt doing anything wrong then it doesnt effect them. Look, take a piece of paper, tear it into a small square and put it in your pocket and walk around the rest of the day. Did carrying that paper effect your life? Ruin your civil liberties? Or in anyway at all no matter how slight effect your personal or professional life? No it did not and thats exactly what would happen to a kid carrying one of those badges while they are at school.

    1. Re:You people dont get it and just want to argue. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      The only kids who have to worry about carrying those RFID cards are the kids who want to do bad stuff. If the kid isnt doing anything wrong then it doesnt effect them.

      Nothing to hide, nothing to fear. I don't think I need to say anything more.

      Did carrying that paper effect your life?

      And to people who don't fly by plane, people getting molested at airports doesn't affect them at all. What does that mean? That it's not wrong?

      Ruin your civil liberties?

      No, because it's just a piece of paper you put in your pocket yourself. That's an absolutely terrible analogy, in my opinion.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  66. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The government also assigned you a Social Security number and failing that, you got an IRS tax number, which identifies you in "the system." - because either one of these is mandatory to be able to file your taxes.

    Why are these *not* a "Mark of the Beast" while a school ID *is*?

    Why would they be? Do you need either a SSN or a tax ID to enter a store and go shopping? That's why they are not. Perhaps you should read in detail what the Mark of the Beast represents, so you can stop talking out of your ass and drawing blank comparisons such as this one. Since you won't, I guess I will explain it to you: the school ID is a Mark of the Beast because without it one may not participate in obtaining knowledge. If the IRS forced everyone to present a tax ID to enter the stores and buy goods, that would be analogous to the school ID and therefore analogous to the Mark of the Beast.

    Firewall the wares and mark everyone that may pass, starve the rest to dumbness and death... great fucking policy to indoctrinate anyone with (particularly the youth who have not entered the cognitive developmental stages prerequisite to deal with such tyranny).

    CAPTCHA: gateway

  67. "We wont track you off campus - Promise!" by wubti · · Score: 1

    This reminds me of the school district who gave every student a laptop with a built-in camera that they could turn on remotely. They promised never to use it when students were off campus... Except they did: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/02/23/2030207/federal-judge-orders-schools-to-stop-laptop-spying

    This is just another step towards an Orwellian state (not that we are too far away).

    --
    You are unique, just like everyone else.
  68. harumph! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    way to cite your imaginary antisocial DRUG ADDICT friend!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  69. RFIDs don't require batteries to be read... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Idiot Judge!!!

  70. Just leave it in your locker when you leave school by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An added bonus is that you're got perfect attendance

  71. What??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Built in batteries??? Since when do RFID's need batteries to operate. The only need for batteries would be signal boosting. RFID can be powered by the receiver, there is no need to use a battery. Thus for tracking purposes the device is still active unless specifically engineered to not be active without the battery. Heck the device without the battery may even be easier to track.

    When will the government finally learn not to stick it's nose in technology without actually having an impartial expert actually analyze the device and answer the questions for the jury. This isnt just a downplay but a flat out misunderstanding of the technology. It's sad that this is the same tech used in out passports.

  72. WTF soulskill and submitter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably just blame soulskill for this. Did you really think it necessary to include an example of a fucking serial number in the summary? A serial number, for example #12345566345

    Wow.

    This site... You know what I'm about to say. No point anymore.

  73. Court-schmort by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why did this even go to court. Give the school a rude gesture and put your kid in a different school, or get him his GED at 16, so he can start college early. Everyone has to get so butt hurt about things. Flow around your problems like water, coalesce, and continue with your life. If everyone did that, what would Nancy Grace have to talk about.

  74. Advice for Concerned Student by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) Research "Faraday Cage"
    2) Get aluminum foil from mommy's cupboard.
    3) Build your ID badge a comfy Faraday Cage.

  75. She figured it out wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If this chip IS the mark of the beast, then, according the the prophecy, she would expect to lose this legal battle. The prophecy makes it quite clear that the mark of the beast will be mandatory.

    If it is not the mark of the beast, then the whole argument comes undone anyway.

    As an aside, anyone who is paying attention already knows that the mark of the beast is the credit card.

    1. Re:She figured it out wrong by bmo · · Score: 1

      As an aside, anyone who is paying attention already knows that the mark of the beast is the credit card.

      This is the most insightful comment all day.

      --
      BMO

  76. There is no upper limit to bad from this by kawabago · · Score: 1

    The things that can go wrong with this type of program are too numerous to itemize. When the first student is stalked and killed using these badges, hopefully minds will change.

    1. Re:There is no upper limit to bad from this by Sarius64 · · Score: 1

      Don't worry. This will be charged as the cost of order.

    2. Re:There is no upper limit to bad from this by sl149q · · Score: 1

      It will be balanced by the first time a student is rescued from a burning school because they knew the exact location of all the students from a laptop accessing the location database conveniently located in the "cloud".

      I mean, as long as we are talking Hollywood screen play scenarios here, right :-)

  77. Now you little mother fuckers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can't hide from me.

  78. Gander Tracking by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    I assume the staff are also required to wear these badges and are tracked as well, right? RIGHT?

    1. Re:Gander Tracking by Sarius64 · · Score: 1

      This depends on if the union believes this will be in its interest.

  79. "On Religious Grounds" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Braindead people here often attack people like this girl and her family because they challenge obscenities like tagging under a 'religious exemption'.

    However, in the USA, many States only allow attempted 'exemption' from police state policies under 'religious' objections, dating back to the time when the USA was a refuge for people from various extremist cults that fled to the USA. These States refuse to accept arguments made under general objections due to 'conscience' or personal beliefs.about reasonable freedom.

    Neither the girl or her family believe in 'mark of the beast' stuff, but are obliged to use this argument because of State laws. Likewise, the school is certainly not chipping the students because of 'funding' or 'attendance'- this is simply the 'plausible' smokescreen excuse for another giant stride by the police state.

    THINK. No-one needs to be chipped to get an education. Let's consider the argument of those that say chipping is necessary. If this girl was told that skipping school would lead to her mother or sister being raped by agents working for the school, that would also likely 'improve' attendance, would it not? The 'extreme measures' argument never passes muster, if you think logically for more than one second.

    In the UK, pro-chipping extremists have just proudly passed laws to limit state benefits to an annual 1% increase per year, when inflation is at 5%. State benefits are calculated, of course, to be the minimal amount possible to allow survival, so lowering the benefits 4% each year clearly defeats their MATHEMATICAL purpose.

    I bring this up because the logic used to decimate benefits is the exact same logic used to sell mass chipping of people. Those who stand up and say "these measures are both inhumane and illogical" must be silenced.

    Slashdotters inherently disapprove of mass chipping of people. How to get them to change their mind (or make them less resistant). Simple. Make the anti-chipping lobby seem like extremist religious nutters. The bad people know what they are doing.

  80. Tinfoil! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is there any rule forbidding to wrap the badge in some nice shielding unless someone requests to read it out?
    And what about jamming the signal?

  81. School is mandated by law;limitations should exist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    School is mandated by law so limitations should exist on the school. Unlike with the real world where you can quit and find another job it isn't something the majority in society can do for schooling that is required by law.

  82. Wait, why does the off-campus thing matter? by jonadab · · Score: 1

    > one of the concerns was that the badges
    > would be used to track students off-campus

    Wait, so are they trying to make her _wear_ the thing even when she's not at school? THAT would be a very clear-cut case of the school overstepping their bounds.

    If they're NOT doing that, I'm confused about why it matters whether the thing could be used to track her when she's off the campus. She could just not wear it when she's not at school, problem solved.

    --
    Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  83. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by sjames · · Score: 1

    It is worth noting that when the drivers license was introduced, it had quite a few opponents. Some on the grounds that it wasn't up to the government to decide if you could drive or not and some objecting to any form of positive ID. They never really conceeded the argument, they were just worn down into silence.

    There's even a Porky Pig cartoon lampooning the license for everything crowd.

    Do you have a license to sell hair tonic to bald eagles in Omaha Nebraska?

  84. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, but you need a social security number to work. If you're working without one or at the very least an IRS tax number then you and/or your employer is doing something illegal.

  85. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by Sarius64 · · Score: 1

    No, actually, you need to rationalize your need for someone to control other people. I'm fairly sure that during the existence of writing and math, required identification has not been a mandate for humanity. Specifically for America, the number one reason that people do not want an identification requirement for voting is to assure no one's voting right is prevented. Having said that, no matter what you believe, you do not own people in this country and they do not have a requirement to adhere to your paradigm.

  86. Simple solution by celtic_hackr · · Score: 1

    Let the child whack the RFID a few times with a hammer. Tracking problem fixed.
    Or 5 seconds in the microwave, although the burn marks might clue in the school as to why the RFID no longer works.

  87. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by celtic_hackr · · Score: 1

    There are actually a number of people who do object to SSNs on this basis and do not have them. I believe the Amish fall into this category. Not everyone has an SSN, but it makes life a lot harder to live, except in an Amish or Mennonite community.

    However, this is a BS case, as the school offered to remove the battery and chip and issue a trackless card, but it would look just like all the other ones on the John Jay campus. But she and her Dad refused that. She wanted to use the same picture ID she had from her old school. Which looks different, as each school has it's own style of badge for rapid identification of student who do not belong on a particular campus.

    So, from the get go, they really had no case, because the school accomodated the Religious objection, which likely would have passed muster.

  88. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by bmo · · Score: 1

    Then go live where there is no society.

    Go ahead, try to find some place that exists where there are people and no cultural norms at all. I'm betting you can't.

    Did you build your computer from scratch that you are reading this message on? Did you smelt the copper for the circuit boards yourself? Did you make the photolithography masks for the chips yourself? No? Other people did that?

    You owe society for your ability to have the things you have, to be able to get up every day in a safe environment, to have standards for food and water. To have sanitation. To live in society, and take advantage of these things, we all have to conform to certain norms because without those norms, society fails and there are no computers, no health standards, no road maintenance, and no internet.

    You're crazy.

    --
    BMO

  89. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by celtic_hackr · · Score: 1

    Catal Hyuck was city that had a population of around 10,000 people, approximartely 10,000 years ago. There is also evidence of ancient American cities like Cahokia, which likely had a population of around 40,000 at it's height. Long before European settlement, and a population greater than any North American city until Philadelphia exceeded 40,000 around 1780. But you didn't see state issued ids in Cahokia, nor in the Colonies. In fact, it's possible the Native Americans in Cahokia didn't even have a writing system.

    I call Bullshit, that you need to keep track of everyone, and have to give out ids for that. I could do everything I need to do except drive a car or travel to a foreign country without id. And if we got rid of the idea of this planet is divdeed into countries with imaginary lines telling us the boundaries I would need id to travel. the id requirement for driving is solely so you know who to blame in the event I damage someone or something.

  90. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by bmo · · Score: 1

    You can certainly go through life without a SSN. You can apply for and get an IRS tax ID. The IRS gives not one shit about whether you are in the SSI system, but they do tend to give a shit if you are an Amish or Mennonite farmer that has an income that needs to be taxed. They will even give an illegal immigrant a tax ID. They don't give a shit about whether you're here illegally, and many illegal aliens pay taxes in the demonstration of good faith hoping that one day that we'd see immigration reform and a tax record would establish "good residency behavior." The IRS cares only about one thing, that you paid enough taxes this year and on that they should be commended for sticking to their business and not scope-creeping like other agencies.

    I believe I did mention tax ID numbers... yes, yes I did.

    Render unto Caesar and all that.

    Someone should have just told her that you can throw the badge in the microwave for a couple of seconds.

    --
    BMO

  91. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by kenh · · Score: 1

    Birth Certificate
    Social Security Card

    You had "identification papers," you just didn't use them.

    --
    Ken
  92. Two Words: by crhylove · · Score: 1

    Home. School.

    Download every documentary made by man, Khan Academy, the NEA is a joke anyway, and public schools are awful. Get your kid involved in a different activity that connects them with other kids. School is an unmitigated fiasco.

    --
    I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
  93. If you don't want to be tracked after school by Nyder · · Score: 1

    Leave the badges in your locker when school is done for the day.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  94. How about blocking it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Radio frequency + Faraday cage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday%27s_cage) equals pretty sucky tracking system. No?

  95. Re:Sorry dude, it's Nero by sysrammer · · Score: 1

    Actually, it seems that most historians believe that 666 referred to Nero. Remember the scope of the New Testament. They expected the 2nd coming to be "right around the corner...all the signs are there". In the meantime, the faithful needed to be warned about Nero and what he was doing. Apparently 666 encodes "Nero" in Hebrew, or something like that. They were big into numerology back then.

    --
    His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
  96. No, sorry dude to you! Re:Sorry dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It seems there's a new "Mark of the Beast" every decade or so. Back when I was a kid and went to church every week with my parents, I remember reading an article in one of the missals how bank account numbers are the "Mark of the Beast" - and this was 20 years ago."

    Unless these markings were placed on/in the 4head and/or on/in the hand, you have no case. Nice try.

  97. Re:Sorry dude, it's Nero by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

    Greek, but you're right. Nero is a possible fit for 666. Of course so was George Walker Bush Jr, in ASCII, if I recall correctly, George Walker bushjr (6 char, 6 char, 6 char) add up the ASCII values for each word and you get 666.

  98. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To somewhat bolster your argument (although I disagree with the overall argument)

    Everyone born AFAIK gets a social security number. Try going through life without any ID would have to include that number. I would also argue that a SSN is much closer to the "mark of the beast" since it is a national id and not just a state id. So unless you are willing to break other laws (which would probably invalidate the religious principle) you aren't going to find meaningful work. Since men also have to register with selective services, my guess is that this also ties all men to an id number of some sort.

    The judge was right in this specific ruling since it is a public school. The card without the RFID was a legitimate compromise. If she wants to make the point she disagrees with the premise of the RFID tags she should print shirts that say "NO RFID" or something else that gets her point across.

    All that being said. We have a constitutional right to freedom of religion. As long as that doesn't infringe on the rights of others, it shouldn't be infringed (eg. I can claim religion/God told me to kill my kids.)

  99. Re: Try going through life without a state issued by bmo · · Score: 1

    And where are they now?

    I'll tell you.

    They are dead.

    --
    BMO

  100. Re:Sorry dude, it's Nero by sysrammer · · Score: 1

    Greek, thanks. That's the great thing about numerology (and asstrology)...one can make up whatever one pleases. Nero was pre-ANSI, though, so no ASCII back then. EBCDIC probably.

    "ASCII silly question, get a silly ANSI"

    --
    His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
  101. Re:Sorry dude, it's Nero by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

    Of course the Christian who came up with the GWB theory argued that an all knowing deity would know ASCII before it was invented, and thus it makes some sort of sense. Cornering a religious loon is like trying to nail jello to a wall. They always find some excuse for the absurdest of the absurd and don't hesitate to resort to "it's one of God's mysteries!" if you really corner em.