Nice to see that our "education dollars" are being wisely spent on making children wear RFID tags so we can ensure the district gets its funding (see this and this). Little Johnny and Little Suzy's presence is required to get that all important government funding.
These stories are from San Antonio, Texas.
Unfortunately this is not the first case. In a federally funded Richmond, California preschool in 2010 RFID chips were sown into children's clothes.
The tag includes the photo and name of the student, a bar code tied to the student’s social security number, as well as an RFID chip pinpointing the precise location of the student, including after hours and when the student leaves campus (according to this article).
These types of system work well forchildren livestock and have been commercially available for this purpose for some time:
We can't have Little Johnny or Little Suzy skipping out of class and causing the district to slip into financial insolvency.
At least one student, Andrea Hernandez, has declined to wear the tag for religious reasons according to the various articles. As a result the Hernandez family received this letter explaining how their child will be removed from the school for failing to follow the rules:
While there is nothing wrong with identification per se the problems arise when you track the students every movement; this eliminates any notion of privacy.
For example, the school can now know exactly what sections of the library the student is spending time in.
Or how long the student spends in the bathroom, at which urinal or in which stall.
Or who that student is associating with in said bath room.
How long before these bits of information are turned over the police as part of "investigations?"
And why is identification crucial in a school but not in a voting booth?
These stories are from San Antonio, Texas.
Unfortunately this is not the first case. In a federally funded Richmond, California preschool in 2010 RFID chips were sown into children's clothes.
The tag includes the photo and name of the student, a bar code tied to the student’s social security number, as well as an RFID chip pinpointing the precise location of the student, including after hours and when the student leaves campus (according to this article).
These types of system work well for
We can't have Little Johnny or Little Suzy skipping out of class and causing the district to slip into financial insolvency.
At least one student, Andrea Hernandez, has declined to wear the tag for religious reasons according to the various articles. As a result the Hernandez family received this letter explaining how their child will be removed from the school for failing to follow the rules:
While there is nothing wrong with identification per se the problems arise when you track the students every movement; this eliminates any notion of privacy.
For example, the school can now know exactly what sections of the library the student is spending time in.
Or how long the student spends in the bathroom, at which urinal or in which stall.
Or who that student is associating with in said bath room.
How long before these bits of information are turned over the police as part of "investigations?"
And why is identification crucial in a school but not in a voting booth?
No comments:
Post a Comment