Ben S 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (142) comment rss

  • On the post: Court Temporarily Blocks School District From Suspending Student For Refusing To Wear Student ID/Tracking Device

    Ben S ( profile ), 27 Nov, 2012 @ 10:47am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    In regards to the comment about knowing what classes she was in, that's a simple solution. Traditional roll call already does that. RFID does not add some sort of magic new functionality, and in fact, is easier to abuse. Want to appear in school, but not actually be there? Give your card to a friend to carry with them along with their own. Traditional roll call involves the teacher actually verifying with their own eyes the presence of the student. Even using cards that you swipe, it can be fooled. In the aforementioned friend helping you appear present, simply carry the badge with their own, scan both, then enter.

  • On the post: Court Temporarily Blocks School District From Suspending Student For Refusing To Wear Student ID/Tracking Device

    Ben S ( profile ), 27 Nov, 2012 @ 10:39am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Actually, it does. It only works from distance measured in feet, so you have to have multiple detectors scattered through the school. You can tell where they are based on which detector is scanning them.

    It's not responsible for tracking, because in order to do their jobs, they need only make sure the student is in class. Making sure they are in the building, but not in class, doesn't make sense, taking credit for the student being present in the school but "playing hooky" is the opposite of what it should be doing.

    Want to verify the student is in the building? Give them a scannable badge, not RFID, then have them scan to enter, and to leave. Problem solved. This with out going overboard on monitoring that tells the exact location of each and every student, where they go, and at what time of day.

  • On the post: Court Temporarily Blocks School District From Suspending Student For Refusing To Wear Student ID/Tracking Device

    Ben S ( profile ), 27 Nov, 2012 @ 10:00am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    That would be fine. The problem with RFID is the degree to which it enables you to be tracked, such as seeing when you go to the bathroom, as well as other safety concerns regarding the personal data stored on those cards in an unencrypted format. Simply having an accurate means of verifying you went to class is not such a big deal. Stick a QR code that represents your student ID number on a card, scan it as you enter class, and they know you are there, they know if you're on time or tardy, and they don't see what you do, or where you go, when you aren't in your classroom.

    Truth is, we don't really even need a change to the traditional system, roll call is effective for this, and takes only a minute or two. The whole thing is just a ploy for more money from the district.

  • On the post: Court Temporarily Blocks School District From Suspending Student For Refusing To Wear Student ID/Tracking Device

    Ben S ( profile ), 27 Nov, 2012 @ 08:32am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    1) To protect both the driver as well as pedestrians and other drivers, people need to be fully trained in the use of a motor vehicle. A Driver's license is proof of having completed the training, and that you know and are capable of employing the methods needed to keep yourself and others safe. It does not emit a signal for law enforcement to track your whereabouts.

    2) The school is not responsible for tracking her. It is responsible for teaching her, and maintaining a safe environment through out the school.

    3) There isn't a difference just in the terminology. The problem is in what the tracking system is designed to do, the whole "big brother" aspect, where you are practically followed and stalked as you go through the school, as opposed to merely carrying a non-tracking license.

    In response to earlier criticisms regarding religious persecution (not yours), it isn't merely a claim if you are the only one of that religion who refused to use wear the tracker, and the only one who is suspended, while others not of your religion also refuse to wear it, and are not punished. It could be that it was some one randomly chosen, but the details aren't sufficient to determine if that's the case

  • On the post: Don't Let Retraction Distract From The Simple Fact: GOP Copyright Policy Brief Was Brilliant

    Ben S ( profile ), 19 Nov, 2012 @ 02:01pm

    Re: Some Problems with the Whole DJ Section

    Actually, a fact of english. When you pluralize something that isn't a word, the only time you don't use the apostrophe is when there's no letters. 7s, 9s, 28s, etc. When letters are involved, you use apostrophes. A5's, DJ's, etc. This is done intentionally, so that you don't mistake the 's' as being part of the collection of letters/numbers, a part of the abbreviation or initialization.

  • On the post: Supreme Court Justices Worry About 'Parade Of Horribles' If They Agree You Don't Own What You Bought

    Ben S ( profile ), 30 Oct, 2012 @ 04:07pm

    Re:

    Keep in mind that the others get to hear the remarks by this minority. With them showing significant understanding of the effects of this ruling the others may not have realized, they can still be persuaded that the minority is right, and ruling for Wiley is bad.

    Sadly, I can see this decision possibly destroying what's left of the economy, if they rule in favor of Wiley. Every one will start moving all their business overseas, along with all the jobs it entails.

  • On the post: Supreme Court Justices Worry About 'Parade Of Horribles' If They Agree You Don't Own What You Bought

    Ben S ( profile ), 30 Oct, 2012 @ 11:19am

    Re: Re:

    I'm fairly certain he meant that if the product is inside the US, regardless of where it's made, that first sale should apply.

  • On the post: Xbox DRM Punishes More Paying Customers And Actually Restricts Purchasing Options

    Ben S ( profile ), 10 Oct, 2012 @ 08:36am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Having worked for a couple credit card companies, I can tell you this much. That won't work for certain monthly recurring transactions that are preauthorized from a previous month. I used to get angry calls quite frequently when I worked Capital One's Investigative Solutions department (Disputes, before it got outsourced to India). People demanding to know why we were letting the merchant charge their accounts despite them having cancelled and replaced the card. The reason is that due to federal regulations, we were not legally allowed to block those transactions and had to let them follow to the new card, despite only the old card number being used for the charge. As such, this strategy might not work. Of course, it depends on how the transaction is done.

  • On the post: Xbox DRM Punishes More Paying Customers And Actually Restricts Purchasing Options

    Ben S ( profile ), 10 Oct, 2012 @ 08:10am

    Re: DRM

    My Dad has a line he likes to give for stuff like this. "It's a bug, not a feature!" It fits so well with DRM.

  • On the post: Why The MPAA Can't 'Win The Hearts And Minds' Of The Public: File Sharing Is Mainstream

    Ben S ( profile ), 05 Oct, 2012 @ 11:27am

    Re: Re: But.....

    Secondly, actor salaries are more grossly inflated that even those of athletes. This is where the majority of the money is going

    This is only true if you go for the major celebrity actors. If you aren't one of them, those movie studios feel perfectly free to rip you off. An example is My Big Fat Greek Wedding, which cost $5 million to make, grossed $368 million, a 6150% return, and yet the film "lost" money thanks to studio accounting methods, and the entire cast had to sue in order to get their share of the money, and get paid. It's not the paychecks of the stars that uses up all the money, it's the labels finding any method they can in order to claim more than their share, the same as with major record labels.

  • On the post: Police Delete Aftermath Footage Of Suspect Shot 41 Times

    Ben S ( profile ), 26 Sep, 2012 @ 09:34am

    Re: Re: I'll call BULLSHIT at AC#6

    Correct. The Judge won't read those rights, because it's not his job or responsibility. The arresting officer is the one who is required to read those rights. The accused can bring this up to the judge how ever, at which point the judge can decide what the correct course of action would be. Generally speaking, if this can be proven, or at least, you can convince the judge this is the case, this can mean throwing out evidence obtained as a result of you not knowing your rights. If there's not enough evidence left to prosecute, you will likely be released, though not necessarily immediately.

  • On the post: Police Delete Aftermath Footage Of Suspect Shot 41 Times

    Ben S ( profile ), 26 Sep, 2012 @ 09:25am

    Re:

    The officer's claim was that the man tried to ram his way out of being pulled over, crashing into the officer's car to force his way out. Had this been correct, there could be legitimate reason to believe his life was in danger, and shooting could have been legitimate. But this was far too excessive for something like that, and the lie was exposed, there's no excuse for opening fire at all.

    There are other reasons that lethal force can be the best choice that do not involve a firearm. A man charging a cop with a knife is such an example. Police are trained to "shoot to stop" in such a situation. That means take aim and hit something that is easy to hit, namely, the largest part of the body. This can be lethal, but it's a shot that can be made more easily during a time of high stress that would occur in such a situation.

    Any situation in which a cop honestly believes some one is going to kill him, either intentionally or not, can make a shooting justified, regardless of whether a firearm is involved.

  • On the post: EU Officials Propose Internet Cops On Patrol, No Anonymity & No Obscure Languages (Because Terrorism!)

    Ben S ( profile ), 21 Sep, 2012 @ 01:12pm

    Re: Re:

    The US for one...

  • On the post: Demanding A Student's Facebook Password A Violation Of First Amendment Rights, Judge Says

    Ben S ( profile ), 15 Sep, 2012 @ 07:04am

    Re: Complete Invasion of Privacy

    What about the parents? Shouldn't they have been contacted? If they are doing something like this to a student, her parents should have been contacted. The parent might even have the password, if that were actually warranted (though I doubt they'd be able to convince the parents of the need here). In the end, it should be their call how to handle such a situation.

    If something so serious that they would justify this kind of activity is really going on, it's the parent's responsibility to handle this, not the school's. The school should have contacted her parents about this, then butted out.

  • On the post: Demanding A Student's Facebook Password A Violation Of First Amendment Rights, Judge Says

    Ben S ( profile ), 15 Sep, 2012 @ 06:56am

    Re:

    That has nothing to do with the law. Just the Facebook terms and conditions, which she isn't old enough to agree to anyway. All this does is make the "contract" voidable, that is, Facebook can choose to terminate her account based on misrepresenting her age. That's it.

  • On the post: Demanding A Student's Facebook Password A Violation Of First Amendment Rights, Judge Says

    Ben S ( profile ), 15 Sep, 2012 @ 06:53am

    Re: Re: Wait a minute...

    That is the case, from a link below the Eric Goldman article, it mentions that is was the parent of the boy she was having this conversation with. Not the parent of the girl.

    Besides, if you did alert the school to such an event in order to protect your child, would you expect the school to have an armed cop interrogate your child as the appropriate response? That would be a traumatizing event that could leave lasting scars. A lawsuit against the school for this is definitely an appropriate response to the school's actions.

  • On the post: Demanding A Student's Facebook Password A Violation Of First Amendment Rights, Judge Says

    Ben S ( profile ), 15 Sep, 2012 @ 06:48am

    Re: Re: Kidding.

    I had an argument on IRC regarding this article. Some idiot was some how coming to the conclusion that the school was justified by comparing this to the girl getting kidnapped or raped, then stating that because she's not legally old enough to make her own decisions, that some how invalidates her rights. I just could not believe anyone could think that.

  • On the post: Your Cynicism About Lobbyists Only Helps The Lobbyists Win

    Ben S ( profile ), 08 Sep, 2012 @ 06:49am

    Re: Re: Electoral votes?

    There needs to be a way to hide the extra comments. Sorry about the duplicates.

  • On the post: Your Cynicism About Lobbyists Only Helps The Lobbyists Win

    Ben S ( profile ), 08 Sep, 2012 @ 06:47am

    Re: Electoral votes?

    Found what I was after. National Popular Vote

  • On the post: Your Cynicism About Lobbyists Only Helps The Lobbyists Win

    Ben S ( profile ), 08 Sep, 2012 @ 06:46am

    Re: Electoral votes?

    Found what I was after. National Popular Vote

Next >>