IT systems designed to protect kids will put them at risk instead 1

[BionicJohn]

The (UK) Information Commissioner commissioned the Foundation for Information Policy Research (FIPR) to investigate the growth in databases on children and report back

The report, "Children's Databases: Safety and Privacy", can be found via

http://www.fipr.org/press/061122kids.html

It's an in-depth analysis of intervention into the balance between the individual and the common good.

They conclude that "that the systems will intrude so much into privacy and family life that they will violate data protection law and human rights law".


LIVERPOOL FC - FA Cup Winners 2006.
Iechyd da! John
Glannau Mersi, Lloegr.

 

[aarenot]

it seems to me that the best way to look out for kids online is to create a new designation like .com, only call it .kid
allow no questionable material here, and create browsers that can only surf the .kid for kids. browsers that can access other than .kid would have to require a password i suppose to navigate the dns. with seperate dns for .kid

 

[BionicJohn]

The report was concerned about databases held by public authorities on the circumstances of individual children, and how they contributed to their welfare and safety.

The DfES has since published a statement which states "We have some serious reservations about this report’s objectivity and evidence base".

A nice row is brewing up…

LIVERPOOL FC - FA Cup Winners 2006.
Iechyd da! John
Glannau Mersi, Lloegr.

 

[chiph]

The problem isn't just limited to children. It affects adults, too.

If you think about the growing threat of Identity Theft, any data in a database that could be used to obtain credit fraudulently is at risk. What really scares me is the data at the DMV (Department of Motor Vehicles). Not only do they have my birthdate, name & address, photo, and digitized signature, thanks to the passage of the Deadbeat Dads law (you can get your license revoked if you don't pay your child support), they have your SSN as well.

So while invoking the battlecry of "Think of the children!" makes for good press, the problem is much more widespread than that portion of the population.

Chip H.

BTW: The Deadbeat Dads law also can result in suspension of your hunting license -- something which turns out to be more effective in getting people to pay up than their losing their driving privileges!


____________________________________________________________________
If you want to get the best response to a question, please read FAQ222-2244 first

 

[ecobb]

...thanks to the passage of the Deadbeat Dads law (you can get your license revoked if you don't pay your child support), they have your SSN as well.

They had your SSN way before the Deadbeat Dads law. Your actual drivers license number used to be your SSN until just a few years ago. And even after they stopped making it your mandatory drivers license number, it was still an option until recently.

Hope This Helps!

ECAR
ECAR Technologies

http://www.ecartech.com

"My work is a game, a very serious game." - M.C. Escher

 

[flapeyre]

In Louisiana, you must have a SSN on your driver's license record. You do not have to have it printed on the license itself (and mine is not; should I lose the wallet, my SSN is not on anything in there).

This is a decent explanation.

Feles mala! Cur cista non uteris? Stramentum novum in ea posui!

 

[chiph]

Hmmm. That may vary by state. North and South Carolina never required your SSN until recently.

Chip H.


____________________________________________________________________
If you want to get the best response to a question, please read FAQ222-2244 first

 

[dilettante]

Believe me, it isn't the States wanting this. The Feds put all kinds of unconstitutional pressures on States, usually through threats of witholding "Federal" highway money.

Old Ben Franklin and most of his buddies have to be spinning in their graves at 7200 RPM these days.

 

[aarenot]

if a dad pays his childs support then this is not an issue. now if they are a deadbeat dad, they get no sympathy from me. i am a dad, and i work more than one job to support my family, why should that change if i get divorced. if you do not have enough money after child support, get a second job, that is what you would do if you were still married, or li9ving with your kids.

some may not like the courts dipping into thier pocket to be a man and support thier kids. they may feel it is too much money as well. the thing is, if everyone else is paying for one penny of others kids support, that is way too much for us to pay.

keep one thing in their pants, or deal with the other one being out also. they choose both if they do not.

if it is a matter of can not pay, meaning they can not even afford food, clothes, heat, etc., not including having any mad money in their pocket, beer money, cable tv, cell phones, eating out, etc. that is different. i have no trouble helping those that can not help themselves. will not is a different story. once you are a dad, you work until the bills are paid, if anything is left over, good for you, if not, work more.

if you do not like it, keep it in your pants, and then your wallet will stay there as well. your choice.

 

[gbaughma]

aarenot:

Well spoken.



Just my 2¢

"What the captain doesn't realize is that we've secretly exchanged his dilithium crystals for new Folger's Crystals." -- My Sister
--Greg

http://parallel.tzo.com

 

[gbaughma]

... but back on topic....


When I was teaching Intro to Internet at the local community college, guaranteed, *every single time*, first class, someone would ask "How do I keep my kids safe/off porn on the Internet?"

My answer?

PUT THE COMPUTER IN THE LIVING ROOM, WHERE IT IS IN PLAIN SIGHT OF YOU.

If parents would take a more interested approach, check the browser history, etc. there would be a lot less issues.

Everyone wants the easy way out. CyberSitter. NetNanny. How about ***PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT YOUR KIDS ARE DOING***.



Just my 2¢

"What the captain doesn't realize is that we've secretly exchanged his dilithium crystals for new Folger's Crystals." -- My Sister
--Greg

http://parallel.tzo.com

 

[aarenot]

when aol was still big, i made a lot of money setting up their personal file cabinets, password protecting them, setting things up to log everything to the pfc. the parents would give their kid their own aol sign on, pay me to set up everything to track them, and then watch what their kids did secretly through what i set up. most kids never figured it out, and the parents were willing to pay me 100 cash to do it and teach them to monitor it.

kids today know how to delete histories, temp files, etc., and if they do not, their friends show them. if you are not secretly recording what your kids do on the pc, you do not know. the monitoring software i have set up has proven this time after time. if you do not think so, set a monitoring/logging software on the pc your kids use, and you will probably agree with me. 90 percent found something they had forbidden being done. confronting the kids did not stop it, they just got better at deleting their tracks. if it were not for the logging software they would have just kept doing it, and learned better how to hide it each time they got caught.

the other solution is constant supervision, and pw protecting access to your pc.

 

[Welshbird]

I've found this discussion really very interesting. Not least because I absolutely agree - if you want to keep your kids safe, then YOU have to do it.

Not a cyber-nanny - YOU!

But, it does strike me that interesting though it is, it actually has very little (if anything) to do with SlimJohnD's original post!

John's original post was about the databases the (UK) government is keeping on Children rather than protecing children when surfing...

Fee

The question should be [red]Is it worth trying to do?[/red] not [blue] Can it be done?[/blue]

 

[lhuegele]

The UK is much more sensitive to privacy issues than we are in the USA, but I too agree that when you database information on anyone, including children, you are creating a "potential" that could easily lead to abuse or invasion of privacy.

 

[BionicJohn]

John's original post was about the databases the (UK) government is keeping on Children rather than protecing children when surfing...

That's correct, though the ease with which "unacceptable" sites can be found and accessed is a concern for parents and others.

With databases held by, for example, Health, social and other services there are opposing views, and a balance has to be struck.

How many times does an inidividal need to give the same information to authorities - shouldn't once be enough? OR should every encounter require a fresh start on the assumption nothing other than key top line data is stored?

LIVERPOOL FC - FA Cup Winners 2006.
Iechyd da! John
Glannau Mersi, Lloegr.