School Pays To Get an Algorithm To Scan Students' Social Media For Threats and Suicide Risks Posts (wbur.org) 96
When someone visits the buildings of Shawsheen Valley Technical High School in Billerica, as they walk through the secure foyer, they have to get their driver's license or another state-issued ID scanned. But the secure foyer does kind of a high-level national background check, too, explains Superintendent Tim Broadrick. From a report: The "LobbyGuard" scanner is the size of a computer tablet. It scans a driver's license, takes a picture of the school visitor and if all is OK with the person's background check, almost instantly clears the person to enter the school. An employee behind a window then pushes a button and unlocks the door to the school hallway. Amid nationwide concern about school shootings, there's talk at Shawsheen Tech of covering the wall of glass in the lobby with a special film to make it harder for a bullet to pierce. There's also a police officer -- known as a school resource officer -- stationed at the school. He has an office in the lobby. And the school has adopted another security measure to try to protect students from attacks -- one you can't see. It's a computer program designed to detect threats against the school in social media posts. And it runs 24/7.
"It's receiving and filtering and then gives us alerts when certain kinds of public communication are detected," Broadrick explains. Shawsheen Tech buys the social media scanning service from a Vermont-based company called Social Sentinel. It's one of many technology firms doing some form of social media scanning or monitoring. Social Sentinel claims it's the only one with expertise in protecting schools. Shawsheen Tech has about 1,300 students. It pays Social Sentinel approximately $10,000 per year, according to Broadrick.
"It's receiving and filtering and then gives us alerts when certain kinds of public communication are detected," Broadrick explains. Shawsheen Tech buys the social media scanning service from a Vermont-based company called Social Sentinel. It's one of many technology firms doing some form of social media scanning or monitoring. Social Sentinel claims it's the only one with expertise in protecting schools. Shawsheen Tech has about 1,300 students. It pays Social Sentinel approximately $10,000 per year, according to Broadrick.
Re: (Score:1)
Let me fix this (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Let me fix this (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't have a clue how much of this has to do directly with school shootings, but I agree inappropriate brainwashing of kids that ignores the reality of the real world seems quite damaging (and probably better explains the large percentage of young people who end up living at home for years after college than the "great recession" does).
The zero tolerance policies for fighting and "bullying" (whatever that means) and the "everyone gets an award" philosophy and over-stressing "being respectful" eliminates many important life lessons from children when they are best equipped to deal with and learn from them.
When I was in school, teachers didn't usually stop fights between boys (or girls, but those were quite rare) if the combatants were somewhat reasonably matched, it was one-on-one, there was little danger of lasting physical damage (for example neither party was trying to poke the other's eyes out or using weapons or beating up a lot on someone who was down on the ground), those involved weren't notorious bullies (of which there were few if any) or particularly vulnerable and were picked on very often. Sometimes we would get disciplined very lightly (have to stay in over the next lunch break rather than go outside for example), but that was it. Trips to the principal's office over such things were very rare, parental notification was even rarer, and suspension (let alone expulsion) was extraordinarily rare (I think we knew it was possible, but I don't think I ever knew anyone very well who it happened to).
Very important life lessons were learned at an appropriate age through such physical combative situations. Most kids learned that they were not as tough as they thought they were (or, conversely that they were actually tougher than they thought). Most kids learned that they could, and should, defend themselves (this lesson sometimes took a while for some). Most kids learned that even though they "win" a fight, sometimes it takes a physical toll on them so fighting may not be the best strategy. Most kids learned that you can have a fight with someone and still be friends. Some, including myself, discovered that after fights with relative strangers, both parties respected each other more having tested the limits of the other party and demonstrated their own abilities -- in fact, after most such fights, regardless of who won, I ended up being substantially more friendly with the other kid.
To deprive kids of these experiences seems unwise.
Similarly, when I was in school, everyone didn't get an award or trophy (even for "participation") and little attempt was made to mask the fact that some students were more capable than others at some things. In this environment, students learned what success and failure felt like, how to deal with constructive (and sometimes not so constructive) criticism, that to get an award or recognition or even a good grade could require hard work and focus and that such hard work and focus could often be the difference between being at the top and in the middle. Having to learn these lessons later in life is much more difficult and, it appears, happens too rarely.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes/No. It's true that bullying is natural, and a part of the way humans naturally react, and if you want to live in the trees, it's a reasonable approach. But it penalizes the intelligent as well as the stupid. In fact, it penalizes anyone identifiably different in some "important to fashion" way. So if you want a technical civilization, you need to suppress it.
OTOH, you also need to reward achievement of any sort. Sports and martial arts teams are a good idea, as long as you don't make everyone parti
Re: (Score:2)
My point about bullying certainly wasn't that it was a "good thing" in itself or that it is a behavior kids should be encouraged to instigate. However it is a reality and most people will encounter "bullying" behavior (generally emotional rather than physical as adults in polite society) in professional and social life and maybe, particularly unfortunately, in their personal life. Thus, even though they don't "live in the trees" or want to do so, it is valuable to recognize it instinctively, realize people
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Take your bullshit somewhere else. Kids have always been shitheads and parents are much more involved with them today. You can't compare your mythical yesterday that never existed.
Re:Let me fix this (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, a bigger problem are the media. Not the "liberal" media, but media of all political views that talks about mass shootings non-stop, publishes the faces and names of the criminals responsible for weeks afterwards. If it bleeds, it leads. I get that that's their bread and butter, but publicizing those kinds of heinous crimes constantly glorifies them and breeds copycats.
What's the answer? We can't legally restrict the press, nor should we. But perhaps if we choose not to watch segments on those crimes nor read about them online, the ad revenue from glorifying those heinous acts will decrease and the media won't have an incentive to do so.
This is one part of the equation. The other is over-medication of children in the US, the fact that bullying has become easier online, and yes, the lack of GOOD (i.e. not just pill-pushing) mental health treatment options at a reasonable cost.
Re: (Score:3)
What's wrong with "common sense regulation" on the press? Seems to be in vogue for the 2nd amendment, why shouldn't we try it for the first?
Sorry, I injected some logic into your thread. Please go back to arguing over scapegoats again.
It's pretty clear to me that the grandfather poster was both being sarcastic and pointing out that any arguments used for denying second amendment civil rights can be used to deny all the others, too.
"That's different!" doesn't cut it - because it's not.
Re: (Score:2)
The 17th amendment was repealed. So can the 2nd amendment.
But those who are, and who are attempting to expand, infingement of 2ndA Rights aren't trying to "repeal" it (FYI: Amendments are not "repealed" as in removed, another Amendment is passed to nullify or alter it) they are attempting to *bypass* the Constitutional processes set in place because they know the majority of Americans would not vote to pass an Amendment that eliminated or severely restricted or altered 2ndA individual rights to firearms.
If you can bypass or end-run one civil right, you can do the
Re: (Score:2)
The second amendment (and many of the others) has already been adapted counter to its wording to adjust it to fit modern situations. This is really something the Federal government should have no say on, as the clear wording of the 2nd amendment says. (Nowhere does it say that the federal government has anything to do with "a well regulated militia", and originally it didn't.) This is something that should be handled by the states, or better by the cities and counties. There are areas where a gun is a u
Re: (Score:2)
There are areas where a gun is a useful tool...but it's not inside the cities.
I disagree. Cities pose far more risk to personal safety from others than outside cities where there are fewer people and fewer criminals.
"When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would d
Re: (Score:2)
- Matthew 26:52
https://www.npr.org/2012/04/16/150728003/bigger-taller-stronger-guns-change-what-you-see
Re: (Score:2)
36 [Jesus] said to [the disciples], "But now the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag; and the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one."
Luke 22:36
Strat
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Let me fix this (Score:4, Interesting)
In much of Europe, with few exceptions newspapers typically won't print the names of criminals (whether just accused or actually convicted), but only refer to them by their initials -- less "glory" to go around while they still report what happened. In many cases because they are required to, but because naming & shaming is against their code of conduct.
(Added benefit is that someone who does get convicted and served their time, won't be instantly unhirable in perpetuity, giving them a chance to make an honest living)
Even in the US, most papers have policies of not printing the names of victims involved in sex crimes -- would it be that much of a stretch to do the same to perpetrators of mass shootings and such? Witholding their name denies them a huge chunk of the 'recognition' the so often seem to yearn for, and it's not not knowing the name of some random criminal is going to have a big impact on the average person's day to day life.
Re: (Score:2)
but media of all political views that talks about mass shootings non-stop
We used to have that problem in Australia. Then we tackled the root issue and stopped mass shootings. Funny enough it stopped being a media sensation after that.
Re: (Score:1)
I graduated in 91 and it was the same then, too. Kids brought guns to school to shoot trap in gym class, showed off their butterfly knives at recess and nobody got hurt. I mean there were some righteous beat downs but they were always one on one and the fight stopped when someone quit or got knocked out.
Not sure when the gun safe trend started either. Nobody ever locked them up at home, or if they did the key was always on the top of the cabinet and ammo in the drawer at the bottom.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States#1930s
Huh lots of school shootings in the 1970s.
So much for your theory.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There were at least 30 school shootings in the US in the 1970s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
By the way, do you know which states have the most school shootings? Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, a
Re: (Score:2)
You're using absolute numbers instead of number of school shootings per 100,000 people. Oklahoma has 1700 schools, but California has over 12,000 just in K-12.
The Heller decision wasn't until 2008. You should take a look at this thorough study of the impact of that decision. The raw data is included in case you want to do an extensive comparison to some random Slate
Re: (Score:2)
You didn't even read his post, you fucking shitstain cuck.
And as for your firearm deaths per 100,000, since we're talking about criminal gun violence here, you might want to look at the chart of murder's by gun per 100,000 on Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] that doesn't include accidents or suicides. According to that list the top five states with the least numbers are Vermont (Grade: F), New Hampshire (Grade: D-), Hawaii (Grade: B+) , North Dakota (Grade: F) and Iowa (Grade: C-).
Re: (Score:2)
Should we send our kids to a state run boarding school where they can be properly indoctrinated?
Re: (Score:2)
Social media is ANTI-social (Score:1)
It's not time to stop being social but tis long past time to stop using "social media". You can be social without Facebook harvesting everfuckingthing you say and do and giving it away to companies like this. You can chat directly with your friends via encrypted IM. You can exchange pictures, same.
Stop putting mega data harvesters in the middle of everything. Eschew Google, esp Docs. Eschew Facebook and Instagram. Bring the internet back to its peer to peer distributed concept.
Social media is antisocia
Re: (Score:2)
This is a hell of a lot of trouble (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We already have mandatory background checks, many states have waiting periods, and there's an abundance of "and the like".
I conclude that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
Re:This is a hell of a lot of trouble (Score:5, Funny)
A friend of a friend just the other day walked in to buy a pistol and managed to walk out with an AR-15 because he got caught up in how cool it looked. Make him wait 3 days and he'd have come to his senses and just bought the pistol he came in for.
I'm sorry your "friend" blew that money that you needed for groceries, but it's amazing that you desire for a federal law to keep your impulse shopping under control! You try to make it sound like buying a semi-automatic rifle, rather than a semi-automatic pistol, is a bad thing. Get over your buyer's remorse, enjoy your AR-15, and next time you can get another Glock. If your wife will let you go there unchaperoned again.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
We abandoned common sense, the very second we treated social media as true and factual. Social media is meant to be a social playground of fun and fantasy, not real world. It corruptly got turned into real world to ruthlessly exploit the psychology of people, for governments to attack citizens and for an endless flow of advertising bullshit.
Social media should be a game, a complete fantasy, have fun creating what ever identity you like, want to call yourself a space pirate, feel free to do so. Want to self
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Facts discernible from your shitpost: You have never used a firearm.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure glad I don't have any social media accounts (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
So many random services and products now demand an email, cell phone other contact data.
How long before they demand "social media" to stay in contact?
The lack of social media now starting an investigation to find a hidden social media account?
Trying to discover if a US student has another way of communication? An account lacking most account details but a classical music CD collection?
The only way to detect that would be gov backed contractor malware pushed out to all home computers. Just t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Facial recognition back over years of accounts to find patterns still in use?
4 hops of most accounts would map a community. Finding many of the unexpected and random accounts in use?
Creating new random accounts often and never going back for reuse them would not be protected from malware getting into the same home computer network.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The network collects it all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My feelings exactly.
... I was thinking of a line from "Chinatown" [youtu.be].
And yet, though most of us are fairly reasonable, well behaved, and start off with good intentions, it's hard to predict the future
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds more like a prison... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds more like a prison than a rural high school. Is this what we've come to as a country?
I give to you Prison Hill Elementary School [google.com]. Er, excuse me, Mission Hill. But we called it the first thing.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Whenever I see someone talking about AR-15's as "powerful guns", I realize that that person knows nothing about firearms.
My .30-06 is a powerful gun. It'll drop pretty much any North American game animal in one shot. Which is a good thing, since it's a single shot rifle. Likewise .45-70 (replica of a 19th century firearm). Or my shotgun.
My Mini-14 (functionally identical to an AR-15, but NOT an "assault weapon" since it was specifically exempted from being considered
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Go back to high school or college physics.
Power is energy per unit of time. Watts are joules per second.
So an AR-15 with a large mag is a more powerful gun than your 30-06. It can deliver more energy to the target in a shorter time, even if that energy isn't in a single round.
So yeah, it's more "powerful."
In practice, it doesn't usually deliver more than one round to a given target.
Re: (Score:1)
So an 18-wheeler full of bullets is a more powerful gun than anything on the market? After all, it can deliver more energy through bullets to a location than any AR-15 or 30-06.
Not to mention that "over time" for semi-automatics is a stupid idea. Is there a standard measure of units for triggers-pulled? Do all people pull triggers at the same rate? No? Pretty shitty science there, buddy.
No one using the term "powerful" in gun legislation ever refers to the physics term.
Re: (Score:2)
Irrational Fear - Think clearly about the kids (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a school where they should be good at math. The risks to small children are childhood leukemia and traffic accidents. As they get older its meningitis, traffic accidents and suicide. How about we spend 1/10 of the money we spend on Hollywood threats on real threats to my kids?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My kids' school has a locked front door and a fence around the school yard.
My wife's school is a building. You can walk in and out of it as you please. The fact you need more than that in the USA is troubling.
Re: (Score:2)
They can hire ... (Score:2)
... Cambridge Analytica.
Some badly needed perspective (Score:5, Insightful)
Where do school shootings rank? There have been about 250 deaths in school shootings over 18 years [washingtonpost.com], or about 14 per year.(and K-12, not just ages 15-19). Since there are approximately 51 million K-12 students in the U.S., a student's chances of being killed in a non-gang, non-suicide school shooting in any given year are about 1 in 3.6 million. You are roughly 3x more likely to be struck by lightning (1 in 1.08 million).
Like airliner crashes, school shootings are one of these extremely rare, statistically insignificant events whose emotional impact creates a large amount of social interest. This causes a disproportionate amount of press coverage, leading people to wildly overestimate the actual danger. If you really want to save high schoolers' lives, teach them to: drive safely and buckle their seat belts, not to abuse drugs, seek counseling for depression, stay out of gangs, use sunscreen, eat healthy and exercise, get the flu shot, don't smoke, don't eat too many sweets, and avoid teen pregnancy. Each of these will save many more lives than all the hand-wringing over school shootings, some (like suicide-prevention) around a hundred times more.
Re: (Score:2)
My kingdom for a mod up to the parent.
why this doesn't work (Score:3)
ID Required? (Score:2)
So, we are now going to require ID for this, but not to vote, right? Got it.
it's too late folks (Score:2)
The book 1984 (Score:1)
Late, however it's almost here. Complete with a ministry of truth that people believe and is the lying news media.
Far cry from when I was growing up. There was no police presence at the school. No panic button. Other than an occasional theft or assault they weren't needed. As a kid I also had guns in my bedroom. One of the was a high powered rifle. We learned marksmanship as kids. All of us did. We also learned respect. We had adults that for the most part told us the truth.
Now we have political correctness
Re: (Score:2)
Everything was better back then.
That has been true since Aristotle.
Or not. I think we have a tendency to look at the past through rose-colored glasses.
Domestic violence was higher, but we didn't talk about it.
Drunk driving was higher, but we didn't talk about it.
There were fewer school shootings, but far from zero: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
There were less opportunities for women or minorities.
All in all, while there have been many changes in society that might not seem positive, there have also been