Now compare to the narrative clip.
"...Schools across the nation are slowly adopting them as well, despite the Northside district quietly deciding last month to discontinue RFID chips on the grounds that they were ineffective."
Begs the questions as to whether they will re-instate the program when the efficiencies are achieved and boot the student back out again.
NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell has backed the right of schools to use fingerprint scanners to track whether kids are skipping class.
"Several public schools are using hi-tech scanners to record when students enter and leave school across the state.
"I think that's a good thing because it reflects our policy of 'local schools, local decisions', which enables schools to make decisions that meet the needs of their communities," Mr O'Farrell told reporters.
Asked whether he had any privacy concerns, the premier said the decision to use the technology was ultimately a matter for individual schools.
"If school communities want to make decisions, whether about the opening hours of schools or whether about these sorts of issues, I'm happy to back them," Mr O'Farrell said.
Civil Liberties Australia have concerns over fingerprint scanning students.
"We support proper use of new technology, but this development has inherent dangers which should be evaluated by schools, their governing bodies and parents," Civil Liberties Australia CEO Bill Rowlings said.
"Schools and education authorities must put robust rules in place for how technology is used and administered, and the data safeguarded.
"A scan on arrival just tells you who passed through the school gates on the way in.
"The only way to ensure a child is at school all day is to fingerprint the student every half hour.
"So pretty soon children will be scanned into every classroom, every separate facility within the school grounds.
"If that is done, suddenly schools will become mini-surveillance states.""
Read about the one million students biometric-fied in the UK here. An estimated 31 per cent of schools did not consult parents before using the biometric technology.
"...I definitely see a revolution in how some people will work..."
Here are the ten core questions I asked of Mark today:
1. Mark, I have you down in my G+ circles as a colleague. I note you have 290 followers. How have you managed to keep such a quiet profile amidst your incredible achievements?
2. You claim not to be a #glassexplorer or at least not part of that online community. What do you call your developments then with #glass or at least with the wider sub-sets of alternative providers?
3. I met with you at ISMAR13 in Adelaide, South Australia. Shortly after that event another occurred in the same university with Professor Andrew Goldsmith, Cybercrimes. What do you see as the nexus between augmented reality (AR) and that of unmanned aerial systems? (UAS)
4. Christchurch is a lovely part of the world. Given you've just returned from Israel what do you consider to be the hotbeds of technology development in the world at present?
5. What does the term privacy mean to you?
6. In a world of big data, open data and the ripples still subsiding from the NSA and Snowden case what do you see as the greatest challenge for those who choose to route their quantified selves through servers in other countries (the cloud)? Is wearable technology responsible in some way for a shift in humanity?
7. The #glassroom - tell us who takes your C22: The Glass Class: Designing Wearable Interfaces and why ?
8. I take it your familiar with +Thad Starner - it appears 'empathetic' appears in both of your current discourses - can you tell us more about what you mean by using augmented reality to create empathetic experiences?
9. Is artificial intelligence (AI) set to leapfrog wearables as the revolution or do we have to wait and see #glass sweep across Australasia first?
10. Will #glass cause revolt, upturn apple-carts, challenge stereotypes, ubiquitously slip amongst the tools of the K-2 educator? What the key challenges that we face as humanity with #glass or is this set to be a US based phenomena only?
The My Real Baby "toy"
The My Real Baby "innards".
WARNING! Viewers may be deeply disturbed by the following footage.
The desensitization/normalization process- how it happens. Compare the reactions of the dog and the baby...
"Meet the offspring of iRobot, and Transformers creator Hasbro. No, really. Back in 2000, the two companies teamed up on a project to create a baby doll called "My Real Baby" that had emotionally expressive animatronic facial expressions.
One look at this pic could explain why the project was later discontinued."
It is few times I have been surprised by how fast technology moves... one of these surprises has come in the early childhood sector...
When I wrote the Muffin Man post reflecting back to a time in 2005 for the Veillance.Me conference I program chaired at the University of Toronto (2013), little did I know that a few years on, one of the superloopers I personally met at my first child care exposure as a parent, would be talking about kinderloop... interesting name, I must say... I wonder what the 'loop' bit means... maybe something akin to 'replay'... or how the world goes round and round...
We've all become accustomed to hearing about NannyCams and even crib webcams in hospitals. A great way for family to share in the experience, especially if extended families can't be there to share in the moment... I imagine a joyous experience esp for grandparents who are immobile or live overseas.
If you study the image above, you will see the camera less than a metre directly over the baby's head.
Each unto their own... but when I had my kids, one of the things I enjoyed most was not having technology invade my space. I did use my mobile phone but that too sparingly. I tried to appreciate the feeling and smell of a new baby.
The above image brings a new meaning to cradle-to-grave surveillance. Mind you I can also see the benefits. One couple I know had to use Skype to film the baby's birth given the husband and wife had been separated by none other than a VISA issue!
And now we are even proposing secure video streaming for peace of mind? Why? Because it is easier than just photographing the good bits and make journaling about the child easier?
Here's what I've started to ponder of late...
- Do parents leave their kids at a child care centre only to look up what their kid is doing many times a day?
- What happens to the moments where the kid is caught doing something either embarrassing, compromising (because kids should be allowed to be carefree) or just plain wrong?
- Deletion is always more difficult than recording. Carers might always find it more convenient for recording to be continuous because it saves time in compilation but the reality is having a child care worker vet 10 hours of footage a day is not cost-effective.
- Compliance handling and accreditation processes are demanding proof of policies put into practice- might they be demanding realtime childcare footage in the not too distant future?
- What about when gathered evidence is requested and parents decide to subpoena the child care for "recordings" taken to replay the playground incident where little Jack or Jill broke their arm or leg or were bitten by another child? Might this cause controversy or animosity between children or parents?
- Might parents feel pressured to consent on behalf of their child to filming? How does the Centre delete another child from the "scene"?
Just a few days ago, an academic I know even shared with me the possibility of remotely supervising an examination using a web cam. Each unto their own I guess... but who is really thinking all this through? No one seems to be asking permission for these practices? Most people claim it is now a part of everyday life? Well, is it?
Are we playing into the hands of the Googles of this world when we start to strap recording devices ONTO people! Next the baby will be wearing the camera, and it won't be long before the camera will sit in the translucent layer of the skin, inside all of us. That's right, the future might well be a PersonView on Google Earth, and that person might happen to be your baby! Why pay for the security when everyone is touting the benefits of transparency?
If we cannot see this "transformation" or better still "metamorphosis" occurring in our world, then we are probably being blinded by the tech hype.
I am not advocating for zero tolerance of images or video or audio in child care centres, but we need to deeply deeply consider the implications of doing so. What is our intent? To inform parents? To help the child develop? To track milestones? Does video really do that? Perhaps very short clips achieve this aim but I'd be wary of any system that wants to setup a sophisticated local area network of CCTVs, just to offer a parent transparency.
In 1997, a colleague of mine at Nortel had begun her daughter's web site 6 months BEFORE her birth into the world. Beyond the fact that we were both Star Trek fans, I wondered how a child who had her life documented online even before her entry into the world might feel some 15 years down the track. Likely "very" normal if social media and electronic exhibitionism is anything to go by these days!
But what are the tradeoffs?
We can argue sousveillance vs surveillance BUT how long will it take to become uberveillance?
Has anyone bothered to read the Surveillance Devices Act of Australia? Or are those principles and laws to be abandoned?
Yesterday, Dr Albrecht appeared on George Noury's Coast to Coast program (see technology update here) and discussed the 'I want my iPad' phenomenon in toddlers. Here is another video she pointed to:
And another... She maintained that she would generally NOT wish for listeners to view these kinds of clips online but in this instance, it was the only way to raise awareness to an epidemic occurring in our society.
This phenomenon is a known phenomenon. See more. So what are we doing about it? Gathering the evidence and putting our kids online so that our Youtube hits increase ten-thousand fold?
I feel so sick in linking these videos of these kids up online in the uberveillance.com environment. But I am calling people out there to wake up to the what is occurring in most of our households.
What is the answer?
Better friends and extended support groups?
Zero tolerance on screen time for toddlers?
Schools saying 'no' to technology in the classroom?
Are we adding fuel to the fire?
What is blatantly obvious to me is that we need more research into SOLUTIONS. We can't have kids crying like this and profusely suffering anguish, and we cannot have parents surviving this kind of daily misery... and most of all we need to feedback these problems to developers... we cannot point the finger at Apple or Google alone... we need to point the finger at ourselves... society... yes 'we' perpetuate the problem. We can plead ignorance but we all know someone going through this- a child, a grandchild, a niece or nephew, a friend or a neighbour... in fact, we might be even going through it ourselves!
Where have we gone wrong?
Beyond that obvious point?
Why are the parents of these poor children putting their kids up online for everyone to comment on? Are they deep down seeking help? Do they want their prayers answered? Do they want to make their kids well?
We cannot claim ALL of these children appearing in thousands of uploads (just search online) are due to autism or some other mental illness or developmental problems! And if we claim that, are computers somehow contributing to these developmental issues?
The other thing that becomes apparent to me is the use of the mobile phone video camera as a weapon. Have we become so heartless, that we begin now to film these traumatic events and post them online for others to comment on. You were right on the mark Dr Albrecht. This is evil. Instead of going over and gently comforting our kids to return to their senses, we take out the camera to record the reality-tv... and so our children are now a part of a global theatre!
In previous posts, I have discussed the importance of NOT capturing these moments so we can allow our children to grow and develop, and not be held accountable for things they did as children. MG Michael and I have discussed the limits of watching. With Christine Perakslis we have also written an extensive book chapter on veillance (in press)!
Can you imagine being one of the kids in this video? How would that make you feel 5 years on, 10 years on, 20 years on, or when you first discovered it was online for all to see on Youtube? Would you be typecast for life?
Everyone, we have to wake up! I am not being alarmist... if your heart doesn't feel sad over these videos then I personally don't know what to say...
And then we are contemplating taking Glass into the classroom? Right-o! Don't you think these tantrums don't happen at school? Will our children become "objects" not just "subjects" in the classroom? Let us tread VERY carefully. We can't use our kids as experiments. We need to think ethics.
And it is not just children that react this way... no... no... adults too, have this reaction but just convey it in a different way. See my article on high-tech lust!
We need to take the negative social implications of computers more seriously. Yes, some guys out there claim that computers can help kids... all my fellow collaborators and I are claiming is that the opposite is also true. Let's not be so narrowsighted. This is our future we are talking about!
"...Teachers and parents have voiced their concerns about privacy issue with Google Glass on campus. We need to have an open conversation, we need transparency in the intended use of Google Glass in educational spaces."