<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_21_2010213</id>
	<title>PA School Defends Web-Cam Spying As Security Measure, Denies Misuse</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1266740820000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>tekgoblin writes <i>"The Lower Merion School District of Pennsylvania was recently <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/10/02/18/1846222/PA-School-Spied-On-Students-Via-School-Issued-Laptop-Webcams">accused of privacy invasion</a>. Now the school has released an official response to the allegations. According to the school, the security feature was <a href="http://www.tekgoblin.com/2020/news/lmsd-response-to-webcam-privacy-allegation/">installed in the laptops as an anti-theft device</a> and was not intended to invade privacy. The software that was installed would take a photo of the person using the laptop after it was stolen to give to the authorities. Now this may be what it was intended for, but it seems that someone didn't get the memo."</i>
The district's claim that it "has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever" doesn't square with the allegations which set off this whole storm. And if there was nothing wrong with it, why does the school say it won't start using the snooping feature again without "express written notification to all students and families"?</htmltext>
<tokenext>tekgoblin writes " The Lower Merion School District of Pennsylvania was recently accused of privacy invasion .
Now the school has released an official response to the allegations .
According to the school , the security feature was installed in the laptops as an anti-theft device and was not intended to invade privacy .
The software that was installed would take a photo of the person using the laptop after it was stolen to give to the authorities .
Now this may be what it was intended for , but it seems that someone did n't get the memo .
" The district 's claim that it " has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever " does n't square with the allegations which set off this whole storm .
And if there was nothing wrong with it , why does the school say it wo n't start using the snooping feature again without " express written notification to all students and families " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tekgoblin writes "The Lower Merion School District of Pennsylvania was recently accused of privacy invasion.
Now the school has released an official response to the allegations.
According to the school, the security feature was installed in the laptops as an anti-theft device and was not intended to invade privacy.
The software that was installed would take a photo of the person using the laptop after it was stolen to give to the authorities.
Now this may be what it was intended for, but it seems that someone didn't get the memo.
"
The district's claim that it "has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever" doesn't square with the allegations which set off this whole storm.
And if there was nothing wrong with it, why does the school say it won't start using the snooping feature again without "express written notification to all students and families"?</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222648</id>
	<title>The school's admins should meet Chatroulette :)</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1266751320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd like to see a mashup of the blog I ran into earlier today with pairs of chatroulette web captures, but with the "you" picture in each case being the shocked (simply shocked!) face of some school official from this place.</p><p>I'm not suggesting that the students should all sit at home masturbating in leopard costumes and makeup while butt-dialing the school to report that their laptops have been stolen. There are many other fruitful scenarios that I am also not suggesting.</p><p>timothy</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd like to see a mashup of the blog I ran into earlier today with pairs of chatroulette web captures , but with the " you " picture in each case being the shocked ( simply shocked !
) face of some school official from this place.I 'm not suggesting that the students should all sit at home masturbating in leopard costumes and makeup while butt-dialing the school to report that their laptops have been stolen .
There are many other fruitful scenarios that I am also not suggesting.timothy</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd like to see a mashup of the blog I ran into earlier today with pairs of chatroulette web captures, but with the "you" picture in each case being the shocked (simply shocked!
) face of some school official from this place.I'm not suggesting that the students should all sit at home masturbating in leopard costumes and makeup while butt-dialing the school to report that their laptops have been stolen.
There are many other fruitful scenarios that I am also not suggesting.timothy</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224416</id>
	<title>Re:What really happened, my theory</title>
	<author>gujo-odori</author>
	<datestamp>1266762960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh, know, that's not what happened. There's a great deal of information about this incident on the web, I'll let you google it for yourself.</p><p>The students are allowed to take the laptops home and typically do so. One of the major goals of the program was to make sure that those who could not afford home computers would have access to one for doing homework blah blah blah.</p><p>What was apparently going on is the school was using the remote spy software they loaded onto the computers to spy on kids they thought (whether rightly or wrongly) were 'bad apples" to try and catch them doing something. The vice principal saw him taking what was believed to be some kind of pill and saved the photo. He says it was a Mike N Ike candy. Maybe, maybe not. I don't think anyone could discern that on something with the resolution of a web cam. In any case, even if he was popping pills, they seem to have opened a legal can of worms, and it's pretty unlikely that the photo would be admissible as evidence.</p><p>At least 8 students were spied on and are suing the district as students Doe 1-8.</p><p>Even if we assume for the sake of argument that this kid is in fact a bad apple and does use and/or deal drugs, etc., what the school did is far worse than what he may or may not have done. There's a reason the Constitution places such tight controls on government power: the authors knew first hand what happens when you don't. Sadly, a general lack of vigilance has resulted in the government running roughshod over the Constitution on a pretty regular basis and usually getting away with it.</p><p>I'm nearing 50; those of you who are now in your twenties or in high school may be looking at how much freedom we have lost in this country since you were in primary school, but let me tell you, it's far worse than you think. The amount of freedom we've lost since \_I\_ was in primary school is astonishing, and we're get it from both sides. On one hand we have neocons who think an all-powerful central government is the way to promote security and allegedly conservative values, and on the other hand we have the neolibs/progressives, who are really just socialists and communists who don't call themselves that.</p><p>The authors of the Constitution and leaders of the US revolution were flaming liberals of their day, but they were liberals in the classical sense, far different from most of those who call themselves liberals today. John Kennedy, who remains the darling of the left, has far more in common with true conservatives today than he does with those who call themselves liberals today.</p><p>What we need to get back to is a highly reigned-in federal government, because any powers not explicitly assigned to it are reserved for the states, and highly reigned in state governments because any powers not explicitly assigned to them are reserved for the people, who are the source and seat of sovereignty. It's been a long time since we really had a government that was of, by, and for the people.</p><p>I'm not a libertarian and have never before voted libertarian, but I will be in the next elections.  Both the Republicans and the Democrats need to be punished. The Libertarian party looks like a good club with which to beat them both.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , know , that 's not what happened .
There 's a great deal of information about this incident on the web , I 'll let you google it for yourself.The students are allowed to take the laptops home and typically do so .
One of the major goals of the program was to make sure that those who could not afford home computers would have access to one for doing homework blah blah blah.What was apparently going on is the school was using the remote spy software they loaded onto the computers to spy on kids they thought ( whether rightly or wrongly ) were 'bad apples " to try and catch them doing something .
The vice principal saw him taking what was believed to be some kind of pill and saved the photo .
He says it was a Mike N Ike candy .
Maybe , maybe not .
I do n't think anyone could discern that on something with the resolution of a web cam .
In any case , even if he was popping pills , they seem to have opened a legal can of worms , and it 's pretty unlikely that the photo would be admissible as evidence.At least 8 students were spied on and are suing the district as students Doe 1-8.Even if we assume for the sake of argument that this kid is in fact a bad apple and does use and/or deal drugs , etc. , what the school did is far worse than what he may or may not have done .
There 's a reason the Constitution places such tight controls on government power : the authors knew first hand what happens when you do n't .
Sadly , a general lack of vigilance has resulted in the government running roughshod over the Constitution on a pretty regular basis and usually getting away with it.I 'm nearing 50 ; those of you who are now in your twenties or in high school may be looking at how much freedom we have lost in this country since you were in primary school , but let me tell you , it 's far worse than you think .
The amount of freedom we 've lost since \ _I \ _ was in primary school is astonishing , and we 're get it from both sides .
On one hand we have neocons who think an all-powerful central government is the way to promote security and allegedly conservative values , and on the other hand we have the neolibs/progressives , who are really just socialists and communists who do n't call themselves that.The authors of the Constitution and leaders of the US revolution were flaming liberals of their day , but they were liberals in the classical sense , far different from most of those who call themselves liberals today .
John Kennedy , who remains the darling of the left , has far more in common with true conservatives today than he does with those who call themselves liberals today.What we need to get back to is a highly reigned-in federal government , because any powers not explicitly assigned to it are reserved for the states , and highly reigned in state governments because any powers not explicitly assigned to them are reserved for the people , who are the source and seat of sovereignty .
It 's been a long time since we really had a government that was of , by , and for the people.I 'm not a libertarian and have never before voted libertarian , but I will be in the next elections .
Both the Republicans and the Democrats need to be punished .
The Libertarian party looks like a good club with which to beat them both .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, know, that's not what happened.
There's a great deal of information about this incident on the web, I'll let you google it for yourself.The students are allowed to take the laptops home and typically do so.
One of the major goals of the program was to make sure that those who could not afford home computers would have access to one for doing homework blah blah blah.What was apparently going on is the school was using the remote spy software they loaded onto the computers to spy on kids they thought (whether rightly or wrongly) were 'bad apples" to try and catch them doing something.
The vice principal saw him taking what was believed to be some kind of pill and saved the photo.
He says it was a Mike N Ike candy.
Maybe, maybe not.
I don't think anyone could discern that on something with the resolution of a web cam.
In any case, even if he was popping pills, they seem to have opened a legal can of worms, and it's pretty unlikely that the photo would be admissible as evidence.At least 8 students were spied on and are suing the district as students Doe 1-8.Even if we assume for the sake of argument that this kid is in fact a bad apple and does use and/or deal drugs, etc., what the school did is far worse than what he may or may not have done.
There's a reason the Constitution places such tight controls on government power: the authors knew first hand what happens when you don't.
Sadly, a general lack of vigilance has resulted in the government running roughshod over the Constitution on a pretty regular basis and usually getting away with it.I'm nearing 50; those of you who are now in your twenties or in high school may be looking at how much freedom we have lost in this country since you were in primary school, but let me tell you, it's far worse than you think.
The amount of freedom we've lost since \_I\_ was in primary school is astonishing, and we're get it from both sides.
On one hand we have neocons who think an all-powerful central government is the way to promote security and allegedly conservative values, and on the other hand we have the neolibs/progressives, who are really just socialists and communists who don't call themselves that.The authors of the Constitution and leaders of the US revolution were flaming liberals of their day, but they were liberals in the classical sense, far different from most of those who call themselves liberals today.
John Kennedy, who remains the darling of the left, has far more in common with true conservatives today than he does with those who call themselves liberals today.What we need to get back to is a highly reigned-in federal government, because any powers not explicitly assigned to it are reserved for the states, and highly reigned in state governments because any powers not explicitly assigned to them are reserved for the people, who are the source and seat of sovereignty.
It's been a long time since we really had a government that was of, by, and for the people.I'm not a libertarian and have never before voted libertarian, but I will be in the next elections.
Both the Republicans and the Democrats need to be punished.
The Libertarian party looks like a good club with which to beat them both.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31227258</id>
	<title>Re:Enough sensationalism already.</title>
	<author>i8blackburn</author>
	<datestamp>1266835500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would you take a photo of yourself eating sweets and send it to your buddies? It's not exactly the most exciting picture you will ever receive is it?!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would you take a photo of yourself eating sweets and send it to your buddies ?
It 's not exactly the most exciting picture you will ever receive is it ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would you take a photo of yourself eating sweets and send it to your buddies?
It's not exactly the most exciting picture you will ever receive is it?!
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221594</id>
	<title>Chris Hansen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266744900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why don't you take a seat over there?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't you take a seat over there ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't you take a seat over there?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31227180</id>
	<title>This rises a few important questions for me ...</title>
	<author>freaker\_TuC</author>
	<datestamp>1266834240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><ul> <li>Why are they using surveillance software as theft locator?</li><li>The school is talking open on <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vza\_bMuy42M" title="youtube.com">youtube</a> [youtube.com] about the great system where they can interact with the class; while it should be a stolen-goods locator.</li><li>I used to have software on my laptop which uploaded an image from the webcam every time the laptop was opened and saved it on the clouds with a private key. The LED of the camera drove me crazy thinking the laptop was infected with a trojan months after I installed the tool because every few times the light goes on and off.</li><li>That software was not even close to remote access of my machine; or I'd never had installed it in the first place.</li><li>So, why are the students confronted with Remote Control software while saying it's only being used for theft prevention?</li><li>Blackbox has a system called "Classnet" which supports hardware remote control of a PC; which is a nice tool to use. Students can see their unit has been watched or taken over. With IP Remote Control software students cannot see this anymore; so, is it still such a fair system towards both parties?</li></ul><p>My 2 cents<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. This school wanted more control over their students than they should have. If they are needing to give the example for the future; consider me very scared of what comes out of this kind of mini-terror towards our own citizens all over the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are they using surveillance software as theft locator ? The school is talking open on youtube [ youtube.com ] about the great system where they can interact with the class ; while it should be a stolen-goods locator.I used to have software on my laptop which uploaded an image from the webcam every time the laptop was opened and saved it on the clouds with a private key .
The LED of the camera drove me crazy thinking the laptop was infected with a trojan months after I installed the tool because every few times the light goes on and off.That software was not even close to remote access of my machine ; or I 'd never had installed it in the first place.So , why are the students confronted with Remote Control software while saying it 's only being used for theft prevention ? Blackbox has a system called " Classnet " which supports hardware remote control of a PC ; which is a nice tool to use .
Students can see their unit has been watched or taken over .
With IP Remote Control software students can not see this anymore ; so , is it still such a fair system towards both parties ? My 2 cents .. This school wanted more control over their students than they should have .
If they are needing to give the example for the future ; consider me very scared of what comes out of this kind of mini-terror towards our own citizens all over the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Why are they using surveillance software as theft locator?The school is talking open on youtube [youtube.com] about the great system where they can interact with the class; while it should be a stolen-goods locator.I used to have software on my laptop which uploaded an image from the webcam every time the laptop was opened and saved it on the clouds with a private key.
The LED of the camera drove me crazy thinking the laptop was infected with a trojan months after I installed the tool because every few times the light goes on and off.That software was not even close to remote access of my machine; or I'd never had installed it in the first place.So, why are the students confronted with Remote Control software while saying it's only being used for theft prevention?Blackbox has a system called "Classnet" which supports hardware remote control of a PC; which is a nice tool to use.
Students can see their unit has been watched or taken over.
With IP Remote Control software students cannot see this anymore; so, is it still such a fair system towards both parties?My 2 cents .. This school wanted more control over their students than they should have.
If they are needing to give the example for the future; consider me very scared of what comes out of this kind of mini-terror towards our own citizens all over the world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221926</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>cduffy</author>
	<datestamp>1266747180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because <a href="http://www.kgw.com/news/national/84839287.html" title="kgw.com">media reports are directly contrary to that speculation?</a> [kgw.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because media reports are directly contrary to that speculation ?
[ kgw.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because media reports are directly contrary to that speculation?
[kgw.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222178</id>
	<title>Re:One possibility</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266748860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Keep in mind that the school is still probably legally bound from discussing the specifics due to their privacy obligations to the student.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Keep in mind that the school is still probably legally bound from discussing the specifics due to their privacy obligations to the student .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Keep in mind that the school is still probably legally bound from discussing the specifics due to their privacy obligations to the student.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222356</id>
	<title>Re:Enough sensationalism already.</title>
	<author>Fastolfe</author>
	<datestamp>1266749760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If the student took the picture an emailed it to his friends we would not have this case.</p></div><p>Why not?  Someone's account of the event is wrong, right?  Maybe the student didn't want to admit that he took the snapshot himself?  Maybe he was stoned and didn't remember it?  Maybe he doesn't know how to use some piece of webcam software he installed, and he had it take a snapshot inadvertently.  So he tells his parents, "I didn't take that snapshot, honest!"  What does a rationally-minded parent do next?  Look for alternate explanations.  The image had to get there somehow.  Maybe the school has a way to remotely take snapshots?  Let's ask them.  The rest is history.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The administration would say "we received this information from an email from another student/teacher/parent."</p></div><p>The school came out and said they could not comment at all on this case.  So that could be why you haven't heard them say this.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>but it looks like the safeguards were not followed</p></div><p>Allegedly.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>This isn't sensationalism, this is a real problem.</p></div><p>This is a real problem only if you accept the student's account over the school's, and I'm not prepared to do that yet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the student took the picture an emailed it to his friends we would not have this case.Why not ?
Someone 's account of the event is wrong , right ?
Maybe the student did n't want to admit that he took the snapshot himself ?
Maybe he was stoned and did n't remember it ?
Maybe he does n't know how to use some piece of webcam software he installed , and he had it take a snapshot inadvertently .
So he tells his parents , " I did n't take that snapshot , honest !
" What does a rationally-minded parent do next ?
Look for alternate explanations .
The image had to get there somehow .
Maybe the school has a way to remotely take snapshots ?
Let 's ask them .
The rest is history.The administration would say " we received this information from an email from another student/teacher/parent .
" The school came out and said they could not comment at all on this case .
So that could be why you have n't heard them say this.but it looks like the safeguards were not followedAllegedly.This is n't sensationalism , this is a real problem.This is a real problem only if you accept the student 's account over the school 's , and I 'm not prepared to do that yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the student took the picture an emailed it to his friends we would not have this case.Why not?
Someone's account of the event is wrong, right?
Maybe the student didn't want to admit that he took the snapshot himself?
Maybe he was stoned and didn't remember it?
Maybe he doesn't know how to use some piece of webcam software he installed, and he had it take a snapshot inadvertently.
So he tells his parents, "I didn't take that snapshot, honest!
"  What does a rationally-minded parent do next?
Look for alternate explanations.
The image had to get there somehow.
Maybe the school has a way to remotely take snapshots?
Let's ask them.
The rest is history.The administration would say "we received this information from an email from another student/teacher/parent.
"The school came out and said they could not comment at all on this case.
So that could be why you haven't heard them say this.but it looks like the safeguards were not followedAllegedly.This isn't sensationalism, this is a real problem.This is a real problem only if you accept the student's account over the school's, and I'm not prepared to do that yet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222388</id>
	<title>Re:Security</title>
	<author>rolfwind</author>
	<datestamp>1266749880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But what about the microphones?  Tape doesn't help so much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But what about the microphones ?
Tape does n't help so much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But what about the microphones?
Tape doesn't help so much.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222692</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>Fastolfe</author>
	<datestamp>1266751560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How would the student know that webcams can be remotely activated?</p></div><p>Maybe he didn't, initially, and after claiming to everyone that he didn't take the picture, someone asked, "Well, is it even <em>possible</em> for the school to take a snapshot without his knowledge?"  And, technically, the answer is yes.  "Well that must be how it happened!!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How would the student know that webcams can be remotely activated ? Maybe he did n't , initially , and after claiming to everyone that he did n't take the picture , someone asked , " Well , is it even possible for the school to take a snapshot without his knowledge ?
" And , technically , the answer is yes .
" Well that must be how it happened ! !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How would the student know that webcams can be remotely activated?Maybe he didn't, initially, and after claiming to everyone that he didn't take the picture, someone asked, "Well, is it even possible for the school to take a snapshot without his knowledge?
"  And, technically, the answer is yes.
"Well that must be how it happened!!
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225018</id>
	<title>And the two people who had access to the function?</title>
	<author>laing</author>
	<datestamp>1266767640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Were the two folks who had the ability to remotely activate the cameras trustworthy, bonded individuals with some kind of background check and security clearance?
People are people and even people with good jobs can do bad things.
If a capability exists to activate a camera on a laptop sitting in a young girl's bedroom, there will be temptation to activate it.  You cannot change human nature.  What you can and should do to prevent such abuses is to never allow such a capability in the first place.  There are many other ways to recover a laptop.  All you would need is for the laptop to "phone home" with the IP address it was assigned (and maybe a traceroute to the destination).  The ISP could then be identified and law enforcement could take action.  There is no justification for having a covert camera on the student laptops.  The commission of one crime (theft) does not justify the commission of other crimes (unauthorized surveillance).  The school is doomed and they are trying to do some damage control while they hurry to the table in an effort to settle this case before it goes to trial.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Were the two folks who had the ability to remotely activate the cameras trustworthy , bonded individuals with some kind of background check and security clearance ?
People are people and even people with good jobs can do bad things .
If a capability exists to activate a camera on a laptop sitting in a young girl 's bedroom , there will be temptation to activate it .
You can not change human nature .
What you can and should do to prevent such abuses is to never allow such a capability in the first place .
There are many other ways to recover a laptop .
All you would need is for the laptop to " phone home " with the IP address it was assigned ( and maybe a traceroute to the destination ) .
The ISP could then be identified and law enforcement could take action .
There is no justification for having a covert camera on the student laptops .
The commission of one crime ( theft ) does not justify the commission of other crimes ( unauthorized surveillance ) .
The school is doomed and they are trying to do some damage control while they hurry to the table in an effort to settle this case before it goes to trial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Were the two folks who had the ability to remotely activate the cameras trustworthy, bonded individuals with some kind of background check and security clearance?
People are people and even people with good jobs can do bad things.
If a capability exists to activate a camera on a laptop sitting in a young girl's bedroom, there will be temptation to activate it.
You cannot change human nature.
What you can and should do to prevent such abuses is to never allow such a capability in the first place.
There are many other ways to recover a laptop.
All you would need is for the laptop to "phone home" with the IP address it was assigned (and maybe a traceroute to the destination).
The ISP could then be identified and law enforcement could take action.
There is no justification for having a covert camera on the student laptops.
The commission of one crime (theft) does not justify the commission of other crimes (unauthorized surveillance).
The school is doomed and they are trying to do some damage control while they hurry to the table in an effort to settle this case before it goes to trial.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221916</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1266747120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is there any info about what kind of "inappropriate behavior" we are talking about? Could it be that said kid was trying to bypass some filter or other on the computer in question, this triggered an alert and the kid got photoed?</p><p>or was it some activity where the computer happened to be running in the background, with the screen (and therefor the camera) facing the activity?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is there any info about what kind of " inappropriate behavior " we are talking about ?
Could it be that said kid was trying to bypass some filter or other on the computer in question , this triggered an alert and the kid got photoed ? or was it some activity where the computer happened to be running in the background , with the screen ( and therefor the camera ) facing the activity ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is there any info about what kind of "inappropriate behavior" we are talking about?
Could it be that said kid was trying to bypass some filter or other on the computer in question, this triggered an alert and the kid got photoed?or was it some activity where the computer happened to be running in the background, with the screen (and therefor the camera) facing the activity?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221650</id>
	<title>Meant to keep the laptops on campus?</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1266745200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I seem to recall reading somewhere that all of the laptops were meant to remain on campus.  I bet the software is designed to snap a photo if it ever comes up with a DHCP IP other than what the campus offers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I seem to recall reading somewhere that all of the laptops were meant to remain on campus .
I bet the software is designed to snap a photo if it ever comes up with a DHCP IP other than what the campus offers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I seem to recall reading somewhere that all of the laptops were meant to remain on campus.
I bet the software is designed to snap a photo if it ever comes up with a DHCP IP other than what the campus offers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221618</id>
	<title>Sounds Half-Assed</title>
	<author>CheshireCatCO</author>
	<datestamp>1266745020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you wanted an anti-theft system, why not <em>buy</em> LoJack?  It has to be at least as reliable as turning on the camera.  Look: in order to catch the thief with a camera, you'd either have to recognize them or the location in which they're sitting.  What are the odds of that working out for you?  (Yes, I know it has happened before.  But out of how many attempts?)</p><p>I'll bet that the district could even have gotten a bulk, educational discount on such software.  They might even have spent less than it would cost to pay a person to troll through the camera images over a few years, even.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you wanted an anti-theft system , why not buy LoJack ?
It has to be at least as reliable as turning on the camera .
Look : in order to catch the thief with a camera , you 'd either have to recognize them or the location in which they 're sitting .
What are the odds of that working out for you ?
( Yes , I know it has happened before .
But out of how many attempts ?
) I 'll bet that the district could even have gotten a bulk , educational discount on such software .
They might even have spent less than it would cost to pay a person to troll through the camera images over a few years , even .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you wanted an anti-theft system, why not buy LoJack?
It has to be at least as reliable as turning on the camera.
Look: in order to catch the thief with a camera, you'd either have to recognize them or the location in which they're sitting.
What are the odds of that working out for you?
(Yes, I know it has happened before.
But out of how many attempts?
)I'll bet that the district could even have gotten a bulk, educational discount on such software.
They might even have spent less than it would cost to pay a person to troll through the camera images over a few years, even.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221906</id>
	<title>Re:Expectation of Privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266747060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is this the same as taking pictures of people in their homes during private moments? Answer: It's not, you're a fucking retard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this the same as taking pictures of people in their homes during private moments ?
Answer : It 's not , you 're a fucking retard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this the same as taking pictures of people in their homes during private moments?
Answer: It's not, you're a fucking retard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221622</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764</id>
	<title>One possibility</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266746040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's one way the school could be telling the truth about this.  They didn't say this explicitly, so it's not clear, but:</p><p>The lawsuit alleges that the school accused the student of inappropriate behavior.  That behavior could have been reporting his laptop as "stolen", then continuing to use it.  The school maintains that they only use the webcams to take a still photo when a laptop has been reported stolen, to aid in recovering it.  If the laptop was reported stolen, the school took a picture, they saw that the student who reported it was the one using it, and they confronted the student with this evidence, that would explain both the lawsuit and the school's position.</p><p>Sort of odd that the school's response wouldn't explain that, if that is indeed what happened.  But people tend to omit important details like that when there's a lawsuit pending, on advice of counsel...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's one way the school could be telling the truth about this .
They did n't say this explicitly , so it 's not clear , but : The lawsuit alleges that the school accused the student of inappropriate behavior .
That behavior could have been reporting his laptop as " stolen " , then continuing to use it .
The school maintains that they only use the webcams to take a still photo when a laptop has been reported stolen , to aid in recovering it .
If the laptop was reported stolen , the school took a picture , they saw that the student who reported it was the one using it , and they confronted the student with this evidence , that would explain both the lawsuit and the school 's position.Sort of odd that the school 's response would n't explain that , if that is indeed what happened .
But people tend to omit important details like that when there 's a lawsuit pending , on advice of counsel.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's one way the school could be telling the truth about this.
They didn't say this explicitly, so it's not clear, but:The lawsuit alleges that the school accused the student of inappropriate behavior.
That behavior could have been reporting his laptop as "stolen", then continuing to use it.
The school maintains that they only use the webcams to take a still photo when a laptop has been reported stolen, to aid in recovering it.
If the laptop was reported stolen, the school took a picture, they saw that the student who reported it was the one using it, and they confronted the student with this evidence, that would explain both the lawsuit and the school's position.Sort of odd that the school's response wouldn't explain that, if that is indeed what happened.
But people tend to omit important details like that when there's a lawsuit pending, on advice of counsel...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223306</id>
	<title>How The School Screwed Up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266755160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><ol> <li>Installed Security Software</li><li> <b>Did Not</b> Inform Parents/Teachers of Ability to Remote Access Webcams</li><li>Remotely Accessed Webcam w/o Court oversight of Investigation</li></ol><p>The last one is why the parents are up in arms. To many folks believe because they have the ability that it gives them not only the right but the responsibility to act as police when the only ones who have the authority to act as police are actually sworn in as Police Officers and we American's feel that because we have the damn ability to act as we want around the damn world, that we have the <b>"God Given Right"</b> to do so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Installed Security Software Did Not Inform Parents/Teachers of Ability to Remote Access WebcamsRemotely Accessed Webcam w/o Court oversight of InvestigationThe last one is why the parents are up in arms .
To many folks believe because they have the ability that it gives them not only the right but the responsibility to act as police when the only ones who have the authority to act as police are actually sworn in as Police Officers and we American 's feel that because we have the damn ability to act as we want around the damn world , that we have the " God Given Right " to do so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Installed Security Software Did Not Inform Parents/Teachers of Ability to Remote Access WebcamsRemotely Accessed Webcam w/o Court oversight of InvestigationThe last one is why the parents are up in arms.
To many folks believe because they have the ability that it gives them not only the right but the responsibility to act as police when the only ones who have the authority to act as police are actually sworn in as Police Officers and we American's feel that because we have the damn ability to act as we want around the damn world, that we have the "God Given Right" to do so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224458</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>rochberg</author>
	<datestamp>1266763140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>there was no evidence of any laptops being stolen therefore the system shouldn't have been turned on to begin with.  The only reason the camera's were turned on would be for misuse.</p></div><p>That's not true, because the school's policies did not require evidence that the laptop was stolen.  For instance, officials were permitted to activate the system "to find missing, lost or stolen computers, which would include a loaner computer taken off campus against regulations."  See <a href="http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/02/20/technology-us-laptops-spying-on-students\_7372630.html" title="forbes.com">here</a> [forbes.com] among other stories.  I've seen multiple stories that indicate the system was activated 42 times, 18 of which <i>did</i> help to recover lost or stolen systems.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>They could get out of this much easier if they simply fired a couple of people and blamed those directly responsible, and their bosses for the policy.</p></div><p>It's a bit more complicated than that.  Whomever you pick to fire, you must make sure that it is justified.  If you fire the official that took the picture, you need to find appropriate grounds to do so.  Otherwise, they could (rightfully) claim that they violated no policy and were being made a scapegoat.  Then you'd be looking at a wrongful termination lawsuit, and possibly paying lost wages.  Similarly, the administrators can argue that the policy was put into place to protect assets owned by the school district.  So if you want to fire someone, you had better be sure that you can justify it.</p><p>One aspect that I haven't seen clarified is whether or not the student was actually disciplined.  If he was just confronted and presented with a warning, he is going to have a much more difficult time proving damages in a court.  If he was suspended without due process and without proof of wrongdoing, then they're screwed.  Either way, though, I would be surprised if this is allowed class action status.</p><p>As much as I value privacy, I think this story has become a bit sensationalized.  Based on the numerous reports I've seen, I believe this is more an example of scope creep than anything nefarious.  Basically, to paraphrase a common aphorism, if I must attribute either malice or incompetence, I go with the latter.  The possibility of theft does provide a legitimate purpose for the ability to remotely activate the web cam.  Where the school screwed up was that they did not have any precise controls over when and how this activation can occur.  My guess (I fully admit I have no proof) is that the camera was activated according to district policy, then the official panicked because they thought they saw something.  To make it worse for the official, the policy probably did not offer any guidance for what to do in that situation.  What if they were trying to locate a stolen laptop and witnessed a rape or murder instead?</p><p>The problem comes down to the possibility of secondary use of technology.  Whenever technology is deployed that has the potential of violating the privacy of others, the policy should <b>explicitly</b> state under what conditions the technology can be used, including a list of the situations that officials are allowed to document based on their observations.  The policy should also default to complete destruction of observed data that does not match the intent of the policy.  Hence, the school district should have made the following policy:</p><ul>
<li>Activation of the remote monitoring system will only be done after informing the student and parents in writing.</li><li>Activation of the remote monitoring system will never occur unless there is documentation indicating a good faith belief that the laptop has been stolen or is missing.</li><li>Data collected during activation will be restricted to the goal of recovering the lost or stolen laptop.  The only exception to this rule would be if an operator, while attempting to recover a lost or stolen laptop, observes behavior that constitutes a felony; in such a case, the data will be handed over to the appropriate authorities.  In all other cases, any data collected during activation will be immediately destroyed.</li></ul><p>But, of course, I'm a researcher that specializes in security.  I have quite a bit more expertise than these school administrators.  And there are too many similar administrators out there that do not have a strong enough background in security and privacy to get these subtleties.  Absent federal legislation governing secondary use of private data, I do not think this will be the last case that we will see like this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>there was no evidence of any laptops being stolen therefore the system should n't have been turned on to begin with .
The only reason the camera 's were turned on would be for misuse.That 's not true , because the school 's policies did not require evidence that the laptop was stolen .
For instance , officials were permitted to activate the system " to find missing , lost or stolen computers , which would include a loaner computer taken off campus against regulations .
" See here [ forbes.com ] among other stories .
I 've seen multiple stories that indicate the system was activated 42 times , 18 of which did help to recover lost or stolen systems.They could get out of this much easier if they simply fired a couple of people and blamed those directly responsible , and their bosses for the policy.It 's a bit more complicated than that .
Whomever you pick to fire , you must make sure that it is justified .
If you fire the official that took the picture , you need to find appropriate grounds to do so .
Otherwise , they could ( rightfully ) claim that they violated no policy and were being made a scapegoat .
Then you 'd be looking at a wrongful termination lawsuit , and possibly paying lost wages .
Similarly , the administrators can argue that the policy was put into place to protect assets owned by the school district .
So if you want to fire someone , you had better be sure that you can justify it.One aspect that I have n't seen clarified is whether or not the student was actually disciplined .
If he was just confronted and presented with a warning , he is going to have a much more difficult time proving damages in a court .
If he was suspended without due process and without proof of wrongdoing , then they 're screwed .
Either way , though , I would be surprised if this is allowed class action status.As much as I value privacy , I think this story has become a bit sensationalized .
Based on the numerous reports I 've seen , I believe this is more an example of scope creep than anything nefarious .
Basically , to paraphrase a common aphorism , if I must attribute either malice or incompetence , I go with the latter .
The possibility of theft does provide a legitimate purpose for the ability to remotely activate the web cam .
Where the school screwed up was that they did not have any precise controls over when and how this activation can occur .
My guess ( I fully admit I have no proof ) is that the camera was activated according to district policy , then the official panicked because they thought they saw something .
To make it worse for the official , the policy probably did not offer any guidance for what to do in that situation .
What if they were trying to locate a stolen laptop and witnessed a rape or murder instead ? The problem comes down to the possibility of secondary use of technology .
Whenever technology is deployed that has the potential of violating the privacy of others , the policy should explicitly state under what conditions the technology can be used , including a list of the situations that officials are allowed to document based on their observations .
The policy should also default to complete destruction of observed data that does not match the intent of the policy .
Hence , the school district should have made the following policy : Activation of the remote monitoring system will only be done after informing the student and parents in writing.Activation of the remote monitoring system will never occur unless there is documentation indicating a good faith belief that the laptop has been stolen or is missing.Data collected during activation will be restricted to the goal of recovering the lost or stolen laptop .
The only exception to this rule would be if an operator , while attempting to recover a lost or stolen laptop , observes behavior that constitutes a felony ; in such a case , the data will be handed over to the appropriate authorities .
In all other cases , any data collected during activation will be immediately destroyed.But , of course , I 'm a researcher that specializes in security .
I have quite a bit more expertise than these school administrators .
And there are too many similar administrators out there that do not have a strong enough background in security and privacy to get these subtleties .
Absent federal legislation governing secondary use of private data , I do not think this will be the last case that we will see like this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there was no evidence of any laptops being stolen therefore the system shouldn't have been turned on to begin with.
The only reason the camera's were turned on would be for misuse.That's not true, because the school's policies did not require evidence that the laptop was stolen.
For instance, officials were permitted to activate the system "to find missing, lost or stolen computers, which would include a loaner computer taken off campus against regulations.
"  See here [forbes.com] among other stories.
I've seen multiple stories that indicate the system was activated 42 times, 18 of which did help to recover lost or stolen systems.They could get out of this much easier if they simply fired a couple of people and blamed those directly responsible, and their bosses for the policy.It's a bit more complicated than that.
Whomever you pick to fire, you must make sure that it is justified.
If you fire the official that took the picture, you need to find appropriate grounds to do so.
Otherwise, they could (rightfully) claim that they violated no policy and were being made a scapegoat.
Then you'd be looking at a wrongful termination lawsuit, and possibly paying lost wages.
Similarly, the administrators can argue that the policy was put into place to protect assets owned by the school district.
So if you want to fire someone, you had better be sure that you can justify it.One aspect that I haven't seen clarified is whether or not the student was actually disciplined.
If he was just confronted and presented with a warning, he is going to have a much more difficult time proving damages in a court.
If he was suspended without due process and without proof of wrongdoing, then they're screwed.
Either way, though, I would be surprised if this is allowed class action status.As much as I value privacy, I think this story has become a bit sensationalized.
Based on the numerous reports I've seen, I believe this is more an example of scope creep than anything nefarious.
Basically, to paraphrase a common aphorism, if I must attribute either malice or incompetence, I go with the latter.
The possibility of theft does provide a legitimate purpose for the ability to remotely activate the web cam.
Where the school screwed up was that they did not have any precise controls over when and how this activation can occur.
My guess (I fully admit I have no proof) is that the camera was activated according to district policy, then the official panicked because they thought they saw something.
To make it worse for the official, the policy probably did not offer any guidance for what to do in that situation.
What if they were trying to locate a stolen laptop and witnessed a rape or murder instead?The problem comes down to the possibility of secondary use of technology.
Whenever technology is deployed that has the potential of violating the privacy of others, the policy should explicitly state under what conditions the technology can be used, including a list of the situations that officials are allowed to document based on their observations.
The policy should also default to complete destruction of observed data that does not match the intent of the policy.
Hence, the school district should have made the following policy:
Activation of the remote monitoring system will only be done after informing the student and parents in writing.Activation of the remote monitoring system will never occur unless there is documentation indicating a good faith belief that the laptop has been stolen or is missing.Data collected during activation will be restricted to the goal of recovering the lost or stolen laptop.
The only exception to this rule would be if an operator, while attempting to recover a lost or stolen laptop, observes behavior that constitutes a felony; in such a case, the data will be handed over to the appropriate authorities.
In all other cases, any data collected during activation will be immediately destroyed.But, of course, I'm a researcher that specializes in security.
I have quite a bit more expertise than these school administrators.
And there are too many similar administrators out there that do not have a strong enough background in security and privacy to get these subtleties.
Absent federal legislation governing secondary use of private data, I do not think this will be the last case that we will see like this.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225730</id>
	<title>Re:Meant to keep the laptops on campus?</title>
	<author>dcollins</author>
	<datestamp>1266772620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I seem to recall reading somewhere that all of the laptops were meant to remain on campus."</p><p>They have successfully misled you; read carefully. The quote is:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>2)... Concerned about the security of district-owned and issued laptops, the security plan was developed by the technology department to give the District the ability to recover lost, stolen or missing student laptops. <b>This included tracking loaner laptops that may, against regulations, have been taken off campus.</b></p> </div><p>Hint: The great majority of laptops will not be of the "loaner" variety.</p><p><a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1557304&amp;cid=31212912" title="slashdot.org">http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1557304&amp;cid=31212912</a> [slashdot.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I seem to recall reading somewhere that all of the laptops were meant to remain on campus .
" They have successfully misled you ; read carefully .
The quote is : 2 ) ... Concerned about the security of district-owned and issued laptops , the security plan was developed by the technology department to give the District the ability to recover lost , stolen or missing student laptops .
This included tracking loaner laptops that may , against regulations , have been taken off campus .
Hint : The great majority of laptops will not be of the " loaner " variety.http : //slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1557304&amp;cid = 31212912 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I seem to recall reading somewhere that all of the laptops were meant to remain on campus.
"They have successfully misled you; read carefully.
The quote is:2)... Concerned about the security of district-owned and issued laptops, the security plan was developed by the technology department to give the District the ability to recover lost, stolen or missing student laptops.
This included tracking loaner laptops that may, against regulations, have been taken off campus.
Hint: The great majority of laptops will not be of the "loaner" variety.http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1557304&amp;cid=31212912 [slashdot.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222472</id>
	<title>School's Laptop Insurance Policy</title>
	<author>BadRon</author>
	<datestamp>1266750300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the <a href="http://www.lmsd.org/sections/about/depart/tech/default.php?m=13&amp;t=departments&amp;p=depart\_tech\_1to1\_insurance" title="lmsd.org" rel="nofollow">school's laptop insurance policy</a> [lmsd.org], the second bullet point under the second heading (Insurance Information) says that students who don't pay for insurance aren't allowed to bring the laptops off campus.</p><p>This could explain why they used this tactic so frequently and the reason for taking the picture in this particular case.</p><p>Nevertheless, the school should have recognized the obvious privacy concerns and used some other system to track uninsured laptops taken off campus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the school 's laptop insurance policy [ lmsd.org ] , the second bullet point under the second heading ( Insurance Information ) says that students who do n't pay for insurance are n't allowed to bring the laptops off campus.This could explain why they used this tactic so frequently and the reason for taking the picture in this particular case.Nevertheless , the school should have recognized the obvious privacy concerns and used some other system to track uninsured laptops taken off campus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the school's laptop insurance policy [lmsd.org], the second bullet point under the second heading (Insurance Information) says that students who don't pay for insurance aren't allowed to bring the laptops off campus.This could explain why they used this tactic so frequently and the reason for taking the picture in this particular case.Nevertheless, the school should have recognized the obvious privacy concerns and used some other system to track uninsured laptops taken off campus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222920</id>
	<title>Re:Meant to keep the laptops on campus?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266752940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DO the retards that write this stuff or the people that mod them ever read even ONE OF THE FUCKING ARTICLES, We need a new rating Ill give you a +1 Retard.</p><p>-- The Retard Troll</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DO the retards that write this stuff or the people that mod them ever read even ONE OF THE FUCKING ARTICLES , We need a new rating Ill give you a + 1 Retard.-- The Retard Troll</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DO the retards that write this stuff or the people that mod them ever read even ONE OF THE FUCKING ARTICLES, We need a new rating Ill give you a +1 Retard.-- The Retard Troll</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221778</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266746100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Why does it not occur to you that perhaps the student took the photo and emailed it to their buddies?</i>
</p><p>
How would the student know that webcams can be remotely activated? Besides, I believe most of the accusation, picture and all, comes from the school administrator.
</p><p>
My best guess is that the system was installed indeed to find lost laptops. However there were no locks, safeguards or anything, so busybody teachers took it upon themselves to monitor students whenever they feel to it. The district claims that only two IT people were authorized to monitor, however how hard is it for an IT guy to tell the URL and the password to a teacher? Teachers were seen as gods until now, or a step above that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does it not occur to you that perhaps the student took the photo and emailed it to their buddies ?
How would the student know that webcams can be remotely activated ?
Besides , I believe most of the accusation , picture and all , comes from the school administrator .
My best guess is that the system was installed indeed to find lost laptops .
However there were no locks , safeguards or anything , so busybody teachers took it upon themselves to monitor students whenever they feel to it .
The district claims that only two IT people were authorized to monitor , however how hard is it for an IT guy to tell the URL and the password to a teacher ?
Teachers were seen as gods until now , or a step above that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Why does it not occur to you that perhaps the student took the photo and emailed it to their buddies?
How would the student know that webcams can be remotely activated?
Besides, I believe most of the accusation, picture and all, comes from the school administrator.
My best guess is that the system was installed indeed to find lost laptops.
However there were no locks, safeguards or anything, so busybody teachers took it upon themselves to monitor students whenever they feel to it.
The district claims that only two IT people were authorized to monitor, however how hard is it for an IT guy to tell the URL and the password to a teacher?
Teachers were seen as gods until now, or a step above that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222672</id>
	<title>Here's a video of it in action</title>
	<author>nawitus</author>
	<datestamp>1266751500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is as creepy as it can get, spying in action:
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vza\_bMuy42M" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vza\_bMuy42M</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is as creepy as it can get , spying in action : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = Vza \ _bMuy42M [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is as creepy as it can get, spying in action:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vza\_bMuy42M [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222148</id>
	<title>Automatic Consent to Monitoring</title>
	<author>stewbacca</author>
	<datestamp>1266748740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would assume that if I were using a school computer that I waived any and all rights to privacy. Why don't people just assume that using any public computer is an automatic consent to monitoring?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would assume that if I were using a school computer that I waived any and all rights to privacy .
Why do n't people just assume that using any public computer is an automatic consent to monitoring ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would assume that if I were using a school computer that I waived any and all rights to privacy.
Why don't people just assume that using any public computer is an automatic consent to monitoring?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225400</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>dcollins</author>
	<datestamp>1266770040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"... so busybody teachers took it upon themselves to monitor students whenever they feel to it. The district claims that only two IT people were authorized to monitor, however how hard is it for an IT guy to tell the URL and the password to a teacher? Teachers were seen as gods until now, or a step above that."</p><p>In a school system there are two opposing camps: teachers vs. administrators. It is monumentally absurd to think that teachers would have the time, interest, or access to monitor stuff like that. The control-freaks are the administrators and their non-unionized IT staff that have to do whatever they say. See sig.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ... so busybody teachers took it upon themselves to monitor students whenever they feel to it .
The district claims that only two IT people were authorized to monitor , however how hard is it for an IT guy to tell the URL and the password to a teacher ?
Teachers were seen as gods until now , or a step above that .
" In a school system there are two opposing camps : teachers vs. administrators. It is monumentally absurd to think that teachers would have the time , interest , or access to monitor stuff like that .
The control-freaks are the administrators and their non-unionized IT staff that have to do whatever they say .
See sig .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"... so busybody teachers took it upon themselves to monitor students whenever they feel to it.
The district claims that only two IT people were authorized to monitor, however how hard is it for an IT guy to tell the URL and the password to a teacher?
Teachers were seen as gods until now, or a step above that.
"In a school system there are two opposing camps: teachers vs. administrators. It is monumentally absurd to think that teachers would have the time, interest, or access to monitor stuff like that.
The control-freaks are the administrators and their non-unionized IT staff that have to do whatever they say.
See sig.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222060</id>
	<title>That's just insulting!</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1266748140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're like the little kid with chocolate smeared all over his face and shirt claiming he didn't eat the candy bar. Forgivable for a little kid, but have these supposed responsible adults seen NO  intellectual growth since age 3? It's just insulting that they even attempt such a lame lie. Are these the same adults who are supposed to be respected when they tell teens to "just own up to your mistakes and take your punishment like an adult"? </p><p>They themselves presented the evidence against them in the form of a picture of a student at home taken from his obviously not stolen laptop.</p><p>How can any kid have respect for these people AND self respect at the same time now? How can they possibly be seen as appropriate role models?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're like the little kid with chocolate smeared all over his face and shirt claiming he did n't eat the candy bar .
Forgivable for a little kid , but have these supposed responsible adults seen NO intellectual growth since age 3 ?
It 's just insulting that they even attempt such a lame lie .
Are these the same adults who are supposed to be respected when they tell teens to " just own up to your mistakes and take your punishment like an adult " ?
They themselves presented the evidence against them in the form of a picture of a student at home taken from his obviously not stolen laptop.How can any kid have respect for these people AND self respect at the same time now ?
How can they possibly be seen as appropriate role models ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're like the little kid with chocolate smeared all over his face and shirt claiming he didn't eat the candy bar.
Forgivable for a little kid, but have these supposed responsible adults seen NO  intellectual growth since age 3?
It's just insulting that they even attempt such a lame lie.
Are these the same adults who are supposed to be respected when they tell teens to "just own up to your mistakes and take your punishment like an adult"?
They themselves presented the evidence against them in the form of a picture of a student at home taken from his obviously not stolen laptop.How can any kid have respect for these people AND self respect at the same time now?
How can they possibly be seen as appropriate role models?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556</id>
	<title>the school already is lying</title>
	<author>peragrin</author>
	<datestamp>1266744720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The school denies Misuse, however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child's bedroom.</p><p>Therefore the School has already committed a misuse of said camera's.  The real question is why hasn't the school fired the people involved.  there was no evidence of any laptops being stolen therefore the system shouldn't have been turned on to begin with.  The only reason the camera's were turned on would be for misuse.</p><p>So the school district is lying to cover themselves.  They could get out of this much easier if they simply fired a couple of people and blamed those directly responsible, and their bosses for the policy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The school denies Misuse , however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child 's bedroom.Therefore the School has already committed a misuse of said camera 's .
The real question is why has n't the school fired the people involved .
there was no evidence of any laptops being stolen therefore the system should n't have been turned on to begin with .
The only reason the camera 's were turned on would be for misuse.So the school district is lying to cover themselves .
They could get out of this much easier if they simply fired a couple of people and blamed those directly responsible , and their bosses for the policy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The school denies Misuse, however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child's bedroom.Therefore the School has already committed a misuse of said camera's.
The real question is why hasn't the school fired the people involved.
there was no evidence of any laptops being stolen therefore the system shouldn't have been turned on to begin with.
The only reason the camera's were turned on would be for misuse.So the school district is lying to cover themselves.
They could get out of this much easier if they simply fired a couple of people and blamed those directly responsible, and their bosses for the policy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223436</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>introspekt.i</author>
	<datestamp>1266756120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Teachers were seen as gods until now, or a step above that.</p></div><p> I think the teachers would love to be tithed to.  They make jack crap as it stands.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Teachers were seen as gods until now , or a step above that .
I think the teachers would love to be tithed to .
They make jack crap as it stands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Teachers were seen as gods until now, or a step above that.
I think the teachers would love to be tithed to.
They make jack crap as it stands.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222718</id>
	<title>Routine management?</title>
	<author>Eric\_Utah</author>
	<datestamp>1266751680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll withhold judgment seeing how there are a lot of accusations with no actual evidence presented.  I wouldn't be surprised if it the school had nothing to do with starting the webcam.  Instead, it's entirely possible that the student opened the webcam with something like Photobooth to record/display images and the school was able to see what they were doing via a remote desktop type program.  Here's an example of a school doing just that in this Frontline video (skip to 4:37):</p><p>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/learning/schools/how-google-saved-a-school.html</p><p>When I saw that program on TV a couple weeks ago, it didn't strike me as unusual at all.  It's normal for companies (or schools) to keep their own computers communicating with admin servers for updates, management or remote assistance services.  Privacy violation wasn't something that jumped out at in me when I saw that as I've always assumed that computers owned &amp; managed by other parties are monitored.</p><p>Admins activating a webcam remotely isn't really justifiable unless it's in the pursuit of stolen gear, but keeping an eye on the software, clickstream and desktop is probably within their realm of responsibilities.  They would probably be on the receiving end of "You gave my child an evil machine filled with drug recipes and pr0nogrpahy!" lawsuits if they didn't manage the systems.</p><p>Kids these days....  Can't even figure out how to boot their own thumbdrive OS to bypass that stuff.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll withhold judgment seeing how there are a lot of accusations with no actual evidence presented .
I would n't be surprised if it the school had nothing to do with starting the webcam .
Instead , it 's entirely possible that the student opened the webcam with something like Photobooth to record/display images and the school was able to see what they were doing via a remote desktop type program .
Here 's an example of a school doing just that in this Frontline video ( skip to 4 : 37 ) : http : //www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/learning/schools/how-google-saved-a-school.htmlWhen I saw that program on TV a couple weeks ago , it did n't strike me as unusual at all .
It 's normal for companies ( or schools ) to keep their own computers communicating with admin servers for updates , management or remote assistance services .
Privacy violation was n't something that jumped out at in me when I saw that as I 've always assumed that computers owned &amp; managed by other parties are monitored.Admins activating a webcam remotely is n't really justifiable unless it 's in the pursuit of stolen gear , but keeping an eye on the software , clickstream and desktop is probably within their realm of responsibilities .
They would probably be on the receiving end of " You gave my child an evil machine filled with drug recipes and pr0nogrpahy !
" lawsuits if they did n't manage the systems.Kids these days.... Ca n't even figure out how to boot their own thumbdrive OS to bypass that stuff .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll withhold judgment seeing how there are a lot of accusations with no actual evidence presented.
I wouldn't be surprised if it the school had nothing to do with starting the webcam.
Instead, it's entirely possible that the student opened the webcam with something like Photobooth to record/display images and the school was able to see what they were doing via a remote desktop type program.
Here's an example of a school doing just that in this Frontline video (skip to 4:37):http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/learning/schools/how-google-saved-a-school.htmlWhen I saw that program on TV a couple weeks ago, it didn't strike me as unusual at all.
It's normal for companies (or schools) to keep their own computers communicating with admin servers for updates, management or remote assistance services.
Privacy violation wasn't something that jumped out at in me when I saw that as I've always assumed that computers owned &amp; managed by other parties are monitored.Admins activating a webcam remotely isn't really justifiable unless it's in the pursuit of stolen gear, but keeping an eye on the software, clickstream and desktop is probably within their realm of responsibilities.
They would probably be on the receiving end of "You gave my child an evil machine filled with drug recipes and pr0nogrpahy!
" lawsuits if they didn't manage the systems.Kids these days....  Can't even figure out how to boot their own thumbdrive OS to bypass that stuff.
:(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222350</id>
	<title>Re:One possibility</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266749640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The improper behavior they accused him of was drug use. The evidence was a web-cam picture of him eating a pill-like object in his own home. Turns out it was Mike and Ike candy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The improper behavior they accused him of was drug use .
The evidence was a web-cam picture of him eating a pill-like object in his own home .
Turns out it was Mike and Ike candy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The improper behavior they accused him of was drug use.
The evidence was a web-cam picture of him eating a pill-like object in his own home.
Turns out it was Mike and Ike candy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221924</id>
	<title>Re:Enough sensationalism already.</title>
	<author>Bman21212</author>
	<datestamp>1266747120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not simply sensationalism.  There are broad reaching consequences of having an undisclosed program that can take pictures remotely.  The main problem is undisclosed.</p><p>And why are you so trusting of authority? Yes people don't normally do intentional things to harm themselves, and this gets better as they age and get more mature.  But many people are not fluent in technology.  They don't know the problems that arise.<br>I am not surprised that technology got abused by those in power.  Come on, it's slashdot, this isn't the first time we've heard of something happening that way.</p><p>If the student took the picture an emailed it to his friends we would not have this case.  The administration would say "we received this information from an email from another student/teacher/parent." The case would simply not be there because the administration could easily defend itself.</p><p>The school had the proper safeguards to prevent too much abuse, but it looks like the safeguards were not followed, thus making them useless.  The administration could easily open up the logs and show that every situation was a proper use, except for one.  That would be bad, but much more understandable.  People make mistakes.  But when the mistakes become patterns true problems arise.</p><p>This isn't sensationalism, this is a real problem.  It's blown out of proportion because the only ones that are affected are those in the school district, but at the same time it teaches some others privacy controls, and that is a much needed lesson.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not simply sensationalism .
There are broad reaching consequences of having an undisclosed program that can take pictures remotely .
The main problem is undisclosed.And why are you so trusting of authority ?
Yes people do n't normally do intentional things to harm themselves , and this gets better as they age and get more mature .
But many people are not fluent in technology .
They do n't know the problems that arise.I am not surprised that technology got abused by those in power .
Come on , it 's slashdot , this is n't the first time we 've heard of something happening that way.If the student took the picture an emailed it to his friends we would not have this case .
The administration would say " we received this information from an email from another student/teacher/parent .
" The case would simply not be there because the administration could easily defend itself.The school had the proper safeguards to prevent too much abuse , but it looks like the safeguards were not followed , thus making them useless .
The administration could easily open up the logs and show that every situation was a proper use , except for one .
That would be bad , but much more understandable .
People make mistakes .
But when the mistakes become patterns true problems arise.This is n't sensationalism , this is a real problem .
It 's blown out of proportion because the only ones that are affected are those in the school district , but at the same time it teaches some others privacy controls , and that is a much needed lesson .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not simply sensationalism.
There are broad reaching consequences of having an undisclosed program that can take pictures remotely.
The main problem is undisclosed.And why are you so trusting of authority?
Yes people don't normally do intentional things to harm themselves, and this gets better as they age and get more mature.
But many people are not fluent in technology.
They don't know the problems that arise.I am not surprised that technology got abused by those in power.
Come on, it's slashdot, this isn't the first time we've heard of something happening that way.If the student took the picture an emailed it to his friends we would not have this case.
The administration would say "we received this information from an email from another student/teacher/parent.
" The case would simply not be there because the administration could easily defend itself.The school had the proper safeguards to prevent too much abuse, but it looks like the safeguards were not followed, thus making them useless.
The administration could easily open up the logs and show that every situation was a proper use, except for one.
That would be bad, but much more understandable.
People make mistakes.
But when the mistakes become patterns true problems arise.This isn't sensationalism, this is a real problem.
It's blown out of proportion because the only ones that are affected are those in the school district, but at the same time it teaches some others privacy controls, and that is a much needed lesson.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221884</id>
	<title>Who is the software manufacturer?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266746940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does anyone know what software was being used? Is this internal software provided by Apple? Is the software manufacturer just a culpable as the school district?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone know what software was being used ?
Is this internal software provided by Apple ?
Is the software manufacturer just a culpable as the school district ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone know what software was being used?
Is this internal software provided by Apple?
Is the software manufacturer just a culpable as the school district?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222054</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266748080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The school denies Misuse, however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child's bedroom.</p><p>Therefore the School has already committed a misuse of said camera's.  The real question is why hasn't the school fired the people involved.  there was no evidence of any laptops being stolen therefore the system shouldn't have been turned on to begin with.  The only reason the camera's were turned on would be for misuse.</p></div><p>That's not true.  The student reported his laptop missing at the beginning of the day, and received a loaner laptop from the school for that day.  He failed to turn it back in to the school before leaving for the day, which was the policy.  The school activated the system because the student had informed them of a missing laptop.  There is no misuse in this instance, except for the student not following the policy that he was supposed to follow.</p><p>Even if you deny that this is what happened, it still shows your logic is flawed.  If the school denies misuse, and they have a picture from the laptop's camera, then either they used the system correctly (and you have your facts wrong), or they are lying.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The school denies Misuse , however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child 's bedroom.Therefore the School has already committed a misuse of said camera 's .
The real question is why has n't the school fired the people involved .
there was no evidence of any laptops being stolen therefore the system should n't have been turned on to begin with .
The only reason the camera 's were turned on would be for misuse.That 's not true .
The student reported his laptop missing at the beginning of the day , and received a loaner laptop from the school for that day .
He failed to turn it back in to the school before leaving for the day , which was the policy .
The school activated the system because the student had informed them of a missing laptop .
There is no misuse in this instance , except for the student not following the policy that he was supposed to follow.Even if you deny that this is what happened , it still shows your logic is flawed .
If the school denies misuse , and they have a picture from the laptop 's camera , then either they used the system correctly ( and you have your facts wrong ) , or they are lying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The school denies Misuse, however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child's bedroom.Therefore the School has already committed a misuse of said camera's.
The real question is why hasn't the school fired the people involved.
there was no evidence of any laptops being stolen therefore the system shouldn't have been turned on to begin with.
The only reason the camera's were turned on would be for misuse.That's not true.
The student reported his laptop missing at the beginning of the day, and received a loaner laptop from the school for that day.
He failed to turn it back in to the school before leaving for the day, which was the policy.
The school activated the system because the student had informed them of a missing laptop.
There is no misuse in this instance, except for the student not following the policy that he was supposed to follow.Even if you deny that this is what happened, it still shows your logic is flawed.
If the school denies misuse, and they have a picture from the laptop's camera, then either they used the system correctly (and you have your facts wrong), or they are lying.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222340</id>
	<title>Re:Meant to keep the laptops on campus?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266749640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you would have read the fucking article you would have seen that<br>kids were meant to take them home to do their homework.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you would have read the fucking article you would have seen thatkids were meant to take them home to do their homework .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you would have read the fucking article you would have seen thatkids were meant to take them home to do their homework.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224266</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>tekgoblin</author>
	<datestamp>1266761820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wondered why my site went down all day, this got posted to slashdot<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:O</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wondered why my site went down all day , this got posted to slashdot : O</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wondered why my site went down all day, this got posted to slashdot :O</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221836</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266746580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The school denies Misuse, however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child's bedroom.</i></p><p>Can this be proved?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The school denies Misuse , however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child 's bedroom.Can this be proved ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The school denies Misuse, however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child's bedroom.Can this be proved?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31226434</id>
	<title>Where is the Beef?</title>
	<author>ps2os2</author>
	<datestamp>1266779520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reply from the school district does not have any information in it that wasn't already disseminated.</p><p>So why was the students camera activated? There is no statement from the school that any computer involved with this had been stolen. The parents law suit does not go into detail as to what the child was accused of or anything about the unit being stolen or *ANYTHING*.</p><p>Where is the BEEF???????</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reply from the school district does not have any information in it that was n't already disseminated.So why was the students camera activated ?
There is no statement from the school that any computer involved with this had been stolen .
The parents law suit does not go into detail as to what the child was accused of or anything about the unit being stolen or * ANYTHING * .Where is the BEEF ? ? ? ? ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reply from the school district does not have any information in it that wasn't already disseminated.So why was the students camera activated?
There is no statement from the school that any computer involved with this had been stolen.
The parents law suit does not go into detail as to what the child was accused of or anything about the unit being stolen or *ANYTHING*.Where is the BEEF??????
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221996</id>
	<title>Absolutely Terrifying</title>
	<author>bearflash</author>
	<datestamp>1266747660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This kind of behavior scares the bejesus out of me. I can't believe they attempted it in the first place and then had the insanity to try and defend their actions in a press release. Absolutely un-defendable actions</htmltext>
<tokenext>This kind of behavior scares the bejesus out of me .
I ca n't believe they attempted it in the first place and then had the insanity to try and defend their actions in a press release .
Absolutely un-defendable actions</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This kind of behavior scares the bejesus out of me.
I can't believe they attempted it in the first place and then had the insanity to try and defend their actions in a press release.
Absolutely un-defendable actions</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31227404</id>
	<title>Alternate theory</title>
	<author>ArsenneLupin</author>
	<datestamp>1266837000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><ol>
<li>School sets up system for tracking stolen laptops using their webcam</li><li>During the first couple of months, the system is used for its intended purpose only</li><li>Some less than savory admin personnel figures out that the feature can also be used to spy on cute boys master bating while watching porn on their laptops</li><li>... this goes on for a while...</li><li>... until one of these admin surprises a boy doing "drugs"</li><li>Now the admin's "civil responsibility" instincts kick in, and he rats the boy out to the principal (... conveniently forgetting that he had no business spying on him in the first place...)</li><li>Parents threaten to sue</li><li>School backpedals, points out that the feature is only a theft-tracking device, but conveniently forgets that it was not used as such</li></ol></htmltext>
<tokenext>School sets up system for tracking stolen laptops using their webcamDuring the first couple of months , the system is used for its intended purpose onlySome less than savory admin personnel figures out that the feature can also be used to spy on cute boys master bating while watching porn on their laptops... this goes on for a while...... until one of these admin surprises a boy doing " drugs " Now the admin 's " civil responsibility " instincts kick in , and he rats the boy out to the principal ( ... conveniently forgetting that he had no business spying on him in the first place... ) Parents threaten to sueSchool backpedals , points out that the feature is only a theft-tracking device , but conveniently forgets that it was not used as such</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
School sets up system for tracking stolen laptops using their webcamDuring the first couple of months, the system is used for its intended purpose onlySome less than savory admin personnel figures out that the feature can also be used to spy on cute boys master bating while watching porn on their laptops... this goes on for a while...... until one of these admin surprises a boy doing "drugs"Now the admin's "civil responsibility" instincts kick in, and he rats the boy out to the principal (... conveniently forgetting that he had no business spying on him in the first place...)Parents threaten to sueSchool backpedals, points out that the feature is only a theft-tracking device, but conveniently forgets that it was not used as such</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31228902</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>Athanasius</author>
	<datestamp>1266851820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One question I've not seen answered yet is: Had the student in question (falsely...) reported the laptop as stolen.  i.e. The school <b>was</b> using the facility as it had planned, and then happened to catch said act ?
</p><p>
I've certainly seen speculation that this might be what happened.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One question I 've not seen answered yet is : Had the student in question ( falsely... ) reported the laptop as stolen .
i.e. The school was using the facility as it had planned , and then happened to catch said act ?
I 've certainly seen speculation that this might be what happened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One question I've not seen answered yet is: Had the student in question (falsely...) reported the laptop as stolen.
i.e. The school was using the facility as it had planned, and then happened to catch said act ?
I've certainly seen speculation that this might be what happened.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222666</id>
	<title>Somebody's lying...</title>
	<author>calmofthestorm</author>
	<datestamp>1266751500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and that means heads are going to roll. We just have to wait to see whose.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and that means heads are going to roll .
We just have to wait to see whose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and that means heads are going to roll.
We just have to wait to see whose.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221816</id>
	<title>Keep it simple</title>
	<author>onyxruby</author>
	<datestamp>1266746460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they started using the cameras to randomly take pictures of students than the school is looking at a well deserved lawsuit. Without question this is a violation of any number of laws. If the web cam pictures were taken in response to a lost or stolen laptop, than this entire thing has been much ado about nothing and the lawsuit is without merit. The only question of note on this is if the web-cams were activated for tracking anything other than lost or stolen laptops. If this kid was incidentally caught because he stole the laptop and was captured when they used the webcam to track the laptop than it changes the entire story.</p><p>Certainly people have occasionally tracked down their stolen laptop, iphone or whatnot by remotely activating the cameras before. Such stories have run on Slashdot before and the consensus has always been along the lines of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/hoot!/ The fact that the tracking is done by a third party shouldn't change the view that it's ok try to recover your lost or stolen property. This is a very different issue than routine monitoring software that monitors the usage of the laptops. That kind of software is used by employers and schools on a daily basis, and I've seen some people mix up the two issues when they are unrelated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they started using the cameras to randomly take pictures of students than the school is looking at a well deserved lawsuit .
Without question this is a violation of any number of laws .
If the web cam pictures were taken in response to a lost or stolen laptop , than this entire thing has been much ado about nothing and the lawsuit is without merit .
The only question of note on this is if the web-cams were activated for tracking anything other than lost or stolen laptops .
If this kid was incidentally caught because he stole the laptop and was captured when they used the webcam to track the laptop than it changes the entire story.Certainly people have occasionally tracked down their stolen laptop , iphone or whatnot by remotely activating the cameras before .
Such stories have run on Slashdot before and the consensus has always been along the lines of /hoot ! / The fact that the tracking is done by a third party should n't change the view that it 's ok try to recover your lost or stolen property .
This is a very different issue than routine monitoring software that monitors the usage of the laptops .
That kind of software is used by employers and schools on a daily basis , and I 've seen some people mix up the two issues when they are unrelated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they started using the cameras to randomly take pictures of students than the school is looking at a well deserved lawsuit.
Without question this is a violation of any number of laws.
If the web cam pictures were taken in response to a lost or stolen laptop, than this entire thing has been much ado about nothing and the lawsuit is without merit.
The only question of note on this is if the web-cams were activated for tracking anything other than lost or stolen laptops.
If this kid was incidentally caught because he stole the laptop and was captured when they used the webcam to track the laptop than it changes the entire story.Certainly people have occasionally tracked down their stolen laptop, iphone or whatnot by remotely activating the cameras before.
Such stories have run on Slashdot before and the consensus has always been along the lines of /hoot!/ The fact that the tracking is done by a third party shouldn't change the view that it's ok try to recover your lost or stolen property.
This is a very different issue than routine monitoring software that monitors the usage of the laptops.
That kind of software is used by employers and schools on a daily basis, and I've seen some people mix up the two issues when they are unrelated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31228284</id>
	<title>Re:One possibility</title>
	<author>ThatsNotPudding</author>
	<datestamp>1266847440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If they had FORTY-TWO laptops stolen, maybe it was time to end the program.  This was authoritarion voyeurism and nothing more.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they had FORTY-TWO laptops stolen , maybe it was time to end the program .
This was authoritarion voyeurism and nothing more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they had FORTY-TWO laptops stolen, maybe it was time to end the program.
This was authoritarion voyeurism and nothing more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225990</id>
	<title>Re:Security</title>
	<author>flyneye</author>
	<datestamp>1266774900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Besides that they best change the statement "express written notification to all students and families" to "express written PERMISSION of all students and families."  Else they live with bloodthirsty lawyers on the local school boards doorstep, hounding their every breath.<br>There are several alternatives that could be taken before right to be secure in your home is violated.<br>1. Insure the laptops.<br>2. Sign the laptops out as the responsibility of the present holder.<br>3. Leave school materials at school and don't expect it to be part of home work curriculum, just to make school teachers lives easier at public expense.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I hope the courts make a bloody example of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides that they best change the statement " express written notification to all students and families " to " express written PERMISSION of all students and families .
" Else they live with bloodthirsty lawyers on the local school boards doorstep , hounding their every breath.There are several alternatives that could be taken before right to be secure in your home is violated.1 .
Insure the laptops.2 .
Sign the laptops out as the responsibility of the present holder.3 .
Leave school materials at school and do n't expect it to be part of home work curriculum , just to make school teachers lives easier at public expense .
        I hope the courts make a bloody example of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides that they best change the statement "express written notification to all students and families" to "express written PERMISSION of all students and families.
"  Else they live with bloodthirsty lawyers on the local school boards doorstep, hounding their every breath.There are several alternatives that could be taken before right to be secure in your home is violated.1.
Insure the laptops.2.
Sign the laptops out as the responsibility of the present holder.3.
Leave school materials at school and don't expect it to be part of home work curriculum, just to make school teachers lives easier at public expense.
        I hope the courts make a bloody example of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221564</id>
	<title>"something wrong with it"?</title>
	<author>martas</author>
	<datestamp>1266744780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> And if there was nothing wrong with it, why does the school say it won't start using the snooping feature again without "express written notification to all students and families"?</p></div><p>

maybe while the feature was introduced for all the right reasons (recovering lost/stolen laptops), they're admitting that students/parents should've been notified? i.e. they're admitting they made a mistake, but denying that they are pedophiles who used this "feature" to spy on acne-faced teenage boys masturbating to vogue magazine.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And if there was nothing wrong with it , why does the school say it wo n't start using the snooping feature again without " express written notification to all students and families " ?
maybe while the feature was introduced for all the right reasons ( recovering lost/stolen laptops ) , they 're admitting that students/parents should 've been notified ?
i.e. they 're admitting they made a mistake , but denying that they are pedophiles who used this " feature " to spy on acne-faced teenage boys masturbating to vogue magazine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> And if there was nothing wrong with it, why does the school say it won't start using the snooping feature again without "express written notification to all students and families"?
maybe while the feature was introduced for all the right reasons (recovering lost/stolen laptops), they're admitting that students/parents should've been notified?
i.e. they're admitting they made a mistake, but denying that they are pedophiles who used this "feature" to spy on acne-faced teenage boys masturbating to vogue magazine.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222768</id>
	<title>Re:What if the student LIED?</title>
	<author>edinc90</author>
	<datestamp>1266752040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think we need to hear why the school activated the webcam in the first place. The laptop was obviously not stolen. If it was reported as lost or stolen, then they aren't in the wrong for activating the webcam (except for that they didn't tell the user that it is possible.) Once they recognized the kid at the computer was the correct user, then they should have just turned off the webcam. No problems. The thing is, they saw what they thought was drugs (<a href="http://www.myfoxphilly.com/dpp/news/local\_news/021910\_FBI\_Probing\_Lawsuit\_Claims\_Of\_Lower\_Merion\_School\_District\_Laptop\_Webcam\_Spying" title="myfoxphilly.com" rel="nofollow">report</a> [myfoxphilly.com]) and disciplined the kid for it. That's where they went wrong, continued use of the webcam after they knew it wasn't stolen.
<br>Now, they should have alerted the users to the fact that the webcams could be remotely accessed, and would only be in the event of a loss. Had they not taken a picture and reprimanded the kid for having "drugs," none of this would have happened.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think we need to hear why the school activated the webcam in the first place .
The laptop was obviously not stolen .
If it was reported as lost or stolen , then they are n't in the wrong for activating the webcam ( except for that they did n't tell the user that it is possible .
) Once they recognized the kid at the computer was the correct user , then they should have just turned off the webcam .
No problems .
The thing is , they saw what they thought was drugs ( report [ myfoxphilly.com ] ) and disciplined the kid for it .
That 's where they went wrong , continued use of the webcam after they knew it was n't stolen .
Now , they should have alerted the users to the fact that the webcams could be remotely accessed , and would only be in the event of a loss .
Had they not taken a picture and reprimanded the kid for having " drugs , " none of this would have happened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think we need to hear why the school activated the webcam in the first place.
The laptop was obviously not stolen.
If it was reported as lost or stolen, then they aren't in the wrong for activating the webcam (except for that they didn't tell the user that it is possible.
) Once they recognized the kid at the computer was the correct user, then they should have just turned off the webcam.
No problems.
The thing is, they saw what they thought was drugs (report [myfoxphilly.com]) and disciplined the kid for it.
That's where they went wrong, continued use of the webcam after they knew it wasn't stolen.
Now, they should have alerted the users to the fact that the webcams could be remotely accessed, and would only be in the event of a loss.
Had they not taken a picture and reprimanded the kid for having "drugs," none of this would have happened.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222596</id>
	<title>Re:Who is the software manufacturer?</title>
	<author>edinc90</author>
	<datestamp>1266751020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In a <a href="http://www.myfoxphilly.com/dpp/news/local\_news/021910\_FBI\_Probing\_Lawsuit\_Claims\_Of\_Lower\_Merion\_School\_District\_Laptop\_Webcam\_Spying" title="myfoxphilly.com" rel="nofollow">Fox 29 report</a> [myfoxphilly.com] they referenced an older report from 2008, an interview with a district IT manager who talked about the software: LANRev <a href="http://www.lanrev.com/" title="lanrev.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.lanrev.com/</a> [lanrev.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>In a Fox 29 report [ myfoxphilly.com ] they referenced an older report from 2008 , an interview with a district IT manager who talked about the software : LANRev http : //www.lanrev.com/ [ lanrev.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a Fox 29 report [myfoxphilly.com] they referenced an older report from 2008, an interview with a district IT manager who talked about the software: LANRev http://www.lanrev.com/ [lanrev.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540</id>
	<title>Security</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266744660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sure. That's what the body scanners at the airports for as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure .
That 's what the body scanners at the airports for as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure.
That's what the body scanners at the airports for as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223280</id>
	<title>The Old Security Excuse</title>
	<author>b4upoo</author>
	<datestamp>1266755100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>      I'm certain that the US would be a great deal more secure if we simply took over Mexico and Canada. Israel always feels more secure when it grabs a mile or ten of Arab soil. So its only natural that a  high school would feel more secure if they had a miniature camera on every sheet of toilet paper that a student uses at home. And the list goes on and on and on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm certain that the US would be a great deal more secure if we simply took over Mexico and Canada .
Israel always feels more secure when it grabs a mile or ten of Arab soil .
So its only natural that a high school would feel more secure if they had a miniature camera on every sheet of toilet paper that a student uses at home .
And the list goes on and on and on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>      I'm certain that the US would be a great deal more secure if we simply took over Mexico and Canada.
Israel always feels more secure when it grabs a mile or ten of Arab soil.
So its only natural that a  high school would feel more secure if they had a miniature camera on every sheet of toilet paper that a student uses at home.
And the list goes on and on and on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222002</id>
	<title>Re:Meant to keep the laptops on campus?</title>
	<author>Sir\_Lewk</author>
	<datestamp>1266747660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So if they get a staticly assigned IP address that is other than what is used on campus, that's fine then?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So if they get a staticly assigned IP address that is other than what is used on campus , that 's fine then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if they get a staticly assigned IP address that is other than what is used on campus, that's fine then?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221650</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222884</id>
	<title>Re:Keep it simple</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266752700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But before none of the security video camera shots were aimed specifically at a minor population. If you,ve got well over 1000 laptops issued to children, most likely if you activate it you are going to see a child stolen or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But before none of the security video camera shots were aimed specifically at a minor population .
If you,ve got well over 1000 laptops issued to children , most likely if you activate it you are going to see a child stolen or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But before none of the security video camera shots were aimed specifically at a minor population.
If you,ve got well over 1000 laptops issued to children, most likely if you activate it you are going to see a child stolen or not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222828</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266752340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The school denies Misuse, however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child's bedroom.</i></p><p>I'm sorry, but what behavior could possibly be "inappropriate" in one's bedroom?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The school denies Misuse , however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child 's bedroom.I 'm sorry , but what behavior could possibly be " inappropriate " in one 's bedroom ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The school denies Misuse, however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child's bedroom.I'm sorry, but what behavior could possibly be "inappropriate" in one's bedroom?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31227190</id>
	<title>Re:Security</title>
	<author>Dan541</author>
	<datestamp>1266834420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>don't forget internet censorship.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>do n't forget internet censorship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>don't forget internet censorship.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223514</id>
	<title>Re:Enough sensationalism already.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266756600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"So the school should just remove all the security software and let the insurance deal with it."</p><p>Unless the cam is part of the insurance policy's restrictions.  Yes, clairvoyance is not the answer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" So the school should just remove all the security software and let the insurance deal with it .
" Unless the cam is part of the insurance policy 's restrictions .
Yes , clairvoyance is not the answer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"So the school should just remove all the security software and let the insurance deal with it.
"Unless the cam is part of the insurance policy's restrictions.
Yes, clairvoyance is not the answer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221602</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266744960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's the Larry Craig style of protecting the children. Someone has to be the pedophile, so the school is calling dibs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the Larry Craig style of protecting the children .
Someone has to be the pedophile , so the school is calling dibs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the Larry Craig style of protecting the children.
Someone has to be the pedophile, so the school is calling dibs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221912</id>
	<title>Re:Enough sensationalism already.</title>
	<author>fatalwall</author>
	<datestamp>1266747060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yea, one would think so... however your forgetting the level of stupid we have running our schools.</p><p>In high school I was almost thrown out of a club because one of the volunteers asked me to do something and I insisted to know the reasoning behind it before I would do it. The logic was not there and he would not explain. The advisory of the club took his side and tried to make me apologize for asking and expecting an answer in an educational environment. This was even brought all the way up the levels where my parents had to step in.</p><p>If a school would try and punish me for honestly trying to learn then its very possible. My situation contained 3-4 very stupid adults along with 10-15 who were keeping there heads down.</p><p>Both ways are honestly very possible.</p><p>Now that being said. One of the 2 people with access may have accidentally activated the wrong computers software. The picture was taken and contained something that surprised and disturbed the employee enough where he felt it needed to be reported.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea , one would think so... however your forgetting the level of stupid we have running our schools.In high school I was almost thrown out of a club because one of the volunteers asked me to do something and I insisted to know the reasoning behind it before I would do it .
The logic was not there and he would not explain .
The advisory of the club took his side and tried to make me apologize for asking and expecting an answer in an educational environment .
This was even brought all the way up the levels where my parents had to step in.If a school would try and punish me for honestly trying to learn then its very possible .
My situation contained 3-4 very stupid adults along with 10-15 who were keeping there heads down.Both ways are honestly very possible.Now that being said .
One of the 2 people with access may have accidentally activated the wrong computers software .
The picture was taken and contained something that surprised and disturbed the employee enough where he felt it needed to be reported .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea, one would think so... however your forgetting the level of stupid we have running our schools.In high school I was almost thrown out of a club because one of the volunteers asked me to do something and I insisted to know the reasoning behind it before I would do it.
The logic was not there and he would not explain.
The advisory of the club took his side and tried to make me apologize for asking and expecting an answer in an educational environment.
This was even brought all the way up the levels where my parents had to step in.If a school would try and punish me for honestly trying to learn then its very possible.
My situation contained 3-4 very stupid adults along with 10-15 who were keeping there heads down.Both ways are honestly very possible.Now that being said.
One of the 2 people with access may have accidentally activated the wrong computers software.
The picture was taken and contained something that surprised and disturbed the employee enough where he felt it needed to be reported.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31242116</id>
	<title>Re:Security</title>
	<author>tekgoblin</author>
	<datestamp>1266918960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Response to questions about allegations: <a href="http://www.tekgoblin.com/2087/news/lmsd-questions-answers-regarding-laptop-allegation/" title="tekgoblin.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.tekgoblin.com/2087/news/lmsd-questions-answers-regarding-laptop-allegation/</a> [tekgoblin.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Response to questions about allegations : http : //www.tekgoblin.com/2087/news/lmsd-questions-answers-regarding-laptop-allegation/ [ tekgoblin.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Response to questions about allegations: http://www.tekgoblin.com/2087/news/lmsd-questions-answers-regarding-laptop-allegation/ [tekgoblin.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222140</id>
	<title>SOP</title>
	<author>yoshi\_mon</author>
	<datestamp>1266748740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right out of modern PR 101:  When busted on something really really bad 1) Deny Deny Deny, and 2) Spin like mad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right out of modern PR 101 : When busted on something really really bad 1 ) Deny Deny Deny , and 2 ) Spin like mad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right out of modern PR 101:  When busted on something really really bad 1) Deny Deny Deny, and 2) Spin like mad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224066</id>
	<title>Re:Security</title>
	<author>stormy\_petral</author>
	<datestamp>1266760620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Um, the cameras on these units are not hidden. Just not obvious at first if you don't know its there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , the cameras on these units are not hidden .
Just not obvious at first if you do n't know its there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, the cameras on these units are not hidden.
Just not obvious at first if you don't know its there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221796</id>
	<title>What if the student LIED?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266746280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are only hearing one side of the story here.  The side the family wants to push to get a pay day from the school district.</p><p>What if the student lied and said the laptop was stolen?  The school district hasn't said anything publicly about this because of a lawsuit. Could you blame them?</p><p>Lets pretend there was a world where the student or family reported the laptop as stolen.  The school activates antitheft software to recover the taxpayers property.  They find that the student and family still have the laptop.  Instead of owning up to the theft they LIE and sue the school to get out of what they have done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are only hearing one side of the story here .
The side the family wants to push to get a pay day from the school district.What if the student lied and said the laptop was stolen ?
The school district has n't said anything publicly about this because of a lawsuit .
Could you blame them ? Lets pretend there was a world where the student or family reported the laptop as stolen .
The school activates antitheft software to recover the taxpayers property .
They find that the student and family still have the laptop .
Instead of owning up to the theft they LIE and sue the school to get out of what they have done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are only hearing one side of the story here.
The side the family wants to push to get a pay day from the school district.What if the student lied and said the laptop was stolen?
The school district hasn't said anything publicly about this because of a lawsuit.
Could you blame them?Lets pretend there was a world where the student or family reported the laptop as stolen.
The school activates antitheft software to recover the taxpayers property.
They find that the student and family still have the laptop.
Instead of owning up to the theft they LIE and sue the school to get out of what they have done.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222248</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>nahdude812</author>
	<datestamp>1266749220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the security software was not a secret.  Parents and students were told of its existence, they just weren't required to sign an acknowledgement of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the security software was not a secret .
Parents and students were told of its existence , they just were n't required to sign an acknowledgement of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the security software was not a secret.
Parents and students were told of its existence, they just weren't required to sign an acknowledgement of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222924</id>
	<title>Re:One possibility</title>
	<author>macs4all</author>
	<datestamp>1266752940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>There's one way the school could be telling the truth about this. They didn't say this explicitly, so it's not clear, but:
The lawsuit alleges that the school accused the student of inappropriate behavior. That behavior could have been reporting his laptop as "stolen", then continuing to use it. The school maintains that they only use the webcams to take a still photo when a laptop has been reported stolen, to aid in recovering it. If the laptop was reported stolen, the school took a picture, they saw that the student who reported it was the one using it, and they confronted the student with this evidence, that would explain both the lawsuit and the school's position.
Sort of odd that the school's response wouldn't explain that, if that is indeed what happened. But people tend to omit important details like that when there's a lawsuit pending, on advice of counsel...</p></div><p>Except for the fact that they have already posted a statement, AND a FAQ. Neither of them mentions that the student have EVER "reported the laptop stolen".<br> <br>
Whoever modded this "insightful" wasn't very "insightful" themselves, methinks.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's one way the school could be telling the truth about this .
They did n't say this explicitly , so it 's not clear , but : The lawsuit alleges that the school accused the student of inappropriate behavior .
That behavior could have been reporting his laptop as " stolen " , then continuing to use it .
The school maintains that they only use the webcams to take a still photo when a laptop has been reported stolen , to aid in recovering it .
If the laptop was reported stolen , the school took a picture , they saw that the student who reported it was the one using it , and they confronted the student with this evidence , that would explain both the lawsuit and the school 's position .
Sort of odd that the school 's response would n't explain that , if that is indeed what happened .
But people tend to omit important details like that when there 's a lawsuit pending , on advice of counsel...Except for the fact that they have already posted a statement , AND a FAQ .
Neither of them mentions that the student have EVER " reported the laptop stolen " .
Whoever modded this " insightful " was n't very " insightful " themselves , methinks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's one way the school could be telling the truth about this.
They didn't say this explicitly, so it's not clear, but:
The lawsuit alleges that the school accused the student of inappropriate behavior.
That behavior could have been reporting his laptop as "stolen", then continuing to use it.
The school maintains that they only use the webcams to take a still photo when a laptop has been reported stolen, to aid in recovering it.
If the laptop was reported stolen, the school took a picture, they saw that the student who reported it was the one using it, and they confronted the student with this evidence, that would explain both the lawsuit and the school's position.
Sort of odd that the school's response wouldn't explain that, if that is indeed what happened.
But people tend to omit important details like that when there's a lawsuit pending, on advice of counsel...Except for the fact that they have already posted a statement, AND a FAQ.
Neither of them mentions that the student have EVER "reported the laptop stolen".
Whoever modded this "insightful" wasn't very "insightful" themselves, methinks.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221552</id>
	<title>In-home Reprimand</title>
	<author>Luthair</author>
	<datestamp>1266744720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>So then why was a student reprimanded for their in home behaviour with a picture from the webcam used as evidence?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So then why was a student reprimanded for their in home behaviour with a picture from the webcam used as evidence ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So then why was a student reprimanded for their in home behaviour with a picture from the webcam used as evidence?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222584</id>
	<title>Re:One possibility</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266750960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HURRR LOOK AT ME, I didn't read the article because I'm a fucking retard.</p><p>The kid was fucking eating CANDY in his fucking bedroom, and these pedophile school admins watching him on his webcam though it was drugs. So they told his parents, and presented stills from the videos they recorded.</p><p>These pedophiles are going to prison where they belong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HURRR LOOK AT ME , I did n't read the article because I 'm a fucking retard.The kid was fucking eating CANDY in his fucking bedroom , and these pedophile school admins watching him on his webcam though it was drugs .
So they told his parents , and presented stills from the videos they recorded.These pedophiles are going to prison where they belong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HURRR LOOK AT ME, I didn't read the article because I'm a fucking retard.The kid was fucking eating CANDY in his fucking bedroom, and these pedophile school admins watching him on his webcam though it was drugs.
So they told his parents, and presented stills from the videos they recorded.These pedophiles are going to prison where they belong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222172</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>nahdude812</author>
	<datestamp>1266748860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, the media reports that the plaintiff contradicts it.  It's right there in the title of the article you linked: "<b>Student says</b> official mistook candy for drugs on webcam pic"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , the media reports that the plaintiff contradicts it .
It 's right there in the title of the article you linked : " Student says official mistook candy for drugs on webcam pic "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, the media reports that the plaintiff contradicts it.
It's right there in the title of the article you linked: "Student says official mistook candy for drugs on webcam pic"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221926</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222532</id>
	<title>FBI involved and Search of computers ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266750660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The FBI is now involved in the investigation:</p><p>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=31004</p><p>There is a lot of information out there on this. To get the point across to the school administration, I would go in and make sure they understand this as I issue the search warrant:</p><p>Any pictures found of these kids in a state of undress will result in prosecution of the individuals involved as sex offenders which will result in charges, prosecution and loss of job and mandatory registration as a sex offender.</p><p>Once that is out there, I would think they might be hesitant to use it as much as they have been.</p><p>To quote one article:</p><p>The Lower Merion School District, in response to a suit filed by a student, has acknowledged that webcams were remotely activated 42 times in the past 14 months, but only to find missing, lost or stolen laptops &mdash; which the district noted would include "a loaner computer that, against regulations, might be taken off campus."</p><p>Sounds like they need a better tracking system/process INSIDE of the school.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The FBI is now involved in the investigation : http : //blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/ ? p = 31004There is a lot of information out there on this .
To get the point across to the school administration , I would go in and make sure they understand this as I issue the search warrant : Any pictures found of these kids in a state of undress will result in prosecution of the individuals involved as sex offenders which will result in charges , prosecution and loss of job and mandatory registration as a sex offender.Once that is out there , I would think they might be hesitant to use it as much as they have been.To quote one article : The Lower Merion School District , in response to a suit filed by a student , has acknowledged that webcams were remotely activated 42 times in the past 14 months , but only to find missing , lost or stolen laptops    which the district noted would include " a loaner computer that , against regulations , might be taken off campus .
" Sounds like they need a better tracking system/process INSIDE of the school .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The FBI is now involved in the investigation:http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=31004There is a lot of information out there on this.
To get the point across to the school administration, I would go in and make sure they understand this as I issue the search warrant:Any pictures found of these kids in a state of undress will result in prosecution of the individuals involved as sex offenders which will result in charges, prosecution and loss of job and mandatory registration as a sex offender.Once that is out there, I would think they might be hesitant to use it as much as they have been.To quote one article:The Lower Merion School District, in response to a suit filed by a student, has acknowledged that webcams were remotely activated 42 times in the past 14 months, but only to find missing, lost or stolen laptops — which the district noted would include "a loaner computer that, against regulations, might be taken off campus.
"Sounds like they need a better tracking system/process INSIDE of the school.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31227364</id>
	<title>Hello I am school system administrator!</title>
	<author>dogzdik</author>
	<datestamp>1266836520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like webcam on laptops., I visit many pretty boys.

Praise Jesus.

School system is good, protect boys from having laptops stolen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like webcam on laptops. , I visit many pretty boys .
Praise Jesus .
School system is good , protect boys from having laptops stolen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like webcam on laptops., I visit many pretty boys.
Praise Jesus.
School system is good, protect boys from having laptops stolen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223054</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>slyfox</author>
	<datestamp>1266753780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A student has been quoted as saying:</p><p><i>"Frequently, the green lights next to our iSight webcams will turn on. The school district claims that this is just a glitch. We are all doubting this now."</i></p><p><a href="http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/school-accused-of-using-webcam-to-photograph-student-at-home/" title="nytimes.com">http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/school-accused-of-using-webcam-to-photograph-student-at-home/</a> [nytimes.com]</p><p>The lawsuit filed in court states:</p><p><i>"[The student] was at home using a school issued laptop that was neither reported lost nor stolen when his image was captured by Defendants without his or his parents' permission and while he was at home."</i></p><p><a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/print/9159778/Irate\_parents\_in\_Pa.\_say\_schools\_use\_peeping\_tom\_technology\_" title="computerworld.com">http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/print/9159778/Irate\_parents\_in\_Pa.\_say\_schools\_use\_peeping\_tom\_technology\_</a> [computerworld.com]</p><p>If this is true, sounds pretty damning to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A student has been quoted as saying : " Frequently , the green lights next to our iSight webcams will turn on .
The school district claims that this is just a glitch .
We are all doubting this now .
" http : //thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/school-accused-of-using-webcam-to-photograph-student-at-home/ [ nytimes.com ] The lawsuit filed in court states : " [ The student ] was at home using a school issued laptop that was neither reported lost nor stolen when his image was captured by Defendants without his or his parents ' permission and while he was at home .
" http : //www.computerworld.com/s/article/print/9159778/Irate \ _parents \ _in \ _Pa. \ _say \ _schools \ _use \ _peeping \ _tom \ _technology \ _ [ computerworld.com ] If this is true , sounds pretty damning to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A student has been quoted as saying:"Frequently, the green lights next to our iSight webcams will turn on.
The school district claims that this is just a glitch.
We are all doubting this now.
"http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/school-accused-of-using-webcam-to-photograph-student-at-home/ [nytimes.com]The lawsuit filed in court states:"[The student] was at home using a school issued laptop that was neither reported lost nor stolen when his image was captured by Defendants without his or his parents' permission and while he was at home.
"http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/print/9159778/Irate\_parents\_in\_Pa.\_say\_schools\_use\_peeping\_tom\_technology\_ [computerworld.com]If this is true, sounds pretty damning to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225686</id>
	<title>Re:One possibility</title>
	<author>dcollins</author>
	<datestamp>1266772140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The school maintains that they only use the webcams to take a still photo when a laptop has been reported stolen, to aid in recovering it."</p><p>Again, the school never claimed that. Read carefully: "... the security plan was developed by the technology department to give the District the ability to recover lost, stolen or missing student laptops". There's no claim that the plan was in fact followed faithfully.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The school maintains that they only use the webcams to take a still photo when a laptop has been reported stolen , to aid in recovering it .
" Again , the school never claimed that .
Read carefully : " ... the security plan was developed by the technology department to give the District the ability to recover lost , stolen or missing student laptops " .
There 's no claim that the plan was in fact followed faithfully .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The school maintains that they only use the webcams to take a still photo when a laptop has been reported stolen, to aid in recovering it.
"Again, the school never claimed that.
Read carefully: "... the security plan was developed by the technology department to give the District the ability to recover lost, stolen or missing student laptops".
There's no claim that the plan was in fact followed faithfully.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222872</id>
	<title>What really happened, my theory</title>
	<author>wronkiew</author>
	<datestamp>1266752640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>1. School gives laptop to student<br>
2. Student reports laptop stolen, takes it home<br>
3. School activates security feature, randomly catches student popping pills while doing homework<br>
4. IT sends photo of student to principal to get laptop back<br>
5. Idiot principal gives student "don't do drugs" talk instead<br>
6. Student panics, tells parents the school is spying on everyone<br>
7. Parents sue school<br>
8. Media frenzy!</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
School gives laptop to student 2 .
Student reports laptop stolen , takes it home 3 .
School activates security feature , randomly catches student popping pills while doing homework 4 .
IT sends photo of student to principal to get laptop back 5 .
Idiot principal gives student " do n't do drugs " talk instead 6 .
Student panics , tells parents the school is spying on everyone 7 .
Parents sue school 8 .
Media frenzy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
School gives laptop to student
2.
Student reports laptop stolen, takes it home
3.
School activates security feature, randomly catches student popping pills while doing homework
4.
IT sends photo of student to principal to get laptop back
5.
Idiot principal gives student "don't do drugs" talk instead
6.
Student panics, tells parents the school is spying on everyone
7.
Parents sue school
8.
Media frenzy!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31229554</id>
	<title>Witch Hunt</title>
	<author>waa</author>
	<datestamp>1266855840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"But those who know what's best for us<br>
Must rise and save us from ourselves<br>
<br>
Quick to judge,<br>
Quick to anger,<br>
Slow to understand<br>
Ignorance and prejudice<br>
And fear walk hand in hand."<br>
<br>
"Witch Hunt - part III of Fear"<br>
Neil Peart - RUSH</htmltext>
<tokenext>" But those who know what 's best for us Must rise and save us from ourselves Quick to judge , Quick to anger , Slow to understand Ignorance and prejudice And fear walk hand in hand .
" " Witch Hunt - part III of Fear " Neil Peart - RUSH</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"But those who know what's best for us
Must rise and save us from ourselves

Quick to judge,
Quick to anger,
Slow to understand
Ignorance and prejudice
And fear walk hand in hand.
"

"Witch Hunt - part III of Fear"
Neil Peart - RUSH</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223652</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>mrshermanoaks</author>
	<datestamp>1266757620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not if the student took the picture of himself. The "big question" here is: Who activated the camera?</p><p>Also, I don't think I've seen anywhere that indicates this security software can snap pictures without turning the green light on next to the camera. Meaning that we're not exactly talking about "covert surveillance".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not if the student took the picture of himself .
The " big question " here is : Who activated the camera ? Also , I do n't think I 've seen anywhere that indicates this security software can snap pictures without turning the green light on next to the camera .
Meaning that we 're not exactly talking about " covert surveillance " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not if the student took the picture of himself.
The "big question" here is: Who activated the camera?Also, I don't think I've seen anywhere that indicates this security software can snap pictures without turning the green light on next to the camera.
Meaning that we're not exactly talking about "covert surveillance".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221658</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>nahdude812</author>
	<datestamp>1266745260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why does it not occur to you that perhaps the <em>student</em> took the photo and emailed it to their buddies?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does it not occur to you that perhaps the student took the photo and emailed it to their buddies ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does it not occur to you that perhaps the student took the photo and emailed it to their buddies?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223586</id>
	<title>Re:Enough sensationalism already.</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1266757140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Each $1,000 laptop is insured by parents, with $55/yr premium and $100 deductible. 2,800 laptops netted $154K, enough to fully replace 154 laptops every year. But they lost only 42, and over more than a year. So the school should just remove all the security software and let the insurance deal with it.</p></div></blockquote><p>I wouldn't be surprised to find that the theft/recovery system was mandated by the insurance company.  It's pretty much standard procedure for commercial insurance to be conditional on the insured being proactive.  It's also standard procedure for insurance rates to be reduced if the insured takes steps to reduce risks.<br>
&nbsp; <br>
&nbsp; </p><blockquote><div><blockquote><div><p>I still find it far more plausible that the student took a photo himself and sent it to his buddies</p></div></blockquote><p>Then you need to explain how the remote webcam activation thing was claimed, and was true (at least to the capability of doing it.)</p></div></blockquote><p>Trivial - kid gets in trouble at school and complains to parents.  Parents call school and want to know how the school could have obtained the picture and why the computer has a webcam anyhow.  The administrator explains the laptops have a webcam as part of the security system.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Each $ 1,000 laptop is insured by parents , with $ 55/yr premium and $ 100 deductible .
2,800 laptops netted $ 154K , enough to fully replace 154 laptops every year .
But they lost only 42 , and over more than a year .
So the school should just remove all the security software and let the insurance deal with it.I would n't be surprised to find that the theft/recovery system was mandated by the insurance company .
It 's pretty much standard procedure for commercial insurance to be conditional on the insured being proactive .
It 's also standard procedure for insurance rates to be reduced if the insured takes steps to reduce risks .
    I still find it far more plausible that the student took a photo himself and sent it to his buddiesThen you need to explain how the remote webcam activation thing was claimed , and was true ( at least to the capability of doing it .
) Trivial - kid gets in trouble at school and complains to parents .
Parents call school and want to know how the school could have obtained the picture and why the computer has a webcam anyhow .
The administrator explains the laptops have a webcam as part of the security system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Each $1,000 laptop is insured by parents, with $55/yr premium and $100 deductible.
2,800 laptops netted $154K, enough to fully replace 154 laptops every year.
But they lost only 42, and over more than a year.
So the school should just remove all the security software and let the insurance deal with it.I wouldn't be surprised to find that the theft/recovery system was mandated by the insurance company.
It's pretty much standard procedure for commercial insurance to be conditional on the insured being proactive.
It's also standard procedure for insurance rates to be reduced if the insured takes steps to reduce risks.
  
  I still find it far more plausible that the student took a photo himself and sent it to his buddiesThen you need to explain how the remote webcam activation thing was claimed, and was true (at least to the capability of doing it.
)Trivial - kid gets in trouble at school and complains to parents.
Parents call school and want to know how the school could have obtained the picture and why the computer has a webcam anyhow.
The administrator explains the laptops have a webcam as part of the security system.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222822</id>
	<title>Re:One possibility</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266752340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.'s can view my webcam anytime you wish.I am a mechanical/electrical guy and dont trust anything online. you will probably see my sphincter since i built my webcam into my chair. How about a probe? I missed my proctologist exam this year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You / .
's can view my webcam anytime you wish.I am a mechanical/electrical guy and dont trust anything online .
you will probably see my sphincter since i built my webcam into my chair .
How about a probe ?
I missed my proctologist exam this year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You /.
's can view my webcam anytime you wish.I am a mechanical/electrical guy and dont trust anything online.
you will probably see my sphincter since i built my webcam into my chair.
How about a probe?
I missed my proctologist exam this year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632</id>
	<title>Enough sensationalism already.</title>
	<author>nahdude812</author>
	<datestamp>1266745080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> The district's claim that it "has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever" doesn't square with the allegations which set off this whole storm.</p></div></blockquote><p>You're right.  It's he-said, she-said.  But since the school district does have controls in place to protect against abuses (only two people have access to the function, and this access is logged), and because I'd be very, <em>very</em> surprised if the district was foolish enough to act in the way that the suit alleges, I'm siding firmly on the side of "someone needs to provide some proof before I condemn anyone" - something the sensationalist media seems to be trying very hard doesn't happen.</p><p><em>Now this may be what it was intended for, but it seems that someone didn't get the memo</em> - or so the plaintiffs allege.<nobr> <wbr></nobr><em>...why does the school say it won't start using the snooping feature again without "express written notification to all students and families"? </em>I don't think it indicates anything at all that the district will more clearly communicate the existence and usage patterns of the software before they activate it again.  The district has successfully used the software to recover 18 of 42 lost laptops, so if anything it seems like they might need even stronger software than this (though this is still $18,000 worth of taxpayer money the software has saved).  Parents and students were surprised to know of its existence, and the district feels in retrospect that whatever communication was made in this regard was insufficient.  That sounds like a reasonable action to me.</p><p>I still find it far more plausible that the student took a photo himself and sent it to his buddies, than that one of two people with access to the system abused it, then exposed their abuse to a principal (who is not one of the two with access), who decided instead of doing something about the abuse, to then further abuse it themselves, and expose the abuse to the student and the student's parents.  Sorry, one kid being kinda stupid is far more likely than two adults being <em>very</em> stupid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The district 's claim that it " has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever " does n't square with the allegations which set off this whole storm.You 're right .
It 's he-said , she-said .
But since the school district does have controls in place to protect against abuses ( only two people have access to the function , and this access is logged ) , and because I 'd be very , very surprised if the district was foolish enough to act in the way that the suit alleges , I 'm siding firmly on the side of " someone needs to provide some proof before I condemn anyone " - something the sensationalist media seems to be trying very hard does n't happen.Now this may be what it was intended for , but it seems that someone did n't get the memo - or so the plaintiffs allege .
...why does the school say it wo n't start using the snooping feature again without " express written notification to all students and families " ?
I do n't think it indicates anything at all that the district will more clearly communicate the existence and usage patterns of the software before they activate it again .
The district has successfully used the software to recover 18 of 42 lost laptops , so if anything it seems like they might need even stronger software than this ( though this is still $ 18,000 worth of taxpayer money the software has saved ) .
Parents and students were surprised to know of its existence , and the district feels in retrospect that whatever communication was made in this regard was insufficient .
That sounds like a reasonable action to me.I still find it far more plausible that the student took a photo himself and sent it to his buddies , than that one of two people with access to the system abused it , then exposed their abuse to a principal ( who is not one of the two with access ) , who decided instead of doing something about the abuse , to then further abuse it themselves , and expose the abuse to the student and the student 's parents .
Sorry , one kid being kinda stupid is far more likely than two adults being very stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The district's claim that it "has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever" doesn't square with the allegations which set off this whole storm.You're right.
It's he-said, she-said.
But since the school district does have controls in place to protect against abuses (only two people have access to the function, and this access is logged), and because I'd be very, very surprised if the district was foolish enough to act in the way that the suit alleges, I'm siding firmly on the side of "someone needs to provide some proof before I condemn anyone" - something the sensationalist media seems to be trying very hard doesn't happen.Now this may be what it was intended for, but it seems that someone didn't get the memo - or so the plaintiffs allege.
...why does the school say it won't start using the snooping feature again without "express written notification to all students and families"?
I don't think it indicates anything at all that the district will more clearly communicate the existence and usage patterns of the software before they activate it again.
The district has successfully used the software to recover 18 of 42 lost laptops, so if anything it seems like they might need even stronger software than this (though this is still $18,000 worth of taxpayer money the software has saved).
Parents and students were surprised to know of its existence, and the district feels in retrospect that whatever communication was made in this regard was insufficient.
That sounds like a reasonable action to me.I still find it far more plausible that the student took a photo himself and sent it to his buddies, than that one of two people with access to the system abused it, then exposed their abuse to a principal (who is not one of the two with access), who decided instead of doing something about the abuse, to then further abuse it themselves, and expose the abuse to the student and the student's parents.
Sorry, one kid being kinda stupid is far more likely than two adults being very stupid.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221878</id>
	<title>Re:Security</title>
	<author>mellon</author>
	<datestamp>1266746880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yup.   The irony here of course is that by creating this kerfuffle, they've completely eliminated any actual security the webcam system might have given them.   Now everybody knows that these laptops have hidden cameras, so they'll just tape over them.   So there's little chance that the cameras will ever actually be used to identify any thief now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup .
The irony here of course is that by creating this kerfuffle , they 've completely eliminated any actual security the webcam system might have given them .
Now everybody knows that these laptops have hidden cameras , so they 'll just tape over them .
So there 's little chance that the cameras will ever actually be used to identify any thief now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup.
The irony here of course is that by creating this kerfuffle, they've completely eliminated any actual security the webcam system might have given them.
Now everybody knows that these laptops have hidden cameras, so they'll just tape over them.
So there's little chance that the cameras will ever actually be used to identify any thief now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221842</id>
	<title>Re:Enough sensationalism already.</title>
	<author>tftp</author>
	<datestamp>1266746640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>The district has successfully used the software to recover 18 of 42 lost laptops, so if anything it seems like they might need even stronger software than this (though this is still $18,000 worth of taxpayer money the software has saved)</i>
</p><p>
Each $1,000 laptop is insured by parents, with $55/yr premium and $100 deductible. 2,800 laptops netted $154K, enough to fully replace 154 laptops every year. But they lost only 42, and over more than a year. So the school should just remove all the security software and let the insurance deal with it.
</p><p>
<i>I still find it far more plausible that the student took a photo himself and sent it to his buddies</i>
</p><p>
Then you need to explain how the remote webcam activation thing was claimed, and was true (at least to the capability of doing it.) Clairvoyance is not the answer<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The district has successfully used the software to recover 18 of 42 lost laptops , so if anything it seems like they might need even stronger software than this ( though this is still $ 18,000 worth of taxpayer money the software has saved ) Each $ 1,000 laptop is insured by parents , with $ 55/yr premium and $ 100 deductible .
2,800 laptops netted $ 154K , enough to fully replace 154 laptops every year .
But they lost only 42 , and over more than a year .
So the school should just remove all the security software and let the insurance deal with it .
I still find it far more plausible that the student took a photo himself and sent it to his buddies Then you need to explain how the remote webcam activation thing was claimed , and was true ( at least to the capability of doing it .
) Clairvoyance is not the answer : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The district has successfully used the software to recover 18 of 42 lost laptops, so if anything it seems like they might need even stronger software than this (though this is still $18,000 worth of taxpayer money the software has saved)

Each $1,000 laptop is insured by parents, with $55/yr premium and $100 deductible.
2,800 laptops netted $154K, enough to fully replace 154 laptops every year.
But they lost only 42, and over more than a year.
So the school should just remove all the security software and let the insurance deal with it.
I still find it far more plausible that the student took a photo himself and sent it to his buddies

Then you need to explain how the remote webcam activation thing was claimed, and was true (at least to the capability of doing it.
) Clairvoyance is not the answer :-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221956</id>
	<title>We haven't spied on students before</title>
	<author>sizzzzlerz</author>
	<datestamp>1266747420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and we promise not to ever do it again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and we promise not to ever do it again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and we promise not to ever do it again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221622</id>
	<title>Expectation of Privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266745020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bring my company-supplied craptop home and get busted surfin' porn.  Misuse of property.</p><p>If you're going to use the taxpayers' equipment, expect some restrictions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bring my company-supplied craptop home and get busted surfin ' porn .
Misuse of property.If you 're going to use the taxpayers ' equipment , expect some restrictions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bring my company-supplied craptop home and get busted surfin' porn.
Misuse of property.If you're going to use the taxpayers' equipment, expect some restrictions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31229750</id>
	<title>Re:Enough sensationalism already.</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1266856680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Each $1,000 laptop is insured by parents, with $55/yr premium and $100 deductible.</p></div><p>So, a dad could beat a PA school admin to death with the laptop that was used to watch his daughter undress and only be out $155? Sweet deal.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Each $ 1,000 laptop is insured by parents , with $ 55/yr premium and $ 100 deductible.So , a dad could beat a PA school admin to death with the laptop that was used to watch his daughter undress and only be out $ 155 ?
Sweet deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Each $1,000 laptop is insured by parents, with $55/yr premium and $100 deductible.So, a dad could beat a PA school admin to death with the laptop that was used to watch his daughter undress and only be out $155?
Sweet deal.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222312</id>
	<title>http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/8471529</title>
	<author>Gnu Zealand</author>
	<datestamp>1266749520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>An aside, but Do schools in the US give/lend laptops to kids? Is this normal? "... officials brag that they give every one of their 1800 high-schoolers laptop computers"</htmltext>
<tokenext>An aside , but Do schools in the US give/lend laptops to kids ?
Is this normal ?
" ... officials brag that they give every one of their 1800 high-schoolers laptop computers "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An aside, but Do schools in the US give/lend laptops to kids?
Is this normal?
"... officials brag that they give every one of their 1800 high-schoolers laptop computers"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223684</id>
	<title>Re:Security</title>
	<author>10101001 10101001</author>
	<datestamp>1266757920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Now everybody knows that these laptops have hidden cameras, so they'll just tape over them.</p></div></blockquote><p>No, odds are good that taping over the hidden cameras will be a punishable offense.  Perhaps it can be conspiracy to engage in theft, considering their given lame excuse for the camera.</p><blockquote><div><p>So there's little chance that the cameras will ever actually be used to identify any thief now.</p></div></blockquote><p>Odds are good, only idiot thieves would have been caught anyways...and they would have likely been caught anyways.  Ie, idiot thieves would neither (a) wipe the HD (and the spying software) nor (b) boot from a clean medium to investigate the laptop's data (and hence not run/load the spying software).  Of course, if you're not wiping the HD, you're likely to be caught at some point with significant evidence that the laptop you sold/are using is stolen.  And if you're simply running the built-in software, odds are good that you'll visit some website, be auto-logged in, and in your snooping into the persons account be pretty traceable by your IP address.</p><p>Now, if they had some sort of hardware GPS device that could be remotely activated and give the GPS unit's location, that'd be a whole other story.  Of course, a thief could still potentially rip out the GPS device (presuming it's not well integrated into the motherboard), but it'd be a lot less obvious that a school would pay for the expense of an always-available GPS and would be a much better deterrent to *announce* the damn device.  No, the odds are good that school officials presumed they owned the laptop and could remotely access the webcam whenever they pleased.</p><p>That they would later try to justify it with some school-wide policy or point out specific misdeeds to justify it really doesn't cover the obvious issues that (a) a thief could likely be another minor student and (b) you could catch said thief in a sexual act (age of consent is 16 in Pennsylvania).  In short, the simple fact that the produced images from a hidden camera are such a hot bed for possibly criminal action (I mean, what part of "hidden camera" and "school" sounds like a good idea?) really shows a severe lack of forethought at minimum and at worst a casual massive overextension of authority.  I mean, what sort of legal predicament would an actual full-time, legal guardian be in for placing a hidden camera in their 16 year old child's bedroom?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now everybody knows that these laptops have hidden cameras , so they 'll just tape over them.No , odds are good that taping over the hidden cameras will be a punishable offense .
Perhaps it can be conspiracy to engage in theft , considering their given lame excuse for the camera.So there 's little chance that the cameras will ever actually be used to identify any thief now.Odds are good , only idiot thieves would have been caught anyways...and they would have likely been caught anyways .
Ie , idiot thieves would neither ( a ) wipe the HD ( and the spying software ) nor ( b ) boot from a clean medium to investigate the laptop 's data ( and hence not run/load the spying software ) .
Of course , if you 're not wiping the HD , you 're likely to be caught at some point with significant evidence that the laptop you sold/are using is stolen .
And if you 're simply running the built-in software , odds are good that you 'll visit some website , be auto-logged in , and in your snooping into the persons account be pretty traceable by your IP address.Now , if they had some sort of hardware GPS device that could be remotely activated and give the GPS unit 's location , that 'd be a whole other story .
Of course , a thief could still potentially rip out the GPS device ( presuming it 's not well integrated into the motherboard ) , but it 'd be a lot less obvious that a school would pay for the expense of an always-available GPS and would be a much better deterrent to * announce * the damn device .
No , the odds are good that school officials presumed they owned the laptop and could remotely access the webcam whenever they pleased.That they would later try to justify it with some school-wide policy or point out specific misdeeds to justify it really does n't cover the obvious issues that ( a ) a thief could likely be another minor student and ( b ) you could catch said thief in a sexual act ( age of consent is 16 in Pennsylvania ) .
In short , the simple fact that the produced images from a hidden camera are such a hot bed for possibly criminal action ( I mean , what part of " hidden camera " and " school " sounds like a good idea ?
) really shows a severe lack of forethought at minimum and at worst a casual massive overextension of authority .
I mean , what sort of legal predicament would an actual full-time , legal guardian be in for placing a hidden camera in their 16 year old child 's bedroom ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now everybody knows that these laptops have hidden cameras, so they'll just tape over them.No, odds are good that taping over the hidden cameras will be a punishable offense.
Perhaps it can be conspiracy to engage in theft, considering their given lame excuse for the camera.So there's little chance that the cameras will ever actually be used to identify any thief now.Odds are good, only idiot thieves would have been caught anyways...and they would have likely been caught anyways.
Ie, idiot thieves would neither (a) wipe the HD (and the spying software) nor (b) boot from a clean medium to investigate the laptop's data (and hence not run/load the spying software).
Of course, if you're not wiping the HD, you're likely to be caught at some point with significant evidence that the laptop you sold/are using is stolen.
And if you're simply running the built-in software, odds are good that you'll visit some website, be auto-logged in, and in your snooping into the persons account be pretty traceable by your IP address.Now, if they had some sort of hardware GPS device that could be remotely activated and give the GPS unit's location, that'd be a whole other story.
Of course, a thief could still potentially rip out the GPS device (presuming it's not well integrated into the motherboard), but it'd be a lot less obvious that a school would pay for the expense of an always-available GPS and would be a much better deterrent to *announce* the damn device.
No, the odds are good that school officials presumed they owned the laptop and could remotely access the webcam whenever they pleased.That they would later try to justify it with some school-wide policy or point out specific misdeeds to justify it really doesn't cover the obvious issues that (a) a thief could likely be another minor student and (b) you could catch said thief in a sexual act (age of consent is 16 in Pennsylvania).
In short, the simple fact that the produced images from a hidden camera are such a hot bed for possibly criminal action (I mean, what part of "hidden camera" and "school" sounds like a good idea?
) really shows a severe lack of forethought at minimum and at worst a casual massive overextension of authority.
I mean, what sort of legal predicament would an actual full-time, legal guardian be in for placing a hidden camera in their 16 year old child's bedroom?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225884</id>
	<title>Have you seen this?</title>
	<author>Grendel Drago</author>
	<datestamp>1266774000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Matt Skala's <a href="http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/lawpoli/scanner-proposal.php" title="sooke.bc.ca">modest proposal</a> [sooke.bc.ca] was apparently written <i>before</i> this story broke. Yes, his satire is outpacing reality, but only just barely.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Matt Skala 's modest proposal [ sooke.bc.ca ] was apparently written before this story broke .
Yes , his satire is outpacing reality , but only just barely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Matt Skala's modest proposal [sooke.bc.ca] was apparently written before this story broke.
Yes, his satire is outpacing reality, but only just barely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222288</id>
	<title>The obvious question</title>
	<author>Hazelfield</author>
	<datestamp>1266749400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The school gives students computers with remote webcam activation. REMOTE WEBCAM ACTIVATION. I mean, how sick is that? How could anyone accept that kind of thing in the first place?<br> <br>

I don't care what's it supposed to be used for. I don't care what they tell me they'll use it for. I don't care that the laptop technically belongs to the school. A webcam that is not controlled by me  - and me only - does not belong in my computer. Period.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The school gives students computers with remote webcam activation .
REMOTE WEBCAM ACTIVATION .
I mean , how sick is that ?
How could anyone accept that kind of thing in the first place ?
I do n't care what 's it supposed to be used for .
I do n't care what they tell me they 'll use it for .
I do n't care that the laptop technically belongs to the school .
A webcam that is not controlled by me - and me only - does not belong in my computer .
Period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The school gives students computers with remote webcam activation.
REMOTE WEBCAM ACTIVATION.
I mean, how sick is that?
How could anyone accept that kind of thing in the first place?
I don't care what's it supposed to be used for.
I don't care what they tell me they'll use it for.
I don't care that the laptop technically belongs to the school.
A webcam that is not controlled by me  - and me only - does not belong in my computer.
Period.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222088</id>
	<title>Boiling all of this down to the lesson learned...</title>
	<author>syntap</author>
	<datestamp>1266748320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All webcams should have masking tape over them, uncover when expressly needed and re-cover when done.  Mics too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All webcams should have masking tape over them , uncover when expressly needed and re-cover when done .
Mics too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All webcams should have masking tape over them, uncover when expressly needed and re-cover when done.
Mics too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223178</id>
	<title>Re:One possibility</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266754500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except, the school said the inappropriate behavior was taking what they assumed to be illegal drugs.<br>"...The Robbinses' attorney, Mark Haltzman, 'It's absolutely not true that this was a lost or stolen laptop.' Haltzman added, 'They were trying to allege that when Blake was holding two Mike &amp; Ikes in his hand &ndash; which he apparently loves and eats religiously &ndash; that those were pills and somehow he was involved in selling drugs. And, you know, that's what they wanted to bring to his attention. That's what they were bringing to the parents' attention. But that doesn't fall in line with their stated purpose of why they're turning on these webcams.'"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except , the school said the inappropriate behavior was taking what they assumed to be illegal drugs .
" ...The Robbinses ' attorney , Mark Haltzman , 'It 's absolutely not true that this was a lost or stolen laptop .
' Haltzman added , 'They were trying to allege that when Blake was holding two Mike &amp; Ikes in his hand    which he apparently loves and eats religiously    that those were pills and somehow he was involved in selling drugs .
And , you know , that 's what they wanted to bring to his attention .
That 's what they were bringing to the parents ' attention .
But that does n't fall in line with their stated purpose of why they 're turning on these webcams .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except, the school said the inappropriate behavior was taking what they assumed to be illegal drugs.
"...The Robbinses' attorney, Mark Haltzman, 'It's absolutely not true that this was a lost or stolen laptop.
' Haltzman added, 'They were trying to allege that when Blake was holding two Mike &amp; Ikes in his hand – which he apparently loves and eats religiously – that those were pills and somehow he was involved in selling drugs.
And, you know, that's what they wanted to bring to his attention.
That's what they were bringing to the parents' attention.
But that doesn't fall in line with their stated purpose of why they're turning on these webcams.
'"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221582</id>
	<title>Riiight.</title>
	<author>nhytefall</author>
	<datestamp>1266744840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Webcams hardly equal a lojack.  Seems to me, this whole incident is nothing more than the reflection of our society's values of surveilance absent privacy, all in the name of security of course.  As is said on The Simpsons, "Won't someone think of the children?!?"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Webcams hardly equal a lojack .
Seems to me , this whole incident is nothing more than the reflection of our society 's values of surveilance absent privacy , all in the name of security of course .
As is said on The Simpsons , " Wo n't someone think of the children ? ! ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Webcams hardly equal a lojack.
Seems to me, this whole incident is nothing more than the reflection of our society's values of surveilance absent privacy, all in the name of security of course.
As is said on The Simpsons, "Won't someone think of the children?!?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221874</id>
	<title>Re:What if the student LIED?</title>
	<author>Volante3192</author>
	<datestamp>1266746820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, what should be in place is if the laptop goes off campus, the family needs to pay a security deposit in advance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , what should be in place is if the laptop goes off campus , the family needs to pay a security deposit in advance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, what should be in place is if the laptop goes off campus, the family needs to pay a security deposit in advance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222254</id>
	<title>Clarification</title>
	<author>forand</author>
	<datestamp>1266749280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I do not believe that they have stated that the 18 recovered laptops were recovered due to the software. That may be the case but I do not believe it has been stated thus far.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do not believe that they have stated that the 18 recovered laptops were recovered due to the software .
That may be the case but I do not believe it has been stated thus far .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do not believe that they have stated that the 18 recovered laptops were recovered due to the software.
That may be the case but I do not believe it has been stated thus far.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224218</id>
	<title>Kiddie Porn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266761580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pictures of naked kids are kiddie porn.  Why did they not arrest the school administrator for this crime?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pictures of naked kids are kiddie porn .
Why did they not arrest the school administrator for this crime ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pictures of naked kids are kiddie porn.
Why did they not arrest the school administrator for this crime?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221596</id>
	<title>Nothing wrong with it?</title>
	<author>dbolger</author>
	<datestamp>1266744900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>And if there was nothing wrong with it, why does the school say it won't start using the snooping feature again without "express written notification to all students and families"?</b></p><p>Umm, because there was a national scandal regarding it and the school is desperately trying to cover its ass on all sides?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And if there was nothing wrong with it , why does the school say it wo n't start using the snooping feature again without " express written notification to all students and families " ? Umm , because there was a national scandal regarding it and the school is desperately trying to cover its ass on all sides ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if there was nothing wrong with it, why does the school say it won't start using the snooping feature again without "express written notification to all students and families"?Umm, because there was a national scandal regarding it and the school is desperately trying to cover its ass on all sides?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31227104</id>
	<title>Go after the teachers not the school</title>
	<author>Blue\_Wombat</author>
	<datestamp>1266833040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It the sue the school then the long suffering taxpayers (who did nothing wrong) will have to cough up and/or the school budget will be cut causing kids education to suffer. It's the sleazebags who did this who should bear the responsibility and punishment. They should bring in the FBI and/or state police. If teachers started using camera to covertly watch kids in their bedrooms then all they have to do is seize the schools monitoring servers. If they find one solitary picture of a kid under 18 getting changed then they can go after the administrator and or any teachers &amp; technical staff involved for child porn. Charge them with a felony, strip them of their teaching licence, give them a couple of years in Club Fed as a roommate with "Bubba", and register them as a sex offender for life when they come out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It the sue the school then the long suffering taxpayers ( who did nothing wrong ) will have to cough up and/or the school budget will be cut causing kids education to suffer .
It 's the sleazebags who did this who should bear the responsibility and punishment .
They should bring in the FBI and/or state police .
If teachers started using camera to covertly watch kids in their bedrooms then all they have to do is seize the schools monitoring servers .
If they find one solitary picture of a kid under 18 getting changed then they can go after the administrator and or any teachers &amp; technical staff involved for child porn .
Charge them with a felony , strip them of their teaching licence , give them a couple of years in Club Fed as a roommate with " Bubba " , and register them as a sex offender for life when they come out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It the sue the school then the long suffering taxpayers (who did nothing wrong) will have to cough up and/or the school budget will be cut causing kids education to suffer.
It's the sleazebags who did this who should bear the responsibility and punishment.
They should bring in the FBI and/or state police.
If teachers started using camera to covertly watch kids in their bedrooms then all they have to do is seize the schools monitoring servers.
If they find one solitary picture of a kid under 18 getting changed then they can go after the administrator and or any teachers &amp; technical staff involved for child porn.
Charge them with a felony, strip them of their teaching licence, give them a couple of years in Club Fed as a roommate with "Bubba", and register them as a sex offender for life when they come out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221840</id>
	<title>There's only one reply to them:</title>
	<author>Perp Atuitie</author>
	<datestamp>1266746640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would you need to turn on the spy software unless you were told the machine was stolen? They're using it to preemptively find out if the student looks like s/he might steal it? The thing is obviously a trojan horse, and it's obviously time for a special emergency  school board election.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would you need to turn on the spy software unless you were told the machine was stolen ?
They 're using it to preemptively find out if the student looks like s/he might steal it ?
The thing is obviously a trojan horse , and it 's obviously time for a special emergency school board election .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would you need to turn on the spy software unless you were told the machine was stolen?
They're using it to preemptively find out if the student looks like s/he might steal it?
The thing is obviously a trojan horse, and it's obviously time for a special emergency  school board election.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221908</id>
	<title>Re:One possibility</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1266747060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the above poster is correct that there are at least 42 instances of taking pictures of kids in their home, then I don't think they were all reported stolen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the above poster is correct that there are at least 42 instances of taking pictures of kids in their home , then I do n't think they were all reported stolen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the above poster is correct that there are at least 42 instances of taking pictures of kids in their home, then I don't think they were all reported stolen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224804</id>
	<title>Oh, the irony! The delicious, delicious irony!</title>
	<author>TheVelvetFlamebait</author>
	<datestamp>1266765900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>And if there was nothing wrong with it, why does the school say it won't start using the snooping feature again without "express written notification to all students and families"?</p></div></blockquote><p>Yes, indeed. Why are they running if they have nothing to hide?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And if there was nothing wrong with it , why does the school say it wo n't start using the snooping feature again without " express written notification to all students and families " ? Yes , indeed .
Why are they running if they have nothing to hide ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if there was nothing wrong with it, why does the school say it won't start using the snooping feature again without "express written notification to all students and families"?Yes, indeed.
Why are they running if they have nothing to hide?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222310</id>
	<title>What if</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266749520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All the school has to do is say the laptop anti theft security feature was activated in all the cases, <i>including</i> this latest case.  Nothing beyond that. No accusation then if anyone is lying, just that they are telling the truth. They didn't say that at first though. Their first message was they detected "inappropriate behavior". That is not the same as saying they received word the laptop was stolen so they activated the feature. They still haven't said that directly, only that the anti theft activation has been activated previously in other cases, so many reported stolen, so many recovered, etc.</p><p>Of course, it could be that BOTH sides are lying and trying to engage in cover your ass here, who knows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All the school has to do is say the laptop anti theft security feature was activated in all the cases , including this latest case .
Nothing beyond that .
No accusation then if anyone is lying , just that they are telling the truth .
They did n't say that at first though .
Their first message was they detected " inappropriate behavior " .
That is not the same as saying they received word the laptop was stolen so they activated the feature .
They still have n't said that directly , only that the anti theft activation has been activated previously in other cases , so many reported stolen , so many recovered , etc.Of course , it could be that BOTH sides are lying and trying to engage in cover your ass here , who knows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the school has to do is say the laptop anti theft security feature was activated in all the cases, including this latest case.
Nothing beyond that.
No accusation then if anyone is lying, just that they are telling the truth.
They didn't say that at first though.
Their first message was they detected "inappropriate behavior".
That is not the same as saying they received word the laptop was stolen so they activated the feature.
They still haven't said that directly, only that the anti theft activation has been activated previously in other cases, so many reported stolen, so many recovered, etc.Of course, it could be that BOTH sides are lying and trying to engage in cover your ass here, who knows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221796</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224746</id>
	<title>Re:Enough sensationalism already.</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1266765300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I still find it far more plausible that the student took a photo himself and sent it to his buddies, than that one of two people with access to the system abused it, then exposed their abuse to a principal (who is not one of the two with access), who decided instead of doing something about the abuse, to then further abuse it themselves, and expose the abuse to the student and the student's parents. Sorry, one kid being kinda stupid is far more likely than two adults being very stupid.</p></div><p>I find it extremely IMplausible that the school would not even mention any of this in their press release if any of it even remotely fit the facts. I find it even harder to believe they'd rather be investigated by the FBI than mention any of that.</p><p>In a world where school officials (not the same ones) are known for strip searching middle school girls on suspicion of possession of <b>IBUPROFEN</b>, schools evacuated when a kid walks in carrying a burrito wrapped in food service foil, and many many more such gems, I'm afraid this level of stupidity as FAR too believable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I still find it far more plausible that the student took a photo himself and sent it to his buddies , than that one of two people with access to the system abused it , then exposed their abuse to a principal ( who is not one of the two with access ) , who decided instead of doing something about the abuse , to then further abuse it themselves , and expose the abuse to the student and the student 's parents .
Sorry , one kid being kinda stupid is far more likely than two adults being very stupid.I find it extremely IMplausible that the school would not even mention any of this in their press release if any of it even remotely fit the facts .
I find it even harder to believe they 'd rather be investigated by the FBI than mention any of that.In a world where school officials ( not the same ones ) are known for strip searching middle school girls on suspicion of possession of IBUPROFEN , schools evacuated when a kid walks in carrying a burrito wrapped in food service foil , and many many more such gems , I 'm afraid this level of stupidity as FAR too believable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still find it far more plausible that the student took a photo himself and sent it to his buddies, than that one of two people with access to the system abused it, then exposed their abuse to a principal (who is not one of the two with access), who decided instead of doing something about the abuse, to then further abuse it themselves, and expose the abuse to the student and the student's parents.
Sorry, one kid being kinda stupid is far more likely than two adults being very stupid.I find it extremely IMplausible that the school would not even mention any of this in their press release if any of it even remotely fit the facts.
I find it even harder to believe they'd rather be investigated by the FBI than mention any of that.In a world where school officials (not the same ones) are known for strip searching middle school girls on suspicion of possession of IBUPROFEN, schools evacuated when a kid walks in carrying a burrito wrapped in food service foil, and many many more such gems, I'm afraid this level of stupidity as FAR too believable.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31228302</id>
	<title>Re:Security</title>
	<author>Theoboley</author>
	<datestamp>1266847500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>could always put it on mute...  just a thought.</htmltext>
<tokenext>could always put it on mute... just a thought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>could always put it on mute...  just a thought.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222122</id>
	<title>"Security" is a catch-all excuse</title>
	<author>Huntr</author>
	<datestamp>1266748560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"You're not against security are you, ya Commie?"
<br>
<br>People have tried to get away with this kind of fascist bullshit in the name of security forever, it's just ramped up in the last 10 years.  It's just especially hard to swallow when it's so <i>blatant</i>.  Did no one at this school district have any 2nd thoughts about the impropriety of this?  No one?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" You 're not against security are you , ya Commie ?
" People have tried to get away with this kind of fascist bullshit in the name of security forever , it 's just ramped up in the last 10 years .
It 's just especially hard to swallow when it 's so blatant .
Did no one at this school district have any 2nd thoughts about the impropriety of this ?
No one ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"You're not against security are you, ya Commie?
"

People have tried to get away with this kind of fascist bullshit in the name of security forever, it's just ramped up in the last 10 years.
It's just especially hard to swallow when it's so blatant.
Did no one at this school district have any 2nd thoughts about the impropriety of this?
No one?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224236</id>
	<title>Few points I don't understand.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266761640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How does the software work when they take it home and don't have an active internet connection?  Does it try to find a way out, or capture pictures and send them back when it's back online?</p><p>It seems that a thief could just keep it from communicating out until they wipe out the software and dial home capabilities.  So......seems like kind of a useless anti-theft system.</p><p>And if it isn't connected to the net......how do they tell it to take pictures?</p><p>What Im getting at here is, does the laptop just random take pictures when it can't stream them to the home controller?  And if it does that, then it's quite obviously not only turned on during thefts....because it would be a rather useless feature if it didn't take pictures unless it was told to do so....when it's in an uncontrollable location (no net/wifi/etc).</p><p>If kids noticed the green light coming on sporadically then it seems the thing just randomly captures a picture...because it'd be a pretty stupid system if you had to have someone tell it when to take pictures all night and day every day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How does the software work when they take it home and do n't have an active internet connection ?
Does it try to find a way out , or capture pictures and send them back when it 's back online ? It seems that a thief could just keep it from communicating out until they wipe out the software and dial home capabilities .
So......seems like kind of a useless anti-theft system.And if it is n't connected to the net......how do they tell it to take pictures ? What Im getting at here is , does the laptop just random take pictures when it ca n't stream them to the home controller ?
And if it does that , then it 's quite obviously not only turned on during thefts....because it would be a rather useless feature if it did n't take pictures unless it was told to do so....when it 's in an uncontrollable location ( no net/wifi/etc ) .If kids noticed the green light coming on sporadically then it seems the thing just randomly captures a picture...because it 'd be a pretty stupid system if you had to have someone tell it when to take pictures all night and day every day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does the software work when they take it home and don't have an active internet connection?
Does it try to find a way out, or capture pictures and send them back when it's back online?It seems that a thief could just keep it from communicating out until they wipe out the software and dial home capabilities.
So......seems like kind of a useless anti-theft system.And if it isn't connected to the net......how do they tell it to take pictures?What Im getting at here is, does the laptop just random take pictures when it can't stream them to the home controller?
And if it does that, then it's quite obviously not only turned on during thefts....because it would be a rather useless feature if it didn't take pictures unless it was told to do so....when it's in an uncontrollable location (no net/wifi/etc).If kids noticed the green light coming on sporadically then it seems the thing just randomly captures a picture...because it'd be a pretty stupid system if you had to have someone tell it when to take pictures all night and day every day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224138</id>
	<title>Re:the school already is lying</title>
	<author>Attila Dimedici</author>
	<datestamp>1266761100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The school denies Misuse, however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child's bedroom.</p></div><p>I am not defending the school, but at this point, I have not seen the school (or anybody other than the plaintiff) mention the photo. Therefore we don't know that was actually the case. However, if the school official didn't show the child and his parents a photo of him engaged in "inappropriate behavior", why doesn't the school say that that never happened? If the picture came from somewhere other than the school using the laptop webcam, again, why doesn't the school say so? <br>
Basically, the school statement never addresses how the plaintiff came to know about the "security" on the laptop that lets them turn on the laptop webcam.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The school denies Misuse , however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child 's bedroom.I am not defending the school , but at this point , I have not seen the school ( or anybody other than the plaintiff ) mention the photo .
Therefore we do n't know that was actually the case .
However , if the school official did n't show the child and his parents a photo of him engaged in " inappropriate behavior " , why does n't the school say that that never happened ?
If the picture came from somewhere other than the school using the laptop webcam , again , why does n't the school say so ?
Basically , the school statement never addresses how the plaintiff came to know about the " security " on the laptop that lets them turn on the laptop webcam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The school denies Misuse, however they have photographic evidence of a child committing inappropriate behavior in the child's bedroom.I am not defending the school, but at this point, I have not seen the school (or anybody other than the plaintiff) mention the photo.
Therefore we don't know that was actually the case.
However, if the school official didn't show the child and his parents a photo of him engaged in "inappropriate behavior", why doesn't the school say that that never happened?
If the picture came from somewhere other than the school using the laptop webcam, again, why doesn't the school say so?
Basically, the school statement never addresses how the plaintiff came to know about the "security" on the laptop that lets them turn on the laptop webcam.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224876</id>
	<title>It is as simple as this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266766680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The the webcams are supposed to be used to catch drugs, then they are a terribly inefficient way of doing so.<br>If they are to catch children not doing homework, then again a stupid way to measure the amount of time not in use<br>If they are to catch a theif, then they would have never been turned on.<br>If they were for the purposes of pedophila then they would be a very well functioning tool.<br>The real story (that no one is asking) is if the warning light for the webcam was tampered with or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The the webcams are supposed to be used to catch drugs , then they are a terribly inefficient way of doing so.If they are to catch children not doing homework , then again a stupid way to measure the amount of time not in useIf they are to catch a theif , then they would have never been turned on.If they were for the purposes of pedophila then they would be a very well functioning tool.The real story ( that no one is asking ) is if the warning light for the webcam was tampered with or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The the webcams are supposed to be used to catch drugs, then they are a terribly inefficient way of doing so.If they are to catch children not doing homework, then again a stupid way to measure the amount of time not in useIf they are to catch a theif, then they would have never been turned on.If they were for the purposes of pedophila then they would be a very well functioning tool.The real story (that no one is asking) is if the warning light for the webcam was tampered with or not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224348</id>
	<title>Re:Enough sensationalism already.</title>
	<author>fermion</author>
	<datestamp>1266762480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is only one peice of sensationalism.  That students were issue with computer that random people could have, maybe not did, but could spied on minors without their knowledge.  Yes this was a valid security issue, but look at it from the point of view of parents.  A girl is using a computer in her sleep clothes, and some minimum wage tech staring at her getting his jollies, probably selling videos on the internet.  We don't know what controls there are to prevent this.  Sure, it probably never happened, but we can't be sure.
<p>
In any case the result is exactly what should have happened in the first place.  Full disclosure.  With full disclosure parents have options, such as investigating the audits of who is viewing the cameras, limiting use, or even buying personal equipment.
</p><p>
One thing that school is supposed to teach is that people make mistakes, these mistakes have consequences intended to insure those same mistakes are not made again.  In this case, it was mistake to not fully disclose the security.  The consequences in the real world for such mistakes is often a court action.  Hopefully all schools have learned to be less secretive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is only one peice of sensationalism .
That students were issue with computer that random people could have , maybe not did , but could spied on minors without their knowledge .
Yes this was a valid security issue , but look at it from the point of view of parents .
A girl is using a computer in her sleep clothes , and some minimum wage tech staring at her getting his jollies , probably selling videos on the internet .
We do n't know what controls there are to prevent this .
Sure , it probably never happened , but we ca n't be sure .
In any case the result is exactly what should have happened in the first place .
Full disclosure .
With full disclosure parents have options , such as investigating the audits of who is viewing the cameras , limiting use , or even buying personal equipment .
One thing that school is supposed to teach is that people make mistakes , these mistakes have consequences intended to insure those same mistakes are not made again .
In this case , it was mistake to not fully disclose the security .
The consequences in the real world for such mistakes is often a court action .
Hopefully all schools have learned to be less secretive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is only one peice of sensationalism.
That students were issue with computer that random people could have, maybe not did, but could spied on minors without their knowledge.
Yes this was a valid security issue, but look at it from the point of view of parents.
A girl is using a computer in her sleep clothes, and some minimum wage tech staring at her getting his jollies, probably selling videos on the internet.
We don't know what controls there are to prevent this.
Sure, it probably never happened, but we can't be sure.
In any case the result is exactly what should have happened in the first place.
Full disclosure.
With full disclosure parents have options, such as investigating the audits of who is viewing the cameras, limiting use, or even buying personal equipment.
One thing that school is supposed to teach is that people make mistakes, these mistakes have consequences intended to insure those same mistakes are not made again.
In this case, it was mistake to not fully disclose the security.
The consequences in the real world for such mistakes is often a court action.
Hopefully all schools have learned to be less secretive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221544</id>
	<title>First Post...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266744660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... i did not intend to troll.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... i did not intend to troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... i did not intend to troll.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31228302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222254
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31228284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31228902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225990
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31227258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31229750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221874
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31227190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31227404
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31242116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_2010213_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225686
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31242116
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31227190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221878
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225990
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224066
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222388
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31228302
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223684
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221906
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222288
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221924
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222254
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221842
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31229750
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31227258
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223514
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224746
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221564
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31228284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222822
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224266
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221552
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221556
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221658
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221926
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222172
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221778
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225400
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223436
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222248
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222692
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31228902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221916
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222140
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222884
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31225730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222340
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31223306
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222672
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221618
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221874
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31227404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31224416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_2010213.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31221884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_2010213.31222596
</commentlist>
</conversation>
