|
the_steve posted:Of course not. It's like congressional bribery: It only counts as a bribe if you say it's a bribe. Otherwise it's just a sparkling donation. Apply the same logic; Investigating actual and legitimate claims of criminal activity shortly after Manchin had "very serious concerns" about the bill outlawing the hunting of homeless people for sport is pure coincidence. So does this mean "yes, that is indeed what I was saying"? The impression I'm getting is that my summary was accurate, but that you don't like how I stated it. Because even though you accused me of "putting words in your mouth", your post appears to at least vaguely confirm every single element of my attempt to summarize it. You're saying that crimes were committed (and I'm assuming you mean federal since that's the only kind the DoJ cares about), you're saying that the DoJ has enough evidence of the crimes that there's probable cause to investigate, and you're saying that "someone" in the Dems stopped the DoJ from prosecuting (there is only one "someone" who actually has the power to do that). Or, as I summed it up, "Are you saying that the Justice Department has evidence of Manchin's daughter committing federal crimes, but that Biden is preventing them from prosecuting?" Although it would be a lot easier to tell whether I'm accurately understanding your argument if you would actually give a straight answer to any of the questions anyone has asked. Or hell, even if you just clearly stated what you were actually talking about, instead of spouting obscure catchphrases that don't make sense outside of whatever deeply online echo chamber you got them from. I asked you twice what federal crime you think the Justice Department has evidence for here. Instead of just answering the question, you're going on aimless rants about bribery and "bullshit with epipens" and "the hunting of homeless people for sport". Which one of those are the answer to the question? Are any of them your answer to the question? I genuinely have no idea, because you appear to be under the impression that everybody already knows exactly what you're vaguely alluding to. To be clear, I'm not asking questions as some kind of gotcha tactic. I'm asking them because I would like you to clearly explain your argument. We're three pages into this argument, and as far as I can tell you have not clearly stated even once what crime you expect the DoJ to charge her with.
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 08:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 10:49 |
|
|
I'm reminded of a Tumblr post frpm a while back (which I don't have on hand) talking about how modern day kids don't have nearly the privacy/freedom from their parents they used to have and it's loving them up, and the prevalence of cell phones is a big part of it (the expectation to call your parents if your out late, some parents outright tracking their cell phone location, etc)
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 09:28
|
|
|
Phones are no help with that, but they're a really small part of the total picture. Parents got poisoned by fear and kids have no autonomy or private time with friends anymore like they used to, and "third spaces" or anywhere you're allowed to roam or do whatever have shriveled and died
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 11:16
|
|
|
I AM GRANDO posted:America’s school system isn’t exactly designed to help children. Other countries have educational systems that are genuinely meant to prepare people to succeed. American schools are partially warehouses meant to keep children away from parents so the parents can work and partially systems meant to habituate children to the environment of a 19-century factory and to accept arbitrary authority exercised against them, but none of those things are really about giving someone what they need to succeed. Even this is outdated; increasingly, American schools are actively sabotaged so that they can be replaced with privatized or religious systems.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 12:46
|
|
|
Staluigi posted:. Parents got poisoned by fear I mean school shootings happen. A lot of this discussion is ignoring why parents want their kids to have phones on them in school.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 12:47
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I mean school shootings happen. A lot of this discussion is ignoring why parents want their kids to have phones on them in school. Yeah, and schools can't fix the underlying worry. While unlikely to happen in a specific school, there is still a possibilty. Otherwise? Just a small bank of free payphones that is accesiable to students especially before ans afterschool. Which is tough ask, not because of the almost extenction of the payphone but because most schools are locked down super tight. Hell, 20+ years ago when I was in high school they were locked down tight, and the only reason I could get to the payphones after school was they were in the "airlock" between the two sets of doors, and thus the outer most doors could remain unlocked at all times.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 13:11
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:School is not "unpaid work," it's education. The presence of smartphones appears to interfere with that education. our school system is not built for education first, it's built for ensuring children are ready for the workforce once they hit 15 to 18 and are legally able to work, with free babysitting during the parents' work day mcdonalds does not care if you can solve trigonometry, they care that you can press the buttons on the cash register touch screen that correspond to what the customer just said into the speaker, and that you can then read the names of the food and find them on the step by step assembly chart taped above the prep stations for the vast majority of people in the school system, mcdonalds and the rest of the lower economic class job hellscape are the only jobs they will ever work what all the boomers in this thread who haven't worked minimum wage jobs in decades don't understand when they're demanding the smartphones be cast into the ocean is that part of being an employee in modern day america is having a phone your boss can contact you via at a moment's notice to let you know the schedule changed and you need to be at the cash register in 1 hour or less or you're fired (this is regardless of if you're still in public schooling, you will be expected to skip school for your job or you will be fired and for a lot of folks working during high school to help support their households, they cannot afford that) i've watched folks get fired on the spot at fast food joints for telling their supervisor they don't own a cell phone and cannot install work apps or be contacted outside of their landline at home having a cell phone, and frankly a smart phone because most people under the age of 30 don't own computers/laptops nowadays and do anything internet-related from their phones, is just part of being a responsible person nowadays in the lower economic classes and it's immensely depressing how much of this thread is out of touch on that regard it'd be nice if schools were a place for education first and foremost still, but that simply hasn't been true for a very long time and never will be true again without significant educational reform to move school away from workplace prep/government paid for babysitting during the work week, and smartphones are an integral part of the workplace nowadays and will never be separated from the children as a result Iamgoofball fucked around with this message at 00:59 on Nov 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 13:16
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:The phones aren't bad because kids are using them to google answers instead of taking notes, they're bad because they're distracting. Yeah the teenagers I interact with regularly have said not responding to drama online ASAP is seen as folks saying "no comment" to reporters Junior High sucked for me, I would not want it in my pocket everywhere I go.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 13:51
|
|
|
Bellmaker posted:Yeah the teenagers I interact with regularly have said not responding to drama online ASAP is seen as folks saying "no comment" to reporters I really worry what I would have done in Junior High if it were like it is now. I was constantly made fun of (short, fat) and it really took it's toll on me...but at least once the day was done, I got to go home. There were a few times where I actually considered suicide, but thankfully got my mental health (mostly) under control. I can't imagine how hard kids have it these days with 24x7 access to their peers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 14:03
|
|
|
AtraMorS posted:some students (very far from all or even most, but enough to notice) can't remember what's due unless it comes to them through a notification of some kind. The concept of manually sticking "Next Thursday" in their head is a foreign concept. In a vacuum, this is probably a good thing. Human brains only learn what is required. If you don't force your brain to remember stuff over and over again, you won't get good at it. But on the flip side, if there's no practical need to get good at memorizing calendars, why force people to get good at it? This may sound like a weird argument, but "what if you end up in a situation without your smart phone but you really have to remember you were supposed to meet someone" is a rare enough thing that it seems pointless to practice for it. It's like practicing for spotting tigers in tall grass. Like, smartphones are just better at managing a calendar than our brain. Not being able to do it yourself is about as big of a handicap as not being able to write in cursive. It's shocking to you because you grew up with that being so important, but it's not anymore. The bigger issue is one of distraction. I have ADD and growing up, I was given a laptop at school (unlike everyone else) to take notes on with the theory that it would help me. It really didn't help on its own - it just distracted me. But that wasn't really the laptop's fault. It was that I never learned (and wasn't taught, because nobody knew how to teach me) the coping skills necessary to use the tools without getting distracted. I eventually did learn them, after much pain and many setbacks, but I personally think struggling with that and overcoming it is a great asset to me now. This is a huge problem with adults - think about how many grown rear end people are sitting on Zoom calls playing Hearthstone instead of participating right this second. You are going to spend the rest of your life metaphorically and possibly eventually literally connected to a computer. You need to learn to handle that more than you need to learn to memorize due dates. School isn't some fixed platonic ideal handed down from God. It's to prepare for being an adult and using cell phones as part of school should be introduced as part of the curriculum. They should honestly replace calculators and tests should be rewritten assuming access to the Internet because that's more representative of what you actually need to be productive now. KillHour fucked around with this message at 14:06 on Nov 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 14:03
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I mean school shootings happen. A lot of this discussion is ignoring why parents want their kids to have phones on them in school. The trend was before that (not like shootings didn't help that along though), its origins were more with stranger danger poo poo and the supposed constant threat of abduction
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 14:22
|
|
|
Yeah it's not shootings - it's the "never talk to strangers" thing. In the 80s and 90s the way we introduced kids to the world was to say "absolutely every person you see is trying to get you, to [worst thing child is able to imagine at that age]," an attitude it turns out some people are unable to shed as they move into adulthood.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 14:41
|
|
|
Misunderstood posted:Yeah it's not shootings - it's the "never talk to strangers" thing. In the 80s and 90s the way we introduced kids to the world was to say "absolutely every person you see is trying to get you, to [worst thing child is able to imagine at that age]," an attitude it turns out some people are unable to shed as they move into adulthood. I remember being told in DARE that as soon as I hit middle school people were going to walk up to me on the street and offer me drugs like all of the time. Still waiting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 14:49
|
|
|
Misunderstood posted:Yeah it's not shootings - it's the "never talk to strangers" thing. In the 80s and 90s the way we introduced kids to the world was to say "absolutely every person you see is trying to get you, to [worst thing child is able to imagine at that age]," an attitude it turns out some people are unable to shed as they move into adulthood. FizFashizzle posted:I remember being told in DARE that as soon as I hit middle school people were going to walk up to me on the street and offer me drugs like all of the time. Plus don't forget the dangers of Dungeons and Dragons in the 80s.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 14:51
|
|
|
Smartphones taking over like they have is perhaps the fastest and most impactful thing that’s happened to this planet since the blast that killed the dinosaurs. Just completely transformed the lived experience in a shorter time than anything else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 14:56
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Huh? Of course the Republicans are perceived as being better with the “economy”. This is also a stereotype that’s been forever true. And it’s a separate thing from perception about social programs. Hell, it almost seems to be at odds with each other, based on stereotypes about federal taxes You just have to look at 2020 quote:Voters narrowly trust Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden more to handle the economy over President Donald Trump, who has been banking on the pre-coronavirus economy buoying his reelection campaign, a new poll finds. https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/2020-10-21/poll-biden-pulls-ahead-of-trump-on-handling-of-economy It's seesawed depending on the election (lol Kerry was beating Bush on it in 2014, while Obama was behind Romney in 2012, tho he trounced McCain by like 20 percent). So I'll amend that to giving up the advantage Biden had in the last round.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 14:57
|
|
|
My 11 year old in 5th grade doesn't have his own phone. I dread when I need to get him one. He might be an outlier because he has AuADHD and is absoluteely screen addicted. I have an old smart phone I let him use around the house for internet that is severely locked down and it is still a problem with him trying to sneak and use it to watch stupid minecraft youtube videos. He might end up being great at IT from tryring to circumvent my controls on devices.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 14:58
|
|
|
Medullah posted:Plus don't forget the dangers of Dungeons and Dragons in the 80s. It was magic the gathering for us. Not even anything crazy; just like tempest. Guess the Catholic Church doesn’t tolerate slither decks (nor should they)
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 14:58
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:It was magic the gathering for us. Not even anything crazy; just like tempest. I've posted this on SA before but can't remember where, my favorite satanic panic story is my friend who had insanely religious parents who were super strict. They found out he was playing D&D and burned all his books in a bonfire. Now, years later, he's the strongest atheist I know. Take that mom and dad!
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 15:05
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:You just have to look at 2020 Let me ask more directly, why are you bringing up people’s trust in a politician’s handling of the economy when we were discussing social programs? For the life of me, I’ve never heard anyone claim that social programs falls under that category Kalit fucked around with this message at 15:26 on Nov 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 15:09
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:? They absolutely are, that's literally why the US abandoned Prohibition and are ceding ground by the electoral cycle in the War on Drugs. In the US this battle is lost because enough parents will clearly never accept it to make it a viable policy, just look at the poster who explained as much ITT. Downsides are ignored, downplayed, or simply accepted as the price of something regarded by many as so beneficial as to be mandatory. They might well be wrong - good luck convincing them. No. Futility arguments are not valid. You should not ever use them; they are a thought-terminating brainworm, a reactionary talking point dressed up as insight. The idea that laws do not effect behavior or cannot exist because of some innate defect causing people to violate them has never been valid and has always been an excuse to not consider the possibility of change. Making these specific counterfactual appeals as the basis for refusing to consider the possibility of change amounts to a principle of inactivity.  Albert Hirschman identified "rhetorics of futility" as one of the three core framings deployed to ruin the consideration of change, from the French revolution to Rush Limbaugh: "arguments that are in effect contraptions specifically designed to make dialogue and deliberation impossible." These arguments seem appealing, but in fact function to avoid thinking about or dealing with specific information about the context of the proposed change. To quote my media lit thread writeup: quote:Hirshman notes that over time, ... these rhetorics have shifted from appealing to divine order to appeals to human nature; where once a given progressive change was destined to fail because it struck against the “natural order” or would be undone by “providence”, nowadays we’re more likely to blame “people” or “society”. If you want to try to prove your claim that phone bans are futile, you're going to have to go a hell of a lot further than just asserting it, you're going to have to prove it- and you're making a categorical claim, so you've already got a problem: multiple users have described how phone bans and restrictions exist and function in other contexts, and that other far more onerous changes can and have been implemented. It is absolutely possible, and there is no innate defect or drive that would make it impossible. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 15:24 on Nov 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 15:22
|
|
|
To answer a few more things I've seen/expand on last post: Ultimately, the parents feeling entitled to dictate schools' phone policy comes from an inability (or unwillingness) to discriminate between "important" and "urgent". Leaving the phones in lockers and only having them accessible before/after school, or during breaks will cover 98 percent of cases parents want to be in touch (the other 2% you go through the office, like we literally always did as kids ourselves); it's just that these parents can't deal with having to wait. They cannot delay gratification. We wonder where the kids get it from... Sure, Chromebooks can be a distraction. They are not the same as a phone though!
Chromebook management best practices:
Yeah, nothing is 100% and kids can have chatrooms in shared Google Docs (generally that can be viewed by the school if needed...) but the amount of harm reduction that is possible from taking the above measures is significant. It's just that there's no will to try. Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 15:27
|
|
|
In reality the futility argument indicates that you are implementing rules that people do not want to find to be unreasonable. The idea of a phone ban is absolutely both to large numbers of people. Instead of realizing that, many of you are going full IN on being over the top authoritarian on the issue. Just have reasonable use policies and aid children in having better control and etiquette with their devices as part of the curriculum. Meanwhile, kids are going to have and use phones in the real world, and schools need to get their poo poo together to actually solve the problem with reasonable rules and enforcement of those rules instead of trying to wish it didn't exist and force everyone else to do the same. As for my situation, my kid has had to call me almost a dozen times this year due to a missed bus, just no bus at all, or with info on someone else that lives near us needing transportation as well due to no bus or missing a bus. This is all after extracurriculars as well so nobody is in the office to let her use a phone. Even if the school had a policy to not bring a phone she would absolutely bring her phone, and the school can get hosed because they don't need to know or care if she isn't using it inappropriately. That doesn't mean I want her playing on her phone in class time or using it in other inappropriate ways. Someone made an argument about not having phones in the class due to it being able to take pictures. My response is that cameras have existed in schools far longer than phones. Kids were taking disposable cameras, old point and shoot digitals, and even old film cameras to school regularly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 15:40
|
|
|
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/28/billionaire-backed-koch-network-endorses-nikki-haley-for-president.html This isn't really a surprise, but Haley's got some more pocket money now. quote:The political network largely financed by billionaire Charles Koch endorsed Nikki Haley for president Tuesday, boosting her primary campaign against the Republican frontrunner, former President Donald Trump. I don't remember what the Koch position was like in 2016. I suspect they were big Jeb! lovers, but I don't feel like looking that up. EDIT: Ken Langone has also been meeting with Haley, so she may have multiple billionaires explicitly in her corner soon. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/27/ken-langone-to-meet-with-nikki-haley-as-he-considers-support.html Eric Cantonese fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Nov 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 15:51
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:In reality the futility argument indicates that you are implementing rules that people do not want to find to be unreasonable. The idea of a phone ban is absolutely both to large numbers of people. Instead of realizing that, many of you are going full IN on being over the top authoritarian on the issue. Are you going to say what this “reasonable policy” is, as distinct from the systems in the article under discussion?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 15:52
|
|
|
Removing kids that use phones during class from the class would be fine after a number of warnings. Or forcing a check in check out system. I have no issue with preventing their use during class, and schools do need to be able to enforce that. They have these systems in place in most schools already. The problem seems like one of enforcement than figuring out what the rule should be. Just don't do blanket bans as they will not work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 15:58
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Removing kids that use phones during class from the class would be fine after a number of warnings. Or forcing a check in check out system. I have no issue with preventing their use during class, and schools do need to be able to enforce that. So you don't have such a system. You are explicitly just saying do the same poo poo, but harder. The thing that we're talking about not working, based on a study. Do you understand why people think you're being unreasonable?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:03
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:It turns out that none of the unschooling stuff scales (if it even works at small scale in the first place) and the best way to give students a free appropriate public education is in a classroom that has some rules. Why bring up unschooling when no one mentioned it? Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Meanwhile, kids are going to have and use phones in the real world, and schools need to get their poo poo together to actually solve the problem with reasonable rules and enforcement of those rules instead of trying to wish it didn't exist and force everyone else to do the same. What is actually unreasonable about a "ban" in the form of "If we see the phone it will be taken away until the end of the day" like they did with other distractions while I was in school? What on earth is your actual reasonable alternative, because as far as I can tell your proposal so far has been to pretend the problems don't exist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:09
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:So you don't have such a system. You are explicitly just saying do the same poo poo, but harder. The thing that we're talking about not working, based on a study. The study seemed more focused on social media use via a smartphone, not generally having a cell phone. The solution I provided seems to work just fine for my kids school. I actually spoke to a fifth grade teacher yesterday evening about this topic and she indicated that it wasn't really an issue except for a couple kids that don't check their phone in. In those cases extra measures are taken such as removing the distracting and distracted child from the classroom for special 1-1 instruction. My daughter drops her phone off in the bin at the beginning of class, and takes it when she leaves the class. She has the phone before school, during breaks, and after school. There is no issue when rules are enforced.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:09
|
|
|
Ah, okay, I'd seen you say you proposed a solution multiple times in other posts but this is the first time I've actually seen the proposed solution. Your solution is a classroom ban rather than a school ban, enforced by a deposit box? That seems... perfectly in line with what the people you are arguing against so vehemently are saying should be done.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:12
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Ah, okay, I'd seen you say you proposed a solution multiple times in other posts but this is the first time I've actually seen the proposed solution. Your solution is a classroom ban rather than a school ban, enforced by a deposit box? No I've been specifically arguing against a complete ban, which several others have been arguing for.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:13
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Removing kids that use phones during class from the class would be fine after a number of warnings. Or forcing a check in check out system. I have no issue with preventing their use during class, and schools do need to be able to enforce that. I feel like proposing that teachers just do the work to manage which children are allowed to have phones and when is a nonstarter. Like you said, they already have the technical authority to do this, but teachers are famously overworked and in this case I think they'd be undersupported by parents as well. Having a regular procedure for dealing with phones enshrines them as a distraction in the day's schedule, whereas if the kids just kept them at home they'd be no worse off than kids were 20 years ago before smartphones were ubiquitous.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:13
|
|
|
Eletriarnation posted:I feel like proposing that teachers just do the work to manage which children are allowed to have phones and when is a nonstarter. Like you said, they already have the technical authority to do this, but teachers are famously overworked and in this case I think they'd be undersupported by parents as well. Having a regular procedure for dealing with phones enshrines them as a distraction in the day's schedule, whereas if the kids just kept them at home they'd be no worse off than kids were 20 years ago before smartphones were ubiquitous. I've already provided my own personal examples of why this doesn't work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:17
|
|
|
Iamgoofball posted:... This made me curious, so I googled. According to the bureau of labor statistics: quote:In 2020, 73.3 million workers age 16 and older in the United States were paid at hourly rates, representing 55.5 percent of all wage and salary workers. Among those paid by the hour, 247,000 workers earned exactly the prevailing federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 865,000 workers had wages below the federal minimum. Together, these 1.1 million workers with wages at or below the federal minimum made up 1.5 percent of all hourly paid workers. I figure you're probably talking about the kind of job and not the precise number on the paycheck; I just find it interesting. The number is way smaller than I expected, even considering that some states have higher minimums.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:19
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:This made me curious, so I googled. According to the bureau of labor statistics: Minimum wage doesn't mean federal minimum wage; many states have higher minimum wages Edit: you edited to add that
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:21
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I've already provided my own personal examples of why this doesn't work. No, you've thrown a temper tantrum about how the rules shouldn't apply to you and your child's toy is more important than people actually learning at school. You don't provide any evidence except for the classic "well it works in my personal anecdote" line of non-argument and trying to dodge. You've argued with every person here who works in education and refuse to address basic points. This is classic FYGM-lite and people are correct to take you to task. There are a lot of serious issues that you're hand-waving away as non-existent while absolutely refusing to acknowledge that other children besides yours exist and deserve to be taught uninterrupted.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:22
|
|
|
Devor posted:Minimum wage doesn't mean federal minimum wage; many states have higher minimum wages I'm having trouble finding national stats that explicitly account for that and have to at least half-listen to this stupid conference call.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:23
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Let me ask more directly, why are you bringing up people’s trust in a politician’s handling of the economy when we were discussing social programs? For the life of me, I’ve never heard anyone claim that social programs falls under that category The beginning of the conversation included economic polling. Also social programs, is an essential part of the economy and what a lot of people use to survive bad economic conditions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:24
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:No, you've thrown a temper tantrum about how the rules shouldn't apply to you and your child's toy is more important than people actually learning at school. Man your reading comprehension is garbage. Bans will not result in a better outcome, so do tell what your solution is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 10:49 |
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Someone made an argument about not having phones in the class due to it being able to take pictures. My response is that cameras have existed in schools far longer than phones. Kids were taking disposable cameras, old point and shoot digitals, and even old film cameras to school regularly. Yeah and if a student whipped out a 90s rear end camcorder and got on with filming their class without permission that would be extra weird and not ok and petty much any teacher would have stopped it even decades ago, with abundantly reasonable cause. it didn't change the privacy issue because the cameras became smaller and rectangular shaped
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2023 16:28
|
|