Some of the LinkedIn Responses are direct and on-point, and also hilariously/depressingly based depending on how you look at it:

EDIT: In hindsight, I think I should’ve looked into posting this in a different community… It’s closer to a silly “innovation”… soo… is this considered FUD? I also don’t support smoking or vaping, especially among kids. Original title had “privacy-violating” before the “solution”.

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipEnglish
    113·
    3 months ago

    I am all for vape detectors. They only detect the fumes and aren’t really that invasive. They are basiclly specialized fire alarms.

    Nicotine is very bad for developing brains. I don’t understand why you are ok with minors using it in a public school of all things.

    • joe_archer@lemmy.world
      61·
      3 months ago

      Nobody said they were ok with young people vaping. The point people are making is that communication and discipline, both things that require time and skill, would be a better, less invasive approach.

      • DigitalDilemma@lemmy.mlEnglish
        1·
        3 months ago

        The point people are making is that communication and discipline, both things that require time and skill, would be a better, less invasive approach.

        Perhaps that’s being done as well?

        But even if it is, that approach doesn’t work with all people, no matter how skillful or how much time is put into it.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipEnglish
        3·
        3 months ago

        It is literally a glorified smoke alarm.

        Although, I am sure it is a slippery slope. Next the may want to install CO2 detectors and water line monitoring. They even may install pencil sharpeners in the classroom

        • Lightor@lemmy.world
          1·
          3 months ago

          Or they could start monitoring for violent words being said.

          A smoke alarm monitors for an emergency, this is for monitoring people. There is a difference.

          It’s not hard to see how the path of “monitor and report” is sliding into a more police state mindset when it’s been show that the best deterrent is education. And before people say “do both”, no. Stuff like this makes kids see the school as the enemy, someone to work around and try to beat. It destroys any trust.

    • samwise_gamgee@beehaw.orgEnglish
      2·
      3 months ago

      It’s not really the detector that I have a problem with here, it’s the “reduce vaping incidents through social influence” part. Their plan (as I understand it) is to have a display outside the washroom to tell other kids that the person in the washroom is vaping and essentially get them to quit through public shaming, which is both cruel and ineffective. If the detector instead alerted teachers privately that there was someone vaping in the washroom then the teachers would deal with it appropriately, I think it could be okay.

      My brother used to vape back in high school, and punishment never got him to stop, it just made him get more creative about how he hid it. When he eventually did quit after he graduated, he chose to because he knew it was harmful.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipEnglish
        1·
        3 months ago

        I think it is a bigger issue. I think the vaping companies need to be held liable for targeting under age kids.

        I think long term the idea is to keep them from starting to begin with. That’s hard to do but getting it out of school will reduce the spread of the addiction. It definitely will be appreciated by the students who don’t vape and don’t want to smell or inhale it.

    • KingOfSuede@lemmy.world
      02·
      3 months ago

      Nicotine is very bad for developing brains.

      [Citation needed]

      While I don’t disagree that kids shouldn’t be vaping, let’s at least stick to the realm of truth.