PROCESS FOR PROTECTING CHILDREN FROM ONLINE PREDATORS

• US 20070282623A1
• Filed: 04/17/2007
• Published: 12/06/2007
• Est. Priority Date: 04/24/2006
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Jon Dattorro
• Original Assignee: Jon Dattorro
• Inventors: Dattorro, Jon
• Application Number:
  US11/736,484
• Publication Number:
  US 20070282623A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 709/225
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/00 Administration; Management

Abstract

A process for protecting children online from sexual predators, contemplated suicide, and premeditated school violence is disclosed: Human female nannys remotely watch computer screens of subscribed children. Using a small cadre of nannys, it is explained why watching large numbers of children is feasible. First, redundancy is introduced to minimize likelihood of a false positive and to ensure no dangerous activity be missed. Next, several forms of time compression are incorporated into the review of children'"'"'s activities. Further, allocation of nannys to children is expressed mathematically as a covex optimization problem. Review-time of children'"'"'s activities is thereby minimized with, provably, no better allocation.

Claims

1. A process for protecting at least one child from at least one predetermined online threat comprising:

a. providing remote-desktop software on at least one remote device,

b. providing at least one human watching the desktop of said remote device having predetermined activity,

whereby a guardian is notified if said remote-desktop software is suspect to defeat, and whereby obfuscation, due to an encrypted transmission to and from said remote device, is circumvented.

2. The process for protecting children of claim 1 wherein said remote-desktop software displays a notification, on said desktop, selected from the group consisting of:

a. an icon, and

b. a balloon, and

c. a webpage, and

d. other predetermined informative window,

whereby said children are made aware of protection by said human.

3. The process for protecting children of claim 1 wherein said human watches and hears said remote device via computer.

4. The process for protecting children of claim 1 wherein a plurality of humans redundantly watch said remote device.

5. The process for protecting children of claim 1 further alerting said guardian of said online threat on said remote device, whereby said guardian can commence discretionary countermeasures.

6. The process for protecting children of claim 5 wherein said guardian is alerted by said human.

7. The process for protecting children of claim 5 further providing a second opinion prior to alerting said guardian.

8. The process for protecting children of claim 1 further prohibiting said human from controlling said remote device, whereby said guardian is satisfied.

9. The process for protecting children of claim 8 wherein said human is prohibited, from controlling said remote device, by an element selected from the group consisting of:

a. said remote-desktop software, and

b. a server, and

c. a nanny graphical user interface, and

d. other predetermined element.

10. The process for protecting children of claim 1 further controlling said remote device upon detection of said online threat thereon, whereby said remote-desktop software, a server, and said human can initiate predetermined countermeasures independently and in concert.

11. The process for protecting children of claim 1 further providing time compression, whereby said human can watch and hear said remote device more quickly than real time.

12. The process for protecting children of claim 1 further providing an optimization algorithm, whereby the plurality of humans are optimally allocated so that said children are reviewed in a least amount of time.

13. The process for protecting children of claim 1 further sorting the plurality of children by a criterion selected from the group consisting of:

a. threat level, and

b. risk level, and

c. age, and

d. sex, and

e. other predetermined criterion,

whereby said children are prioritized and each individual child'"'"'s behavior is characterized.

14. The process for protecting children of claim 1 wherein said human is exclusively female, whereby said guardian is satisfied.

15. The process for protecting children of claim 1 wherein a predator and said child are interchanged, whereby the remote device of said predator can instead be watched and heard.

16. The process for protecting children of claim 1 wherein said remote device is selected from the group consisting of:

a. computer, and

b. laptop computer, and

c. cell phone, and

d. personal digital assistant, and

e. handheld computerized device, and

f. worn computerized device, and

g. other predetermined device.

17. The process for protecting children of claim 1 wherein said remote-desktop software is suspendable and uninstallable only via password and schedule specified by said guardian.

18. The process for protecting children of claim 1 wherein said predetermined activity is detected by an element selected from the group consisting of:

a. said remote-desktop software, and

b. a server, and

c. said human, and

d. other predetermined element,

whereby only the remote devices of active children at risk are watched and heard.

19. The process for protecting children of claim 1 wherein said human watches a plurality of remote devices.