• Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    3 months ago

    People really handing their kids devices that have cellular service and unfettered internet access? All my kids devices have 2 layers of adblock, parental controls, and no cell service.

    • qooqie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’ll probably get my kids a dumb phone for school when they get old enough. I want them to have cell service for emergencies of any kind.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        I thought about that but I myself am broke and have gotten all of these from relatives that no longer use them. If I could go back in time, I would have abstained and ripped our N64 from my brother’s closet sooner.

    • ccunix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      Is the sort of parent who gives a 5 year old their own phone going really going to a limit the use? I think the crossover in that Venn diagram is pretty small.

  • EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I went to look around a nursery the other day, one that is attached to a school. We walked past kids that couldn’t have been older than 6-7 dancing (possibly filming) to a TikTok vid, on a brand-new looking iPhone.

    I’m usually against governments getting involved in the internet, since they have such a piss-poor understanding of tech, but it would be good to see some kind of regulation that bans people of a certain age from operating a smartphone without a limited set of operations (i.e. to contact parents, to get school alerts, etc), alongside school bans for the use of social media on school grounds. My wife is a teacher, and cyber bullying is rampant, whether it’s the police getting called in over someone (underage) sending nudes and having them posted online once they break up, or fights being planned via iMessage or WhatsApp, and sometimes even people creating fake Tinder/Grindr profiles of their teachers (or to try to match with them).

    Obviously, there are parents that’ll just say “fuck it, it keeps them quiet” or ones that’ll let them use a smartphone due to peer pressure, but a lot of it can be cut down before it becomes a problem.

    In many ways, I’m quite glad I grew up with AIM and MSN Messenger. This kind of online power would have been crazy to me as a kid, and I don’t envy kids that have to deal with this landscape.

      • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        They don’t let you out of the room if you do that one. Plus the annoying little buggers are cute. And then there’s the inevitable… you’re fucking getting old. In your 20s you tend to be pretty stupid and learn from that. In your 30s your at the top of your game. I’m your 40s you realize how valuable time is and that you’re running out of it. I assume there’s some more wisdom to be had between here and 6 feet under. Actually I’m choosing cremation. I want to be a vanilla creme. Why don’t they just call it burning of the bodies? They gotta call it cremation because it sounds like ice cream like that. But yeah, when you die you don’t take anything with you. So without kids to sell your shit and ruin everything, what’s the point? Right?

  • heartsofwar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Disclaimer: I know the article is for the UK, but I’m in the US, so my reply will be US focused

    There’s always more than one side to every issue…

    • Social media is the devil and Parents before 2000 didn’t have to worry much, or did they, about their kids being on the internet 24/7

    First, you needed a computer, a pretty expensive, bulky item, and then you needed the internet, mostly tied to a fixed landline that interrupted the main form of personal communication up until around the mid 90s. Even in the late 90s, internet options that wouldn’t interrupt the landline service usually had big draw-backs (usually price or shared bandwidth, etc). The point is that while the internet and social media existed back then (newsgroups, BBS, IRC, etc), their availability was limited by external factors.

    Before the age of 15, my parents wouldn’t allow us to have our own computers, we were limited to a few hours per day of screen time, and less than 1 hour per day on the internet. In addition, the 1 hour of internet had to be on our father’s computer which was in public view. These rules didn’t stop us from doing bad stuff, but it definitely limited things.

    After the age of 16, we were able to have our own computers, but internet access was still limited to 1 hour per day. Fortunately for me, I had an older brother that was 18 and leaving home, so before he left, I asked him to create an account with the ISP and I’d pay the bill). At this point, I was 16 with unlimited internet, the only problem was it still interrupted the main house land line, but that changed a year or so later with DSL.

    Even when the technology and availability was semi-difficult to work around, I still got into a ton of online arguments with random, unknown people about stupid stuff, formed online friendships and “relationships”, sexted, even got into arguments with other jealous dudes trying to steal my online girl, etc.

    All of this is to say though that while my social media experience during my teen years wasn’t nearly as bad as what kids are subjected to today, my parents were right that they had reasons to be worried, and I’m sure the rules they did enforce along with the hoops I had to jump through with the tech kept me from making some pretty unfathomable mistakes which is kind of ridiculous considering everything else I did that I’m not admitting to ;-)

    Today parents shove a smart phone into their child’s hand to stop them from crying or to keep them busy, but many don’t realize the power of influence the phone, social media, or they have over their child.

    I really hate to say this, but a parent should not be a friend. My parents didn’t do everything they could, but I’d give them a solid B rating (85 grade) on trying to minimize any bad influence from the internet given the tech that was reasonably priced and at their fingertips. However, today, parents just straight don’t have any excuse.

    There are $50 routers that have pretty extensive, standard parental tech on-board. They can limit the access to the internet per day and for certain hours, log all websites visited, deny access to certain websites, etc. There are more tech savvy options too, logging all traffic, Remote viewing, etc.

    Android and Apple phones can block all incoming / outgoing, calls / SMS except for those on an approved contact list, You can deny access to certain apps, even force the phone / app to go into a limp mode when a certain “on-screen-time” is met, etc

    Parents today have so much available to them to prevent their children from being “mind-controlled” by social media; however, the most important aspect is awareness or resolve to do something about it. A parents’ job, until the child becomes mature enough or legally an adult, is to always present, support, and or sometimes enforce the overall best, healthiest decision.

    While I won’t deny that some stuff on social media has gotten out of control, I mostly think parents today are to blame and the government needs to stay out of it except if they want to enforce a higher minimum age limit for social media or try and penalize the companies for obvious negligence on not properly making the efforts to keep younger children off the platforms.

    • Richard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Sounds like you would be a horrible parent. The last thing kids need is their father to snoop around in their web traffic and erode any kind of privacy. Children are still humans, and you should respect them as such.

      • heartsofwar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Children are still humans, and you should respect them as such

        Absolutely; however, children aren’t adults and until the child is an adult, the parent is the legal custodian for that child. Part of that duty is to protect the child from negative outside influences and / or themselves if need be. When it comes to my child, while they are not an adult, nothing is off the table of consideration in order to protect them.

        The last thing kids need is their father to snoop around in their web traffic and erode any kind of privacy

        Respectfully, we disagree. The last thing a child needs is to be scooped up in a web of lies by an online predator and kidnapped, raped, humiliated, or worse… killed.

        You seem to think I would refuse my child any privacy, but that isn’t the case. I will protect my children the best way I can from any harm, and that starts by being aware and setting limits for them that not only protects them but also protects their privacy. If those limits get violated, then I have cause for concern and would need to re-evaluate those limits… and in that situation, yes, I would snoop on their web traffic.

        I’m a firm believer that the middle road is usually the best stance to take in most situations until you’re given valid reason to act. I doubt anything I have said thus far has swayed your opinion; therefore, I think we will just have to respectfully agree to disagree. :)