Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

France to ban mobile phones in primary, junior and middle schools

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 358 posts

Re: France to ban mobile phones in primary, junior and middle schools

#311

Post by 13of40 »

baldfat wrote: post #294
chrisper wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who had unsupervised access to the internet as a child, I turned out to be just fine. But maybe beacause the internet was way different back then. (I am talking dial up era intrent). To me after all these years the "new" internet got a dystopian image. If I had a child, I'd provide them unsupervised access to the internet I remember, but certainly not to the one from today.

No it was worse back then. From 1995 My Uncle saw my 12 year old male cousin was on AOL and he got messages from men. My cousin just kept deleting them. My Uncle pretended to be a 14 year old girl and it was bad and he reported it to the FBI after AOL did nothing about the situation. Long story short the FBI worked with my Uncle within a week and they arrested 13 predators in one night. My Uncle was on Nightline and…

I remember buying my first webcam and briefly visiting the forum the manufacturer had set up, in 1999 or 2000. Basically the "forum" was about a dozen guys live streaming (postage stamp sized) pictures of their dicks. I don't know exactly what changed, but you don't tend to see things that blatant as much anymore.

Re: France to ban mobile phones in primary, junior and middle schools

#312

Post by baldfat »

setecgastronomy wrote: post #295
baldfat wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous. People freak out if a predator lives int heir neighborhood but they let their child be accessible to millions of predators via their phone or table. This is why kids initial exposure to porn is 8 in the US and 10 when kids are getting addicted. This is all happening prior to puberty. I still remember working with children and teens and found out, throu…

> Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous. Why? > People freak out if a predator lives int heir neighborhood but they let their child be accessible to millions of predators via their phone or table. Well advise the kids of the dangers. I and most of my friends had unsupervised internet access. We are all doing fine. > This is why kids initial exposure to porn is 8 in the US and 10 when kids a…

LOL Techmeme River :

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2017/12/...

> > Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous.

> Why?

Your reasoning with kids. Sure when they are teenagers that's great but children need more than a reasoning parent. Children need to be protected and above everything feel safe. The internet is not a safe place for children nor just YouTube for kids without someone keeping an eye out. Research absolutely proves that children need to feel safe. https://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/persistent-fea...

Now I am not talking about helicopter and babying children. I am saying all children need strong parents that will protect them and help them to make good meaningful decisions and have awesome experiences. They don't need parents saying hey 10 year old Susie there are guys that want to hurt you sexually for their own perverse desires so you need to .... No you tell them they are safe and you are their to help keep them safe. If they ever feel uncomfortable or someone is touching what a bathing suit covers to tell you. You also need to know that the vast majority of predators are family and friends.

If you aren't your children's protector your just throwing you responsibility and weight of parenting on to a child. Again I am not for helicopter and over protective, but all kids need to know that Mom and Dad will protect them (Even if we fail sometimes).

> Every kid is getting "addicted"?

Did I say every? https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/21/technology/personaltech/w...

Yes when the 4th grade boy wrote down the url to where he saw a man having sex with a dog and gave it to my daughter, yeah that kid had some issues. He also had a tablet with Netflix when he was in Kindergarten and still has unlimited access to the internet. Sadly that kid ins't in school anymore due to his mother not protecting him physically or mentally.

> And guess what? 99.99% of 90s kids didn't use webcams.

And guess what kids are being exploited unbelievably now. The Children's Mental Hospital has many homes with just sexually exploited girls ages 11 to 15. There are dozens of them messed up. Most of them were exploited by people they met online.

> No offense, but your kids aren't prepared for the real world.

Hey buddy if I could swear at you I would. My two oldest that were abused for years. They both graduated from college (10% of former foster kids attempt college 50% don't make it past 1st semester) My son is being shipped out to Kuwait with the National Guard and he just got married last month. My daughter she now works full time with the girls who were sexually exploited. You are all focused on over babying children that you think negating a basic parental role of protector messes up kids. Please. They both lived on their own since 19 and when i can help them out I would, but my kids are the most tenacious hard working adults I know, because they knew the neglect they grew up with before my home was crap and that the love and protection they had when they moved in. It was hell for them and us both for the first year or two. In the end they are rocking. Also Mr No Offense I even got an award from the state of Pennsylvania and a bunch of congressional and state plaques for parenting these abused kids to where they aren't in the system anymore and are successful productive members of society.

The first step of parenting children is that you make them feel safe from day one till they are mostly adults. That's essential and you give kids internet with no filters? That's how we have Alex Jone's audience members.

Re: France to ban mobile phones in primary, junior and middle schools

#313

Post by lr4444lr »

setecgastronomy wrote: post #295
baldfat wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous. People freak out if a predator lives int heir neighborhood but they let their child be accessible to millions of predators via their phone or table. This is why kids initial exposure to porn is 8 in the US and 10 when kids are getting addicted. This is all happening prior to puberty. I still remember working with children and teens and found out, throu…

> Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous. Why? > People freak out if a predator lives int heir neighborhood but they let their child be accessible to millions of predators via their phone or table. Well advise the kids of the dangers. I and most of my friends had unsupervised internet access. We are all doing fine. > This is why kids initial exposure to porn is 8 in the US and 10 when kids a…

> Well advise the kids of the dangers. I and most of my friends had unsupervised internet access. We are all doing fine.

Most people who ride in car don't get into an accident. We still wear seatbelts.

> Every kid is getting "addicted"?

Perhaps not the best choice of words from the OP, but look up premature sexualization and psychological trauma.

> No offense, but your kids aren't prepared for the real world. What will they do now that they are adults with no parental supervision. Also, no parent with 5 kids is "responsible".

A comment like that to a stranger can be nothing but offensive. For lack of space or time to use anything more nuanced than crude Freudian terms, the role of the parent is to model the superego for the child while he's too young to understand the consequences of his actions and the dangers of the world.

Re: France to ban mobile phones in primary, junior and middle schools

#314

Post by poooogles »

13of40 wrote: post #311
baldfat wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it was worse back then. From 1995 My Uncle saw my 12 year old male cousin was on AOL and he got messages from men. My cousin just kept deleting them. My Uncle pretended to be a 14 year old girl and it was bad and he reported it to the FBI after AOL did nothing about the situation. Long story short the FBI worked with my Uncle within a week and they arrested 13 predators in one night. My Uncle was on Nightline and…

I remember buying my first webcam and briefly visiting the forum the manufacturer had set up, in 1999 or 2000. Basically the "forum" was about a dozen guys live streaming (postage stamp sized) pictures of their dicks. I don't know exactly what changed, but you don't tend to see things that blatant as much anymore.

>but you don't tend to see things that blatant as much anymore.

I think you stilldo. Chatroulette and similar services were besieged by them a few years ago.

Re: France to ban mobile phones in primary, junior and middle schools

#315

Post by alexvoda »

logfromblammo wrote: post #250
crdoconnor wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in your view a school's main product is entertainment?

In my view, education is more effective if it is also entertaining. There's no particular reason why pedagogy can't take advantage of nearly ubiquitous computing hardware, other than the textbook and curriculum racket that publishers are running. The mammalian instinct for play is essentially a learning mechanism. All it takes to educate is to structure a game such that the lessons being learned are useful in the rea…

You have expressed this better than I could have. Indeed, we should put in effort to make school fun and entertaining. Learning is a life long process, and if the first thing you learn is that learning is boring you are less likely to engage in it and therefore you will be less adaptable to the situations life puts you in. As teachers we should make sure that learning is fun.

Re: France to ban mobile phones in primary, junior and middle schools

#316

Post by baldfat »

lr4444lr wrote: post #313
setecgastronomy wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous. Why? > People freak out if a predator lives int heir neighborhood but they let their child be accessible to millions of predators via their phone or table. Well advise the kids of the dangers. I and most of my friends had unsupervised internet access. We are all doing fine. > This is why kids initial exposure to porn is 8 in the US and 10 when kids a…

> Well advise the kids of the dangers. I and most of my friends had unsupervised internet access. We are all doing fine. Most people who ride in car don't get into an accident. We still wear seatbelts. > Every kid is getting "addicted"? Perhaps not the best choice of words from the OP, but look up premature sexualization and psychological trauma. > No offense, but your kids aren't prepared for the real world. What wi…

I didn't say every child :)

OP

Re: France to ban mobile phones in primary, junior and middle schools

#317

Post by clu3l355 »

lr4444lr wrote: post #313
setecgastronomy wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous. Why? > People freak out if a predator lives int heir neighborhood but they let their child be accessible to millions of predators via their phone or table. Well advise the kids of the dangers. I and most of my friends had unsupervised internet access. We are all doing fine. > This is why kids initial exposure to porn is 8 in the US and 10 when kids a…

> Well advise the kids of the dangers. I and most of my friends had unsupervised internet access. We are all doing fine. Most people who ride in car don't get into an accident. We still wear seatbelts. > Every kid is getting "addicted"? Perhaps not the best choice of words from the OP, but look up premature sexualization and psychological trauma. > No offense, but your kids aren't prepared for the real world. What wi…

>Perhaps not the best choice of words from the OP, but look up premature sexualization and psychological trauma.

Existence of it is hardly grounds for mass hysteria - this smacks of 'will somebody please think of the children'.

Re: France to ban mobile phones in primary, junior and middle schools

#318

Post by clu3l355 »

scott_karana wrote: post #260
zxd1098 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, protect kids from the world so they don’t know how to handle bullying as an adult.

This ban doesn't protect them from regular in-person bullying. Just crowd-sourced, Internet scale bullying. Ever had your photo released mockingly, and been laughed at by an entire school? Or even millions?

How does a phone ban stop this from happening? Not to mention the challenge of actually enforcing it. I suspect the kids who want to take pictures of others and upload them mockingly will still do it.

Re: France to ban mobile phones in primary, junior and middle schools

#319

Post by setecgastronomy »

baldfat wrote: post #312
setecgastronomy wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous. Why? > People freak out if a predator lives int heir neighborhood but they let their child be accessible to millions of predators via their phone or table. Well advise the kids of the dangers. I and most of my friends had unsupervised internet access. We are all doing fine. > This is why kids initial exposure to porn is 8 in the US and 10 when kids a…

LOL Techmeme River : http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2017/12/... > > Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous. > Why? Your reasoning with kids. Sure when they are teenagers that's great but children need more than a reasoning parent. Children need to be protected and above everything feel safe. The internet is not a safe place for children nor just YouTube for kids without…

> LOL Techmeme River :

Oh god.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11637697/Catcal...

Yes. There are bad people everywhere. Did you lock your children in the basement? I'm not denying there are dangers in the world and on the internet. My point is that those threats are overblown.

And there have been clickbait fearmongering articles every decade.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/technology/personaltech/28...

> Research absolutely proves that children need to feel safe.

And you telling your kids that there are dangers everywhere must make them feel real safe.

> Again I am not for helicopter and over protective

Okay. But everything you've written and the "research" you've done says otherwise.

> Did I say every?

You kinda implied it.

> Yes when the 4th grade boy wrote down the url to where he saw a man having sex with a dog and gave it to my daughter, yeah that kid had some issues. He also had a tablet with Netflix when he was in Kindergarten and still has unlimited access to the internet. Sadly that kid ins't in school anymore due to his mother not protecting him physically or mentally.

Anecdotes?

> Hey buddy if I could swear at you I would.

No need for that.

> The first step of parenting children is that you make them feel safe from day one till they are mostly adults.

And I posit that you did just the opposite. I doubt there was a day in your kids life that they felt safe.

> That's how we have Alex Jone's audience members.

What? Oh my god. I now am very concerned for what you did to your kids, if you had any.

Re: France to ban mobile phones in primary, junior and middle schools

#320

Post by noobermin »

Angostura wrote: post #61
noobermin wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that is a step too far. Imagine they banned books during breaks. That's how far this is. I get you want to not have them use them during class but that is the general policing class behavior that teachers are supposed to do. Why ban them during breaks when it doesn't hurt their studies?

> Imagine they banned books during breaks. That's how far this is. I don't see the analogy really. A closer analogy would be 'imagine if they banned portable games consoles'.

Books are a means of entertainment. How is it any different than one class is electronic and another isn't?
Post reply on HN