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

The Case for the “Self-Driven Child”

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 238 posts

Re: The Case for the “Self-Driven Child”

#51

Post by barrkel »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #29
aglavine wrote: post #10

Are video games still considered an addiction by someone?

Yup, by me. Source: I'm 32 and if I could I'd spend all my time playing video games. This hasn't changed much from back when I was a kid. Doesn't help that games are so much better nowadays either. FACTORIO IS CRACK COCAINE. Just cheaper and with less withdrawal effects.

I find them much less interesting these days that I used to when I was in my 20s. I'm not sure if it's because the games are better or worse -- I haven't found games as engaging as Thief or Deus Ex since those old days -- but I rather suspect it's because there's nothing at stake.

I don't walk away with anything other than the experience. The experience needs to be pretty excellent throughout, and in particular grinding and filler needs to be kept to a minimum.

Re: The Case for the “Self-Driven Child”

#52

Post by [deleted] »

Spooky23 wrote: post #38
tischler wrote: post #19

.

The "rise" of depression and anxiety is similar to the "rise" in things that are now declared autism. Bullshit. In 1960, half of the population had a limited number of roles easily available to them: housewife, secretary, nurse (both until marriage), servant. Most of the non-white population was diverted to specific cul-de-sacs in terms of place in society. Do you think these folks were overflowing with joy and purpo…

[deleted]

Re: The Case for the “Self-Driven Child”

#53

Post by robotresearcher »

organsnyder wrote: post #8
bubbleRefuge wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cut the cable thinking that would make a difference, but youtube and Netflix have infinte content. Back in the days of broadcast only TV, you watch your show and its over, go play.

The main advantage to Netflix (and YouTube, with a Red subscription) is the lack of advertising. My kids probably see 1/20th the number of ads that I saw growing up.

My son has managed to become obsessed with fashion brands from audio podcasts. It’s amazing how this stuff gets into the house.

Re: The Case for the “Self-Driven Child”

#54

Post by andrepd »

whataretensors wrote: post #15

Look at reward signals. Elementary through high school is a little sliver of what a collapsed marxist society looks like - no positive rewards signals just negative arbitrary ones. I was programming at 8 but apparently to be "well rounded" I had to do all this other stuff that non-coders deemed important. Meanwhile there was no "safe base" for me or anyone else who grew up poor. But at least now I can also now see sc…

> I was programming at 8 but apparently to be "well rounded"

Well so was I (Turbo Pascal on DOS ftw), and thanks god responsible adults didn't let me sit in front of the PC all day, and made me learn languages, history, literature, philosophy, mathematics, science, etc.

I'm also straining to see how the adjective "Marxist" found its way on your rant. I fail to see the applicability.

Re: The Case for the “Self-Driven Child”

#55

Post by ben7799 »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #30
bubbleRefuge wrote: post #5

I find it tough to get my kids to socialize more without scheduling them especially on weekends. Daycare is good because they exercise and run wild. But weekends are hard because the kids are just not out there anymore, so you have to coordinate with other parents.

That sounds like more of a factor of where you live and whatnot than anything; I was fortunate enough to grow up in a normal sized town (~6000 inhabitants) and had friends living within walking / cycling distance (not to mention streets you could actually walk on). Not nearly as sprawled out as some cities / suburbs are.

You're an adult... lots of us grew up in towns like that but those same towns/neighborhoods are not like that anymore in the US.

Re: The Case for the “Self-Driven Child”

#57

Post by [deleted] »

jacquesm wrote: post #43
tboyd47 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some reason, whenever I hear parenting advice (especially related to technology usage) and see that it's from someone my parents' age, I automatically stop listening. I feel like they are so far removed from the challenges of parenting in this decade that they have nothing to offer us. Not that our challenges are harder than theirs, but just that they're such a different set of challenges that we can't relate to…

"These are the moments when I wished I'd listened more to my mother" "Ok, what did she say?" "I don't know, I never listened..."

[deleted]

Re: The Case for the “Self-Driven Child”

#58

Post by zachlatta »

monkmartinez wrote: post #12
stinkytaco wrote: post #4

There's a certain irony in this. By putting restrictions on kids (no screens, digital downtime, etc), we expect them to become self-driven. This is a great idea in theory, but it also seems pretty likely that a kid will go to their friends house to watch Youtube videos, when I would just as soon have them (and their friends, if necessary) at my house doing that where at least I have some sense of what they are watchi…

I don't expect my kids to be "self-driven", in the sense of "productive" when I restrict screen time. They can literally do whatever they want... if that is mope around bored as hell, so be it. If that is digging a hole in the back yard, so be it. If that is getting into a little trouble somewhere down the street, so be it. If they want to read the latest "Diary of a wimpy kid", so be it. The only thing I am after is…

I deeply and thoroughly don't understand this mindset.

Whether you like it or not, technology is part of growing up in the 21st century. It's not just an "outlet" or a place to waste time on YouTube, it's interwoven into everything in their lives. Their ability to gather information depends on it. Their social lives depend on it. Just as yours does. If you restrict access, you're pretending like a very crucial part of living today doesn't exist -- or isn't as important as it actually is.

At the end of the day, I'd imagine your goal is for your child to have a happy and healthy life. As part of that, you probably want them to have a healthy relationship with technology. Restricting access instead of helping them build that healthy relationship just leads to them wanting to do things like go to the houses of friends to watch YouTube. I know this because I lived it and that's exactly what I did.

Re: The Case for the “Self-Driven Child”

#59

Post by eddieplan9 »

bubbleRefuge wrote: post #6
stinkytaco wrote: post #4

There's a certain irony in this. By putting restrictions on kids (no screens, digital downtime, etc), we expect them to become self-driven. This is a great idea in theory, but it also seems pretty likely that a kid will go to their friends house to watch Youtube videos, when I would just as soon have them (and their friends, if necessary) at my house doing that where at least I have some sense of what they are watchi…

I cut the cable thinking that would make a difference, but youtube and Netflix have infinte content. Back in the days of broadcast only TV, you watch your show and its over, go play.

I do the old-school thing of buying shows by episode on iTunes for this particular reason (even if the shows are available for "free" in Netflix or Amazon). My kid gets one new episode per week, and she only watches from the iTunes library, which is a self-throttle because it gets boring after a while because it's the same set of episodes. She also learns more from every show and can remember the name of species and their habitats etc way better because she has watched most shows dozens of times after some time.

Re: The Case for the “Self-Driven Child”

#60

Post by barsonme »

adamnemecek wrote: post #50
EliRivers wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was programming at 8 but apparently to be "well rounded" I had to do all this other stuff I think restricting education from the age of 8 onwards based on what a given 8-year-old likes at that point is just asking for trouble.

Not what OP said. You can totally give them freedom while providing some guidance. Instead of siting in class, let them read things they are interested in.

When I was 8 I'd have only read books on dinosaurs, baseball, and the Legend of Zelda. It took me until halfway or more through college to realize I really liked programming, way more than I did my other majors I'd invested considerable time and money in (medicine, politics). Kids, especially 8-year-olds, need a lot of guidance and need to learn the fundamentals.

I'm very glad my parents and teachers worked hard to make me learn things I had no intention of learning, like math.

Post reply on HN