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

YouTube has become the world's nanny

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 403 posts

Re: YouTube has become the world's nanny

#241

Post by batch12 »

theshrike79 wrote: post #169
HlessClaudesman wrote: post #59

As a parent, screen time vs no screen time is a fine line that we have to continually renegotiate. Screens can be great, there is so much good information out there that can enrich our lives. I wouldn't go the "no screens ever" route because that's just being a luddite, robbing them of the change to experience, and acquire expertise in, the digital world that they will be interacting with for the rest of their lives.…

Time spent reading = 2x amount received in screen time works for us. Books (comic books count) have no screen time, neither have any kinds of crafts or other interactive things. Games are more OK in my mind than just passively staring at someone open surprise eggs on Youtube or watching a "let's play" of some game or a "influencer reacts to X" crapfest. Thus we have a separate more generous screen time set for games…

We do something similar and cap the time on screens. Also, if the kids start showing signs of wanting screens too much, we refocus them on something else- sometimes for several days or more. When they ask why, we remind them that screens are a tool for us to use, not the other way around-- and it's time to take a break. In fairness, we do this for anything they get overly attached to that could be harmful in excess.

Re: YouTube has become the world's nanny

#243

Post by somenameforme »

ok123456 wrote: post #236

And, TV was the baby sitter of the last three generations. The technologies aren't 1:1, but letting your kids passively consume video seems is just as popular as ever.

I think there's one huge difference. TV gets boring, fast. The only time it would remain remotely entertaining was Saturday morning. And even that would get boring relatively quickly. And so you end up turning to other things to entertain yourself, or just be bored. Both of which are probably much better for one's development.

YouTube can probably provide entertainment to a child for an arbitrary length of time, on demand, anywhere. So I don't think it's especially comparable to TV. It also seems to trigger behavior that seems borderline addictive in many people - let alone children. Ultimately I expect online media of this sort will probably be treated in a way analogous to something like drugs or gambling, whereas right now we're just living through "Let's put cocaine in everything, because it feels goooooood!" phase.

Re: YouTube has become the world's nanny

#244

Post by Cthulhu_ »

bbor wrote: post #206
HlessClaudesman wrote: post #59

As a parent, screen time vs no screen time is a fine line that we have to continually renegotiate. Screens can be great, there is so much good information out there that can enrich our lives. I wouldn't go the "no screens ever" route because that's just being a luddite, robbing them of the change to experience, and acquire expertise in, the digital world that they will be interacting with for the rest of their lives.…

I’d argue that our current algorithms can absolutely find the right stuff for your child, its just not in their financial interest to do so. Sad stuff from capitalism, as always.

That's it exactly; surprise egg videos get repeat views, kids open them up and just hyperfocus and/or zone out on them for hours on end; it's low energy watching. Give them something intellectualy stimulating though, and they'll have brain drain after a while and be too tired to keep watching that kind of content. Bad for revenue, it's better to have them accrue those minutes watched counters all the time.

Re: YouTube has become the world's nanny

#245

Post by silveroriole »

i67vw3 wrote: post #55

Two of my sisters have in total 3 kids (4 to 6 years old) and all three of them need to watch youtube videos while eating. Just few days back, my sister had a 'gathering' to announce her 2nd child (making it total 4 kids combined) and the 3rd kid needed to watch few youtube videos (usually they are of other kids playing or doing some stuff) to eat his dinner, which I found quite odd. This thing is not only related to…

How many adults would eat happily if you took their phones and TV away? I reckon most of them would get just as perturbed and restless as the kids. I think it’s fairly normal really and we only find it odd because it’s an ipad now… I always had a book at the dinner table as a kid, there’s the stereotype of dad reading the paper at the breakfast table, many families eat dinner with the TV on, restaurants give kids activity menus, etc.

Re: YouTube has become the world's nanny

#246

Post by TeMPOraL »

passwordoops wrote: post #233
theshrike79 wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, not even parent permission. It's used as one factor to prove that they are not "marketing to children". If you are considered as targeting your product to children, you get hit by a different set of laws than if it's an "adult" product. Source: I just spent a few hours listening to our lawyer give a presentation about this and why we need to be clear in marketing to adults only. Epic got hit with a $245M fine b…

There's marketing and then there's using. Obviously they do restrict certain apps like Tinder and PH, but it's only those that are exclusively 18-over (and Epic since the fine). Other apps like FB, TikTok, XBox and the rest that no child should go near (or anyone else for that matter) gives a prompt with something along the lines of "Ask your parents for permission". If I say OK, either from my account or by logging…

To be clear: all of this happens when the device is set up by the parent to mark it explicitly as kids' device? I've never seen such things before.

When I was a kid, knowing what year to put in a DOB form to put yourself safely over 18 y.o. was the most basic "Internet 101" life skill, second only to knowing where to type a website address.

Re: YouTube has become the world's nanny

#247

Post by blitzar »

theshrike79 wrote: post #158
blitzar wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they have school age children and their children are unaware of these things (or at least the parents believe that to be true) then either the parents are dumb or their children are incredible at deceiving their parents and possibly showing early signs of being psychopaths.

According to the logs the only devices that have accessed Youtube in the last week is the living room Apple TV and my laptop. If my kid, at 10 years old, has hacked my router and keeps actively deleting the relevant access and DNS logs, they have a future career in information security :D

https://www.techdetoxbox.com/kids-bypass-parental-controls/

Some of the suggestions there are a bit dystopian - like locking your kids devices in a safe ... You are probably fairly safe at 10, for a year or two!

"The poll, posted on Facebook by internet security vendor SmoothWall, found almost half (49 per cent) of 13-17 year olds admitted to using illicit tools to access blocked websites in school."

https://www.itpro.co.uk/607677/kids-bypass-school-internet-s... (2008 - guessing that number is a little higher now that it was then)

Re: YouTube has become the world's nanny

#248

Post by Cthulhu_ »

HlessClaudesman wrote: post #59

As a parent, screen time vs no screen time is a fine line that we have to continually renegotiate. Screens can be great, there is so much good information out there that can enrich our lives. I wouldn't go the "no screens ever" route because that's just being a luddite, robbing them of the change to experience, and acquire expertise in, the digital world that they will be interacting with for the rest of their lives.…

And you'll have to remember that curating content won't be possible forever. At some point they will be alone with an unlocked device and the internet, probably much sooner than you're comfortable with.

We've got filters set up at home; they worked fine for a while, but teenagers are easily impressed and soon we had to add stock photo websites to these filters. Then there's free VPN services, going around the (consumer grade) filters and time limits entirely.

Next up, schools give kids laptops, but they don't have the necessary IT prowess to lock them or the school internet down (and there's unrestricted public wifi everywhere, of course). The amount of shit I've found on there is unreal, and of course the thing breaks because of caggy-handedness.

Re: YouTube has become the world's nanny

#249

Post by alexvoda »

bbor wrote: post #206
HlessClaudesman wrote: post #59

As a parent, screen time vs no screen time is a fine line that we have to continually renegotiate. Screens can be great, there is so much good information out there that can enrich our lives. I wouldn't go the "no screens ever" route because that's just being a luddite, robbing them of the change to experience, and acquire expertise in, the digital world that they will be interacting with for the rest of their lives.…

I’d argue that our current algorithms can absolutely find the right stuff for your child, its just not in their financial interest to do so. Sad stuff from capitalism, as always.

There is absolutely no technical reason this problem could not be solved. It is not a technical issue. It is a human issue. Just like most issues of modern society.

Re: YouTube has become the world's nanny

#250

Post by TeMPOraL »

scotty79 wrote: post #129
i67vw3 wrote: post #55

Two of my sisters have in total 3 kids (4 to 6 years old) and all three of them need to watch youtube videos while eating. Just few days back, my sister had a 'gathering' to announce her 2nd child (making it total 4 kids combined) and the 3rd kid needed to watch few youtube videos (usually they are of other kids playing or doing some stuff) to eat his dinner, which I found quite odd. This thing is not only related to…

Eating is immensly boring and I hated it as a kid. I wish I had something to distract myself from the boredom of eating. Despite not having anything like that as a child I now, at 43, eat all my meals in front of a computer while gaming or watching or reading something.

Eating is immensely boring and I still hate it as an adult. The food is nice, but I really need to have my mind occupied by something even remotely useful/interesting during that time. Which is why I'm writing this comment now while eating my dinner.
Post reply on HN