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

Parental controls aren't for parents

beasthacker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 476 posts

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#251

Post by BeetleB »

soperj wrote: post #240
BeetleB wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I agree, but I also see absolutely no reason why 5 years old children would have access to a gaming device. Pretty much any other activity I can imagine is better for them. I suggest expanding your imagination skills. There are definitely worse activities, like watching TV. And there's physical limit to how much physical activity one can be doing. There's definitely a point of diminishing returns there. And the ski…

> And there's physical limit to how much physical activity one can be doing Do you hang out with many 5 year olds? They're made of energy. > I could have him do math but it's a lot more boring I did Math all the time with my 5 year old and he loved it, but then I also love math, and it's easy to make fun.

Fair points, but understand that this is a multidimensional issue, with each dimension being a continuum.

I know plenty of people using the exact same arguments to argue that kids should not waste time with Lego. There are better physical activities.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#252

Post by ip26 »

squibonpig wrote: post #211
BeetleB wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I want a device for my kids to play games. Not communicate. Not buy stuff. Just play (local) games. Stuff like online communications will come at a later age. Absolutely no reason to start explaining that to a 5 year old. And absolutely no reason to have all 3 bundled in one. > Take an earnest interest in your child's activities, both online and offline. Guide them how to behave in strange, even weird and sca…

Gun ownership isn't a terrible example honestly. I would have been probably 8 or so when I was allowed to traipse around in the woods near my dad's house with a BB gun, following extensive safety teaching of course. We would go out in the yard and shoot a shotgun and a rifle around that same age. People are probably not careful enough with guns right now in America given the stats, but it's not at all unreasonable in…

Maybe the analogy here is you can buy only one kind of gun. That gun can load any ammunition. It’s easy for children to get their hands on anything from bb’s to BMG50. The gun has parental controls to allow selecting which ammunition the gun will accept. It’s up to the parents to decipher the difference between all the types, and the out-of-box default is all types are allowed.

Some commenters admonish parents for trying to use these parental controls at all. “Just be good parents and instruct your 6 year old not to use hollow point, 7.62mm, or fmj”

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#253

Post by pwg »

toss1 wrote: post #156
unloader6118 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When it happens only a few times, it might be neglect. This is absolutely by design. Not sure if I want to call it by design. It is not a dark pattern, it is just "what is the minimum we can do to sell this without doing the curation work?"

Building 29 separate settings with confusing and overlapping effects is less work than making a single setting of: [Local Only]? Seems to be a much larger amount of work to design, implement, and support a more-or-less dozen-step customer journey that does NOT work than just implementing a few switches. And that goes even if the switch must be designed-in from the beginning by designing operation for local-only opera…

> Building 29 separate settings with confusing and overlapping effects is less work than making a single setting of: [Local Only]?

The 29 separate confusing overlapping effects is by design. A single "local only" switch would (so long as that switch is enabled) lock out all manner of potential future revenue and recurring rents, which these companies very much want to see hit the balance sheet.

So the 29 separate confusing overlapping settings is designed to frustrate you to the point that you allow what they want from the start, the ability of the device to generate future revenue (via both of one time sales and recurring rents on rental sales).

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#254

Post by quirkot »

toss1 wrote: post #156
unloader6118 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When it happens only a few times, it might be neglect. This is absolutely by design. Not sure if I want to call it by design. It is not a dark pattern, it is just "what is the minimum we can do to sell this without doing the curation work?"

Building 29 separate settings with confusing and overlapping effects is less work than making a single setting of: [Local Only]? Seems to be a much larger amount of work to design, implement, and support a more-or-less dozen-step customer journey that does NOT work than just implementing a few switches. And that goes even if the switch must be designed-in from the beginning by designing operation for local-only opera…

>> Building 29 separate settings with confusing and overlapping effects is less work than making a single setting of: [Local Only]?

Yes, absolutely. 29 separate overlapping settings likely match up precisely to arguments in various APIs that are used. On the other hand, what does local only even mean? No wifi? No hardwired connection? LAN only? Connection to the internet for system updates but not marketplace? Something else? All with a specified outcome that requires different implementation depending on hardware version and needs to be tweaked everytime dependencies change.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#255

Post by camhart »

The biggest trap parents fall into is they buy devices assuming there will be ways to enforce parental controls on them. The reality is it's impossible to do on many devices, and extremely difficult to get right on the remaining ones. Many of the platforms offering "parental controls" just do lip service and provide a false sense of security.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#256

Post by bmandale »

You could, I dunno, trust your son, communicate with him, and let him make decisions for himself? If instead of wasting all your time on scam products trying to isolate him from the world, you'd spent the same time teaching him to navigate the world, you wouldn't have had any problems, and he would be better prepared for adult life when he doesn't have someone breathing down his shoulder. Just my 2c.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#257

Post by ronsor »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #202
PaulHoule wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was one of those kids. I got a 300 baud modem the year after Wargames came out. It was a whole different world. My wife and I disagreed about letting my son have my old desktop replacement laptop at a young age. Of course I said yes, based on my own experience, but my wife turned out to be right in the end. He got into some pretty dark places and the toxic relationships he developed with other people his age were b…

My wife was right too. My kids ended up being unable to manage their device use at all, they developed seriously bad habits, lied and deceived extensively to gain access to devices, and repeatedly sacrificed relationships and trust for more screen time. There were years there where I thought surely they'd click with it and develop better habits, make better choices (with our guidance), and so on. Abstinence could be…

The Internet now mostly consists of short-form garbage and dark patterns.

Also,

> He is incredibly compulsive, self-harming, and freely harms his relationships to get what he wants.

This probably indicates deeper psychological issues that aren't solely related to Internet addiction.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#258

Post by tempodox »

dosman33 wrote: post #29

It's not an accident that its so hard to get this stuff right, I've heard countless stories like this from friends who are parents. If the market wanted parents to be able to figure this out it would be getting it right. It's obviously a dark pattern that benefits everyone but the parents and their children. If more people stopped to think deeper about this they would and should be very disturbed by what this means.

In the absence of consumer protection laws, this kind of abuse is to be expected.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#259

Post by exitb »

natnatenathan wrote: post #163
hnlmorg wrote: post #26

I really want to sympathise with the author but this feels more like a one-sided rant piece than a constructive article. For example, in one paragraph they complain that “I don’t want my son to get online” then literally the following paragraph they complain that they need a Switch Online membership to get their son online. If you want your Nintendo Switch to “behave like a Gameboy” then don’t get the online membersh…

Part of the point is that you cannot use it without it being online. This is a big difference between the Switch and Switch 2.

In what sense? I have a Switch 2 without NSO and it does not allow online play. It also, in the default configuration, needs to authenticate before even entering the online shop. In that scope, it doesn’t even need to have any parental controls.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#260

Post by RandomDistort »

hnlmorg wrote: post #90
squigz wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Which means reading their WhatsApp et al messages after they’ve gone to bed. Do they know you do this? Otherwise this seems like a very effective way to create trust issues in your kids.

Of course they do. You should be open and honest. For us, it’s a system that’s worked well. So well, in fact, that our kids have felt comfortable coming to us when they see something concerning in a group chat rather than waiting for us to find it. And in return, we’ve learned to trust their judgement a lot more because they’ve demonstrated mature behaviour online.

Are you sure the kids aren't learning to delete the messages?
Post reply on HN