Live data from Hacker News

Where do the children play?

unpublishablepapers.substack.com

141–150 of 264 posts

Re: Where do the children play?

#141
post #13
post #4

I think this heavily depends on location. At 7 my child can check nearly all the boxes for independent activities. My wife may not like it, but the surroundings are probably safer than anywhere else in the world. The only thing we don’t have is forests. This is central Tokyo. Kids still spend a lot of time on Roblox because everyone tends to be deathly afraid of letting them ring each other’s doorbells.

I also live in Suginami! There's always a lot of kids running around together, especially after school, but that feels quite normal for anywhere in Japan, no?

I can’t speak to the rest of Japan, but in Tokyo, yes.

Suginami in particular seems to be very kid focused in terms of infrastructure development efforts. 6 years ago the was a wild sprouting of daycare facilities everywhere around, and these days new parks pop up everywhere. They were going to close the nearby jidoukan, and the new major seems to have reversed all of that. Japan is absolutely making an effort to reverse population decline xD

Re: Where do the children play?

#142
post #86
post #72

It's cars. It was always cars.

Plenty of cars in the 90s and we played outside all day. The biggest change since then is two things. One is that there’s way more to do inside now, mostly games and shows. The second is that baseless kidnapping panics convinced society that children can never be unattended. The main vector was daytime TV and now true crime podcasts. The reality is that kidnapping is statistically extremely rare and more than 95% of…

Totally unrelated, but awesome username!

Re: Where do the children play?

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in Eastern Europe 25-30 years ago, other adults would have no problem yelling at you to behave in their own language/words. Very much different than today where people mostly mind their own business and judge in silence. I'm good with the former, it's inline with "It takes a village".

> And in Eastern Europe 25-30 years ago, other adults would have no problem yelling at you to behave in their own language/words. Nobody yelled at us then or even thought that we were doing something wrong. If you would yell at a kid in a shopping mall for running around like crazy - people would look at your weirdly. It was expected of kids to behave this way in my culture, and still is to this day. This may not be…

You're right it is cultural, I was thinking more Slavic where bad behavior from other kids isn't tolerated by adults and they have no fear expressing it.

Re: Where do the children play?

#144
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No? I grew up in a rural area, with fields and places to run... and run I did. A nearby huge city had a mall. City being 30k people. Yet left in that mall, with 10 friends, I'd run there too.. until chastised. No real difference 50 years ago, in a rural area with a mall than now. Groups of kids running tend to bump into things, fall into people, excited kids aren't known for taking care. It's been typical for at leas…

I don't disagree with you, but the fact that something has been done since the 50s when it comes to child care is not necessarily an indicator that it's good. We imposed many things on children during that time that would be widely considered damaging and counter productive today.

Telling kids not to run around indoors where they can collide with objects or people, break things, injure themselves, and generally get in the way isn't damaging - or at least is significantly less damaging than the perception in this thread that telling kids not to do something is awful.

Re: Where do the children play?

#145
As an ex-child. The best years I remember are with a small group of kids who would wander all over the suburb playing at different parks, or whatever crazy idea someone came up with, finding bee hives, climbing trees or exploring past the boundary of what we always stayed inside of. They were only a few years, but a major highlight.

(Australian suburbs ~2004)

Re: Where do the children play?

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I said "had", because on average, two of them will survive to adulthood and procreation. That's natural. That's the way things were for our species for megayears. Where are you getting that stat? For the majority of human history the childhood mortality rate has hovered around 50% not 80%. Back in the second century BC if you had 10 children you expected half of them to reach adulthood. In addition I can't find spe…

> Where are you getting that stat? Basic population dynamics. For a population to remain steady, a breeding pair can only have on average two surviving children that procreate themselves. If you want to get into the weeds, there's obviously some "fudge factors" that bring this a little bit up above two. 1. Not every kid that survives to adulthood will go on to procreate themselves, so the remainder need slightly more…

> That's just the way it is, for essentially all species. It has to be, otherwise populations would explode in numbers until it's standing room only for the entire surface planet.

Human population has been increasing for at least thousands of years. Our best estimates put the human population 30000 years ago to about 8 million people, at about 1 ad the population is estimated at about 200 million people, in the 17 hundreds the population is estimated at about 600 million.

That is not a stable population, that's a growing population. You also have to take into account pandemics, widespread violence, etc. The black plague killed 1/3 of the population of Europe, you can be pretty sure that the reproduction rate was above 2 both before and after the pandemic. Millions of people died when Europeans colonized the Americas again the population growth rate would have to be much larger after the event for the population to bounce back.

Additionally adult mortality before procreation does not factor in child rearing behavior. Because why would it?

And lastly all that is pretty much irrelevant especially the habits of prehistoric people, because the change in how Americans raise their children happened in the last 20 years. Not in the 1900s when child mortality went way down.

The thing that changed between the 80s and now was not the acceptability of losing children, what changed was how Americans in particular assess risk, the Satanic Panic of the 80s, the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in 2007, the revelation of how widespread childhood sexual abuse is (before the 90s it was estimated at about 1% of the population turns out it's over 16%), all of these factors made the American public incredibly afraid about their children safety.

It's not that people in the 70s and 60s were okay with harm coming to their children it's that they didn't believe harm would come to their children when they were with other children alone running around. Which by the way was mostly a correct assessment.

In Japan the fertility rate is 1.2 per woman and yet 6 and 7 year olds got to school on their own. Because the culture there believes that is a safe practice, mostly because it is.

Go watch Old Enough, obviously it's a television show exaggerated and not how life really works in Japan, the production team and the parents are essentially watching over the children, but it clearly demonstrates that the culture there expects children to roam the cities safely.

Oh and by the way on average preindustrial families had 5 to 7 children not 10 so 50% survival rate is 2.5 to 3.5. Which taking into account occasional widespread population collapses fits much better with the observed long term growth.

Re: Where do the children play?

#147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree with you, but the fact that something has been done since the 50s when it comes to child care is not necessarily an indicator that it's good. We imposed many things on children during that time that would be widely considered damaging and counter productive today.

Telling kids not to run around indoors where they can collide with objects or people, break things, injure themselves, and generally get in the way isn't damaging - or at least is significantly less damaging than the perception in this thread that telling kids not to do something is awful.

This is just standard manners and teaching children how to interact with an adult society. Why does anybody think telling kids not to run indoors is wrong?

Re: Where do the children play?

#148
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other comments already pointed out that there is plenty to do for kids growing up in villages - it's not until they're teenagers that it becomes limiting, really (speaking from personal experience and what I was told by friends who also grew up in the countryside). Funny that you're talking about having to drive them everywhere though, because the main worry I have as a parent is the impact of car traffic on chil…

I dunno - I have a seven year old whom I try to allow to be as feral as possible. We let him go alone to the neighborhood park, which requires seven small residential street crossings. But I would hesitate also about a multi-lane stroad if there wasn't a lot of pedestrian traffic. Kids are small and cars have gotten huge and drivers are very distracted, especially post-pandemic. (We're in the US, and I draw the line…

That seems like a sensible cut-off point. You would probably (and probably rightfully) laugh at what I consider a stroad in the Swedish city of Malmö where I live, with traffic lights and zebra crossings everywhere. Like I said, I know on a rational level that my fear is irrationally heightened from my own memories of being extremely careless at a young age because I safely could be.

Re: Where do the children play?

#149

a bit off but it sometimes feels like a self-reinforcing loop in Western societies: We have fewer children because we optimize so hard for money, stability, and personal security. But because we have fewer children, each child becomes “economically and emotionally precious.” And the more precious they become, the more afraid we are to let them take risks, explore freely, or just do their own thing. The end result is…

This is not a standalone loop, it is initiated by external factors which are bigger: De-industrialization of the West, with the social changes it implies (feminism, gentrification, many things including the single-child phenomenon). It will go away if the world changes its equilibrium — maybe with AI — for the better or worse.

Don't you think AI, for example, will just be another facet of de-industrialization? I think the way we are headed now, this loop will only grow bigger...

Re: Where do the children play?

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I mostly agree with you, cars then and cars now in the US are not the same. The typical car back then was a 5 door sedan, think ford crown, Chevrolet lumina, etc. These days almost everyone is driving pretty much a light truck.

I'll give you a hint about statistics... there will always be a #1 killer of children. Today it's car accidents, 100 years ago it was disease. After disease it was other accidents, and 100 years from now it will be something else.

Listen I agree with both you and the poster I replied to. What I am saying is that the risk from cars really did increase. Not that it's the only reason that the change happened.
Post reply on HN