421–430 of 476 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can. You can. Spotify users though? Too dumb
Spotify allows you to download songs for offline (requiring a phone home once a month) and play local files. I'm far from a Spotify advocate but no need to be inflammatory and misinformed.
I wonder if kids aren't safer in online spaces where there's very little expectation that the person on the other end is a child. Like here.
I'm stuck with my son not able to play minecraft from his nintendo account anymore though it used to work. I'm just getting an unhelpful error message and all permissions should be enough. Parental control is a joke. Deezer has kids accounts but you can just switch to another account. Spotify kids was a joke when I used it, poor discoverability, poor cataloge specifically if you care about childrens audio books. Goog…
Try the XBox app on your phone, I managed to find settings there once that unlocked Minecraft. I'd like a flag for messaging apps called "turn off images and video". Sure, my kid might get called nasty names in plain text, but would not get beheading or bestiality videos or underage schoolmate pics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. I think it is an “accident” that stems from organizations rather than anything sinister. Companies generally want good parental controls, but let’s face it, it’s not the cash cow or particularly interesting. This leads to understaffed teams of b-list developers with high churn, hence the overly confusing and half-baked features.
It's nearly impossible to block YouTube on a smart TV without third party apps, even worse on non-android ones. And the app is not uninstallable. I don't think this is b-tier devs, feels like intentionall neglect.
I see folks saying no access to phones until 16, and others arguing how that will absolutely crush a kid's ability to do stuff socially. Why not just have a 'home' phone? you can use the phone in shared spaces at home, but cannot take it into your room or go to school with it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have kids? I'm guessing you don't, because the answer is pretty obvious to those of us who do - the vast majority of parents seem to give not one single fuck about what their kids do with technology. I've known families who have a cell phone - a dedicated device - for their four year old . My armchair diagnosis is that parents who are just a little bit older than me (I'm 34) and especially parents who didn't g…
There is enough general public concern about minors having access to online pornography that jurisdictions all over the world are passing age restrictions but I think the HN discussion is one sided. That is, HN users see the costs, the difficulty, the privacy concerns, etc. But they're also dismissive of the harm, which in terms of the young Gen Z men that I know personally is real. I can't attribute online pornograp…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spotify allows you to download songs for offline (requiring a phone home once a month) and play local files. I'm far from a Spotify advocate but no need to be inflammatory and misinformed.
Worth adding this option is available for premium accounts only.
Because products need to see ads, check in and report usage and ad consumption.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Parents did not have to hover over everything their child did. Was it perfect, of course not, but it worked fairly well and didn't require constant monitoring. Except kids from families without respectable parents would always be the ones to find access to alcohol, cigarettes, and porn. There were always a few kids in every class that had an older brother, uncle, or friend who would give them access to stuff they s…
Sure the old social there was the kid with porn mags and cigs in his treehouse, but you were never at his house 24/7 and that limited exposure almost inoculated against long term addictions and you experienced it with peer input. Parents would eventually isolate you from those bad elements due to neighbors gossiping and the like. The new social is your neighbors don’t even know you have kids much less who they are ta…
That’s my point. Some Parents now expect technology to do their parenting for them in ways they were expecting to do themselves previously.
> I do not have kids,
I do have kids. So my opinions are based on what I’ve personally seen work with my kinds and my peers.
Parental controls shouldn’t be seen as a way to absolve the parents of their responsibility to monitor what their kids consume.
Yeah there will be occasions when things slip through, but that’s always been a risk even before smartphones and the web. What matters is you’re there, as a parent, to ensure leaks are not tidal waves, and to ensure children develop responsible use of technology.
This has always been something parents have had to manage. Both in the 80s and equally so now. Blaming technology is just another way of saying “I’m too lazy to keep tabs on my children”
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?"
I’m not sure why some are struggling to understand this. A single "godmode" checkbox would only be possible if every element, the marketplace, the hardware, and the payment rails, were inside one ecosystem. The Switch is Nintendo, Minecraft is Microsoft, the credit card is Visa, and so on. There are simply too many moving parts, making a single killswitch nearly impossible to orchestrate.
We are only talking about the architecture, setup, and options for each particular game.