Live data from Hacker News

Parental controls aren't for parents

beasthacker.com

451–460 of 476 posts

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you but you can't just go out and buy a Gameboy anymore. And gaming is more of a social activity now where you'll need internet access.

They're called retro handhelds and you can get them for ~$30-40 at the low end, which can apparently run up through Playstation 1. In the $200-300 range (so still less than a Switch 2), you can apparently run up through Switch and maybe PS3.

I know about these but they require a lot more technical know-how to set up and getting ROMs is legally questionable. Your kid's friends are probably not playing those games either. They aren't a good option for most people.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#452
post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

unless you send your child to private school where all parents enforce such rule, your kid (that is 12+ year old) is going to be ostracize by majority of peers that have such phone. This is completely different environment comparing to times when we were growing up.

It's the same environment

by environment I mean back then we didn't have smartphones, social media, internet.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#453
post #432
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By high school there is definitely an expectation that everyone has a phone. They will literally miss out on a normal method of communication between friends and classmates. They miss out on the social group and then fade away from it and just become "that one guy in our class." The last time I mentioned this several people argued that, "true friends would stick together" or some such. Well, if you already have those…

You think that missing out on talking to high schoolers is worse than missing out on the harms of smartphones? We must have very different views of the world. I would never let a child for whom I am responsible have a smartphone. They are not required, despite what you may have been told. I’m an adult and I’ve been experimenting with leaving mine behind when I go out. It’s more than fine.

I'm sitting here from the perspective of having 2 adult children -- both graduating early, and my youngest who enters high school next year. They all got phones starting with 9th grade (14 at the start of the school year). Generally speaking they charged the phones downstairs.

I literally addressed the problems of missing out for high schoolers. The social event they'll miss on its own may not be a big deal. But the missed opportunities to make and deepen friendships is a big deal.

As an adult, you have your friend/peer group already. You and your friends are far less likely to do things spontaneously and far more likely to be courteous and thoughtful to invite someone along. A high school teen has middle school friends and is probably discovering their peer group. A huge portion of that discovery becomes unavailable without a phone.

Say they just finished up with band and everyone chats online, "hey meet up at the pizza place." Your kid will be left out. That's the firm reality. They won't know about it. It's the opportunity cost of meeting and learning other kids which will be missed, not the riveting conversations themselves.

> They are not required, despite what you may have been told.

Required? no. Central to the social fabric that binds them, unfortunately yes.

I'm fairly confident in my methods as I'm 2 for 2 graduating conscientious adults from college.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#454
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By high school there is definitely an expectation that everyone has a phone. They will literally miss out on a normal method of communication between friends and classmates. They miss out on the social group and then fade away from it and just become "that one guy in our class." The last time I mentioned this several people argued that, "true friends would stick together" or some such. Well, if you already have those…

This is just generally true even as an adult. A lot of social events used to start out on text threads in the early 2000's and then moved on to Facebook Calendar by the mid 2000's and then Instagram and I don't even know how it would work now. But if you wanted to be in any particular social group you probably had to deal with the icky features of all of these social media apps just to do that. We needed a public squ…

So much has moved to facebook and it's eternally frustrating. Facebook has its own priorities, and I get the last minute "hey! meet here" things the next day.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worth adding this option is available for premium accounts only.

Of course. It's available for customers, not products. Because products need to see ads, check in and report usage and ad consumption.

Spotdl.......

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#456
post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heroin is addictive. Physical compulsion is addiction. What you are talking about is not addiction. It shares some elements, but no one is breaking into cars so they can scroll Instagram.

They are lying and stealing from their parents to “scroll instagram”

Exactly. And what worries me is that they are essentially greasing the groove for these synapses, growing the neural network around deception and dishonesty. If they get into gambling in 5 years or so and happen to have a partner, they will already be somewhat adapted and practiced in hiding this activity quite effectively rather than seeking and accepting help. It's worrying. It's all foundational to very self-destructive habits from my perspective.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#457
post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, the government is expressly prohibited from regulating video games sales on the basis of content, per the First Amendment (with an exception existing for pornography). This was the Supreme Court’s ruling in Brown v. Entertainment Merchant’s Association (2011).

And that's the problem. The US Constitution isn't Moses' 10 Commandments chiselled in stone. It can be changed and improved. To quote Jeff Jefferies: "That's why it's called an AMENDMENT!". The fact that the US government is frozen in amber overall will be the downfall of the US.

It's not set in stone, its just used as an excuse. Or a thought terminating cliche.

From OP:

> the First Amendment (with an exception existing for pornography)

The text is not

> Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, except for showing boobs on TV, which would be a heinous crime and worthy of deportation

There are many exceptions to "freedom of speech".

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#458
post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like the parent(s) use it as well > I cannot prevent the kid from seeing installed games that are rated Mature.

Can someone explain the problem with 'mature' rated games? As kids (under 10), we played Mortal Kombat and GTA III, laughing when we interacted with hookers in GTA. It was fun, and we had a great time playing these games. What's the issue? It's no different from playing with a wooden sword and shield.

In my mind when I was 13 I played Carmageddon and GTA1

In reality I was 15 when they came out. The graphics in GTA weren't much different to Frogger. Doom and Quake involved blasting monsters, not people. Duke Nukem 3D, Halflife had very unrealistic looking people.

Todays games are very different in terms of visual quality, but even then, GTA is relatively mild compared to many games. You can hit a prostitute with a bat and kill her, but you can't drag a random person off the street and plunge their arm into a deep fat fryer.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#459

My daughter will not get a phone at all until she's at least 16 and probably finally actually needs one. As for the Switch and Nintendo Online, I didn't find it confusing or difficult at all to set up a child's account, make sure they can't buy anything without my permission, and then I make sure my daughter knows what she can and can't do, and I keep an eye on it to make sure she follows my rules. I don't trust pare…

Then you are a terrible parent and your kids will get their social activities through detention as they can't do homework.

Re: Parental controls aren't for parents

#460

Just recently did this with XBox. I cannot prevent the kid from seeing the marketplace. I cannot prevent the kid from seeing installed games that are rated Mature. It won't let them play it, but it lists all the games installed in the XBox. I cannot prevent them from downloading free stuff. It was frustrating and clear to me that this wasn't designed for the benefits of parents. I just want it to act like a console w…

And depending on the community you go to to ask questions, the likely response is, "just be a parent". Wanting seat belts made just for kids IS BEING A PARENT.

Children are quite literally the future of the human race.

A fact childless nerds have forgotten.

Post reply on HN