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

Google releases smart watch for kids

store.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 809 posts

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#611

Post by gizmo »

eks391 wrote: post #230
thinkingkong wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its weird the types of sacrifices we expect kids to make with regards to survival. Like when a school shooting happens we wouldnt event consider banning assault rifles. Those kids dont survive. But if having a tracker on your kid marginally increases their chance for survival in the rarest of circumstances it’s totally out of the question to not have it.

Do you know what an 'assault' rifle is? I only heard that term used by people who want them banned, who usually think this means automatic weapons, like the other commonly misused term machine gun. The correct term that 'assault' has become an umbrella for is semi-automatic. That means 1 bullet shot for every 1 time the trigger is pulled. There are technically other guns, like pump-action, that require literal pumpin…

Assault rifles are rifles designed for killing humans (as opposed to hunting rifles). Sniper rifles require training. Shot guns have limited range and take long to reload. Handguns are hard to aim and not that lethal. Assault rifles are unique in that they allow an untrained teenager to shoot accurately and kill a lot of people very quickly. That’s why people want to restrict access to AR-15 type rifles.

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#612

Post by bkanuka »

khazhoux wrote: post #316
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #106

Ugh, I threw up a little in my mouth just from the headline. This constant tracking of kids is unnecessary and dangerous. Generations of kids survived without their parents needing to know their location at all times. And yes, I totally admit, some kids (very few actually depending on the locale) didn't survive. But we've traded this false sense of "safety" for kids that are so risk averse it is seriously negatively…

> This constant tracking of kids is unnecessary and dangerous. Generations of kids survived without their parents needing to know their location at all times. This topic is always so alarmist. I have kids and a spouse. We all have Find My and Location Sharing on our phones. I don't FrEaK oUt that my kids are going to die if I'm not tracking their every movement. But it's nice to glance at Find My app and see if the k…

I completely agree. My wife and I have our locations shared with each other. I'm not "surveilling" her. I almost never remember that we have this feature until we need it for some reason, and even then its normally very benign (how far from home are you? should we wait before having dinner?)

Honestly, it's because I just don't care. I'm not worried about her changing plans or going somewhere without telling me (the feels dirty just thinking about) and at a certain age, I also won't care what my kids do. They will also change plans, or explore off the path. So what? But that one time I _really_ need to call them or they need help, we will be glad they have a little bit of tech on them.

I also find it somewhat interesting that many of the same people who are so worried about this type of surveillance _already_ have the devices and/or technical knowledge to surveil others and choose not to for whatever reason. For example, we have home networks and could track what our families do online. We _could_ put a malicious app into someone's phone, or a tracker on someone's car. Simply having the ability to do something does not imply that it will be done, and certainly doesn't imply that it will be done maliciously.

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#613

Post by Double_a_92 »

khazhoux wrote: post #414
BenFranklin100 wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good lord. As I recall, a big part of growing up was spending time and doing things my parents didn’t want me to do. The idea of them tracking me is super creepy, as is tracking one’s spouse for that matter.

“Tracking” is a scare word. The ability to see where my spouse is, when needed, without having to call or send a text, is a convenience. There’s nothing wrong with not sharing your location with your spouse if you don’t want to, but there’s also nothing weird about doing so. Neither of us “cares” one bit where the other is, but it’s frequently useful to know.

Only if you both are mature enough though. If you are constantly looking at the location of your spouse to see of they are cheating or something, and then question every unexpected movement they do, you won't benefit from it.

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#614

Post by xdennis »

khazhoux wrote: post #316
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #106

Ugh, I threw up a little in my mouth just from the headline. This constant tracking of kids is unnecessary and dangerous. Generations of kids survived without their parents needing to know their location at all times. And yes, I totally admit, some kids (very few actually depending on the locale) didn't survive. But we've traded this false sense of "safety" for kids that are so risk averse it is seriously negatively…

> This constant tracking of kids is unnecessary and dangerous. Generations of kids survived without their parents needing to know their location at all times. This topic is always so alarmist. I have kids and a spouse. We all have Find My and Location Sharing on our phones. I don't FrEaK oUt that my kids are going to die if I'm not tracking their every movement. But it's nice to glance at Find My app and see if the k…

> But it's nice to glance at Find My app and see if the kids are still hanging out at Starbucks or they got to school on time. It's convenient to see which corner of the park they're at when I need to go pick them up.

I've heard other parents say they only track their kids in case of an emergency, while you admit you admit you track your kids for trivial issues.

I'm not a parent, so I wouldn't know, but I'd like to think I can trust my kid if he tells me he goes to school on time. Seems more useful to build trust than to know for sure his precise location, because there are a lot of things which can't be tracked by technology.

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#615

Post by fireflash38 »

lolinder wrote: post #358
jagged-chisel wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the important part is whether the children are affected by the tracking. Is it a big deal if they don’t have service and you can’t Find them for a couple hours? Mine are grown now, but I’ve always told them: I’m not worried about where you are, I want to know where to go when something happens and you need a rescue. I want them to have the peace of mind that, if needed, the safety net is within reach. When I…

> my parents were in reach if I was in reach of a [wired] phone This is the biggest reason why I'm not against this tech. When I was a kid I was almost always within reach of a wired phone: at school they had a phone explicitly available for kids to use, and while out and about I was almost always in reach of a pay phone. Even if I had no cash I occasionally would call collect. These days, the network of wired phones…

I'm tempted to get it for my son as a divorced Dad - specifically so he can call Mom or Dad anytime he wants.

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#616

Post by loughnane »

stickfigure wrote: post #362
godelski wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In general I’m struck at how many people’s sense or “right” leans so hard on what’s available for sale. I'm mostly confused how it seems there's pretty significant evidence that helicopter parenting[0] has resulted in poor outcomes for kids[1] but then we act as if the reason it fails is because we aren't paying __enough__ attention. I am sympathetic to parents wanting to protect their kids, but if the objective is…

I object to the idea that putting a smartwatch on your child is helicopter parenting. It can be exactly the opposite - if a little piece of technology allows kids to roam farther unsupervised, then it fosters independence. I have never been accused of overparenting, yet I preordered one of these google watches. I expect to use it on outings like amusement parks and ski trips. We'll see how it goes.

> if a little piece of technology allows kids to roam farther unsupervised

I think we have a different definition of 'unsupervised'; I understand it to mean "no supervision/oversight" where I guess you mean "out of sight"?

Similarly, I'm not sure what you mean by "overparenting", and even if I did I don't know your situation so I wouldn't feel comfortable charging you with it. That said, if I were to put such a device on my kid I'd feel I was doing something wrong.

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#617

Post by fireflash38 »

kelnos wrote: post #539
jagged-chisel wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the important part is whether the children are affected by the tracking. Is it a big deal if they don’t have service and you can’t Find them for a couple hours? Mine are grown now, but I’ve always told them: I’m not worried about where you are, I want to know where to go when something happens and you need a rescue. I want them to have the peace of mind that, if needed, the safety net is within reach. When I…

> Providing a safety net while allowing freedom boosts self confidence. That's a bit tricky, though, because 24/7 tracking is the antithesis of freedom, regardless of the intent behind it.

Kids that know their parent has their back or will help them often tend to use that freedom more.

Like a kid who won't climb a tree cause they're afraid of falling... But then will climb way higher with a parent there to catch them. And as a parent, you have to be willing to let them fall sometimes too - to show that they can handle it.

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#618

Post by BiteCode_dev »

khazhoux wrote: post #316
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #106

Ugh, I threw up a little in my mouth just from the headline. This constant tracking of kids is unnecessary and dangerous. Generations of kids survived without their parents needing to know their location at all times. And yes, I totally admit, some kids (very few actually depending on the locale) didn't survive. But we've traded this false sense of "safety" for kids that are so risk averse it is seriously negatively…

> This constant tracking of kids is unnecessary and dangerous. Generations of kids survived without their parents needing to know their location at all times. This topic is always so alarmist. I have kids and a spouse. We all have Find My and Location Sharing on our phones. I don't FrEaK oUt that my kids are going to die if I'm not tracking their every movement. But it's nice to glance at Find My app and see if the k…

Kids need to mess up, and do things outside of the sight of their parents to grow.

They need to be able to do things their parents disapprove from time to time, or just hide some behavior that they feel shy about.

Sex, meeting people outside of your social norms, attempting stupid stunts, and all that is part of growing.

The simple fact you can know where they are at all time steal those opportunities from them, and normalize spying so that they grow into citizens that will accept it in the future by the gov.

It also removes the parts of the day when they are on their own, and have to figure things out, then deal with the consequences of their action because the parents are not there to get them out of trouble.

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#620

Post by BiteCode_dev »

Double_a_92 wrote: post #610
vasco wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the premise is that they have a phone, why not just ask them where they are when you need to know?

Because that's an extra annoyance on both sides.

Extend this logic to other thing you should ask about, and you'll see it gets creepy very fast.
Post reply on HN