671–680 of 706 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there no resistance to things like having to adult having to prove their age to social networks? How is that going to be done, BTW?
The same way it has been done for years when you sign up for a mobile plan etc. You verify your age using either passport, driver's license, digital ID etc. There are plenty of services that provide this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Confiscation until the next day could cause all sorts of problems. For example my daughter needs a smartphone app for bus tickets. It would be a lot more expensive to buy a single ticket to get home and I suppose (especially with younger kids) its going to be difficult to ensure they have the money to get home - or the phone might be their main means of payment. People are dependent on smartphones to live day to day,…
I'm sorry but my honest response to that is something is failing there, either education or parent but you're both using the child as an excuse. Having to walk home or wait to get picked up from school to be punished isn't crazy its called consequences which children need to be taught.
it would be OK in our case, but lots of kids live too far away to walk. Not everyone has a car.
it was also an example of how hard it is to do without it. My daughter is old enough not to need those rules and at this point (and at a sixth form college: a school that only takes kids 16+) I do not think such rules are needed.
For a more real example one parent told me of their low income family free travel to school that required a mobile app, but the school banned kids from even taking phones in.
Disclosure: I work for a social media company. However I live in the UK. Most schools in the UK ban phones in school. The difference here is that in this study phones were taken away for 21 days, even after school. They lost access to the phone completely during that time. I am less convinced that we should wholesale ban phones for kids, because in the UK at least, there is no longer any culture of letting kids go ou…
> because …, there is no longer any culture of letting kids go out and socialise Are you frakking kidding me? We can bring that back. That’s no reason to allow social media + mobile phones to poison society and youth.
My wife is and was horrified by this. She was shuttled to other kids houses, and never allowed to go off on their own until deep into her teens.
Objectively kids are much much safer now, however they are not allowed freedom outside. Most of this is because of safety (where are they, are they being abused, have they been run over, are they in a gang, etc etc)
So _you_ as a parent need to entertain them
Giving your kid "the internet" shuts them up, and means you can do other things. However that comes with a bunch of risks that most parents aren't aware of.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Confiscation until the next day could cause all sorts of problems. For example my daughter needs a smartphone app for bus tickets. It would be a lot more expensive to buy a single ticket to get home and I suppose (especially with younger kids) its going to be difficult to ensure they have the money to get home - or the phone might be their main means of payment. People are dependent on smartphones to live day to day,…
I don’t know of any public transit that has a mobile app as the only way to prove purchase of some pass, they all have a physical card you can obtain. Maybe yours doesn’t, but I doubt it.
Disclosure: I work for a social media company. However I live in the UK. Most schools in the UK ban phones in school. The difference here is that in this study phones were taken away for 21 days, even after school. They lost access to the phone completely during that time. I am less convinced that we should wholesale ban phones for kids, because in the UK at least, there is no longer any culture of letting kids go ou…
> stops all notifications after 20:00 Better to stop absolutely all notifications. When I need to know if someone of my friends is asking something I can open a chat app and check. If something is urgent then just a phone call. The amount of distractions is enormous, thus disabling it by law might be more effective solution, otherwise intellectual decline/underdevelopment of the future society is predetermined.
They are a symptom of something else. For group chat, its missing out on socialising, Nobody wants that. How do you allow kids to socialise via mobile phone is that actual question there.
For video based stuff, _what_ are they being exposed to? how tightly does the selection algorithm push the viewer into certain categories? Who is making that media, and why?
Given that UK had the BBC to "inform and entertain", why are we outsourcing the entertain and leaving the "inform" to people sponsored by shady companies and malicious actors?
Disclosure: I work for a social media company. However I live in the UK. Most schools in the UK ban phones in school. The difference here is that in this study phones were taken away for 21 days, even after school. They lost access to the phone completely during that time. I am less convinced that we should wholesale ban phones for kids, because in the UK at least, there is no longer any culture of letting kids go ou…
> there is no longer any culture of letting kids go out and socialise. Could this have died due to tech?
As people became "less local" as in, you didn't know the people in your street, it meant that unaccompanied kids could be more of a shit without their parent's finding out.
More old people getting or feeling threatened meant that something must be done. ASBOs were one thing, but also the feat that your kids might be mixed up in that sort of stuff, meant that free-range kids were the preserve of "seen to be failing" families
Disclosure: I work for a social media company. However I live in the UK. Most schools in the UK ban phones in school. The difference here is that in this study phones were taken away for 21 days, even after school. They lost access to the phone completely during that time. I am less convinced that we should wholesale ban phones for kids, because in the UK at least, there is no longer any culture of letting kids go ou…
When I see all these "phone ban" experiments, I always wonder, is the phone that's the issue, or is it the apps/websites tailored for engagement (a.k.a addiction)? Maybe instead of banning kids from using phones, they should consider banning companies from making their apps addictive on purpose.
How do you police what's addictive on purpose vs what's addictive by use? Who polices the difference between addictive additives versus standard driving of engagement? After all, I think sites/apps Youtube or even Hacker News would be guilty depending on how you draw the lines.
It's such an easy sell too. Hey parents, any objections if we prevent companies advertising to your kids? How about stopping them from tracking everything your kids do?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Use an open source TOTP manager and sync your codes using something like Standard Notes, not your regular password manager. This gives nice redundancy and two layers of security while staying synced.
Ente Auth + $100 old android phone for backing up to. Old phone stays in a safe, and only pull it out to add new TOTP codes.