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

791–800 of 809 posts

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#791

Post by teddyh »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #790
teddyh wrote: post #788

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Please keep this conversation about the topic and less about what you evidently consider some sort of personal conflict.) > You keep avoiding saying location tracking. Are you seriously talking about location tracking an adult in their 30s? Say it directly. Yes, of course. I did not intend to be obscure. > Are you saying this happens with knowledge or without? With consent or without? Are you saying parents are putt…

Regarding evidence, I am not aware of any research about any of this. You don't say. In other words you are making up and hallucinating these vague scenarios. You saying things like 'parents are creatures of habit' is not evidence that these made up things actually happen. This smart watch is being advertised for actual kids. 6-12 year olds. Do you actually think a 30 year old is going to keep using their toy watch f…

> you are making up and hallucinating these vague scenarios

You are using very combative and insulting language, which is not helping.

> This smart watch is being advertised for actual kids. 6-12 year olds. Do you actually think a 30 year old is going to keep using their toy watch for 20 years, stay on their parents phone plans and their parents are going to track their 30 year old child?

No. I was not discussing the watch. I made a comment specifically on your statement about whether a parent, which initially has used location tracking on a child, will keep doing so as the child has reached the age of 30. And my position is that yes, very many parents will do so if they don’t need to alter their habits significantly in order to keep doing it.

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#792

Post by throwaway2037 »

4ggr0 wrote: post #568
throwaway2037 wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People raised children for 1000s of years without any technology. I bet we can do that too. I love these comments. So, no vaccines for you and your kids, right?

> So, no vaccines for you and your kids, right? Depending on the person, the answer you expect might not be the actual answer you get...

Correct me if wrong, but the anti-vaxxer movement is limited to Americans. I never once heard any other nationality talk about it, except to make fun of loonies from the US. In many highly developed countries, you cannot go to public schools without evidence of many vaccines.

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#793

Post by throwaway2037 »

yurishimo wrote: post #530
throwaway2037 wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you to share. My experience (different countries) was similar to yours. Do you know anyone who grew up in a big city in the same era? I do. They didn't experience the same type of freedoms. Their parents were much more concerned about crime/kidnapping/"the boogey man".

Anecdotally, where I live in a more rural area now, it's common to see kids out riding bikes during the day. Contrast that, I work in the city and unless it's right after when school lets out, I don't see nearly as many kids just riding around. Perhaps it's because they really stay inside the neighborhood or culdasac, but the city is small enough and well connected (Netherlands) with bike infrastructure, that I would…

    > the number of expats in the larger cities
I cannot imagine it is more than 5% percent outside Europe.

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#794

Post by throwaway290 »

scotty79 wrote: post #787
Larrikin wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parents decide that for babies. Kids going through puberty that let their parents continue to decide every decision can be an actual abusive relationship. You need to be influencing good behavior, not forcing it at a certain point.

Kinds going through puberty are already tracked through their phones, if not by their parents then by uncle Google. I thought we were talking about younger kids.

How can you so casually equate mass tracking by Google and direct surveillance by family member? that's not even whataboutism, completely different situation

Google doesn't need to know who I am to track me, Google cannot lock me up in my room, Google cannot gaslight/manipulate/abuse me based on where I went today

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#795

Post by throwaway290 »

taylorius wrote: post #518
throwaway290 wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's about consent perhaps?

I'm not going to say that consent doesn't exist - but it's sufficiently ill-defined as a concept that it is somewhat meaningless. What constitutes consent? If I finally agree to something after being nagged interminably - have I consented, or have I just given in? At the other end of the spectrum, if someone asks for something which doesn't particularly suit my purposes, but I agree to it as it seems fair enough - is…

It's totally vague. Some decisions are considered okay for parents to make for their children without consent but others aren't.

I feel like as a teen I would consent to being tracked by my parents but that doesn't mean it would be a good idea. It all depends on intent and parent-child relationship in the first place (looking back I didn't have a great one :shrug:)

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#796

Post by CyberDildonics »

teddyh wrote: post #791
CyberDildonics wrote: post #790

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding evidence, I am not aware of any research about any of this. You don't say. In other words you are making up and hallucinating these vague scenarios. You saying things like 'parents are creatures of habit' is not evidence that these made up things actually happen. This smart watch is being advertised for actual kids. 6-12 year olds. Do you actually think a 30 year old is going to keep using their toy watch f…

> you are making up and hallucinating these vague scenarios You are using very combative and insulting language, which is not helping. > This smart watch is being advertised for actual kids. 6-12 year olds. Do you actually think a 30 year old is going to keep using their toy watch for 20 years, stay on their parents phone plans and their parents are going to track their 30 year old child? No. I was not discussing the…

You are using very combative and insulting language, which is not helping.

No I'm not. This is something people do when they say things without evidence, they try to attack how the other person is pointing out they have no evidence.

If you don't want to be told you're making things up, prove that you're not. You keep repeating the same claims and you haven't shown anything to support that.

No. I was not discussing the watch.

You might want to look at the title because that's what this thread is about.

I made a comment specifically on your statement about whether a parent, which initially has used location tracking on a child, will keep doing so as the child has reached the age of 30. And my position is that yes, very many parents will do so if they don’t need to alter their habits significantly in order to keep doing it.

You have definitely made the comment over and over, it's just that it's nonsense and you have zero evidence that it's true. Repeating yourself isn't evidence and rephrasing your claims isn't either.

It doesn't even make sense. Why would someone become and adult and never get a new phone so they can keep using what they had when they turned 10 for multiple decades?

Who has ever heard of this happening let alone enough that "very many parents do so"?

This is not reality. This is like someone saying that bigfoot exists and when someone asks for evidence they just say "what I'm saying is that bigfoot exists".

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#797

Post by teddyh »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #796
teddyh wrote: post #791

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you are making up and hallucinating these vague scenarios You are using very combative and insulting language, which is not helping. > This smart watch is being advertised for actual kids. 6-12 year olds. Do you actually think a 30 year old is going to keep using their toy watch for 20 years, stay on their parents phone plans and their parents are going to track their 30 year old child? No. I was not discussing the…

You are using very combative and insulting language, which is not helping. No I'm not. This is something people do when they say things without evidence, they try to attack how the other person is pointing out they have no evidence. If you don't want to be told you're making things up, prove that you're not. You keep repeating the same claims and you haven't shown anything to support that. No. I was not discussing th…

I maintain that your usage of the word “hallucinating”, “nonsense”, and associated language is combative and insulting. Of course, I have no proof whatsoever for this claim.

> You might want to look at the title because that's what this thread is about.

A thread very frequently strays in topic, and comments are not all strictly about the article’s headline.

> It doesn't even make sense. Why would someone become and adult and never get a new phone

My thinking was that parents would typically keep installing tracking software on the child’s phone whenever they get the opportunity to do so, provided they have acquired the habit of always doing that.

It’s quite possible, of course, that, in practice, most adult children don’t have any tracking software on their phone, simply because they have gotten a new phone without the parents having access.

> This is not reality. This is like someone saying that bigfoot exists and when someone asks for evidence they just say "what I'm saying is that bigfoot exists".

We don’t have any hard evidence either way. I mean, either parents who track their children’s location do mostly stop doing that when the children become adults, or parents do try to keep tracking the kids as long as practically possible. Both are observable phenomena (unlike bigfoot, whose non-existence is not observable).

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#798

Post by CyberDildonics »

teddyh wrote: post #797
CyberDildonics wrote: post #796

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are using very combative and insulting language, which is not helping. No I'm not. This is something people do when they say things without evidence, they try to attack how the other person is pointing out they have no evidence. If you don't want to be told you're making things up, prove that you're not. You keep repeating the same claims and you haven't shown anything to support that. No. I was not discussing th…

I maintain that your usage of the word “hallucinating”, “nonsense”, and associated language is combative and insulting. Of course, I have no proof whatsoever for this claim. > You might want to look at the title because that's what this thread is about. A thread very frequently strays in topic, and comments are not all strictly about the article’s headline. > It doesn't even make sense. Why would someone become and a…

A thread very frequently strays in topic,

I think you mean that you started making outrageous claims that you can't back up.

My thinking was that parents would typically keep installing tracking software on the child’s phone whenever they get the opportunity to do so, provided they have acquired the habit of always doing that.

So in this made up scenario, a parent is stealing their 30 year old child's phone and installing tracking software on it?

Where are you even getting these ideas? You keep repeating them, what even made you think this stuff in the first place?

We don’t have any hard evidence either way.

You're the one making the claim and you don't have any evidence at all, hard, or soft. You can't even explain how it would happen.

I mean, either parents who track their children’s location do mostly stop doing that when the children become adults,

Now the backpeddling finally begins because you keep replying without evidence.

Both are observable phenomena

So observe it and show me evidence.

Here's some actual evidence. Most people replace their phone every 3.5 years on average. Not every 20 years while using the toy watch they got when they were 10.

https://www.sellcell.com/blog/how-often-do-people-upgrade-th...

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#799

Post by partiallypro »

hgomersall wrote: post #545
partiallypro wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems to me that such devices could actually help give kids -more- freedom. Let's not act like kids are outside playing like they were in the 80s/90s. Helicopter parents sort of ruined that (along with neighborhoods no longer being bikeable/walkable.) So, this kinda seems like a device that could give kids a longer leash. Parents can know they are safe/where they are while also giving the kid more freedom to just be…

Except it doesn't in any way deal with the actual real danger in our neighbourhoods, the one that keeps me awake at night, of cars.

I agree with you that unwalkable neighborhoods are a concern, but they aren't the -only- concern.

Re: Google releases smart watch for kids

#800

Post by jaydeegee »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #631
jaydeegee wrote: post #268

Gamifying fitness and activity I really like. The rest is something I don't think we need.

You might like the Garmin Bounce: https://www.garmin.com/en-US/p/714945#specs It's a similar LTE-enabled smart watch with GPS for parental tracking and two-way text/voice messaging within the app, but from Garmin, which has a much better reputation for privacy - including a very positive review from the Mozilla Foundation: https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/garmin-... . I would trust Garmin with my…

Awesome info cheers I have a feeling my 6yo will have a vivofit jr 2 in a few days.
Post reply on HN