Recent Posts
My children know they have absolutely no expectation of privacy when it comes to the Internet, their phones, the television Etc. I monitor them, and then counsel them. After so long being monitored, it has actually had the effect of creating trust and respect between my children and I, as well as teaching right from wrong. When I was a child, we didn't have the devices and access we do now, yet I still was monitored and had no privacy. As a child it got under my skin due to the fact our maturing brains work that way, but taught me the right lessons. As an adult I see the benefits and reasons for monitoring.
I can honestly say, after watching what they do for so long, that I monitor them now more for keeping them away from links or people that specifically prey on children. Whether it be for monetary reasons or for other, more sick reasons.-y0himba (October 07, 2013, 08:36 AM)
While it may "take a village" to raise a child (and I have my doubts about thattheoryfolk mantra as well) it certainly doesn't require software and an electronic device to do it.-40hz (October 07, 2013, 09:25 AM)
I hate that saying.
-Renegade (October 07, 2013, 09:50 AM)
I've started with perfectly innocent links, and within a half dozen clicks I've inadvertently ended up at some seriously sick, disturbed, demented perversions. (No - I don't mean pron.) There are gateways out there that young kids really shouldn't be getting into. Being able to control or limit that for kids is just being responsible. However... that can't go on forever. The reigns must be slowly loosened until you finally let go. Nobody has any business putting reigns on another adult.-Renegade (October 07, 2013, 04:28 AM)
And I guess it's no big deal to someone that has been tracked by their parents since birth to continue to be tracked by police, as adults, when they go off to college.-app103 (October 07, 2013, 08:17 AM)
And again, the most important part- I respect and listen to my children. That seems to be a real fact that people ignore in this conversation.-wraith808 (October 06, 2013, 10:54 AM)
So, how many of you here have had your privacy violated by a spying parent that thought they had the right to do that? How many of you had a parent that went rummaging through your "private thoughts" looking for something to hang you for? How many of you can really speak from the violated child's point of view? How many of you know first hand how damaging that is to a child, the relationship with that parent, what it does to any trust that child has in that parent, and how difficult it is to fix the damage once it is done? How many of you know first hand what happens after the child finds out?
Let's see a show of hands.
Am I the only one with my hand up?-app103 (October 06, 2013, 12:58 PM)
It might be worth noting that not all kids are made from cookie-cutters, and they're not all the same. Some kids probably need more attention/monitoring than others.That's a very good point- and a part of that equation of paying attention.-Renegade (October 06, 2013, 11:10 AM)
(Cynical rant about state-sponsored schools being cookie-cutters omitted.)-Renegade (October 06, 2013, 11:10 AM)
It's all fine and dandy to talk about "good parenting" and "proper supervision" and have lofty ideals, but the reality is that no matter how hard you try, you'll never be able to live up to that 100% of the time. An app can help possibly catch a problematic situation when (not if) your attention lapses.-Renegade (October 05, 2013, 10:21 PM)
Anything else and it is invasion of privacy. It does not matter that these are your own kids, they are still human beings and they should be able to have secrets.-vlastimil (October 06, 2013, 03:15 AM)
Is it a bad idea to monitor small children that are prone to getting lost?-Renegade (October 05, 2013, 08:55 PM)
No, it's not a bad idea to monitor small children, in fact it's a really good one. But what's wrong with monitoring small children the old fashioned way? You know...actually watching them? Small children rarely get lost when they are properly supervised.-app103 (October 05, 2013, 09:48 PM)
And just because there is one way to do such things (the trace the phone bit) does that mean that's the only way you'd want to do it? Is no one else allowed to provide solutions that might be useful?-wraith808 (October 05, 2013, 03:21 PM)
Not in my perfect world they ain't!
But since I'm not in charge here - and my perfect world is a very small and wholly imaginary place - that shouldn't bother anybody.
-40hz (October 05, 2013, 04:20 PM)
(there's no devil emote for devil's advocate... hmm...)This is a dangerous product in that it teaches people, at a very young age, that it is somehow perfectly acceptable for you (or others) to electronically monitor another human being purely for your own peace of mind.-40hz (October 05, 2013, 11:25 AM)
Ah yes, other peoples kids...Eek! As it's obvious that you really do care, I'm quite sure yours are just fine. I just think the usage of this technology sends a bad message to the masses. As I mentioned before, if a child doesn't step over the line because they don't want to that's a good thing. But if the don't step over the line because they are afraid to...the end result is destined to fail. I've seen it happen many times when kids get out of a repressive culture and then just go bat shit crazy when they finally realize nobody is watching ... Too many of my childhood friends died that way.-Stoic Joker (October 05, 2013, 08:27 AM)
And here we get to the true crux of the matter. Because in reality...you still do not know. Because all you can truly confirm is that if there was an accident...the phone wasn't damaged.
Now, if the tracking was normally off...and a child had the option of turning it on (or it was/could be auto activated by an accelerometer) ... that would be an acceptable compromise. Because it gives them a send up a flair safety net, and a modicum of trust/control of the situation. While also giving you some level of true assurance that all is truly well (e.g. no news really is good news).-Stoic Joker (October 05, 2013, 08:27 AM)
Even if it is "your kids" (insert strongly worded language what one might do to protect "your kids"), I still think that's beginning to slide down the wrong path. Particularly for Teenagers is where it all gets fuzzy.
I think that if there is a meta-theme where the parents have to have Always On monitoring, that resentment will simmer "nice and fine" until it blows up like a volcano. Then in the resulting emotional explosion is when it gets really dangerous because the kid will be in Rebellion Mode!
Plus these monitoring solutions are "lazy" - "I do nothing, I know every step you make". The whole country isn't one gang war zone. And as that resentment builds, the kid will actively try to break the app himself.
Rob Malda of Slashdot fame posted an anecdote once that his parents tried to reprimand something he did as a child, and took away his computer, so he logged into his friend's computer or something.
Then what happens when the kid turns 18? That's why college sees a lot of bumpy stuff, because suddenly after living in a virtual walled room, all that goes away and then the kid has had no practice taking his baby steps to live a real life.-TaoPhoenix (October 05, 2013, 10:18 AM)
Well, I don't think 8-year olds know much about all that stuff, which is kind of why it's probably a good thing to shield them from some of the nastiness out there. Let them be kids. Dig for worms. Climb trees. etc.
But when it comes to the digital world, I don't see how it benefits a 9-year old to know about where in the real world we have people decapitating other people then replacing their head with goat heads in a pentagram for a black magic zombie animation ritual. That wasn't made up. That happens. And it doesn't need to be a part of growing up. That can be left for the adults or "new adults" to deal with.
Monitoring adults is one thing, but for parents to take care of their kids through some degree of monitoring is another thing entirely.
However, it's a matter of degrees. A 10-year old isn't a 16-year old, and you can't treat them the same.-Renegade (October 04, 2013, 10:45 AM)
I have heard this one before. Isn't this basically the same justification that governments use for spying on their citizens?-app103 (October 04, 2013, 09:42 AM)
I think we have a serious scale issue going on here, between black and white/all or none assertion. How many people remember the old commercials with the tag line "It's 10 O'clock...do you know where your children are?" Here's a hint for those that don't remember them...they're from the 1970s!
Now, Orwell time - the scale part kicks in. In the 1970s it was simply a matter of asking the kids where they were going, who they were going with...and paying attention to the GD answer. That was called parenting. But our society has devolved to the point where there isn't time to pay proper attention to much of anything so why not offload the whole parenting responsibility crap on technology! YEAH! Let the computer keep track of the little monsters...I don't have time.
Seriously???
Have we really sunk to the point where Orwellian monitoring of our children is considered proper? Instead of taking the time to build a rapport of respect and trust with them??!?
The real key problem here is that if the kid has a GPS target painted on their back, then they're just as easy for anyone to find...and not all anyones have said child's best interests in mind. But yet we have obviously been trained to accept the idea of Big Brother-esq monitoring systems as righteous and good ... Because it's... For. The. Children.
The fact of the matter is that if the kid wants to get lost. They're going to get lost. technology be damned.-Stoic Joker (October 04, 2013, 06:47 AM)
At approximately 1:30 p.m. EDT on August 2, 2013, Mr. Levison gave the FBI a printout of what he represented to be the encryption keys needed to operate the pen register. This printout, in what appears to be 4-point type, consists of 11 pages of largely illegible characters. See Attachment A. (The attachment was created by scanning the document provided by Mr. Levison; the original document was described by the Dallas FBI agents as slightly clearer than the scanned copy but nevertheless illegible .) Moreover, each of the five encryption keys contains 512 individual characters - or a total of 2560 characters. To make use of these keys, the FBI would have to manually input all 2560 characters, and one incorrect keystroke in this laborious process would render the FBI collection system incapable of collecting decrypted data.
I have no problem with it at all. I do have a problem with parents that don't monitor what their kids are doing.-edbro (October 03, 2013, 08:39 PM)
It's one thing to have an explicit agreement with your young kids that you are going to be monitoring their online/mobile activity in exchange for them getting such a device. But doing it secretly seems like it's teaching them some wrong lessons.-mouser (October 03, 2013, 08:48 PM)
But how do you think all arrests are made, I mean in other times in history? Take any case from the 20th century or whenever before the current NSA era. Listening to communication to catch bad and evil people has helped and certainly nothing new, not even a 20th century invention.-rgdot (October 03, 2013, 01:17 PM)
I already said (anything remotely close to) blanket snooping is wrong (see above).
But how do you think all arrests are made, I mean in other times in history? Take any case from the 20th century or whenever before the current NSA era. Listening to communication to catch bad and evil people has helped and certainly nothing new, not even a 20th century invention.
This is exactly what I am talking. In the face of an evil authoritarian and corporate take over of our world we are doing and saying things that will do nothing to improve the world, just play in the hands of those who want this world this way.-rgdot (October 03, 2013, 01:17 PM)
