this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
59429 readers
2759 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The ones I mentioned directly after... Please, do not quote out of context.
I feel like people miss the context of the original content and put words in my mouth. I was referring to the claim that parents can "simply" supervise, and should supervise, all media consumption of their children. Which I argue is impossible without infringing on the children's rights of privacy.
It's like people misinterpret my point with intent. Or there is a huge language barrier I can not comprehend.
You can not supervise every media consumption of your children. That is all I wanted to say. I didn't even comment upon whether or not and how good it works (or not) to teach your children about responsible media consumption. That's a whole different topic.
So none. All devices have the capability to control access.
But that whole conversation is in context of governmental control vs. parental control. In my opinion governmental control infringes much more on everyones rights in this case. So obviously your statement is interpreted in this context, not in vacuum.
Parents do not have access to parental control on devices of other children, other adults, school, libraries, etc.