this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
395 points (95.0% liked)

Technology

58083 readers
3104 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Mountain_Mike_420@lemmy.ml 76 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

Please don’t give kids smartphones period. A smart watch is far less addictive and just as valuable to parents and kids (parents can track location, kids can still make phone calls and txt.) other suggestions are a dumb phone (think t9 txting), or just let them go phoneless.

[–] yaycupcake@lemmy.blahaj.zone 27 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't think going phoneless would be a great idea because emergencies happen and people need to communicate but society would probably be better if kids weren't glued to smartphone apps and social media from a young age. The smart watch or dumb phone idea makes sense to me though.

[–] copd@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

The emergency argument can be managed by not giving kids a smart phone with internet aceess. Easy

[–] majestictechie@lemmy.fosshost.com 26 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Don't they require smart phones to work though? All the ones I have had are all just BT devices which require a phone to do anything beyond tell the time

[–] gray@pawb.social 41 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

There are several cellular capable watches.

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

My Samsung watch works without a phone on Google Fi network. Watches get a free line.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 23 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Those watches with tracking built in are certainly popular in my area, but I absolutely refuse to use it. Kidnapping just isn't a thing (the majority of kidnappings is by a trusted family member/friend), and I don't think kids should get accustomed to someone constantly looking over their shoulder. I've gotten my kids "smart" watches (fun Minecraft watches with built-in games and whatnot), and there's no tracking or internet access whatsoever.

If kids need to call, they can ask a trusted adult to borrow a phone. If I trust my kid, they can borrow my spare. Kids don't need a phone of their own until they can at least get around on their own (e.g. driver's license or parental permission to leave the neighborhood on their own), and for me, that's like 14yo. I have a 10yo, and there's no way I'm giving them a phone now or in the next year. They're really responsible, but they don't need it at all.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 12 points 3 weeks ago

Garmin makes watches specifically for kids and seem to have a decent privacy policy.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 11 points 3 weeks ago

Or just give them a dumb phone.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] JDPoZ@lemmy.world 62 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Scrolling to find out what “EE” is… I can’t find anything. Can someone fill me in?

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 67 points 3 weeks ago

EE (formerly Everything Everywhere) is a British mobile network operator, internet service provider and a brand of BT Consumer, a division of BT Group. Supposedly the #1 network in the UK similar to Verizon in the US.

[–] Fuzzy_Red_Panda@lemm.ee 16 points 3 weeks ago

A telecom company with the hubris and arrogance to call themselves "Everything Everywhere".

[–] skeezix@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] bhamlin@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

Erectile Encumbrance

Electronics Enonymous.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 49 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I will argue smartphones or any electronic is not the problem. The problem is lazy parents.

My kids all have had phones since before 10 and they're all well adjusted but to be clear I monitor their usage and I check in with my kids regularly.

I cannot hold back society or technology at the fear of my kids being left behind. What I can do is help them navigate both as they grow.

I love how quick we are to lay the blame anywhere but parents.

[–] padge@lemmy.zip 20 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I strongly believe that a large part of the reason China is so strict with underage phone and game restrictions is because the parents are at work for too long to do any real parenting. Ideally parents should be the ones making those choices and actually monitoring their kids, but since I don't have kids I can't really say for myself.

[–] TwinTusks@bitforged.space 16 points 2 weeks ago

the parents are at work for too long to do any real parenting

This 100%.

[–] Emerald@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I'm always sus of anything the Chinese government does. I feel that governments restricting Internet usage is just a way to indoctrinate people with the media you (the state) shows them instead.

[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

The problem here is that the systems you have to monitor usage aren't great, and kids are known for lying or omitting details to their parents.

Giving kids open-ended access to technology doesn't have to involve giving them access to the Internet without constant guidance. I would rather my kid have less digital access than their peers, than get sexually exploited because they were a child publicly online.

More and more I am seeing that the places kids go online are places I don't fully understand, but a cursory review reveals is also a hotspot for sexual predators. This seems like the perfect place for a predator to stalk my child. I don't know enough to stop them, and my kid doesn't know enough not to get exploited. By the time I find out about it, it'll probably be too late.

Giving a child an internet-connected camera and screen can become such a horrific nightmare, I think that good parenting actually has to involve being realistic and telling your kids "just because your friends have TikTok and Instagram doesn't mean you won't get grounded for it in this house", and letting kids use technology when I am in the room with them. I have seen what kids are posting online, and it's easy to assume that their parents don't care, but it's a lot more realistic to accept that kids are good at keeping secrets, and their parents don't know what they're up to.

If they want to learn about computers on their own, I'll buy them what they need to learn about all sorts of stuff that doesn't expose them directly to capitalist or sexual exploitation online. When they are old enough to defend themselves, then they can be given the trust in accessing the Internet on their own, but until then they need to explore under my watchful eye.

Giving a smartphone to a <10 year old child, and trusting that the limited monitoring tools available, and your child's honesty is enough to keep them safe from vicious exploitation is delusional and irresponsible.

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

This is an extremely reactionary take. I hear what you are saying but I draw the line as delusional and irresponsible unless you apply that to pretty much all parents that don't completely smother their children.

We make mistakes as we grow. We lie. We get hurt. Technology is always Pandora's box. I'd argue we have better knowledge of our kids now than we ever used to and stats show the world is safer now than it has ever been.

If you live in fear you will form your decisions from a place of fear.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 7 points 2 weeks ago

This is actually a good take. Kids aren't miniature adults, they're kids. They're not helpless or useless, but neither are they fully morally and emotionally developed. They need guidance. Plenty of adults can't responsibly handle internet access. I survived early onilne porn and gore and social media, but it's not like any of it benefited me in a meaningful way.

Some folks have an attitude that's like "I touched hot stoves and I learned better", but that's far from ideal.

[–] yessikg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 47 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Get the kids a dumb phone instead. Calls and texts are more than enough in an emergency

[–] VerdantSporeSeasoning@lemmy.ca 12 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

When I went to price it out at the store, the line for a dumb phone was going to cost $30/mo more than a smart phone. It was dumb.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 19 points 3 weeks ago

So get them a smartphone plan and slap the SIM in their dumbphone?

I'm in the US and can get a simple plan for $6/month for no data, 300 minutes, and unlimited texting. Unlimited minutes is $8. There's no contract, so this isn't some kind of family deal, this is just the regular price at Tello for a single line.

I personally have 1GB and 300 min for $7/month.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] bulwark@lemmy.world 37 points 3 weeks ago (11 children)

My kids are around that age and it's a real struggle when all of their friends have one.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 31 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

There is a growing tide of data suggesting the fight is worth it, but understand it is a serious struggle.

Much like trying to get kids to eat healthy when they are surrounded by so much awful food in the US.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Is it the phone, or the social media? The article only really mentions social media as the real issue.

Subsequently, does that mean social media on a computer is 100% A-OK? (this is a mobile phone carrier so it makes sense that they'd only focus on phones)

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (6 children)

The article specifically mentions smartphones. Which smartphone can't access social media?

Computer is not necessarily "A-OK" but theyre far less likely to carry them around and be on them all day.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sundial@lemm.ee 28 points 3 weeks ago

You definitely see a difference in children who are regularly given phones to keep them occupied. They're just so much more hyper active. I know a lot of teachers have been complaining about phone use in the classrooms. In Canada they just started rolling back against rules saying teachers can't confiscate phones.

[–] AFC1886VCC@reddthat.com 26 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

In my opinion, social media is a bigger problem than smartphones in general. For me a smartphone is a just a tool that can be both incredibly useful but also very harmful.

With a bit of knowhow, you can neuter a smartphone so kids can't access social media, games, and other distracting mediums. No social media apps, no browser access, no YouTube, no games. But they can still access useful functions like calculators, the torch, phone calls and messages, etc. Android and iOS both have features allowing parents to do this.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] themadcodger@kbin.earth 24 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

What age is a good age to give them one?

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 21 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

When they need one. And no, that's not when they say they need one, but when you decide they need one.

I'm planning on having a loaner phone when my kids are teenagers that they can share. It'll stay home unless they leave the house, and they'll be limited to how much time they can spend on it. If they earn my trust, maybe they'll get their own (again, subject to limitations). I don't see a reason why they'd need one before they can drive, but I'll play it by ear.

That said, I refuse to do any sort of tracking on their devices. If I trust them with a phone, I'll respect their privacy with it. If they violate my trust, they lose the phone. If they don't like it, they're free to get their own once they're 18, and not a day before.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 12 points 3 weeks ago

No age. It's just especially damaging for young people.

[–] biggerbogboy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

As a 17 year old who has 3 phones (somewhat strange story behind it), giving a child a phone should be either when they need it, such as when they go out more often or other events where they need a specific use, but if not, I believe 18 to 20 is not a bad age to receive one, since young adults are more likely to need to travel to schooling such as UNI more often and generally need more info about travel routes and to be able to message parents/siblings/etc.

As for my 3 phones, one is a galaxy S4 my dad gave me as a hand-me-down, pretty much used to text my parents exclusively, then I received an oppo Reno z from a friend who didn't need it, which I currently use as a games and social media phone, then the third is one is a galaxy a20 my dad brought home and said I could take if I wanted, since there were a few of those unused at his workplace, so I now just use that as a flashlight.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Macropolis@lemmy.world 18 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Just don't do it people. Me and so many parents have horror stories. Even without social media these phone numbers get out one way or another. For us it was much more trouble than it was worth.

[–] Clent@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I haven't had a problem.

iPhone with Screen time and communication limits means I can control how much time they spend in the device and in which apps and I control who they can contact.

Don't approve any apps that allow social features.

Talk to them about the realities of the internet and the wider world.

All of this has to happen at some point. If you just hand off a phone to an 11 year old or even a 14 year old workout doing any of the above, you're still going to have issues.

Much of what is being said about tech is the same as was said about tv and video games. The only studies you're going to hear about this are the ones that confirm the societal biases.

If you don't seek counter opinions of this topic you're playing into the same fear mongering every generation of parents has had about the new thing.

Dancing, rock and roll, tv, video games, and now phones. Every time, everyone thinks this time is different and every time it hasn't been.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] John_CalebBradberton@lemmy.world 18 points 3 weeks ago (12 children)

Don't give them a phone until they are prepared to see everything the Internet has. Kids can be smart and will find ways around the blocks you put in place.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Yes, don't do it. It's a bad idea. Phones are addicting and one day when we all realize this, we will have laws to prevent it.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] badbytes@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

I think we all could benefit from less screen time 💻

[–] 01011@monero.town 10 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Lucky them. I wish I didn’t need one. It’s a window to other people’s problems.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Let's go one step further...

VRChat on the Quest is not a babysitter!

[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Is that a step further though? I feel like not giving kids access to VR Chat comes way before not giving them a smartphone in terms of restrictiveness or severity. It's a far more reasonable suggestion.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] tal@lemmy.today 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (9 children)

EE is advising parents that children under 11 should be given old-fashioned brick or “dumb” phones that only allow them to call or text instead.

That sounds ridiculous. An 11-year-old is, what, a fifth-grader in the US?

If they have access to a computer or something in addition to their phone, okay, maybe. But for a lot of young people in 2024, their smartphone is their sophisticated electronic device. Maybe they tack on a keyboard or whatnot. But take that away, and they don't have a computer to use. A computer is just too essential of a tool to not let someone learn.

Kids used to veg out in front of the TV, where material is generally not all that fantastic and the device is noninteractive. I think that it's great that smartphones are replacing that.

I was programming when I was in first grade. I was doing computer graphics and word processing somewhere around there. Those are important skillsets to have. I made use of those. You want kids to pick those up. You do not want to push those back. I'd get a computer of whatever form into their hands at the earliest point that they can avoid destroying it.

If your concern is that you want to restrict access to pornography or something, okay, fine, whatever, set up content filtering. I think that they're probably going to get at it anyway. But that does not entail not permitting access to the computing device. That's a restriction on access to the Internet.

In May this year, MPs on the education committee urged the government to consider a total ban on smartphones for the under-16s and a statutory ban on mobile-phone use in schools as part of a crackdown on screen time for children.

That'd be, what, up to high school before you have one? And that's not "I have parents who want that", but outright "the government doesn't let anyone do that".

Wikipedia. Google Maps. The store of knowledge available from search engines. I use those all the time. You want to cut them off from that?

I read and certainly write way more text than I did in the pre-Internet era. Do you want kids reading and writing less?

I mean, I'm just boggled.

[–] IllNess@infosec.pub 10 points 3 weeks ago (19 children)

I was programming when I was in first grade. I was doing computer graphics and word processing somewhere around there. Those are important skillsets to have. I made use of those. You want kids to pick those up. You do not want to push those back. I’d get a computer of whatever form into their hands at the earliest point that they can avoid destroying it.

Most kids aren't improving their skillsets. They definitely aren't programming on cell phones. I am a programmer. I have code editors that I paid for on my phone at all times. I've used them like 5 times at most.

Social media and misinformation is damaging for everyone but more so for children. Social media is what kids are mostly doing.

I agree that there can positives for using a cell phone. Their are educational software but most kids aren't doing that.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] Ibuthyr@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Smartphones won't help you learn how computers work. They are dumbed down devices, designed to keep you on social media while maximizing exposure to ads. These things are way worse than TVs.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›