this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59587 readers
2940 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
[–] Sundial@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months 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.

[–] Mountain_Mike_420@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago (6 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 0 points 2 months 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 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

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

[–] majestictechie@lemmy.fosshost.com 0 points 2 months 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 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There are several cellular capable watches.

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago

Or just give them a dumb phone.

[–] falk1856@midwest.social 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Anyone have a recommendation for a decent kids smartwatch with cell service? I got my son a Garmin Bounce and the text and the service sucked so we returned it.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago

You can find older Apple Watches for fairly cheap, I paid 10 bucks a month on T-Mobile for just the watch plan.

You would need to have an iPhone in order to manage it but you can manage a watch for a kid that way. They have school mode for them so it just acts as a watch with emergency contact action at school.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago (1 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.

[–] beefbot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Curious, what smart(-ish) watches did you get? Product recommendations appropriate in this discussion imho

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 months ago (6 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)

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] mannycalavera@feddit.uk 0 points 2 months ago

Make parents less entitled. Problem solved.

[–] yessikg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] VerdantSporeSeasoning@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 months 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.

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 (1 replies)
[–] underthesign@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

If the new dumb phones also came with Google Family Link for tracking then it would be a win. But they don't. As a parent, having the ability to track my kids when I know they're heading to or from somewhere is a big deal. And no, it's not an issue of trust.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] bulwark@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months 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)
[–] JDPoZ@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (5 children)

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

[–] Fuzzy_Red_Panda@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago

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

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months 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.

[–] skeezix@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] bhamlin@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

Erectile Encumbrance

Electronics Enonymous.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

Electrical Engineers.

[–] themadcodger@kbin.earth 0 points 2 months ago (10 children)

What age is a good age to give them one?

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago (3 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.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] tal@lemmy.today 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 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".

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

set up content filtering

Then kids will just work around it.

I personally refuse to set up content filtering. My state passed a law requiring ID to view porn and use SM, and I'm willing to set up a VPN on my WiFi to work around that because I detest content filtering. I'd much rather have zero filtering and track what websites are visited so I can react appropriately (i.e. if the kid is watching porn, they probably need some proper sex ed and something to occupy their time).

That's a restriction on access to the Internet.

Sure, and I'm 100% willing to take that away from them.

My policy is, if I trust you, I trust you to not be supervised. If I don't trust you, I don't trust you at all. So either you get complete access, or you get no access.

That's how I'm planning to handle phones as well. They'll get a loaner phone when they need it, and if they earn my trust with that, they'll get their own. If they violate my trust, they lose the phone, including the loaner. Simple as that.

the government doesn’t let anyone do that

Yeah, that's not cool at all, the government shouldn't tell me how I can raise my kids.

That said, kids can still access the internet at school and at libraries, just like I did as a kid. Or they can ask to borrow the family computer. If I choose to restrict my child's access to the internet, that should 100% be my prerogative, as should me deciding to give my child a smart phone.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 0 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Hey kid, you finished your vegetables and cleaned your room, here's the car keys. Right pedal is gas and... ah, you'll figure it out. Be home by 10.

Also lol @ family computer.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] IllNess@infosec.pub 0 points 2 months 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 0 points 2 months 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)
[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 0 points 2 months ago

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?

That's a bit overdramatic. Most kids have a laptop for schoolwork these days. I personally didn't get a smartphone until I started university, got a Samsung S7 then. I had no issues accessing any of those sources. These days I have a comp sci masters degree, so it definitely didn't "stunt" me in any way.

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

Kids reading and writing skills appear to have been declining ever since the rise of the smartphone, so I doubt they're reading anything of sufficient quality to hone those skills a bit.

Schools here have recently mostly banned smartphones, and the kids seem happier for it and their grades and concentration in school is improving. Sound like positives to me.

[–] tooLikeTheNope@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago

Agree with your points on having a pocked PC to hack with, the issue here is then with mobile and their OS makers which mindbogglingly have omitted to design a working and hardly hackable "children account mode", since what is damaging here is not what they can fiddle within their devices, nor certainly what they can read from wikipedia, but rather the unfiltered and unaccountable exposure to a profiling oriented social media storm which even adults fatigue to cope with.

I'm sure it isn't unheard of OSes having a hardware locked managed kiosk mode, because that is what smartphones basically need.

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months 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)
[–] 01011@monero.town 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] targetx@programming.dev 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

You know you don't have to doomscroll social media right? You can just, you know, not do social media.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] John_CalebBradberton@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (11 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 (11 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›