I’m not completely convinced. It is possible but sounds a bit high to me. It is based on a survey of less than 3k parents, and although I found the BBC article, it doesn’t seem to link to the actual source. It is therefore difficult to take this too seriously without seeing exactly who was interviewed and how the questions were worded.
It's probably not that bad, but I wouldn't be surprised just based on anecdotal experience.
I'm a provider at a children's hospital and phones have always been an issue during appointments. Before, it was mostly an issue with getting parents to pay attention or answer questions during the evaluation.
However since COVID, we've noticed a large increase of parents using tablets and phones as a constant babysitter. These children are so emotionally attached to their screens that they will tantrum until they have access to their screen again.
I managed to almost completly keep my children away from it for now (8 and 10). But it is a struggle. And I will soon lose that struggle. So many children at age 8 or 9 have smartphones for fs sake.
I plan to slowly introduce them to stuff like this, so they will be able to deal with it. I did so rather successfully with the other bullshit, like Roblox. They are only allowed to play it when I am in the room, and I check that they follow that rule (they do).
Feels like walking on the edge though. Still unsure when to open the TikTok thing. Too early is bad, but too late and they will somehow already he on tiktok and I just don't know about it.
the main thing for you is to stay off your phone as well. Kids watch their parents closely and humans have an in built need for "fairness", if they see you addicted to it they will never stop wanting to do the same.
I'd add the "have clear rules" concept to this and enforce the rules. Don't be wishy washy. But communicate the rules and be prepared to explain the rules.
But also accept that theory and practice are not the same. Imo you should allow them enough, that they don't isolated from their friends experiences. That is why I allow them to play Roblox under supervision or why I set up a Minecraft Server so that they can play online with their friend in a safe environment (but only on weekends for a fixed time period).
The TikTok van isn't bad, it's great for humanity, it's great for kids.
Can we now do the same with Instagram and Facebook and the likes? Basically all of social media?
Can we also please start banning kids from the Internet now? Since 20 years ago I've been saying that kids under 14-16 should not be on the Internet, or if they do, with monitoring and very limited time and access. The Internet is NOT a healthy place for kids. Hell, today they Internet isn't a healthy place for adults, but that is a different story.
I hate desantis, but that Florida kids and social media ban is great
Can we now do the same with Instagram and Facebook and the likes? Basically all of social media?
No. In fact, we're going to gear up our marketing campaigns for IG and YT so that we can reroute all that profitable children's traffic to a Good American Liberty Loving Social Media Company.
Can we also please start banning kids from the Internet now? Since 20 years ago I’ve been saying that kids under 14-16 should not be on the Internet
I can't imagine how this would be enforced, much less whether arbitrarily cutting kids off from what will (let's face it) be an essential part of their lives as adults is actually good for them.
To pull from an old XKCD, simply giving people a novel form of communication isn't what's bad for them.
And you need to moderate content in order to avoid this sort of shit. Simply banning it all makes about as much sense as banning your kids from looking at magazines, because Playbook and Heavy Metal exist.
I hate desantis, but that Florida kids and social media ban is great
If you consider how Florida actually enforces its laws, I think what you'll find its actually really awful. You're going to have a bunch of lower-middle class parents and teachers getting random filings against them for things they have very little control over.
If you consider how Florida actually enforces its laws, I think what you’ll find its actually really awful.
And like everything that a Republican does, despite claims to "protect children" or "uphold family values" or want "small government", the only actual effect will be massive government overreach into private homes and lives.
it's not a ban. It's highly likely China will allow Tiktok to split off a USA version before the deadline is up, if they don't get it tossed in court. TikTok isn't going anywhere.
I turned out perfectly fine without a phone until age 15, and I'm 17 now, I don't really use social media other than reddit, Lemmy and YouTube on my phone and I barely use it, since I'm more likely to use my iPad at home exclusively.
I feel as though more parents need to do the same mine did, restrict access to smartphones until ages the kid is more likely to explore the world more, specifically for safety, but still teach them to concentrate on stops while on public transport, on where they walk, etc. and not use their phone on the go apart from when time is able to pass and be stationary.
I cringe at the fact kids a third or less my age are allowed phones, I shouldn't even be allowed since my brain is still developing, i cant imagine the levels of braindead these children will be when they get to my age, since people my age are already horrific enough...
Socialization is a slow process. Many people who have good families and rich environments still have problems learning how to have face to face conversations. Look how many people on this site talk about not wanting to have a conversation over the phone or talk to a stranger in a shop.
What does this have to do with smartphones and the internet? The internet is a means of gathering information first, and a form of communication second. I don't get what socialization has to do with the first one. If you want people to be comfortable communicating on the internet (or via phone or whatever) then presumably they need to start earlier.
As for people struggling with phones, that's because a) lots of people here are autistic, and b) voice phones are not an ideal form of communication anyway. Either way the answer is practice, not shying away from the problem.
Okay first who said eight hours? I am not saying there shouldn't be limits, just that banning the internet completely is a bad idea. Second communicating with technology is an essential social skill in itself, and being able to use technology and apply critical thinking to things you read is absolutely essential. Lots of people work from home using technology. Almost everyone will have to use technology to do research e.g. in college.
Socialization is a slow process. Many people who have good families and rich environments still have problems learning how to have face to face conversations. Look how many people on this site talk about not wanting to have a conversation over the phone or talk to a stranger in a shop.
That's my original comment. Never said anything about banning the internet.
Okay now you are just being obtuse. You realize lots of kids these days don't have or use regular computers, right? Smartphones are now the only way to access some services as well, and are important in case you get lost. You can't call your parents or 999 on a laptop now can you?
well since social media can affect attention spans negatively, as I've observed with myself recently, I don't think the effects of such would translate positively into social or educational circumstances, arguably the most needed situations in a child's life at that time, even if they are almost an adult.
sure, alcohol and drugs do still affect a child quite intensely, though I'm saying that, is social media and the endless dopamine harvesting NOT a drug? if you think about it, it extracts, makes a person want to come back for more, causing addiction, further extracting more, losing its effectiveness and making it almost impossible to quit from there.
people may say it isn't addictive, but its just that it isn't as noticeable since it is a society-wide phenomena which is seen as positive.
no, I'm not confused at all, I am meaning that the smartphone is the most accessible way to utilise social media, meaning due to its formfactor, it is the most convenient way to access it.
are you more likely to use a desktop PC using android x86 (just an example) or use a smartphone? its almost like using a smartwatch to use Photoshop, its not the same as using a desktop, you know what I mean?
except they don't have the same software. Phones use ARM, not x86.
(amusingly, if you had just said "Android", you would have seemed less insane. still insane, since you could have just said 'linux', but less. But even saying that would still make you insane, since the operating system isn't the social media, and isn't what you were talking about.)
I do understand that fact, but I used it as an example since you can utilise android apps with the same or similar user experience as a smartphone, I'm more using it as an example of form factor compared to chip architecture, as the latter wouldn't be fitting at all. Apologies for the confusion.
If you were in any way correct, we should be banning cars and trucks from the USA, because they're the most accessible way drugs are transported. To stop drugs, we should ban cars. Cars are making it far too easy to get that nose candy.
Yeah, no. Hardware has nothing to do with this.
(I'm not even going to start with how insane your mentioning android x86 is; like somehow that esoteric version of an OS has something to do with social media. I'm guessing you think everything uses apps, and social media doesn't run through web pages?)
sure, alcohol and drugs do still affect a child quite intensely, though I'm saying that, is social media and the endless dopamine harvesting NOT a drug? if you think about it, it extracts, makes a person want to come back for more, causing addiction, further extracting more, losing its effectiveness and making it almost impossible to quit from there.
I don't think you understand what drugs are or can do. They don't all just blindly increase dopamine. They have many other effects on the mind and body that social media does not. This whole concept of dopamine detoxes and addiction = dopamine needs to die too. It's not based on solid scientific understanding as addiction is far more complex than this and comes in multiple, separate forms. Even drugs like amphetamines that primarily interact with the dopamine system don't always lead to addiction (ask anyone with experience of ADHD meds). Thinking dopamine is only about addiction and vice versa is like thinking electricity is only for heating and that all heating must be done using electricty.
Raising children without access to the internet is both backwards for their education and actively dangerous. The internet has allowed minors in bad situations to escape or get help multiple times. It's also made people realise their parents or guardians are insane or abusive including those who are members of dangerous religions and cults, are homophobic, or are abusive for other reasons. School in some countries is also packed full of propaganda, and even when it isn't they can't always help and are sometimes a source of abuse themselves. Restricting access to information isn't a good thing.
I was given a phone quite young but completely discarded it after I bought myself a thinkpad. No need for it when I can be comfortable on my Arch setup. I think the amount of brain damage could be severely reduced if they only had access to a family PC or something. Most kids probably wouldn't even touch the PC until way later.
I dunno I'm just gonna drop a 50 minute video link on this one and bounce, 'cause if I chronically post my dogshit opinions every time one of these boomer ass articles gets posted here and gets upvoted a million times by the masturbatory elder millennial ex-redditor linux userbase, then I'm gonna be here for a fuckin eternity
honest-broker.com
Oldest