• Mio@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I am actually surprised that they even can use it. This is the time when they start to learn to read…

    • ahal@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      You’re correct that most 5 year olds cannot read… However there’s so much you can do without knowing how to read. Plus kids are very good at pressing buttons and can figure stuff out by trial and error.

  • heartsofwar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Disclaimer: I know the article is for the UK, but I’m in the US, so my reply will be US focused

    There’s always more than one side to every issue…

    • Social media is the devil and Parents before 2000 didn’t have to worry much, or did they, about their kids being on the internet 24/7

    First, you needed a computer, a pretty expensive, bulky item, and then you needed the internet, mostly tied to a fixed landline that interrupted the main form of personal communication up until around the mid 90s. Even in the late 90s, internet options that wouldn’t interrupt the landline service usually had big draw-backs (usually price or shared bandwidth, etc). The point is that while the internet and social media existed back then (newsgroups, BBS, IRC, etc), their availability was limited by external factors.

    Before the age of 15, my parents wouldn’t allow us to have our own computers, we were limited to a few hours per day of screen time, and less than 1 hour per day on the internet. In addition, the 1 hour of internet had to be on our father’s computer which was in public view. These rules didn’t stop us from doing bad stuff, but it definitely limited things.

    After the age of 16, we were able to have our own computers, but internet access was still limited to 1 hour per day. Fortunately for me, I had an older brother that was 18 and leaving home, so before he left, I asked him to create an account with the ISP and I’d pay the bill). At this point, I was 16 with unlimited internet, the only problem was it still interrupted the main house land line, but that changed a year or so later with DSL.

    Even when the technology and availability was semi-difficult to work around, I still got into a ton of online arguments with random, unknown people about stupid stuff, formed online friendships and “relationships”, sexted, even got into arguments with other jealous dudes trying to steal my online girl, etc.

    All of this is to say though that while my social media experience during my teen years wasn’t nearly as bad as what kids are subjected to today, my parents were right that they had reasons to be worried, and I’m sure the rules they did enforce along with the hoops I had to jump through with the tech kept me from making some pretty unfathomable mistakes which is kind of ridiculous considering everything else I did that I’m not admitting to ;-)

    Today parents shove a smart phone into their child’s hand to stop them from crying or to keep them busy, but many don’t realize the power of influence the phone, social media, or they have over their child.

    I really hate to say this, but a parent should not be a friend. My parents didn’t do everything they could, but I’d give them a solid B rating (85 grade) on trying to minimize any bad influence from the internet given the tech that was reasonably priced and at their fingertips. However, today, parents just straight don’t have any excuse.

    There are $50 routers that have pretty extensive, standard parental tech on-board. They can limit the access to the internet per day and for certain hours, log all websites visited, deny access to certain websites, etc. There are more tech savvy options too, logging all traffic, Remote viewing, etc.

    Android and Apple phones can block all incoming / outgoing, calls / SMS except for those on an approved contact list, You can deny access to certain apps, even force the phone / app to go into a limp mode when a certain “on-screen-time” is met, etc

    Parents today have so much available to them to prevent their children from being “mind-controlled” by social media; however, the most important aspect is awareness or resolve to do something about it. A parents’ job, until the child becomes mature enough or legally an adult, is to always present, support, and or sometimes enforce the overall best, healthiest decision.

    While I won’t deny that some stuff on social media has gotten out of control, I mostly think parents today are to blame and the government needs to stay out of it except if they want to enforce a higher minimum age limit for social media or try and penalize the companies for obvious negligence on not properly making the efforts to keep younger children off the platforms.

  • stonerboner@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s much easier to give your kid your old phone and pay $10 a month for a kids’ account than to deal with your kid constantly wanting to use your phone.

      • stonerboner@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        When they are at the point of going to sleepovers, play dates at friends, camp, etc it also makes a lot of sense to give them a lifeline.

        The kids line I pay for gives me all the parental controls I could dream of and control over her contacts. I am 100% present, but I’m not dumb enough to send me kid out into the world without a lifeline.

        It seems being needlessly judgmental is the easiest of all.

      • stonerboner@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        When they are at the point of going to sleepovers, play dates at friends, camp, etc it also makes a lot of sense to give them a lifeline.

        The kids line I pay for gives me all the parental controls I could dream of and control over her contacts. I am 100% present, but I’m not dumb enough to send me kid out into the world without a lifeline.

        It seems being needlessly judgmental is the easiest of all.

        • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Dumbphone seems enough for a “lifeline”. Also parental controls where the parent sees absolutely everything seem dystopian af anyway, I would not like to expose my potential child to such an experience.

          • stonerboner@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Lmoa you’re suggesting that me fully managing my seven year old’s phone is dystopian? The free-phone-because-it’s-my-old-phone with great parental controls is way safer than a dumb phone with no contact management or GPS tracking.

            You can do whatever the fuck you want in this “dystopian” world, but try to be less judgmental when you think a dumb phone is a better option for a child.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Why do they need a “lifeline”? They can ask an adult to call you if they need something. If you don’t trust them at a sleepover or play date, then don’t send them.

          I let my kids go to their friends’ houses all the time and sometimes to the local park by themselves, and I’ve never once regretted not giving them a phone. They know our address, phone numbers, and how to get home, and we pre-arrange what time they should be home (they have simple watches).

          That has worked well for us.

    • The Dark Lord ☑️@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s also easier to give them all the candy they can eat, than to deal with your kid constantly wanting candy. Doesn’t make it healthy.

  • datendefekt@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Beyond the proven addictive effects of handing a dopamine device to your kid, there are legal ramifications many parents aren’t aware of.

    WhatsApp and TikTok aren’t just there like air, free for all to consume. They are service providers and both sides are bound by a contract, the EULA. IIRC, WhatsApp recently reduced it minimum age from 16 to 12. So if you install WhatsApp on your 8 year old’s phone, you have broken the contract.

    • ccunix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Is the sort of parent who gives a 5 year old their own phone going really going to a limit the use? I think the crossover in that Venn diagram is pretty small.

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    People really handing their kids devices that have cellular service and unfettered internet access? All my kids devices have 2 layers of adblock, parental controls, and no cell service.

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Ok. Or you could, you know, not give them these. Some pretty good data coming out on why this isn’t a great idea. It’s not just luddite ranting.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yup. I let my kids (7 and 10) play video games or watch approved shows and that’s about it. They get 1 hour on Saturdays, and they can “earn” more any day by reading: 1 hour reading = 30 min “screen time.” We have a max of 2 hours/day, but they can bank time day to day.

        It works pretty well. They definitely abuse the system by going beyond their allotted time, but if I “find out,” they lose privileges for a couple days, so it seems they stay pretty honest on average without a ton of oversight.

        I don’t have any parental controls/blocking except for:

        • ad blocker - screw ads
        • passcode on Switch - mostly because of my 4yo, my older kids know the code

        Basically, I operate on trust and honesty, and I think it works okay.

  • Muffi@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    The worst thing about this in my opinion, is that this is mostly a problem for the children from less resourceful families. There is already a tendency for children from lower socioeconomic households to have more problems with concentration. Adding smartphones will only exacerbate the problem and fuel the fires of growing inequality.

    • erwan@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      The problem is those family sets the standard for everyone.

      In middle school it started from poor family who can’t afford other activities than handing down their old smartphone, then the percentage grew to the point not giving a smartphone to your kid means he’s isolated from the group.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Perhaps, but parents need to commit to what they know is healthy for their kids. I didn’t have a phone until I bought it myself in college, even though “everyone” had a phone. My sister is doing the same with her family (has a 17yo with no phone), and I plan to do the same with mine (10yo w/ no phone).

        My kids (oldest 10) can whine as much as they want, but they’re not getting a phone until they earn my trust. And given how much they break the rules we already have, it’s going to be a while.

        My sister and I aren’t poor, nor were we growing up, we’re both middle class or even a bit above. More people need to push back, because phones seem to be screwing kids up. Look at statistics for suicide and depression, suicide seems to be going up while depression remains pretty consistent, and that seems to have changed right around the time when smartphones became ubiquitous (2015-ish).

        So no, my kids aren’t getting phones anytime soon, and it really doesn’t matter what their friends’ parents do.

        • erwan@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          The problem with this approach is that you might be cutting off your kids from their friends.

          Smartphone messaging apps are the way kids communicate nowadays, and if your kid is not in the group chat he/she is isolated.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yes, that’s the FOMO angle, but kids find a way.

            Growing up, most of my friends had phones, and while I missed stuff, I went to most of the parties and had good friends. My sister has teenagers, and they have strong friend networks and whatnot. Good friends will accommodate you.

            But communication is a small part of what kids do on their phones. A lot of it is “preparation,” like following TikTok trends so they’re up on what’s currently popular. There’s almost no positives here, only negatives if you don’t spend your time the same way your peers do. If they don’t have a phone at all, they’ll blame their parents, but it’s not the failing of the individual. I’m totally willing to be the “bad guy” if it means my kids aren’t being peer pressured to do things that aren’t beneficial to them. They’ll still have access to tech, but only during limited times at home.

            Good friends will work around your lack of access to a phone. I absolutely think the negatives outweigh the positives here, so I’m not letting my kids have a phone, it’s not worth subjecting them to addiction and peer pressure. To me, it’s like smoking (which was still cool when I was a kid), it just impacts your mental health instead of physical health.

    • ahah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      this. the concern maybe not at the smartphone, but, quoting inaccurately from Amartya Sen, have the freedom to choose and to become, respectfully to others

  • EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I went to look around a nursery the other day, one that is attached to a school. We walked past kids that couldn’t have been older than 6-7 dancing (possibly filming) to a TikTok vid, on a brand-new looking iPhone.

    I’m usually against governments getting involved in the internet, since they have such a piss-poor understanding of tech, but it would be good to see some kind of regulation that bans people of a certain age from operating a smartphone without a limited set of operations (i.e. to contact parents, to get school alerts, etc), alongside school bans for the use of social media on school grounds. My wife is a teacher, and cyber bullying is rampant, whether it’s the police getting called in over someone (underage) sending nudes and having them posted online once they break up, or fights being planned via iMessage or WhatsApp, and sometimes even people creating fake Tinder/Grindr profiles of their teachers (or to try to match with them).

    Obviously, there are parents that’ll just say “fuck it, it keeps them quiet” or ones that’ll let them use a smartphone due to peer pressure, but a lot of it can be cut down before it becomes a problem.

    In many ways, I’m quite glad I grew up with AIM and MSN Messenger. This kind of online power would have been crazy to me as a kid, and I don’t envy kids that have to deal with this landscape.