| ▲ | jemmyw 12 hours ago |
| Engage with your kids. Don't give them personal devices until they're a bit older. Monitor their usage properly with your own senses, not with "parental controls". Talk to them about what they do. If they're minded to bypass all that then they're going to bypass any technical block you put on anyway. |
|
| ▲ | Aunche 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Parents want another option between their child being shown harmful content on social media and signing up their child up to be a pariah because they're not allowed to use social media altogether. |
|
| ▲ | kelseyfrog 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That's the option we have now and it's not working. Please suggest and alternative that works. |
| |
| ▲ | margalabargala 24 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | No, you misunderstand. You're reaching for legally mandated solutions. Why can't this be one? "Choose to be a good parent, vs legally mandated spyware". Why not "legality mandated be a good parent"? This would solve a lot of other problems too. Like, all those people who hand wring "oh we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas! It's not working! Whatever could work in aggregate?!" people who don't actually parent can be trained to parent, and if they refuse they face consequences. | |
| ▲ | geoffmanning 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Maybe suck less at being a parent? Just throwing it out there. You actually need to do the work. | | |
| ▲ | kelseyfrog 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm talking about parents in aggregate. It's not working. Please suggest something that works en mass. | | |
| ▲ | jimbooonooo 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You are the person requesting others comply (on behalf of the aggregate) the onus is on you to provide this solution. The solution that was provided, specifically engaged parenting, is the appropriate response. | | |
| ▲ | kelseyfrog 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Nope, because it will be passed unless you come to the negotiating table in good faith. The truth is that all this resistance mean you don't get a seat at the table, will be left out of discussions and your worst fears will come to pass because you took a hard-line position. Good luck. People who aren't willing to collaborate don't get what they want. | | |
| ▲ | 9dev 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | My god. People like you are the reason we can’t have nice things. | |
| ▲ | potsandpans 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is rich. Really setting the terms here huh? So tough and scary on the internet. It's really adorable. |
|
| |
| ▲ | mmastrac 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Maybe we should require a license to have kids if it's not working as it is. | | |
| ▲ | kelseyfrog 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | I can't believe a license for kids is less infringing on rights than age verification. Please be serious. | | |
| |
| ▲ | nextaccountic 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think it's the opposite, you need to demonstrate that this law would work | | |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > If they're minded to bypass all that then they're going to bypass any technical block you put on anyway School bans have been effective because the entire friend group is taken off at once. That network effect is important. We need a real solution for keeping kids off social media—there is too much popular will for this not to happen. The debate is realistically around how. |
