| ▲ | pjc50 4 hours ago |
| I suspect they don't really; once you give a teen a smartphone your control over what websites they visit ends. (you will reply "don't do that then") But also: cutting one kid off from social networks ostracises them. The parents recognize it's a collective action problem. |
|
| ▲ | everdrive 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Quite a twist, no? This generations of parents are telling their children "Well all your friends are jumping off a bridge, so you need to as well." |
| |
| ▲ | rayiner an hour ago | parent [-] | | The generations of parents who came up with the original bridge hypothetical also worked to have the government ban alcohol and cigarette sales to minors. | | |
| ▲ | mothballed an hour ago | parent [-] | | You can order cigars, loose tobacco and rolling papers, and wine straight to your house without any ID check, all completely legal. I did it as a minor and you can still do it today (well today you can also add "CBD" on to that list). The truth is there is no meaningful controls on teenage minors getting access to tobacco and alcohol. The limitations used are just window dressing for Karen to pretend like the government is doing something. | | |
| ▲ | nativeit 13 minutes ago | parent [-] | | They should (and frequently do) require ID for delivery. The postal carrier will literally check ID before delivering the package. It costs about $8 extra. Any company that’s not using these services is exposed to some dire consequences if/when ATF comes knocking. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | goodcanadian 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Also, it is arguably dangerous to not let your teen have a phone in a time when payphones (and to a great extent landlines) no longer exist. |
| |
| ▲ | akramachamarei 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Dumbphones are still a thing | | |
| ▲ | tombot 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I really don’t know why there isn’t a brand that’s capitalising on this. Messaging, calls, maps, notes but no way to take or view images. Marketed simply from a global brand. | | |
| ▲ | kube-system 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | There are many brands that have tried the "phone that does less" angle. They haven't been very successful. | |
| ▲ | delusional 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Because of the ostracization problem. Kids are ruthless, and failure to conform is swiftly punished. | | |
| ▲ | smelendez an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Images are also a huge part of messaging. For memes obviously, but also other communication (here’s the flyer for the event, look what the teacher wrote on my exam, should I get this gift for mom, look what my significant other sent me — what do you think I should say?), etc. | |
| ▲ | HlessClaudesman an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Parents need to weigh potential otracization against the cost of giving a smart device, which could be as high as ending their normal childhood development. Personally I think no phones until 16 is a good rule. | | |
| ▲ | kube-system 35 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Parents need to weigh the potential bad effects of social media against the cost of otracization, which could be as high as ending their normal childhood development. Social development is very critical during school-age years. | |
| ▲ | tokioyoyo 43 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Easier to say. Your child will just despise you for willingly making their school life hell. | | |
| ▲ | akramachamarei 16 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I went through high school until almost 16 with no phone whatsoever. Twas fine. I remember peers around me for the most part had smartphones at the start of high school, maybe even some in middle school? I don't want to say exactly when this was for privacy, but I don't see why phoneless school living could be so disastrous. But then, I am a bit of an oddball and introvert. | |
| ▲ | HlessClaudesman 37 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | I'm living it. They don't despise me, yet. My youngest just spent a rainy afternoon reading books, drawing pictures, and is now breaking out a boardgame, the horror! Hopefully they grow up well adjusted and come to appreciate the sacrifice. Cell phone and social media addictions arn't inevitabilities they are choices. |
|
| |
| ▲ | mothballed an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I knew so many kids that got into selling cigarettes, alcohol, or weed because their parents did not want to buy them things that would facilitate social integration. Most optimistically, if you don't give a kid a smart phone then they're going to mow lawns or something and get one and hide it; that scenario isn't really a bad one. | |
| ▲ | esseph an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Because of the ostracization problem. Kids are ruthless, and failure to conform is swiftly punished. Shocker, but those are probably not the people you are going to give a shit about after you leave school. | | |
| ▲ | wizzwizz4 an hour ago | parent [-] | | Shocker, but a lot of psychological damage can be done before you leave school. Do children really not have value, except as far as they become adults? |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | CivBase 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Payphones were mostly extinct even when I was a kid. I didn't have a cellphone either and smartphones didn't exist yet, except for the extremely rare Blackberry. But it wsn't a problem because basically every establishment around me had a landline phone I could use in an emergency. Now even landlines are extinct because just about everyone has their own phone on them at all times. Phones are easier to come by now more than ever. Kids have never been safer, even without their own phones. | | |
| ▲ | technothrasher an hour ago | parent [-] | | Even when I was teen back in the 1980s while payphones were still going strong, they weren't everywhere you wanted them to be. My mother had a standing rule that if I was going to be out past 10pm, I had to call her to let her know. Depending upon where I was, it was often a pain to find a payphone before 10pm so I didn't get in trouble. If I had an emergency, it wasn't at all guaranteed I'd be near enough to a payphone for it to be helpful. |
| |
| ▲ | bluGill 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Not really because nearly every adult has a phone with unlimited calling, and will allow you to make a call from their phone. I don't want my kids to be someplace where there are not some responsible adults around (drunk adults are not responsible) Note that I agree with your point overall. My kids have phones for times when they are away and might need to contact me. I'm just saying it isn't as bad as it sounds. | | |
| ▲ | onion2k 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Not really because nearly every adult has a phone with unlimited calling, and will allow you to make a call from their phone. This isn't very compatible with also teaching children that they can't trust the majority of adults, and that every stranger is a potential danger. | | |
| ▲ | subscribed 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | That trope is pretty dangerous in itself (there WILL be time they have to rely on the unrelated adult), and I'm pretty adamant on teaching my kids that the vast majority of adults can be trusted, instead trying to instill Tricky People in them: https://fitzroyelc.com.au/the-tricky-people-lesson-you-need-... | | |
| ▲ | bluGill 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Thanks for that, it is a much better idea/link than the common stranger danger. It also matches better to what other groups (schools, scouts) that I know of are teaching kids. |
| |
| ▲ | rel_ic 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Good point - folks should stop teaching them that. If your kid is really in a sea of dangerous adults their phone won't save them anyway. |
| |
| ▲ | szszrk 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Not really because nearly every adult has a phone with unlimited calling, and will allow you to make a call from their phone. that's not even true for adults. Why would you assume it's true for kids? | | |
| ▲ | bluGill 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It is close enough to true where I live anyway. I don't know your situation. | |
| ▲ | delusional 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Which part is untrue? | | |
| ▲ | zdragnar 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > and will allow you to make a call from their phone. People can be wildly reluctant to just hand over a thousand or two dollars worth of equipment to a teenager in a busy street and hope they don't run off with it. Smartphone theft is still a thing. | | |
| ▲ | ctoth an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | > People can be wildly reluctant to just hand over a thousand or two dollars worth of equipment Who owns a $2,000 phone which isn't insured and should they really be leaving their house? | | |
| ▲ | pixl97 29 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I own a $60,000 dollar car that's insured, still doesn't mean I'm going to just let anyone use it when I depend on it. | | |
| ▲ | ctoth 24 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I would assume that you cannot merely walk in to the nearest Apple car store and get a new car the same day if something bad happened to your car, so I don't really understand your statement as there is no equivalency here to exploit in your analogy. | | |
| ▲ | pixl97 19 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I mean, you can go get a new car the same day, hence rental places while insurance figures everything out. How about this, I'll pick a random day in your future while you're out doing stuff to show up and break your phone in half. How much is that going to ruin your day? |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | mothballed an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | When I was homeless I would just ask people to call on my behalf. If it was an innocuous message about 10-50% of people would be willing to do it. I've even gotten people (complete strangers) to make phone calls for me while I was in handcuffs and everyone thought I was the bad guy but even then they were willing to make a call. You don't ask for the phone, you ask for someone to relay the message. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | NoMoreNicksLeft 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >Not really because nearly every adult has a phone with unlimited calling, and will allow you to make a call from their phone. I don't want my kids to be someplace where there are not some responsible adults around (drunk adults are not responsible) I remember about 10 or 12 years ago, I'd answer every incoming call. Many were wrong numbers (guy who had the phone number before we was, I kid you not, some sort of wine salesman... people were wanting to order crates of wine). But I'd answer. Now, not so much. I get 15 calls a day some days, all are robots. I screen through voicemail transcription most of the time, unless I recognize the number. Blocking does not good. Numbers in my area code mean nothing... a surprising number of robot calls match my own exchange number (why? what's the point?). For 3 weeks a few months ago, one even matched my own phone number but for the last two digits being transposed, but it wouldn't leave a voicemail. I no longer have the reasonable ability to answer strange phone numbers. If it were just mean, I'd chalk it up to some idiosyncratic neurosis and be quiet, but my own impression is that everyone else is doing the same thing. We not only tore down the old POTS network, we got rid of all the norms around it. | | |
| ▲ | arjie 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The alternative networks have solved this problem for me. I don’t get spam calls on Signal or WhatsApp though WhatsApp and Telegram do both have a spam text problem. I also have a phone number from a different area and I blocked that area code and everything near it. | |
| ▲ | bluGill 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 10 years ago I was wondering if things would reach that point. However these days I almost never get junk calls and so I answer the phone again. I guess our experience is different. | | |
| ▲ | pixl97 30 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Is your phone company blocking them? I have phone numbers in an area code that just seems to get flooded with spam calls. Even our unpublished numbers get them so it doesn't seem like directed attacks, just broadcast spam. | | |
| ▲ | bluGill 22 minutes ago | parent [-] | | It wouldn't surprise me, but I don't know. There have been enough complaints that I'd expect everyone to do some blocking. |
|
| |
| ▲ | pwg an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > a surprising number of robot calls match my own exchange number (why? what's the point?). The robocallers have found that if the fake caller id given matches the area code and exchange of the number being called, that more of the recipients are willing to answer. And from a robocaller's perspective, getting folks to answer is critical to being able to transfer them to someone in the scam boiler room for reaping. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | AnonymousPlanet 30 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Maybe legally banning minors from smartphones instead of from arbitrary websites is the better idea. |
|
| ▲ | RandallBrown 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > once you give a teen a smartphone your control over what websites they visit ends. Isn't it pretty easy to set up a whitelist of apps/websites kids are allowed to use? Whether or not that's a healthy thing for your parent/child relationship is a different question. |
| |
| ▲ | vlovich123 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > But also: cutting one kid off from social networks ostracises them. The parents recognize it's a collective action problem. OP already gave you your answer, you just chose to ignore it | |
| ▲ | edoceo 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Not easy. Kids can bypass very easy. Like those security-theatre apps companies use - but crappier. Then, once on a site/app like Instagram or Roblox it's a whole other layer of whitelist to manage (if possible). It's simpler to take the phone away. And iPad. And stop hanging out with your friends that have it. Phone management is hard to solve for pre-teen and teens. It's like taking heroin away from an addict. They hate you for helping. | |
| ▲ | larrik 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | on iOS this is basically impossible | | |
| ▲ | mwigdahl an hour ago | parent [-] | | Using the built-in Screen Time tools, yes. Qustodio works pretty well though as an add-on product. Not perfect UX, not perfect functionality, but it's the best I've found. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | thinkingtoilet 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Don't do it then. :) It's not hard. If they need to be contacted get them a dumb phone. And yes, my kids will miss out. They will miss out on their attention span being destroyed, their ability to critically think destroyed, body issues, radicalization, horrible influences, etc... My children will miss out on all that and I'm very glad that will be the case. I'm not sure why other parents are rushing to destroy their kids brains but that's their choice. |
| |
| ▲ | dghlsakjg an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Or they’ll be mildly resourceful and pickup a cheap Walmart phone, or a friend’s old phone and learn that they can’t be open with you. I ran a summer camp for teenagers. They know how to get around that stuff if they want. They know how to hide it from their parents to keep access. You’ll do far better to explain how these things are harmful, and help them make decisions that are healthy. Below a certain age I’m sure it works for a time, but you will eventually have to find a balance. That’s why parents want bans. Their kids are going to go where the other kids are. If they are all banned on instagram, they won’t care about finding a way onto a platform where none of their friends are. | |
| ▲ | postexitus an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I can smell the reply of someone who doesn't have a teenager from a mile. Yes, you will do everything right. Yes, your kids will be perfect. Everyone has a plan until you get punched in the face. |
|
|
| ▲ | Emanation 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| So does grounding a kid, so I guess parents shouldn't do that either unless all parents collectively agree to ground their children. |
| |
| ▲ | jraph 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's not remotely comparable. Grounding is very temporary. (not arguing in favor of social media, I'm pretty much against them, but I'm quite interested in how to deal with their existence) |
|
|
| ▲ | esseph an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > But also: cutting one kid off from social networks ostracises them. 2 of my 3 have never touched social media are are healthy, functioning adults with jobs and friends. FOMO chasing Jones family bullshit. |