4 ms·

I believe that instead of stopping one's kids from giving out personal information (unless they have a disorder- then it may be necessary), one should teach his

by dbz 17y ago

I believe that instead of stopping one's kids from giving out personal information (unless they have a disorder- then it may be necessary), one should teach his or her children what is appropriate: to speak and to write => in public and in private- to family - to friends - to acquaintances - to strangers. All of that should be taught. Show the child why things are bad rather than simply stopping them. If your child doesn't listen, then more extreme measures of censorship should come into play.

blogimus 17y ago
Keywords: "taught" "show" "listen" "learn" Let's turn this around a little bit: I believe that instead of automotive safety belts, we should all just teach people to drive slower and more cautiously. That we we are not encumbered by restrictive seat belts. Reasonable? Takeaway: Take everything that you just said and then add parental controls on top of it because children really do need boundaries while they learn to think for themselves and hopefully make good decisions. Yes. I am a parent.
- dbz 17y ago
  =] Very interesting point; however, I must completely disagree. In a car you are entrusting your life to other drivers, but in sharing information about yourself, you are entrusting yourself. I'm trying to say "You have no control over others, but you have control over yourself" which is why I view your point as incorrect- yet interesting.
  - oscardelben 17y ago
    What you said is true, but children are not responsible fot themselves until they reach a certain age, the parent is responsible for them.
    - SlyShy 17y ago
      That kind of thinking is a great way to bring up children who remain irresponsible for their own behavior. Growing up I was responsible for everything I did, and now I'm quite tired of college classmates who still haven't learned to take accountability for basic things.
      - oscardelben 17y ago
        Yes but at 12 you may not be able to reason with your head, and if you do something you are not supposed to do, your parents will pay for it, so they're still responsible for you. It's the law (at least where I live).
        dbz 17y ago
        That's very vague. Children may not be able to reason, that is true; however, I was taught to never talk to strangers, never leave with strangers, never take my favorite pokemon card from a stranger, never do anything I don't want to explain to the paramedics, never say something I wouldn't want to say to someone's face, never say naughty things. You get the idea. I never really went through a "swearing phase" either. Occasionally, I do swear, but I don't (and never did) drop f bombs every ten minutes like lots of people have. I never swore on Facebook because I wouldn't want people to read that. I never wrote a private conversation on someone's wall(public message board), through a message(email), or through an instant message- always did things like that in person. You will never see me do things like that, I mean- I might swear occasionally nowadays, but that's as bad ass as I get ;p (and it's usually for comic effect anyways). To cover what I said: 1) I have remained in control of my "virtual" life my entire life. 2) I have never made a mistake of telling someone I don't know anything important about me 3) I believe if I can do it, others can too.
      - jerf 17y ago
        Something that can be very easy to forget until you concretize the question is that "children" is not a monolithic category. I have no particular intention of locking down my 15-year old (in 13 years) with serious parental controls. But not all children are 15. Letting a 4-year-old run around loose on the Internet with no protection sounds like a bad idea to me. Which do you prefer, simply telling a 6-year-old "No internet access for you!", or drawing some boundaries but letting them roam within them freely? "Someday, your children will need to be able to live without Mommy and Daddy saving them from everything!" is not an argument for throwing your 5-year-old out on the street.
  - Groxx 17y ago
    Bull. You're trusting everyone on the internet to not abuse the information you gave out. At best in this case, it's just everyone you know / email with. How many people you communicate with can be trusted online with all the information you give them? Most people use 2 or 3 passwords total! What if they lose control of their accounts? And when was the last time someone got in trouble for info they put on Facebook? Minutes ago? Seconds? The internet is arguably more dangerous than driving, though you're less likely to die, you instead just lose everything. I've had more viruses than car crashes (zero).
- ThinkWriteMute 17y ago
  Then I'm afraid for your kids. Any parent who equates on-line socializing with vehicle safety is clearly someone who needs a reality check. Yes, I am a parent.
- fab13n 17y ago
  I see a key difference between driving cars and interacting on Internet, besides the nature of the dangers: it is important to know how to act on Internet without censorship, whereas I don't see the point of knowing how to drive without a seatbelt. Now it can be discussed whether temporary censorship is a good pedagogic tool, which is the heart of the disagreement here, but the seatbelt analogy doesn't hold water. I personally tend to believe into responsibiling rather than censorship, because: - most censorships don't work well and get healthy kids to react against them; there's nothing worse than foolishly relying on a censorship that doesn't work. - I tend to believe that when you trust people, they try very hard to be trustworthy. - Our society is deresponsibilising everyone (it's the microwave vendor's fault if you're dumb enough to microwave your cat); giving a sane sense of responsibility to my kids is probably one of the best competitive edge I can give them in life. - I'm ideologically libertarian when it comes to ideas, free speech and communications (not so much when it comes to economy, but that's off-topic)
  - FluidDjango 17y ago
    > I tend to believe that when you trust people, they try very hard to be trustworthy. Maybe "people" (individuals) do. Yet this trust is exactly what black-hats tap when they social engineer an email recipient into visiting a malware site.
    - fab13n 17y ago
      So, should I make sure that my kids aren't black hat before trusting them? :)
mbreese 17y ago
The appropriate question here is: do you have kids? This should be an obligatory statement (similar to IANAL) when you publicly question the way someone else is raising their kids.
- natrius 17y ago
  Most people who don't have kids (myself included) think they can still have valid opinions on child rearing. The more appropriate question to ask would be, "Have you tried this, and did it work?"
  - mbreese 17y ago
    Until you have kids... most people who have kids think that your opinions aren't really valid. I don't intend for that to sound mean. Sure, you can have your opinions, but there is so much that goes into raising a kid that you just can't know beforehand that you can't make an informed opinion. So, knowing if you have kids sets the level of expectations. I think that it's fair to say that you can describe 'principles', but talking about putting those into practice is where people (such as myself), get touchy. This is especially true when you criticize someone else's choices. Another way of putting it is this: In theory, there is no difference between theory in practice. In practice, there is.

by dbz 17y ago

blogimus 17y ago

Keywords: "taught" "show" "listen" "learn" Let's turn this around a little bit: I believe that instead of automotive safety belts, we should all just teach people to drive slower and more cautiously. That we we are not encumbered by restrictive seat belts. Reasonable? Takeaway: Take everything that you just said and then add parental controls on top of it because children really do need boundaries while they learn to think for themselves and hopefully make good decisions. Yes. I am a parent.

dbz 17y ago
=] Very interesting point; however, I must completely disagree. In a car you are entrusting your life to other drivers, but in sharing information about yourself, you are entrusting yourself. I'm trying to say "You have no control over others, but you have control over yourself" which is why I view your point as incorrect- yet interesting.
- oscardelben 17y ago
  What you said is true, but children are not responsible fot themselves until they reach a certain age, the parent is responsible for them.
  - SlyShy 17y ago
    That kind of thinking is a great way to bring up children who remain irresponsible for their own behavior. Growing up I was responsible for everything I did, and now I'm quite tired of college classmates who still haven't learned to take accountability for basic things.
    - oscardelben 17y ago
      Yes but at 12 you may not be able to reason with your head, and if you do something you are not supposed to do, your parents will pay for it, so they're still responsible for you. It's the law (at least where I live).
      - dbz 17y ago
        That's very vague. Children may not be able to reason, that is true; however, I was taught to never talk to strangers, never leave with strangers, never take my favorite pokemon card from a stranger, never do anything I don't want to explain to the paramedics, never say something I wouldn't want to say to someone's face, never say naughty things. You get the idea. I never really went through a "swearing phase" either. Occasionally, I do swear, but I don't (and never did) drop f bombs every ten minutes like lots of people have. I never swore on Facebook because I wouldn't want people to read that. I never wrote a private conversation on someone's wall(public message board), through a message(email), or through an instant message- always did things like that in person. You will never see me do things like that, I mean- I might swear occasionally nowadays, but that's as bad ass as I get ;p (and it's usually for comic effect anyways). To cover what I said: 1) I have remained in control of my "virtual" life my entire life. 2) I have never made a mistake of telling someone I don't know anything important about me 3) I believe if I can do it, others can too.
    - jerf 17y ago
      Something that can be very easy to forget until you concretize the question is that "children" is not a monolithic category. I have no particular intention of locking down my 15-year old (in 13 years) with serious parental controls. But not all children are 15. Letting a 4-year-old run around loose on the Internet with no protection sounds like a bad idea to me. Which do you prefer, simply telling a 6-year-old "No internet access for you!", or drawing some boundaries but letting them roam within them freely? "Someday, your children will need to be able to live without Mommy and Daddy saving them from everything!" is not an argument for throwing your 5-year-old out on the street.
- Groxx 17y ago
  Bull. You're trusting everyone on the internet to not abuse the information you gave out. At best in this case, it's just everyone you know / email with. How many people you communicate with can be trusted online with all the information you give them? Most people use 2 or 3 passwords total! What if they lose control of their accounts? And when was the last time someone got in trouble for info they put on Facebook? Minutes ago? Seconds? The internet is arguably more dangerous than driving, though you're less likely to die, you instead just lose everything. I've had more viruses than car crashes (zero).
ThinkWriteMute 17y ago
Then I'm afraid for your kids. Any parent who equates on-line socializing with vehicle safety is clearly someone who needs a reality check. Yes, I am a parent.
fab13n 17y ago
I see a key difference between driving cars and interacting on Internet, besides the nature of the dangers: it is important to know how to act on Internet without censorship, whereas I don't see the point of knowing how to drive without a seatbelt. Now it can be discussed whether temporary censorship is a good pedagogic tool, which is the heart of the disagreement here, but the seatbelt analogy doesn't hold water. I personally tend to believe into responsibiling rather than censorship, because: - most censorships don't work well and get healthy kids to react against them; there's nothing worse than foolishly relying on a censorship that doesn't work. - I tend to believe that when you trust people, they try very hard to be trustworthy. - Our society is deresponsibilising everyone (it's the microwave vendor's fault if you're dumb enough to microwave your cat); giving a sane sense of responsibility to my kids is probably one of the best competitive edge I can give them in life. - I'm ideologically libertarian when it comes to ideas, free speech and communications (not so much when it comes to economy, but that's off-topic)
- FluidDjango 17y ago
  > I tend to believe that when you trust people, they try very hard to be trustworthy. Maybe "people" (individuals) do. Yet this trust is exactly what black-hats tap when they social engineer an email recipient into visiting a malware site.
  - fab13n 17y ago
    So, should I make sure that my kids aren't black hat before trusting them? :)

mbreese 17y ago

The appropriate question here is: do you have kids? This should be an obligatory statement (similar to IANAL) when you publicly question the way someone else is raising their kids.

natrius 17y ago
Most people who don't have kids (myself included) think they can still have valid opinions on child rearing. The more appropriate question to ask would be, "Have you tried this, and did it work?"
- mbreese 17y ago
  Until you have kids... most people who have kids think that your opinions aren't really valid. I don't intend for that to sound mean. Sure, you can have your opinions, but there is so much that goes into raising a kid that you just can't know beforehand that you can't make an informed opinion. So, knowing if you have kids sets the level of expectations. I think that it's fair to say that you can describe 'principles', but talking about putting those into practice is where people (such as myself), get touchy. This is especially true when you criticize someone else's choices. Another way of putting it is this: In theory, there is no difference between theory in practice. In practice, there is.