4 ms·

Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous. People freak out if a predator lives int heir neighborhood but they let their child be accessi

Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous. People freak out if a predator lives int heir neighborhood but they let their child be accessible to millions of predators via their phone or table. This is why kids initial exposure to porn is 8 in the US and 10 when kids are getting addicted. This is all happening prior to puberty. I still remember working with children and teens and found out, through the police and parents, that a few of the kids 11 to 15 were using their webcams to get people to buy them stuff online. This was in the late 90s. I am a dad of 5 now. I don't own desktop computers and they are in common areas. When my oldest were teens they were their phones but they are in my room after 9 PM. Saved the drama of messaging fights and drama. No phones at dinner, no phones on family events unless it was end of the visit. My job as a parent is to help them become awesome adult selves and learning not to be addicted to anything from drugs, alcohol, laziness or phones is part of being a parent.

chrisper 9y ago
As someone who had unsupervised access to the internet as a child, I turned out to be just fine. But maybe beacause the internet was way different back then. (I am talking dial up era intrent). To me after all these years the "new" internet got a dystopian image. If I had a child, I'd provide them unsupervised access to the internet I remember, but certainly not to the one from today.
- 0xWilliam 9y ago
  ofc the internet was different back then.
- nasredin 9y ago
  Actually that's not a bad idea. You can simulate 56k dialup speed on a router and the kids will probably avoid Facebook and other heavy sites and stick to WikiPedia as a Pavlovian response. As a bonus they will have to masturbate to images, just like in the old days. You can also disconnect them when they get out of line thus simulating the complete dialup experience.
- pishpash 9y ago
  A network is the sum of its users. Today's internet is, if not dystopian, at least a fairly adult place.
  - chrisper 9y ago
    It may be the sum of the users but it is not an equal sum. Companies like Google and Facebook make up too much of that sum. And don't get me started on all the scummy people and sites online.
- baldfat 9y ago
  No it was worse back then. From 1995 My Uncle saw my 12 year old male cousin was on AOL and he got messages from men. My cousin just kept deleting them. My Uncle pretended to be a 14 year old girl and it was bad and he reported it to the FBI after AOL did nothing about the situation. Long story short the FBI worked with my Uncle within a week and they arrested 13 predators in one night. My Uncle was on Nightline and every major TV national network that year. EVEN Longer story Steve Case (Founder of AOL) banned my Uncle for life from AOL. Steve Case is scum. Here is a Senate Bill with the story in Congressional Records. "On-line services are an easy way for pedophiles to meet children anonymously, noted Dyanne Greer, a senior lawyer with the National Center for the Prosecution of Child Abuse. ``Many cases are not reported, so I'm not sure anybody is really aware how much this is going on,'' she said. A Post probe uncovered these on-line horror stories: Westchester computer expert George Telesha pretended to be a 14-year-old girl on America Online and was quickly besieged by perverts sending dirty pictures. https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/1995/1/18/senate-section/article/s1070-2 https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/1995/1/18/sena... THE PREVENTION OF SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN ACT
  - 13of40 9y ago
    I remember buying my first webcam and briefly visiting the forum the manufacturer had set up, in 1999 or 2000. Basically the "forum" was about a dozen guys live streaming (postage stamp sized) pictures of their dicks. I don't know exactly what changed, but you don't tend to see things that blatant as much anymore.
    - poooogles 9y ago
      >but you don't tend to see things that blatant as much anymore. I think you stilldo. Chatroulette and similar services were besieged by them a few years ago.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
- baldfat 9y ago
  Another Reason to keep a close eye on your children's phones and need adult supervision. "Users are swarming young girls and asking them to do inappropriate things. And the live-streaming app hasn't been able to stop them." http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2017/12/periscope_users_are_asking_young_girls_to_do_sexually_explicit_things_and.html http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2017/12/...
  - aperrien 9y ago
    You know it bugs me, but why can't we find the people abusing chat services to do these things? Are there that many of them? I'd like to hope that the percentage of men who are scum is not that high, but recent events have shaken that theory.
nkkollaw 9y ago
You are doing the right (and hard) thing. Well done.
setecgastronomy 9y ago
> Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous. Why? > People freak out if a predator lives int heir neighborhood but they let their child be accessible to millions of predators via their phone or table. Well advise the kids of the dangers. I and most of my friends had unsupervised internet access. We are all doing fine. > This is why kids initial exposure to porn is 8 in the US and 10 when kids are getting addicted. Every kid is getting "addicted"? > I still remember working with children and teens and found out, through the police and parents, that a few of the kids 11 to 15 were using their webcams to get people to buy them stuff online. This was in the late 90s. And guess what? 99.99% of 90s kids didn't use webcams. > My job as a parent is to help them become awesome adult selves and learning not to be addicted to anything from drugs, alcohol, laziness or phones is part of being a parent. No offense, but your kids aren't prepared for the real world. What will they do now that they are adults with no parental supervision. Also, no parent with 5 kids is "responsible".
- baby 9y ago
  There's definitely an age where unsupervised access to the internet is bad. Not even talking about porn, but bullying, gore, pedophiles, etc... What is that age? I don't know.
- schwap 9y ago
  > I and most of my friends had unsupervised internet access. I don't know how old you are, but personally (in my early 30s) the internet of my youth was pretty vastly different than the internet of today, i.e. as you say: > And guess what? 99.99% of 90s kids didn't use webcams. Well now most kids have a high quality webcam in their pocket at all times.
  - setecgastronomy 9y ago
    >I don't know how old you are, but personally (in my early 30s) the internet of my youth was pretty vastly different than the internet of today, i.e. as you say: I too was a 90s kid. No. It really wasn't. The same dangers that existed back then existed today. There was threats of child predators, internet addiction, gambling, porn, etc. That's why we were taught to be anonymous on the internet. You could argue today's internet is a lot safer than it was in the 90s when most parents didn't even know what the internet was. > Well now most kids have a high quality webcam in their pocket at all times. And? 99.99% of them don't use them to sell their photos to pedophiles. There are pedophiles lurking at libraries too. I guess we should stop kids from using the library. It's funny how people who want to control kids and who are so scared of everything find something to be scared of no matter what. Just because 0.000001% of kids might do stupid stuff on the internet isn't a reason to monitor every kid or keep kids from the internet without supervision.
ACow_Adonis 9y ago
I'm torn on the issue. On the one hand, I view the early internet as saving me/raising me. I detested school, still do. Sure there were dangers back then too, but that's why we learnt to be skeptics, anonymous, question people's motives, and actually understand the technology. On the other hand, social networks weren't around, videos weren't really around, advertising wasn't around, nothing was monetized, there was no such thing as a Webcam, no such thing as a mobile. By the stage of the internet, I was well and truly addicted to reading. If I had children, I'd probably want to restrict them from phones and social media, at least until they learnt to love reading, learnt to concentrate without distractions, and skepticism/pushing back against social messages. Simultaneously, I feel my current life would have been worse off without early access to the internet... Edit: in case it's not clear, I think this is generally a good thing. It may do us good to remember this isn't the first time technology has tried to insert itself into the classroom. Television was supposed to revolutionize teaching, but most of us now would be hard pressed to believe that TV in the classroom is generally a good thing (the teacher generally used them when they were lazy or needed some time off). Let's not kid ourselves, the MAIN purpose/use, like TV, of phones and tablets are currently media consumption and social communication, not learning.
- baldfat 9y ago
  It isn't about no access or unlimited it is about safe appropriate access to the internet. Teaching them to be responsible.
- meebs 9y ago
  > On the one hand, I view the early internet as saving me/raising me. There is also the path not taken: perhaps you'd have been better off without the Internet. I do not know you nor do I believe I can make these value judgements. Just a thought.

chrisper 9y ago

As someone who had unsupervised access to the internet as a child, I turned out to be just fine. But maybe beacause the internet was way different back then. (I am talking dial up era intrent). To me after all these years the "new" internet got a dystopian image. If I had a child, I'd provide them unsupervised access to the internet I remember, but certainly not to the one from today.

0xWilliam 9y ago
ofc the internet was different back then.
nasredin 9y ago
Actually that's not a bad idea. You can simulate 56k dialup speed on a router and the kids will probably avoid Facebook and other heavy sites and stick to WikiPedia as a Pavlovian response. As a bonus they will have to masturbate to images, just like in the old days. You can also disconnect them when they get out of line thus simulating the complete dialup experience.
pishpash 9y ago
A network is the sum of its users. Today's internet is, if not dystopian, at least a fairly adult place.
- chrisper 9y ago
  It may be the sum of the users but it is not an equal sum. Companies like Google and Facebook make up too much of that sum. And don't get me started on all the scummy people and sites online.
baldfat 9y ago
No it was worse back then. From 1995 My Uncle saw my 12 year old male cousin was on AOL and he got messages from men. My cousin just kept deleting them. My Uncle pretended to be a 14 year old girl and it was bad and he reported it to the FBI after AOL did nothing about the situation. Long story short the FBI worked with my Uncle within a week and they arrested 13 predators in one night. My Uncle was on Nightline and every major TV national network that year. EVEN Longer story Steve Case (Founder of AOL) banned my Uncle for life from AOL. Steve Case is scum. Here is a Senate Bill with the story in Congressional Records. "On-line services are an easy way for pedophiles to meet children anonymously, noted Dyanne Greer, a senior lawyer with the National Center for the Prosecution of Child Abuse. ``Many cases are not reported, so I'm not sure anybody is really aware how much this is going on,'' she said. A Post probe uncovered these on-line horror stories: Westchester computer expert George Telesha pretended to be a 14-year-old girl on America Online and was quickly besieged by perverts sending dirty pictures. https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/1995/1/18/senate-section/article/s1070-2 https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/1995/1/18/sena... THE PREVENTION OF SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN ACT
- 13of40 9y ago
  I remember buying my first webcam and briefly visiting the forum the manufacturer had set up, in 1999 or 2000. Basically the "forum" was about a dozen guys live streaming (postage stamp sized) pictures of their dicks. I don't know exactly what changed, but you don't tend to see things that blatant as much anymore.
  - poooogles 9y ago
    >but you don't tend to see things that blatant as much anymore. I think you stilldo. Chatroulette and similar services were besieged by them a few years ago.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
baldfat 9y ago
Another Reason to keep a close eye on your children's phones and need adult supervision. "Users are swarming young girls and asking them to do inappropriate things. And the live-streaming app hasn't been able to stop them." http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2017/12/periscope_users_are_asking_young_girls_to_do_sexually_explicit_things_and.html http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2017/12/...
- aperrien 9y ago
  You know it bugs me, but why can't we find the people abusing chat services to do these things? Are there that many of them? I'd like to hope that the percentage of men who are scum is not that high, but recent events have shaken that theory.

nkkollaw 9y ago

You are doing the right (and hard) thing. Well done.

setecgastronomy 9y ago

> Children given unsupervised access to the internet is ridiculous. Why? > People freak out if a predator lives int heir neighborhood but they let their child be accessible to millions of predators via their phone or table. Well advise the kids of the dangers. I and most of my friends had unsupervised internet access. We are all doing fine. > This is why kids initial exposure to porn is 8 in the US and 10 when kids are getting addicted. Every kid is getting "addicted"? > I still remember working with children and teens and found out, through the police and parents, that a few of the kids 11 to 15 were using their webcams to get people to buy them stuff online. This was in the late 90s. And guess what? 99.99% of 90s kids didn't use webcams. > My job as a parent is to help them become awesome adult selves and learning not to be addicted to anything from drugs, alcohol, laziness or phones is part of being a parent. No offense, but your kids aren't prepared for the real world. What will they do now that they are adults with no parental supervision. Also, no parent with 5 kids is "responsible".

baby 9y ago
There's definitely an age where unsupervised access to the internet is bad. Not even talking about porn, but bullying, gore, pedophiles, etc... What is that age? I don't know.
schwap 9y ago
> I and most of my friends had unsupervised internet access. I don't know how old you are, but personally (in my early 30s) the internet of my youth was pretty vastly different than the internet of today, i.e. as you say: > And guess what? 99.99% of 90s kids didn't use webcams. Well now most kids have a high quality webcam in their pocket at all times.
- setecgastronomy 9y ago
  >I don't know how old you are, but personally (in my early 30s) the internet of my youth was pretty vastly different than the internet of today, i.e. as you say: I too was a 90s kid. No. It really wasn't. The same dangers that existed back then existed today. There was threats of child predators, internet addiction, gambling, porn, etc. That's why we were taught to be anonymous on the internet. You could argue today's internet is a lot safer than it was in the 90s when most parents didn't even know what the internet was. > Well now most kids have a high quality webcam in their pocket at all times. And? 99.99% of them don't use them to sell their photos to pedophiles. There are pedophiles lurking at libraries too. I guess we should stop kids from using the library. It's funny how people who want to control kids and who are so scared of everything find something to be scared of no matter what. Just because 0.000001% of kids might do stupid stuff on the internet isn't a reason to monitor every kid or keep kids from the internet without supervision.

ACow_Adonis 9y ago

I'm torn on the issue. On the one hand, I view the early internet as saving me/raising me. I detested school, still do. Sure there were dangers back then too, but that's why we learnt to be skeptics, anonymous, question people's motives, and actually understand the technology. On the other hand, social networks weren't around, videos weren't really around, advertising wasn't around, nothing was monetized, there was no such thing as a Webcam, no such thing as a mobile. By the stage of the internet, I was well and truly addicted to reading. If I had children, I'd probably want to restrict them from phones and social media, at least until they learnt to love reading, learnt to concentrate without distractions, and skepticism/pushing back against social messages. Simultaneously, I feel my current life would have been worse off without early access to the internet... Edit: in case it's not clear, I think this is generally a good thing. It may do us good to remember this isn't the first time technology has tried to insert itself into the classroom. Television was supposed to revolutionize teaching, but most of us now would be hard pressed to believe that TV in the classroom is generally a good thing (the teacher generally used them when they were lazy or needed some time off). Let's not kid ourselves, the MAIN purpose/use, like TV, of phones and tablets are currently media consumption and social communication, not learning.

baldfat 9y ago
It isn't about no access or unlimited it is about safe appropriate access to the internet. Teaching them to be responsible.
meebs 9y ago
> On the one hand, I view the early internet as saving me/raising me. There is also the path not taken: perhaps you'd have been better off without the Internet. I do not know you nor do I believe I can make these value judgements. Just a thought.