4 ms·

Huh that’s a bizarre take on the situation. Try explaining this to a parent whose daughter is suffering from ED and Self Harm. The sociologist/apologists won’t

Huh that’s a bizarre take on the situation. Try explaining this to a parent whose daughter is suffering from ED and Self Harm. The sociologist/apologists won’t let instagram do anything since it breaks their fantasy of free speech being always “net” positive. And Apple won’t let the parent monitor her own daughter because think about PRIVACY!!!! The truth is the industry optimizes for anarchy under the guise of liberal ideology and privacy. As society wises up to this ruse we will see great push back against the fake SV philosophy.

geofft 7y ago
As a technologist, I don't think I have a responsibility to the daughter's parents, either to do anything about the situation or to explain anything about it. I do have a responsibility to the daughter to get her the help she needs; that help is potentially not from her parents.
- bschelsea 7y ago
  Great thanks for proving my point. Let’s replace technologist by medical professionals and you can see immediately that parents consent is required for most medical procedures barring edge cases where doctors get a court order. Oh also COPPA exists for this very deluded thinking that “technologist” like you have.
  - jdietrich 7y ago
    > Let’s replace technologist by medical professionals and you can see immediately that parents consent is required for most medical procedures barring edge cases where doctors get a court order. Many states allow minors to receive mental health treatment without the consent of their parents and allow those minors to retain confidentiality. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080%2F1067828X.2013.777380 https://dx.doi.org/10.1080%2F1067828X.2013.777380
  - DanBC 7y ago
    This article is from England, and the context is a person in England who died by suicide, and the English government advancing white papers that talk about online harm. In that context, the English rules abuot medical treatment seem useful. Someone the age of 16 or over is assumed to have capacity to make medical decisions by themselves (and there's complex law to regulate if they're thought to lack that capacity). Someone under 15 or under can also have that capacity: the doctor would need to check if the patient is Gillick Competent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gillick_competence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gillick_competence
    - geofft 7y ago
      Interesting! Wikipedia claims: "The House of Lords focused on the issue of consent rather than a notion of 'parental rights' or parental power. In fact, the court held that 'parental rights' did not exist, other than to safeguard the best interests of a minor." I am of the opinion that we should give significant credence to a minor over the age of, say, eight who says "I do not trust my parents to act in my best interests." This may generally involve having a qualified doctor or social worker evaluate the child's best interests instead of making the child decide, but at least a doctor or a social worker, unlike a parent, had qualifications to evaluate the options and has no conflict of interest unlike a parent.
  - geofft 7y ago
    Medical procedures, yes. But it's standard for doctors to ask parents of minors to leave the room so the doctor can speak privately, even if they don't suspect abuse, isn't it?
jstarfish 7y ago
It's not Instagram's problem, nor should it be made to be. Apple could certainly do more to facilitate MDM, but a phone known for letting your parents track your GPS and MITM your communications would not prove popular with the kids. In the end the parents are the ones provisioning the device, paying the phone bill and are ultimately responsible for both it and its user...yet they have no administrative privileges over anything of relevance. By all logic children should never be given access to fully-encrypted black boxes.
- bschelsea 7y ago
  Instagram is enabling destructive behavior hurting society, how is this NOT their problem. Sure legally maybe not but how about ethically. Unless of course if ethics cannot be codified as a crypto smart contract they don’t matter.
- danaris 7y ago
  Giving parents unfettered ability to violate their children's privacy does not serve the children's interests. Many parents are abusive. Many children are discovering a sexuality or identity that their parents would find unacceptable. In these cases, and many more, ensuring that the parents can read every single message their children send—and every single website they access—is much more likely to lead to serious negative outcomes for the children (at best, a repressed identity; at worst, suicide due to having one's self rejected by one's parents).
  - paulryanrogers 7y ago
    Would such abusive parents get their child a private phone knowing it limits their power over the child? Maybe privacy-respecting tech is one of many solutions to bad parenting. Though I suspect getting to know ones neighbors well would be a far more effective first step.
    - danaris 7y ago
      Many parents are only abusive some of the time. As I understand it, the scenario of abusive some of the time, lavishing with gifts some of the time is actually not that uncommon. Also, if most or all phones respect the child's privacy, it becomes harder for the parents to get their child a phone that lets them micromanage the child's life.
DanBC 7y ago
I agree with you, it's not a great article. I submitted it because it's currently the best available piece advancing this position. Regulation will come, and if people don't want that regulation they'll need to develop much better arguments than this.
foobarbecue 7y ago
ED? SV?
- SolaceQuantum 7y ago
  ED == Eating Disorder, SV == Silicon Valley
- etrevino 7y ago
  ED = Eating Disorder SV = Silicon Valley (I think)

geofft 7y ago

As a technologist, I don't think I have a responsibility to the daughter's parents, either to do anything about the situation or to explain anything about it. I do have a responsibility to the daughter to get her the help she needs; that help is potentially not from her parents.

bschelsea 7y ago
Great thanks for proving my point. Let’s replace technologist by medical professionals and you can see immediately that parents consent is required for most medical procedures barring edge cases where doctors get a court order. Oh also COPPA exists for this very deluded thinking that “technologist” like you have.
- jdietrich 7y ago
  > Let’s replace technologist by medical professionals and you can see immediately that parents consent is required for most medical procedures barring edge cases where doctors get a court order. Many states allow minors to receive mental health treatment without the consent of their parents and allow those minors to retain confidentiality. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080%2F1067828X.2013.777380 https://dx.doi.org/10.1080%2F1067828X.2013.777380
- DanBC 7y ago
  This article is from England, and the context is a person in England who died by suicide, and the English government advancing white papers that talk about online harm. In that context, the English rules abuot medical treatment seem useful. Someone the age of 16 or over is assumed to have capacity to make medical decisions by themselves (and there's complex law to regulate if they're thought to lack that capacity). Someone under 15 or under can also have that capacity: the doctor would need to check if the patient is Gillick Competent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gillick_competence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gillick_competence
  - geofft 7y ago
    Interesting! Wikipedia claims: "The House of Lords focused on the issue of consent rather than a notion of 'parental rights' or parental power. In fact, the court held that 'parental rights' did not exist, other than to safeguard the best interests of a minor." I am of the opinion that we should give significant credence to a minor over the age of, say, eight who says "I do not trust my parents to act in my best interests." This may generally involve having a qualified doctor or social worker evaluate the child's best interests instead of making the child decide, but at least a doctor or a social worker, unlike a parent, had qualifications to evaluate the options and has no conflict of interest unlike a parent.
- geofft 7y ago
  Medical procedures, yes. But it's standard for doctors to ask parents of minors to leave the room so the doctor can speak privately, even if they don't suspect abuse, isn't it?

jstarfish 7y ago

It's not Instagram's problem, nor should it be made to be. Apple could certainly do more to facilitate MDM, but a phone known for letting your parents track your GPS and MITM your communications would not prove popular with the kids. In the end the parents are the ones provisioning the device, paying the phone bill and are ultimately responsible for both it and its user...yet they have no administrative privileges over anything of relevance. By all logic children should never be given access to fully-encrypted black boxes.

bschelsea 7y ago
Instagram is enabling destructive behavior hurting society, how is this NOT their problem. Sure legally maybe not but how about ethically. Unless of course if ethics cannot be codified as a crypto smart contract they don’t matter.
danaris 7y ago
Giving parents unfettered ability to violate their children's privacy does not serve the children's interests. Many parents are abusive. Many children are discovering a sexuality or identity that their parents would find unacceptable. In these cases, and many more, ensuring that the parents can read every single message their children send—and every single website they access—is much more likely to lead to serious negative outcomes for the children (at best, a repressed identity; at worst, suicide due to having one's self rejected by one's parents).
- paulryanrogers 7y ago
  Would such abusive parents get their child a private phone knowing it limits their power over the child? Maybe privacy-respecting tech is one of many solutions to bad parenting. Though I suspect getting to know ones neighbors well would be a far more effective first step.
  - danaris 7y ago
    Many parents are only abusive some of the time. As I understand it, the scenario of abusive some of the time, lavishing with gifts some of the time is actually not that uncommon. Also, if most or all phones respect the child's privacy, it becomes harder for the parents to get their child a phone that lets them micromanage the child's life.

DanBC 7y ago

I agree with you, it's not a great article. I submitted it because it's currently the best available piece advancing this position. Regulation will come, and if people don't want that regulation they'll need to develop much better arguments than this.

foobarbecue 7y ago

ED? SV?

SolaceQuantum 7y ago
ED == Eating Disorder, SV == Silicon Valley
etrevino 7y ago
ED = Eating Disorder SV = Silicon Valley (I think)