3 ms·
Well, let's say we find a compromise. You're paying for the internet, so you're entitled to set rules as to how people use it. But, if your child wants to pony
by ddevault 7y ago
Well, let's say we find a compromise. You're paying for the internet, so you're entitled to set rules as to how people use it. But, if your child wants to pony up to, for example, buy a mobile hotspot, it's up to them to set their own rules for how it's used.
If your 2.5 year old is mature enough to manage that, then yeah, maybe they ought to be able to have unfettered internet access, too.
- GordonS 7y agoSo parents only get to set boundaries in relation to things they pay for? Got to be honest, I'm struggling to take your arguments seriously.
- ddevault 7y agoYour children are people, not property. Your property is property, not a person. It's pretty straightforward.
- claudiawerner 7y agoFiltering internet access for someone does not imply they are property; no legal system in the world (that I know of) recognizes or treats children as property. The idea that children should be permitted to do whatever they want so long as they can pay for it seems very backwards. We all know children aren't property, but we also know that parents have a responsibility to raise their children such that they are protected from things they may not understand yet. To be honest, I was surprised to see you making comments like this, after seeing your programming skill, pretty reasonable takes about software, and discussions on Fedi.
- _-david-_ 7y agoIf a 7 year old saves their money for a knife are they allowed to kill themself with it?