12 ms·

I dislike Facebook as much as any HN poster, but I can say that the Facebook Messenger for Kids app has been... surprisingly good. Kids can't talk to anyone wh

I dislike Facebook as much as any HN poster, but I can say that the Facebook Messenger for Kids app has been... surprisingly good. Kids can't talk to anyone who you don't add as a friend, and your child's friends list is managed by you and new friends must be approved by the parents of both kids. You can see at any time who they have been talking to, you can see all the images that have been sent and received, and there's no advertising. It's basically a walled garden just for your kids group of friends who've been approved by parents and nothing more. Kids can't even start a group chat or video chat with friends who aren't all mutual friends, so there's no way for your child to talk to anyone who you haven't approved. It has stuff that kids like, like little games and filters they can use to play with their friends, which is clearly just to increase engagement (and screen time), but it's actually not nearly as terrible as you'd expect from Facebook (yet). Messenger for Kids has been a godsend during the quarantine due to the fact that the kids want to do video chat but all have different types of devices, and it's nice because it's locked down to only the people you approve. Now, is Instagram for Kids a good idea? We shall see, my guess is "probably not" but at least Messenger for Kids isn't exactly the nightmare you'd think it is based on the name.

calmworm 5y ago
It’s not completely off-base to compare these “for kids” branded apps to candy cigarettes and big league chew. Not to mention the data collection.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- thatguy0900 5y ago
  I just now connected big league chew to tobacco, I use to buy it all the time from the tee ball concession stands. That's funny.
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  Exactly. It's getting the kids conditioned and addicted to devices just like Pavlov's dogs. Facebook knows exactly what they are doing here.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    It is human nature to want to converse with others. The internet itself makes it extremely convenient to be in a 24/7 chat with your crew, so it’s addictive with or without Facebook.
  - johannes1234321 5y ago
    Yes, Facebook doesn't create that out of mercy. But what is the alternative aside from becoming Amish? You can't take away smartphones completely. And once there is the smartphone a communication app is the most useful thing they can get. Better than any game or whatever. But an open messaging app can quickly lead to issues. Would be good if there were non-profit vendors of similar things, bit they don't exist, yet.
    - anoncake 5y ago
      And Facebook entrenching itself reduces the chance of a non-profit vendor succeeding.
    - ryandrake 5y ago
      There is probably a middle ground somewhere between being hopelessly addicted to Social Media and going Amish and throwing away all technology. Someone mentioned the other day on HN that Social Media is the modern-day Smoking, and I agree there are a lot of parallels. Surely we can keep our kids out of S.M. without restricting them from using other, less harmful parts of technology.
    - bun_at_work 5y ago
      The alternative isn't becoming Amish. It's being more mindful about how your children interact with new technologies. Facebook/Instagram/etc aren't required for children, and even if there are good arguments for social media for children (like learning how it works), that doesn't mean letting the children have unfettered access to the tech and letting these companies have unfettered access to the children's attention. Here's an alternative: restrict usage to a simple time-boxed window each day, contingent on the completion of what the child needs to have done (chores, homework, etc.). Augment that by limiting what apps the child will have access to, based on what is reasonable at the time. It requires effort, but seems totally reasonable. There doesn't seem to be a strong argument for children having continuous access to devices that have empirically been shown to cause serious mental health issues, not even including the crazy dangers of the internet (stalking, child sexualization, etc). Alternatively, don't control anything the child does and hope it works out.
- bootlooped 5y ago
  There's a harm reduction argument to be made: kids are using digital devices already (probably too much) so one way to improve the whole situation is to make using them safer for kids. I'm not a parent, but I imagine controlling your kids electronic device use is a difficult task. The jump to them having a smartphone must be like a dam being blown apart with dynamite.
  - HenryBemis 5y ago
    So our dear FB is helping us get them depressed faster, 'safer', and with a nice blue icon, and we should let it happen? Facebook is cancer. Letting this play out will only condition kids be more immersed/addicted to social media. How can that be good for them now? How can that be good for them in the future? Facebook has proven that they toy with its users, their psyche, their privacy. This will definitely come to hurt them in the future. Either by FB selling out every 1_and_0 they got on you, or allowing 'by accident' another scammy CambridgeAnalyticaV2 to siphon all your data, or by getting hacked and disclosing that 2 years late.
    - bootlooped 5y ago
      If you're familiar with any other harm reduction efforts, pretty much the same arguments are made against all of them. Take for example needle exchanges. People who run needle exchanges are not asserting that people being addicted to heroin is a good outcome, only that people being addicted to heroin and also having to share dirty needles is worse. Likewise, I'm not asserting that little kids using Facebook products is a good outcome, only that it may be less bad than other outcomes.
      - agogdog 5y ago
        Needle exchanges aren't willingly run by heroin manufacturers. It's impossible to believe in harm reduction when it comes from the harm producer. I'd be much more willing to accept this as harm reduction if Facebook outsourced the task to an independent non-profit... but even that arrangement comes with pro-Facebook biases.
      - 5y ago
- an_opabinia 5y ago
  > It’s not completely off-base to compare these “for kids” branded apps to candy cigarettes and big league chew. In terms of verisimilitude, it is 49.9% off base to compare for kids branded apps to tobacco use. In terms of intellectual honesty, it is 99.9% off base to compare for kids branded apps to tobacco use. If you want guidance on app use for your kids, ask a pediatrician a specific question. You'll get more knowledge than flaming on this place.
thebackup 5y ago
I understand that a lot of parents are positive to the parental control and supervision that you describe, I am not that kind of parent. I want the relationship with my kids to be built on trust and honesty. My two boys make mistakes sometimes, probably more than I know of, but that is fine, it's part of growing up. They also don't use social media, instead they text their friends by SMS or simply call them when they want to talk or meet up. So far they have never complained about missing out on anything.
- garmaine 5y ago
  It’s not about preventing them from making mistakes. It’s about protecting them from predators.
  - nineplay 5y ago
    Yes yes yes. The most direct discussions I have with my kid about social media is "there are adult male perverts who are going to pretend to be your friend because they want to have sex with you." It's a more explicit discussion than I'd like to have but there's no getting away from it. It's also why I have the "I will monitor your internet usage at any time that I feel it's necessary" discussion. I don't like invading privacy - I wouldn't want my internet history explored and it's as vanilla as you can imagine but it's also a projection of my inner thoughts. I knew a young girl who was lured into a sexual encounter with an adult after striking up a friendship on "Words with Friends". I don't trust/allow anything with private communication.
    - ixacto 5y ago
      It’s totally possible that pedophiles and abuses are using tiktok and Instagram to groom children, but most of the time it’s someone that the child knows that actually does the abuse: “ A common myth is that child sexual abuse is perpetrated by strangers and pedophiles. But most people who sexually abuse children are our friends, partners, family members, and community members. About 93 percent of children who are victims of sexual abuse know their abuseriii. Less than 10 percent of sexually abused children are abused by a stranger.” https://www.ywca.org/wp-content/uploads/WWV-CSA-Fact-Sheet-Final.pdf https://www.ywca.org/wp-content/uploads/WWV-CSA-Fact-Sheet-F... So I’d not freak out too much if your kid searches for something really weird, because we all did that as kids.
dheera 5y ago
So all this sounds good at first, but if the walls are too high, wouldn't kids simply end up treating it as a teacher/parent-infested app and start using something else (e.g. IRC) without you knowing? I mean, when I was a kid I was all over IRC and Usenet instead of my school's censored e-mail/chat system, just saying ...
gentleman11 5y ago
In other words, as long as it’s the Facebook AND parents doing the surveillance, it’s okay? The concern is over the parents getting a cut of the data? My parents would never have snooped on me the way most parents try to these days, it would have freaked me out any time after turning 11 or so
- faitswulff 5y ago
  I'd love to trust that my kids are safe with technology, but the landscape for parents is way different now than it used to be, too. The grandparents left my then-toddler alone with youtube for an hour or so and I came back to my child watching some truly nightmarish videos. I can't trust the tech, so someone needs to be watching.
  - techteachtea 5y ago
    Web companies used to forbid accounts belonging to children under the age of 13 until what, 5-10 years ago? I was under the impression that that was US law, so I was initially surprised at the rapid fluorishing of child accounts on nearly every service. But there seems to be a "...without parental consent" rider in our laws about data collection, and that consent is now assumed to be freely given. Really though, children should not be using these devices to communicate or access web services unsupervised. You are the parent, not the phone.
    - hokumguru 5y ago
      https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/rules/rulemaking-regulatory-reform-proceedings/childrens-online-privacy-protection-rule https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/rules/rulemaking-regulatory-... Banning children from social media has generally been an easy way to avoid the highly stringent regulations concerning data protection in the USA. The FTC doesn’t mess around with COPPA and it’s very easy to find yourself in the hole.
  - cosmojg 5y ago
    Out of curiosity, was your child enjoying them? What did you find objectionable? How did the subsequent conversation with your child go? I always wonder how I'll handle these types of situations if and when I myself become a parent. I imagine it's much more difficult in reality than it is in my head.
twobitshifter 5y ago
I have to ask, what’s the benefit of the app to Facebook? Are they serving ads to kids? Or are they hoping to bring them up with Facebook firmly as part of their digital identity?
- derwiki 5y ago
  Collect data now, profit later
  - ronsor 5y ago
    That's probably illegal, and as far as I know the big tech companies take children's privacy at least somewhat seriously, as it's one of the few things that can land them in deep trouble if mishandled.
    - ixacto 5y ago
      Yes I think this is more a play for Facebook mindshare with parents.
      - AndrewUnmuted 5y ago
        Kids generate data in more ways than can be directly siphoned from the web service run by Facebook. It can be to their benefit simply because it pushes more Facebook traffic through the ISPs and other major infrastructure. A quick win on the business side, and a whole new venture for further tech development on the product side.
- nineplay 5y ago
  No ads, I think there is a bit of "If you like Facebook for kids, you'll _love_ Facebook for adults" It has been a lifesaver during covid. It is the way kids text/video chat with each other without a cell plan and with only approved contacts. I don't know what my kid would have done without it, it is a 2-3-4 hour virtual playdate when there are no other ways to connect with their friends.
kerng 5y ago
I didnt know parents would see the conversations also - seems right down FB line. So spying is okay when parents do it? It's interesting how we normalize this all. I'd imagine most kids use their own creative stuff anyway to get around snoopy parents.
- jasongill 5y ago
  Parents can't see the conversations but can see the number of messages and calls per contact, as well as recently shared/received photos. It's a pretty good compromise IMHO.
  - herbst 5y ago
    I dont have kids. But this still sounds creepy. Either they are to young that a smartphone or Facebook would actually benefit them, or they are to old to spy on them.
tomc1985 5y ago
Newsflash from police state parenting
efdee 5y ago
They'll wait for kids to get hooked and then gradually start injecting all those things you didn't want in the first place once the cat is out of the bag.
fallingknife 5y ago
Yeah just like they told me when I was a kid, "never talk to strangers because there's a predator behind every tree." Of course what they don't tell you is that, overwhelmingly, the most likely person to abuse a child it their parents.
- anoncake 5y ago
  Avoiding your parents as a child because they might abuse you is not a real option though.
hosh 5y ago
Ok. Leaving aside quarantine, do kids really need to talk to other kids through a personal computing device that they carry around as a constant companion? Does that foster something developmentally that could not happen without it? What do kids lose if they use such devices as their primary means of communication? And let’s say, we think the “constant companion” is the problem, and we restrict the kid’s interaction through an old school, family computer. Is that necessarily any better? I have already seen first hand how social media interaction at the middle school (when kids are starting to form social identities independent of their parents) gets toxic. And looking at the social-media-fueled culture wars since 2014, it does not get any better for adults. (https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2018/03/06/a-quick-battle-field-guide-to-the-new-culture-wars/ https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2018/03/06/a-quick-battle-field-g...).
- tjr225 5y ago
  I don't really know how I'm going to approach this once my child is old enough to use devices but I think one might be able to argue that it makes sense for them to learn how to interact with the world as it exists, rather than a fantasy world where devices and the internet doesn't exist.
  - wreath 5y ago
    > rather than a fantasy world where devices and the internet doesn't exist. The fantasy world is also the one that the likes of Facebook want to lead us to.
  - hosh 5y ago
    My wife and I decided on a no-social media policy for our kids. We have a teenager and a 5 month old. Our teenager has a phone we found that is a locked down Android, and has no internet (no wifi or 4g/5g). It is just a phone, with multimedia text, and non-network enabled calendar, clock. There is no app store. My daughter is autistic. Our problems with the phone has more to do with her feeling like we are cutting her off of connecting with people she clings to, triggering some childhood history. I have no idea what will happen when our neurotypical son becomes a teenager. There is much more to life than just what are on devices, and I have a general idea on how to approach this. I have been studying, and to some extent, applying regenerative paradigms. A good deal of that will involve the kids into the natural cycle of life. To viscerally experience where their food comes from, and where it goes. How to connect with another living being as a whole being in an ecosystem and community, whether that being is a human, animal, or plant. I am going to teach them the ethical framework, “care for people”, “care for land”, “fair share”. Technology, then, is thoughtfully applied within that context. What that means, I am still discovering for myself. But I have already made some progress on that —- what Christopher Alexander really meant by pattern languages and a timeless way of building; what Smalltalk and Hypercard had in common, why we had turned our back to it, and maybe it is time to use it; the philosophy of Free Software and how it is different than open source, and why it matters more than basic rights and liberty; how sandstorm.io enables community-oriented and local platforms. It has not all gelled together for me yet, but I know something is there.
wolfretcrap 5y ago
By doing this we are conditioning kids to not have privacy, later when they grow up - they'll come to accept lack of privacy because it's something they grew up with, first it was their parents spying on them, now it's tech company and government and their advertisers spying on them
KorematsuFred 5y ago
I think it is very healthy and good for major companies like Facebook or Youtube to create kids versions of their apps to keep our kids safe, to make sure parents understand what their kids do online and also to have better compliance with law. The government on other hand is hell bent on destroying some of the most successful american comapnies at the expense of its citizens.
unclebucknasty 5y ago
>I dislike Facebook as much as any HN poster, but I can say that the Facebook Messenger for Kids app has been...surprisingly good. That opener and the glowing comment that follows are pretty strange. It's essentially, "I hate Facebook too, but in spite of hating it, I give their product to my kids and (effectively) here are all the reasons you should consider giving it to your kids too." Maybe we dislike Facebook for different reasons, but I believe most (including myself) would point to something along the lines of their horrible business practices and privacy abuses. This is not a per-app thing. It's their approach to everything and, really, the entire point of their ecosystem (of which your kids are now a part). So, whether or not they can make an app "safe" from outside predators, I have zero interest in feeding my kids to the Facebook machine. I'm not trying to be on the attack here, but it frustrates me as a parent to see another parent promoting this stuff in the name of convenience (or whatever) when they also know it's awful. Ultimately, when enough parents approve and enough kids are using it, then other parents are left to make the awful choice between also feeding their kids to the machine or allowing them to be socially isolated to some extent. When do we take a stand? Or, at a minimum, maybe don't help Facebook promote it?
thesausageking 5y ago
I loath FB Messenger Kids. Because other kids have it, there's huge peer pressure for my kids to use it. I either have to be the bad parent and isolate my kids from their friends, or give in and start them down the path of getting conditioned to use FB products. And the games on it use the same engagement tricks all of Facebook does, so the kids end up getting sucked into them at a very young age.
- Spivak 5y ago
  I swear have people forgot what it was like when we were kids. It's not like Facebook is covering new ground here. My parents were pressured into to giving me internet access so I could talk to my friends on AIM, I begged my Dad to buy me a cell phone because all my friends had them. And don't even get me started on Pokemon cards, Game Boy links, slap bracelets, silly bands, a bike so I could reach my friend's houses, and a car when I turned 16. You're not conditioning your kids to be soulless zombies to lord Zuckerberg any more than I was conditioned to love AOL. Let your kids socialize in whatever way their friends are, the actual socializing and shared experience is what will matter years down the line.
  - Proziam 5y ago
    I understand where you're coming from but I hold the extreme opposite view. I believe it should be illegal for a company to intentionally allow children into a system where their psychology is manipulated. Instagram has huge negative psych effects, predominantly on young girls. But the other social dynamics, and the effects of advertising, and the effects of the echo chambers that result from the algorithmic feeds are profound and harmful across all social media platforms. It isn't socializing when every photo is edited, every post that a kid sees is the most dramatic thing thanks to the algorithm, and moral/political activism is rampant and signal boosted. Kids should learn how to deal with real humans in the real world rather than digital characterizations of humans curated by a machine.
    - supernovae 5y ago
      When I was a kid, my parents said the same things about TV, Music, Cartoons and Magazines. This is not in defense of facebook or IG, they are problematic for kids for sure for many reasons and they should be restricted from data collecting on kids. BUT... American culture is rooted in pop/controlled/manicured/curated culture... we idolize celebrities, sports teams, beauty... we should fix that too
herbst 5y ago
You are literally entrusting facebook with your kids private data because the app works well. Or in another world, my kid would definitly hate me because of all the tech its not allowed to use.

calmworm 5y ago

It’s not completely off-base to compare these “for kids” branded apps to candy cigarettes and big league chew. Not to mention the data collection.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
thatguy0900 5y ago
I just now connected big league chew to tobacco, I use to buy it all the time from the tee ball concession stands. That's funny.
throwawayboise 5y ago
Exactly. It's getting the kids conditioned and addicted to devices just like Pavlov's dogs. Facebook knows exactly what they are doing here.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  It is human nature to want to converse with others. The internet itself makes it extremely convenient to be in a 24/7 chat with your crew, so it’s addictive with or without Facebook.
- johannes1234321 5y ago
  Yes, Facebook doesn't create that out of mercy. But what is the alternative aside from becoming Amish? You can't take away smartphones completely. And once there is the smartphone a communication app is the most useful thing they can get. Better than any game or whatever. But an open messaging app can quickly lead to issues. Would be good if there were non-profit vendors of similar things, bit they don't exist, yet.
  - anoncake 5y ago
    And Facebook entrenching itself reduces the chance of a non-profit vendor succeeding.
  - ryandrake 5y ago
    There is probably a middle ground somewhere between being hopelessly addicted to Social Media and going Amish and throwing away all technology. Someone mentioned the other day on HN that Social Media is the modern-day Smoking, and I agree there are a lot of parallels. Surely we can keep our kids out of S.M. without restricting them from using other, less harmful parts of technology.
  - bun_at_work 5y ago
    The alternative isn't becoming Amish. It's being more mindful about how your children interact with new technologies. Facebook/Instagram/etc aren't required for children, and even if there are good arguments for social media for children (like learning how it works), that doesn't mean letting the children have unfettered access to the tech and letting these companies have unfettered access to the children's attention. Here's an alternative: restrict usage to a simple time-boxed window each day, contingent on the completion of what the child needs to have done (chores, homework, etc.). Augment that by limiting what apps the child will have access to, based on what is reasonable at the time. It requires effort, but seems totally reasonable. There doesn't seem to be a strong argument for children having continuous access to devices that have empirically been shown to cause serious mental health issues, not even including the crazy dangers of the internet (stalking, child sexualization, etc). Alternatively, don't control anything the child does and hope it works out.
bootlooped 5y ago
There's a harm reduction argument to be made: kids are using digital devices already (probably too much) so one way to improve the whole situation is to make using them safer for kids. I'm not a parent, but I imagine controlling your kids electronic device use is a difficult task. The jump to them having a smartphone must be like a dam being blown apart with dynamite.
- HenryBemis 5y ago
  So our dear FB is helping us get them depressed faster, 'safer', and with a nice blue icon, and we should let it happen? Facebook is cancer. Letting this play out will only condition kids be more immersed/addicted to social media. How can that be good for them now? How can that be good for them in the future? Facebook has proven that they toy with its users, their psyche, their privacy. This will definitely come to hurt them in the future. Either by FB selling out every 1_and_0 they got on you, or allowing 'by accident' another scammy CambridgeAnalyticaV2 to siphon all your data, or by getting hacked and disclosing that 2 years late.
  - bootlooped 5y ago
    If you're familiar with any other harm reduction efforts, pretty much the same arguments are made against all of them. Take for example needle exchanges. People who run needle exchanges are not asserting that people being addicted to heroin is a good outcome, only that people being addicted to heroin and also having to share dirty needles is worse. Likewise, I'm not asserting that little kids using Facebook products is a good outcome, only that it may be less bad than other outcomes.
    - agogdog 5y ago
      Needle exchanges aren't willingly run by heroin manufacturers. It's impossible to believe in harm reduction when it comes from the harm producer. I'd be much more willing to accept this as harm reduction if Facebook outsourced the task to an independent non-profit... but even that arrangement comes with pro-Facebook biases.
    - 5y ago
an_opabinia 5y ago
> It’s not completely off-base to compare these “for kids” branded apps to candy cigarettes and big league chew. In terms of verisimilitude, it is 49.9% off base to compare for kids branded apps to tobacco use. In terms of intellectual honesty, it is 99.9% off base to compare for kids branded apps to tobacco use. If you want guidance on app use for your kids, ask a pediatrician a specific question. You'll get more knowledge than flaming on this place.

thebackup 5y ago

I understand that a lot of parents are positive to the parental control and supervision that you describe, I am not that kind of parent. I want the relationship with my kids to be built on trust and honesty. My two boys make mistakes sometimes, probably more than I know of, but that is fine, it's part of growing up. They also don't use social media, instead they text their friends by SMS or simply call them when they want to talk or meet up. So far they have never complained about missing out on anything.

garmaine 5y ago
It’s not about preventing them from making mistakes. It’s about protecting them from predators.
- nineplay 5y ago
  Yes yes yes. The most direct discussions I have with my kid about social media is "there are adult male perverts who are going to pretend to be your friend because they want to have sex with you." It's a more explicit discussion than I'd like to have but there's no getting away from it. It's also why I have the "I will monitor your internet usage at any time that I feel it's necessary" discussion. I don't like invading privacy - I wouldn't want my internet history explored and it's as vanilla as you can imagine but it's also a projection of my inner thoughts. I knew a young girl who was lured into a sexual encounter with an adult after striking up a friendship on "Words with Friends". I don't trust/allow anything with private communication.
  - ixacto 5y ago
    It’s totally possible that pedophiles and abuses are using tiktok and Instagram to groom children, but most of the time it’s someone that the child knows that actually does the abuse: “ A common myth is that child sexual abuse is perpetrated by strangers and pedophiles. But most people who sexually abuse children are our friends, partners, family members, and community members. About 93 percent of children who are victims of sexual abuse know their abuseriii. Less than 10 percent of sexually abused children are abused by a stranger.” https://www.ywca.org/wp-content/uploads/WWV-CSA-Fact-Sheet-Final.pdf https://www.ywca.org/wp-content/uploads/WWV-CSA-Fact-Sheet-F... So I’d not freak out too much if your kid searches for something really weird, because we all did that as kids.

dheera 5y ago

So all this sounds good at first, but if the walls are too high, wouldn't kids simply end up treating it as a teacher/parent-infested app and start using something else (e.g. IRC) without you knowing? I mean, when I was a kid I was all over IRC and Usenet instead of my school's censored e-mail/chat system, just saying ...

gentleman11 5y ago

In other words, as long as it’s the Facebook AND parents doing the surveillance, it’s okay? The concern is over the parents getting a cut of the data? My parents would never have snooped on me the way most parents try to these days, it would have freaked me out any time after turning 11 or so

faitswulff 5y ago
I'd love to trust that my kids are safe with technology, but the landscape for parents is way different now than it used to be, too. The grandparents left my then-toddler alone with youtube for an hour or so and I came back to my child watching some truly nightmarish videos. I can't trust the tech, so someone needs to be watching.
- techteachtea 5y ago
  Web companies used to forbid accounts belonging to children under the age of 13 until what, 5-10 years ago? I was under the impression that that was US law, so I was initially surprised at the rapid fluorishing of child accounts on nearly every service. But there seems to be a "...without parental consent" rider in our laws about data collection, and that consent is now assumed to be freely given. Really though, children should not be using these devices to communicate or access web services unsupervised. You are the parent, not the phone.
  - hokumguru 5y ago
    https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/rules/rulemaking-regulatory-reform-proceedings/childrens-online-privacy-protection-rule https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/rules/rulemaking-regulatory-... Banning children from social media has generally been an easy way to avoid the highly stringent regulations concerning data protection in the USA. The FTC doesn’t mess around with COPPA and it’s very easy to find yourself in the hole.
- cosmojg 5y ago
  Out of curiosity, was your child enjoying them? What did you find objectionable? How did the subsequent conversation with your child go? I always wonder how I'll handle these types of situations if and when I myself become a parent. I imagine it's much more difficult in reality than it is in my head.

twobitshifter 5y ago

I have to ask, what’s the benefit of the app to Facebook? Are they serving ads to kids? Or are they hoping to bring them up with Facebook firmly as part of their digital identity?

derwiki 5y ago
Collect data now, profit later
- ronsor 5y ago
  That's probably illegal, and as far as I know the big tech companies take children's privacy at least somewhat seriously, as it's one of the few things that can land them in deep trouble if mishandled.
  - ixacto 5y ago
    Yes I think this is more a play for Facebook mindshare with parents.
    - AndrewUnmuted 5y ago
      Kids generate data in more ways than can be directly siphoned from the web service run by Facebook. It can be to their benefit simply because it pushes more Facebook traffic through the ISPs and other major infrastructure. A quick win on the business side, and a whole new venture for further tech development on the product side.
nineplay 5y ago
No ads, I think there is a bit of "If you like Facebook for kids, you'll _love_ Facebook for adults" It has been a lifesaver during covid. It is the way kids text/video chat with each other without a cell plan and with only approved contacts. I don't know what my kid would have done without it, it is a 2-3-4 hour virtual playdate when there are no other ways to connect with their friends.

kerng 5y ago

I didnt know parents would see the conversations also - seems right down FB line. So spying is okay when parents do it? It's interesting how we normalize this all. I'd imagine most kids use their own creative stuff anyway to get around snoopy parents.

jasongill 5y ago
Parents can't see the conversations but can see the number of messages and calls per contact, as well as recently shared/received photos. It's a pretty good compromise IMHO.
- herbst 5y ago
  I dont have kids. But this still sounds creepy. Either they are to young that a smartphone or Facebook would actually benefit them, or they are to old to spy on them.

tomc1985 5y ago

Newsflash from police state parenting

efdee 5y ago

They'll wait for kids to get hooked and then gradually start injecting all those things you didn't want in the first place once the cat is out of the bag.

fallingknife 5y ago

Yeah just like they told me when I was a kid, "never talk to strangers because there's a predator behind every tree." Of course what they don't tell you is that, overwhelmingly, the most likely person to abuse a child it their parents.

anoncake 5y ago
Avoiding your parents as a child because they might abuse you is not a real option though.

hosh 5y ago

Ok. Leaving aside quarantine, do kids really need to talk to other kids through a personal computing device that they carry around as a constant companion? Does that foster something developmentally that could not happen without it? What do kids lose if they use such devices as their primary means of communication? And let’s say, we think the “constant companion” is the problem, and we restrict the kid’s interaction through an old school, family computer. Is that necessarily any better? I have already seen first hand how social media interaction at the middle school (when kids are starting to form social identities independent of their parents) gets toxic. And looking at the social-media-fueled culture wars since 2014, it does not get any better for adults. (https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2018/03/06/a-quick-battle-field-guide-to-the-new-culture-wars/ https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2018/03/06/a-quick-battle-field-g...).

tjr225 5y ago
I don't really know how I'm going to approach this once my child is old enough to use devices but I think one might be able to argue that it makes sense for them to learn how to interact with the world as it exists, rather than a fantasy world where devices and the internet doesn't exist.
- wreath 5y ago
  > rather than a fantasy world where devices and the internet doesn't exist. The fantasy world is also the one that the likes of Facebook want to lead us to.
- hosh 5y ago
  My wife and I decided on a no-social media policy for our kids. We have a teenager and a 5 month old. Our teenager has a phone we found that is a locked down Android, and has no internet (no wifi or 4g/5g). It is just a phone, with multimedia text, and non-network enabled calendar, clock. There is no app store. My daughter is autistic. Our problems with the phone has more to do with her feeling like we are cutting her off of connecting with people she clings to, triggering some childhood history. I have no idea what will happen when our neurotypical son becomes a teenager. There is much more to life than just what are on devices, and I have a general idea on how to approach this. I have been studying, and to some extent, applying regenerative paradigms. A good deal of that will involve the kids into the natural cycle of life. To viscerally experience where their food comes from, and where it goes. How to connect with another living being as a whole being in an ecosystem and community, whether that being is a human, animal, or plant. I am going to teach them the ethical framework, “care for people”, “care for land”, “fair share”. Technology, then, is thoughtfully applied within that context. What that means, I am still discovering for myself. But I have already made some progress on that —- what Christopher Alexander really meant by pattern languages and a timeless way of building; what Smalltalk and Hypercard had in common, why we had turned our back to it, and maybe it is time to use it; the philosophy of Free Software and how it is different than open source, and why it matters more than basic rights and liberty; how sandstorm.io enables community-oriented and local platforms. It has not all gelled together for me yet, but I know something is there.

wolfretcrap 5y ago

By doing this we are conditioning kids to not have privacy, later when they grow up - they'll come to accept lack of privacy because it's something they grew up with, first it was their parents spying on them, now it's tech company and government and their advertisers spying on them

KorematsuFred 5y ago

I think it is very healthy and good for major companies like Facebook or Youtube to create kids versions of their apps to keep our kids safe, to make sure parents understand what their kids do online and also to have better compliance with law. The government on other hand is hell bent on destroying some of the most successful american comapnies at the expense of its citizens.

unclebucknasty 5y ago

>I dislike Facebook as much as any HN poster, but I can say that the Facebook Messenger for Kids app has been...surprisingly good. That opener and the glowing comment that follows are pretty strange. It's essentially, "I hate Facebook too, but in spite of hating it, I give their product to my kids and (effectively) here are all the reasons you should consider giving it to your kids too." Maybe we dislike Facebook for different reasons, but I believe most (including myself) would point to something along the lines of their horrible business practices and privacy abuses. This is not a per-app thing. It's their approach to everything and, really, the entire point of their ecosystem (of which your kids are now a part). So, whether or not they can make an app "safe" from outside predators, I have zero interest in feeding my kids to the Facebook machine. I'm not trying to be on the attack here, but it frustrates me as a parent to see another parent promoting this stuff in the name of convenience (or whatever) when they also know it's awful. Ultimately, when enough parents approve and enough kids are using it, then other parents are left to make the awful choice between also feeding their kids to the machine or allowing them to be socially isolated to some extent. When do we take a stand? Or, at a minimum, maybe don't help Facebook promote it?

thesausageking 5y ago

I loath FB Messenger Kids. Because other kids have it, there's huge peer pressure for my kids to use it. I either have to be the bad parent and isolate my kids from their friends, or give in and start them down the path of getting conditioned to use FB products. And the games on it use the same engagement tricks all of Facebook does, so the kids end up getting sucked into them at a very young age.

Spivak 5y ago
I swear have people forgot what it was like when we were kids. It's not like Facebook is covering new ground here. My parents were pressured into to giving me internet access so I could talk to my friends on AIM, I begged my Dad to buy me a cell phone because all my friends had them. And don't even get me started on Pokemon cards, Game Boy links, slap bracelets, silly bands, a bike so I could reach my friend's houses, and a car when I turned 16. You're not conditioning your kids to be soulless zombies to lord Zuckerberg any more than I was conditioned to love AOL. Let your kids socialize in whatever way their friends are, the actual socializing and shared experience is what will matter years down the line.
- Proziam 5y ago
  I understand where you're coming from but I hold the extreme opposite view. I believe it should be illegal for a company to intentionally allow children into a system where their psychology is manipulated. Instagram has huge negative psych effects, predominantly on young girls. But the other social dynamics, and the effects of advertising, and the effects of the echo chambers that result from the algorithmic feeds are profound and harmful across all social media platforms. It isn't socializing when every photo is edited, every post that a kid sees is the most dramatic thing thanks to the algorithm, and moral/political activism is rampant and signal boosted. Kids should learn how to deal with real humans in the real world rather than digital characterizations of humans curated by a machine.
  - supernovae 5y ago
    When I was a kid, my parents said the same things about TV, Music, Cartoons and Magazines. This is not in defense of facebook or IG, they are problematic for kids for sure for many reasons and they should be restricted from data collecting on kids. BUT... American culture is rooted in pop/controlled/manicured/curated culture... we idolize celebrities, sports teams, beauty... we should fix that too

herbst 5y ago

You are literally entrusting facebook with your kids private data because the app works well. Or in another world, my kid would definitly hate me because of all the tech its not allowed to use.