4 ms·

Why do kids even need a messenger app though ? Seems like a pretty shit use of a kids precious time being a kid.

iamstupidsimple 5y ago
Mobile phones aren't just another time waster, they have actively replaced things like television and SMS. There is immense social pressure to be on these platforms, so I'd rather it was done in a safe way than forcing everyone onto some shadier platform (likely full of adults and without the barriers that Messenger Kids has).
- freeflight 5y ago
  > There is immense social pressure to be on these platforms And the way to fix that is to give in to said pressure, which are just network effects, until everybody and all their kids are on FB or one of their platforms? > I'd rather it was done in a safe way than forcing everyone onto some shadier platform I wonder how most of us here managed to grow up for decades on a "not safe for children" web before we had companies like Facebook "tackle" a problem they created themselves? As hyperbolic as that might sound, this is a discussion that needs to be had properly and doesn't just stop at the emotional appeal of "Think about the children!" but also involves what role Social Media is actually supposed to hold in society and if children should have access to it at all. Yes, that sounds radical, but we are also living in times that present a radical shift to how societies used to function, maybe radical shifts need radical solutions.
  - iamstupidsimple 5y ago
    > And the way to fix that is to give in to said pressure, which are just network effects, until everybody and all their kids are on FB or one of their platforms? The solution is to balance your kid being ostracized while also educating them on how to be safe online. That can only come from exposure. Unless you seriously expect other kids and teenagers to not latch onto their lack of social media/phone/anything trendy and turn it into a bullying vector? > ... Every time a "think of the children" argument comes up, the default opinion of government is to usher in sweeping, authoritarian changes to the whole internet, e.g. ID cards required, criminalising misinformation, etc... Messenger Kids is literally a free market solution to give parents another choice and avoid authoritarian overreach in the process. The standard NSFW web is still available for those parents who trust their kids are able to handle it. And others can totally pull their kid off if that's also preferred. None of these options are perfect, but it's important there is the space to choose. And at least with Messenger Kids you're giving the kid balanced privacy from their parents and safety from strangers.
johnisgood 5y ago
Because we overprotect. Kids cannot be kids. Kids must live in their own safe bubble these days. It is actually unhealthy for the children and their development. When I was a kid, I spent most of my time with my grandparents and I was either in their garden or outside in the street with other kids. I am honestly tired of the "think about the children" motto, or the selling of things in the name of protecting children (which it really does not do and solves nothing, or "solves" a non-issue).
- notJim 5y ago
  Your comment could be read in favor of or against having a messaging app for kids.
  - johnisgood 5y ago
    It is not my business, but were it my kid, I would not necessarily mind. Personally I would rather have the friend over and do the homework together that way instead of using a messaging app. I am old school like that. :)
jdavis703 5y ago
In some parts of the world children were locked out of school and in-person socializing for two school years. Even playgrounds were shutdown with mixing between households prohibited. Allowing children to safely engage in digital socialization is probably better than nothing.
- johnisgood 5y ago
  > Allowing children to safely engage in digital socialization is probably better than nothing. This is debatable. It could actually be worse, but I am not too well-informed on this. Of course socialization is good, and one would think that it is better to have it digitally than to not have it at all; I would think so, too, but this may not be true, or at least not in a longer-term. I think we should allow kids to be kids and do the socializing in real life, ideally without masks so they could learn to pick up emotional cues from facial expressions and so forth. This plays a pretty important role in the children's development. I wonder what kind of effects those restrictions have had on "some" of these children. For what it is worth, I am not speaking out against the restrictions, but its effects on both children and adults make me curious.
  - dleslie 5y ago
    The socialization on Messenger Kids is quite literally video chat and cooperative or competitive multiplayer games. They play things similar to pictionary, have video chats where they can digitally dress up in fun outfits, and so on.
  - iamstupidsimple 5y ago
    > For what it is worth, I am not speaking out against the restrictions Why? If they have negatively affected child development then that's a problem that was never considered by the powers at be.
    - johnisgood 5y ago
      I am not not speaking against nor in favor of the restrictions, is what I really meant. :)
dleslie 5y ago
Because a global pandemic made it so that in many regions of the world it was _impossible_ for children to play with each other in person. My kids, for instance, went around eight months where Covid restrictions meant that indoor gatherings with other children were verboten. Even playgrounds were closed to them for some time.

Mobile phones aren't just another time waster, they have actively replaced things like television and SMS. There is immense social pressure to be on these platforms, so I'd rather it was done in a safe way than forcing everyone onto some shadier platform (likely full of adults and without the barriers that Messenger Kids has).

freeflight 5y ago
> There is immense social pressure to be on these platforms And the way to fix that is to give in to said pressure, which are just network effects, until everybody and all their kids are on FB or one of their platforms? > I'd rather it was done in a safe way than forcing everyone onto some shadier platform I wonder how most of us here managed to grow up for decades on a "not safe for children" web before we had companies like Facebook "tackle" a problem they created themselves? As hyperbolic as that might sound, this is a discussion that needs to be had properly and doesn't just stop at the emotional appeal of "Think about the children!" but also involves what role Social Media is actually supposed to hold in society and if children should have access to it at all. Yes, that sounds radical, but we are also living in times that present a radical shift to how societies used to function, maybe radical shifts need radical solutions.
- iamstupidsimple 5y ago
  > And the way to fix that is to give in to said pressure, which are just network effects, until everybody and all their kids are on FB or one of their platforms? The solution is to balance your kid being ostracized while also educating them on how to be safe online. That can only come from exposure. Unless you seriously expect other kids and teenagers to not latch onto their lack of social media/phone/anything trendy and turn it into a bullying vector? > ... Every time a "think of the children" argument comes up, the default opinion of government is to usher in sweeping, authoritarian changes to the whole internet, e.g. ID cards required, criminalising misinformation, etc... Messenger Kids is literally a free market solution to give parents another choice and avoid authoritarian overreach in the process. The standard NSFW web is still available for those parents who trust their kids are able to handle it. And others can totally pull their kid off if that's also preferred. None of these options are perfect, but it's important there is the space to choose. And at least with Messenger Kids you're giving the kid balanced privacy from their parents and safety from strangers.

johnisgood 5y ago

Because we overprotect. Kids cannot be kids. Kids must live in their own safe bubble these days. It is actually unhealthy for the children and their development. When I was a kid, I spent most of my time with my grandparents and I was either in their garden or outside in the street with other kids. I am honestly tired of the "think about the children" motto, or the selling of things in the name of protecting children (which it really does not do and solves nothing, or "solves" a non-issue).

notJim 5y ago
Your comment could be read in favor of or against having a messaging app for kids.
- johnisgood 5y ago
  It is not my business, but were it my kid, I would not necessarily mind. Personally I would rather have the friend over and do the homework together that way instead of using a messaging app. I am old school like that. :)

jdavis703 5y ago

In some parts of the world children were locked out of school and in-person socializing for two school years. Even playgrounds were shutdown with mixing between households prohibited. Allowing children to safely engage in digital socialization is probably better than nothing.

johnisgood 5y ago
> Allowing children to safely engage in digital socialization is probably better than nothing. This is debatable. It could actually be worse, but I am not too well-informed on this. Of course socialization is good, and one would think that it is better to have it digitally than to not have it at all; I would think so, too, but this may not be true, or at least not in a longer-term. I think we should allow kids to be kids and do the socializing in real life, ideally without masks so they could learn to pick up emotional cues from facial expressions and so forth. This plays a pretty important role in the children's development. I wonder what kind of effects those restrictions have had on "some" of these children. For what it is worth, I am not speaking out against the restrictions, but its effects on both children and adults make me curious.
- dleslie 5y ago
  The socialization on Messenger Kids is quite literally video chat and cooperative or competitive multiplayer games. They play things similar to pictionary, have video chats where they can digitally dress up in fun outfits, and so on.
- iamstupidsimple 5y ago
  > For what it is worth, I am not speaking out against the restrictions Why? If they have negatively affected child development then that's a problem that was never considered by the powers at be.
  - johnisgood 5y ago
    I am not not speaking against nor in favor of the restrictions, is what I really meant. :)

dleslie 5y ago

Because a global pandemic made it so that in many regions of the world it was _impossible_ for children to play with each other in person. My kids, for instance, went around eight months where Covid restrictions meant that indoor gatherings with other children were verboten. Even playgrounds were closed to them for some time.