3 ms·

I strongly disagree with your comment. First of all, ALL kids must survive, not most. Safety and safety of knowing are two different things. Lastly, this tech l

I strongly disagree with your comment. First of all, ALL kids must survive, not most. Safety and safety of knowing are two different things. Lastly, this tech looks a lot less intrusive than the current another watch that everyone is getting for their kids — this one appears to have more activity-engaging features.

kelnos 2y ago
> First of all, ALL kids must survive, not most. I don't think anyone would really want to live in a world where we've done what's necessary such that literally all kids survive the various accidents and perils they might face out in the world. Such a world would be sanitized into oblivion. This is just a variation on the "security vs. freedom" stuff. You can have perfect security if you don't allow for any freedom. But hopefully we can agree that a world with no freedom isn't one we want to live in. But sure, let's step back from the extreme that you introduced. Are the downsides of pervasive 24/7 tracking and surveillance worth the (possible and as-yet unproven) increase in good outcomes? I can see that many people here seem to think it is, but I don't agree.