3 ms·

Keep it simple dude. All they get is a basic device with text/RCS and call capabilities. I would be okay with giving a kid just a smart watch. No social media

by xyst 2y ago

Keep it simple dude. All they get is a basic device with text/RCS and call capabilities. I would be okay with giving a kid just a smart watch. No social media or smart phones until 16 y/o. Also making sure kids have friends in their community is a plus. Involve them in school programs, help guide them as they find their interest. For love of god, don’t give your kid an unlocked iPad with YT/TT/FB/Twitch/kick.

ceejayoz 2y ago
> Also making sure kids have friends in their community is a plus. A lot of them coordinate hangouts via social media, unfortunately. It’s a tough balance.
- nicksergeant 2y ago
  Yup. This is what I see missing from all the non-parents or parents of kids under 10 on HN. Once middle school hits their whole friend/support system is probably on SnapChat and if you're not on there, you're instantly excluded from everything.
  - nytesky 2y ago
    Imagine growing up without a phone in the 90s. That’s what these Luddite patents are advocating. It’s hard. We actually have banned social media until 16, but fortunately iMessage was the defacto coordination and we accepted that. No TikTok until adults, for a host of reasons.
    - nicksergeant 2y ago
      Same here. Hard no on YouTube and TikTok. Sadly everything happens on SnapChat in their friend groups and SnapChat has a terrible TikTok style feed that I wish to god I could disable somehow. It adds nothing to the experience for actually socializing with one's friends group and is simply designed for mindless scrolling and consumption. I hate it.
- asdf000333 2y ago
  But it's via the messaging component of a social media site, which is fine by itself. Nice how FB Messenger is its own app.
lukev 2y ago
It's very easy to say this if you're not a parent. Social media does some harm. Being socially excluded does far _more_ harm. Which starts to happen in middle school. So as a parent, you have three choices: 1. Deal with the emotional consequences of your kid being systematically excluded and having few/no friends. 2. Construct an alternative school/community with like-minded parents and kids. 3. Just give them the damn device, with screen time restrictions and the understanding that you'll be monitoring their activity. Follow through and be involved in their social life, with open and honest conversations about what happens online. It turns out most good parents these days opt for #3.
- t-3 2y ago
  Your kid won't have no friends if they have no phone. They will be in school with other kids for 8 hours a day, no phone required for interaction. Pretty much all messaging apps work from computers as well if they need to talk to friends from home and you don't have a landline.
  - lukev 2y ago
    I'm not speculating here, I am telling you how it works. Phones ARE banned from school and the kids DO socialize in person there. But then they all get home and stay in touch. Some have phones, some have tablets, some just their school-issued laptops. But they're constantly talking, 1:1, in various overlapping group chats. They organize getting together in the neighborhood or meeting up elsewhere over the weekend. It's where a lot of the drama happens (which isn't great.) If you prevent your kid from accessing this communication layer, it will 100% affect their social life.
  - geerlingguy 2y ago
    In fact, many schools are starting to ban phones on campus (for a variety of reasons, not just the negative aspects of social media), which makes this even easier. Outside the classroom there are still plenty of in-person activities from informal gatherings, to sports teams, to clubs and civic events, and in those situations, the few people who are sitting on their phones are the ones more separated from the rest. I think a lot of us who were early involved in building some of the web that led beyond Web 2.0 into algorithmically-driven media consumption see the massive dangers, and have probably sometimes even overreacted in terms of kids' access to it, but it's certainly better than the alternative.

by xyst 2y ago

ceejayoz 2y ago

> Also making sure kids have friends in their community is a plus. A lot of them coordinate hangouts via social media, unfortunately. It’s a tough balance.

nicksergeant 2y ago
Yup. This is what I see missing from all the non-parents or parents of kids under 10 on HN. Once middle school hits their whole friend/support system is probably on SnapChat and if you're not on there, you're instantly excluded from everything.
- nytesky 2y ago
  Imagine growing up without a phone in the 90s. That’s what these Luddite patents are advocating. It’s hard. We actually have banned social media until 16, but fortunately iMessage was the defacto coordination and we accepted that. No TikTok until adults, for a host of reasons.
  - nicksergeant 2y ago
    Same here. Hard no on YouTube and TikTok. Sadly everything happens on SnapChat in their friend groups and SnapChat has a terrible TikTok style feed that I wish to god I could disable somehow. It adds nothing to the experience for actually socializing with one's friends group and is simply designed for mindless scrolling and consumption. I hate it.
asdf000333 2y ago
But it's via the messaging component of a social media site, which is fine by itself. Nice how FB Messenger is its own app.

lukev 2y ago

It's very easy to say this if you're not a parent. Social media does some harm. Being socially excluded does far _more_ harm. Which starts to happen in middle school. So as a parent, you have three choices: 1. Deal with the emotional consequences of your kid being systematically excluded and having few/no friends. 2. Construct an alternative school/community with like-minded parents and kids. 3. Just give them the damn device, with screen time restrictions and the understanding that you'll be monitoring their activity. Follow through and be involved in their social life, with open and honest conversations about what happens online. It turns out most good parents these days opt for #3.

t-3 2y ago
Your kid won't have no friends if they have no phone. They will be in school with other kids for 8 hours a day, no phone required for interaction. Pretty much all messaging apps work from computers as well if they need to talk to friends from home and you don't have a landline.
- lukev 2y ago
  I'm not speculating here, I am telling you how it works. Phones ARE banned from school and the kids DO socialize in person there. But then they all get home and stay in touch. Some have phones, some have tablets, some just their school-issued laptops. But they're constantly talking, 1:1, in various overlapping group chats. They organize getting together in the neighborhood or meeting up elsewhere over the weekend. It's where a lot of the drama happens (which isn't great.) If you prevent your kid from accessing this communication layer, it will 100% affect their social life.
- geerlingguy 2y ago
  In fact, many schools are starting to ban phones on campus (for a variety of reasons, not just the negative aspects of social media), which makes this even easier. Outside the classroom there are still plenty of in-person activities from informal gatherings, to sports teams, to clubs and civic events, and in those situations, the few people who are sitting on their phones are the ones more separated from the rest. I think a lot of us who were early involved in building some of the web that led beyond Web 2.0 into algorithmically-driven media consumption see the massive dangers, and have probably sometimes even overreacted in terms of kids' access to it, but it's certainly better than the alternative.