4 ms·

People keep saying it’s the parents responsibility to keep their kids safe, and don’t give them the tools! This is such an obvious one. I should be able to lock

People keep saying it’s the parents responsibility to keep their kids safe, and don’t give them the tools! This is such an obvious one. I should be able to lock down a laptop for a child, and then have the browser limit websites to those that are actually child safe. I don’t care if a government agency is the one issuing “child safety certs”. This gets around the whole “identify everyone no matter what” thing, and it means that parents don’t have to run an entire IT department level of security infrastructure to keep their kids safe online.

marcosdumay 2mo ago
There's a reason why nobody is giving the parents those tools. And it's the same reason why everybody keeps pushing the stupidier, most obnoxious and invasive tools to "protect the children".
- encoderer 2mo ago
  my kids are not teenagers yet, what am I missing? the iPad I let them use has child safety enabled and it seems to do exactly what the comment above you is suggesting.
  - hdgvhicv 2mo ago
    Apple does parental controls right. The easy path is parental controls. Companies like epic and Microsoft dont. The easy path is just a default install I suspect this is by design.
  - marcosdumay 2mo ago
    What you are missing is that it's not enough for a fraction of devices to have parental control. If you want kids to not access social networks, you need to have most of them out. If only a minority is out, they will just be outcast. That said, "everybody must do that thing that Apple does" may be a very good example of good regulation. IDK what Apple does, though.
    - awsglkhj 2mo ago
      > If only a minority is out, they will just be outcast. My kids do not have a social media presence, we have parental controls set on their devices, and the router only lets them online for a small window of the day. They still manage to communicate with friends via email, shared Google docs, phone calls, and actually meeting up. (Remember when people would agree to meet at a particular time and place, and then just show up with no further discussion? It still works.) I think they'll be fine.
      - mixmastamyk 2mo ago
        Wait till the school, wife, neighbors, and friends, all undermine that.

marcosdumay 2mo ago

There's a reason why nobody is giving the parents those tools. And it's the same reason why everybody keeps pushing the stupidier, most obnoxious and invasive tools to "protect the children".

encoderer 2mo ago
my kids are not teenagers yet, what am I missing? the iPad I let them use has child safety enabled and it seems to do exactly what the comment above you is suggesting.
- hdgvhicv 2mo ago
  Apple does parental controls right. The easy path is parental controls. Companies like epic and Microsoft dont. The easy path is just a default install I suspect this is by design.
- marcosdumay 2mo ago
  What you are missing is that it's not enough for a fraction of devices to have parental control. If you want kids to not access social networks, you need to have most of them out. If only a minority is out, they will just be outcast. That said, "everybody must do that thing that Apple does" may be a very good example of good regulation. IDK what Apple does, though.
  - awsglkhj 2mo ago
    > If only a minority is out, they will just be outcast. My kids do not have a social media presence, we have parental controls set on their devices, and the router only lets them online for a small window of the day. They still manage to communicate with friends via email, shared Google docs, phone calls, and actually meeting up. (Remember when people would agree to meet at a particular time and place, and then just show up with no further discussion? It still works.) I think they'll be fine.
    - mixmastamyk 2mo ago
      Wait till the school, wife, neighbors, and friends, all undermine that.