If you got to write legislation to "protect young people online" and it will be passed and enacted in good faith what, if anything, would you propose?
-
@dalias @futurebird I do understand the reluctance, there is at most a fine line between legitimate monitoring and control and spyware.
However there is a lot of stuff on the internet that is very very dark. I grew up being flamed and goatse'ed and I can see peoples desire to protect their children from that sort of experience. The only solution I can think of to control the sites children are allowed to access. One way to solve that problem is to not allow unsupervised access to the internet, like I used to not have unsupervised access to TV. That seems to be unacceptable to many, and the only other way I know how to do that is an allowlist, either on the device or on the network. I think I could set this up on a laptop, but most people could not and I do not know how I would do in on a google android phone so making this technology widely available and easy to use seems the obvious answer.
@DavyJones @futurebird I'm sorry but you are entirely full of shit if you think that "seeing goatse" is in any way comparable to the harm of young people being denied access to information about gender and sexual orientation, anything outside of neurotypical norms that authorities are imposing on them, etc.
-
@DavyJones @futurebird I'm sorry but you are entirely full of shit if you think that "seeing goatse" is in any way comparable to the harm of young people being denied access to information about gender and sexual orientation, anything outside of neurotypical norms that authorities are imposing on them, etc.
@DavyJones @futurebird While it's not a very pleasant way for it to happen, seeing goatse teaches you that there are mean people out there who get a kick out of grossing you out. It doesn't help them take advantage of you or do any harm to you *unless* they can blackmail you that you'll get in trouble for looking at things you "weren't supposed to". Which is what you're advocating for - a regime that *does* put children at risk of harm.
-
@DavyJones @futurebird While it's not a very pleasant way for it to happen, seeing goatse teaches you that there are mean people out there who get a kick out of grossing you out. It doesn't help them take advantage of you or do any harm to you *unless* they can blackmail you that you'll get in trouble for looking at things you "weren't supposed to". Which is what you're advocating for - a regime that *does* put children at risk of harm.
Until around age 13-15 kids should use internet protected with age-appropriate white lists IMO. School internet should have whitelists developed by teachers and with student input.
Younger kids under age 10 should use internet mostly with supervision.
Some parents will want to limit white lists to impose their values in various ways. Some of this is probably harmful. But I doubt that the internet rules are the greatest source of harm in those families.
-
Until around age 13-15 kids should use internet protected with age-appropriate white lists IMO. School internet should have whitelists developed by teachers and with student input.
Younger kids under age 10 should use internet mostly with supervision.
Some parents will want to limit white lists to impose their values in various ways. Some of this is probably harmful. But I doubt that the internet rules are the greatest source of harm in those families.
When you have a hight level of trust in your relationship with young people the appreciate this kind of protection ... it's not just that there are gross and scary things out there but for younger kids many things online aren't made for them and can be too difficult to use. So just like having a "children's section" in a library you curate content for them. It's a big responsibility and something I take very seriously.
-
When you have a hight level of trust in your relationship with young people the appreciate this kind of protection ... it's not just that there are gross and scary things out there but for younger kids many things online aren't made for them and can be too difficult to use. So just like having a "children's section" in a library you curate content for them. It's a big responsibility and something I take very seriously.
@futurebird @DavyJones The "too difficult to use" aspect can be handled the same way it is in a library - you have a curated children's section, but you don't police young people browsing or checking out books from elsewhere in the library.
I don't see any way "age-appropriate white lists" can be viable. Certainly the people making them are not going to let anything obviously LGBTQ onto them, and kids who are not okay with the gender or gender expectations being imposed on them need access to comprehensive information on that stuff way before age 13-15.
-
@futurebird @DavyJones The "too difficult to use" aspect can be handled the same way it is in a library - you have a curated children's section, but you don't police young people browsing or checking out books from elsewhere in the library.
I don't see any way "age-appropriate white lists" can be viable. Certainly the people making them are not going to let anything obviously LGBTQ onto them, and kids who are not okay with the gender or gender expectations being imposed on them need access to comprehensive information on that stuff way before age 13-15.
Some school libraries have the same problems. It depends on the school community.
Our parents and teaches don't block such content in the library or online. But we do use a white list for middle school and a black list for HS (most of what is blacklisted are big social media sites, a list we get of general phonographic stuff from service and various games that the student council asks us to block because they are distracting)
-
I'm a teacher and I've taken kids on camping trips. They all had their phones. We told them that this was meant to be an offline time and their phones would need to stay in their bags.
I had to tell two students to put them away and threaten to take the phone of one who did it again. Some of them used their phones in their sleeping bags after lights out, but most didn't. I didn't bother to enforce that one since during the day they forget the phones even existed.
@futurebird @archroadkill I am having a big ‘kids these days’ moment. I loved school camping trips. Mr. Davis, the physics teacher at my high school, led student backpacking trips to Yosemite—from Berkeley, CA—which are probably my fondest memories of high school. But nobody had a cell phone (even Mr. Davis, I think), and there wouldn’t even be an iPhone for another 7+ years.
-
@futurebird @archroadkill I am having a big ‘kids these days’ moment. I loved school camping trips. Mr. Davis, the physics teacher at my high school, led student backpacking trips to Yosemite—from Berkeley, CA—which are probably my fondest memories of high school. But nobody had a cell phone (even Mr. Davis, I think), and there wouldn’t even be an iPhone for another 7+ years.
IDK I don't think much has changed.
I talk with them about WHY I don't like it when they are buried in their phones when we've gone to the trouble of taking them somewhere special together, how I don't want them to miss out and they seemed to take it seriously.
It was a great trip. I'm looking forward to going with the next group this year.
-
Until around age 13-15 kids should use internet protected with age-appropriate white lists IMO. School internet should have whitelists developed by teachers and with student input.
Younger kids under age 10 should use internet mostly with supervision.
Some parents will want to limit white lists to impose their values in various ways. Some of this is probably harmful. But I doubt that the internet rules are the greatest source of harm in those families.
@futurebird@sauropods.win @dalias@hachyderm.io @DavyJones@c.im children should have the same access to the internet as anyone. the only way i was able to talk to anyone my age outside of being at school (which was an all boys school where i received more abuse as closeted trans kid) was the internet my parents frequently took my access away. i remember losing friends because of it, and dealing with total social isolation. i remember as a kid opening up my school laptop internet history and finding a bunch of "big dicked shemale" porn my abuser had been looking at. i was 12 at the time? unrestricted access to the internet may sound dangerous to children, and i agree with very young children, but i think at some point they have the right to put themselves in danger if they understand the risks my mother was terrified of me being abused by internet strangers so i was scared to talk to even ppl my own age of i didn't know them in person hell i wasn't allowed to even go to other peoples houses most of the time because of it yet all it did was make me more isolated and vulnerable to my abuser, and i do not think i was a unique case -
@futurebird@sauropods.win @dalias@hachyderm.io @DavyJones@c.im children should have the same access to the internet as anyone. the only way i was able to talk to anyone my age outside of being at school (which was an all boys school where i received more abuse as closeted trans kid) was the internet my parents frequently took my access away. i remember losing friends because of it, and dealing with total social isolation. i remember as a kid opening up my school laptop internet history and finding a bunch of "big dicked shemale" porn my abuser had been looking at. i was 12 at the time? unrestricted access to the internet may sound dangerous to children, and i agree with very young children, but i think at some point they have the right to put themselves in danger if they understand the risks my mother was terrified of me being abused by internet strangers so i was scared to talk to even ppl my own age of i didn't know them in person hell i wasn't allowed to even go to other peoples houses most of the time because of it yet all it did was make me more isolated and vulnerable to my abuser, and i do not think i was a unique case
IDK if unlimited internet can fix terrible parents or an environment that is intolerant or unsupportive of who a child is.
There are instances where it has helped ... on the flip side I've seen kids sucked in by these communities that form around minor celebrity influencers. Sometimes the influencers themselves are predatory, sometimes creeps just lurk in such places looking for lonely disconnected young people.
-
IDK if unlimited internet can fix terrible parents or an environment that is intolerant or unsupportive of who a child is.
There are instances where it has helped ... on the flip side I've seen kids sucked in by these communities that form around minor celebrity influencers. Sometimes the influencers themselves are predatory, sometimes creeps just lurk in such places looking for lonely disconnected young people.
The pattern that alarms me is it's a bit like groupies of boy bands only you have never heard to the 20-something streamers thousands of teens are obsessed with.
Frankly I don't know what to do.
Though communities with better awareness of issues of consent and the dangers of para social relationships can sometimes do a decent job self-policing. But even those examples makes me think a lot is missed.
-
IDK if unlimited internet can fix terrible parents or an environment that is intolerant or unsupportive of who a child is.
There are instances where it has helped ... on the flip side I've seen kids sucked in by these communities that form around minor celebrity influencers. Sometimes the influencers themselves are predatory, sometimes creeps just lurk in such places looking for lonely disconnected young people.
@futurebird@sauropods.win @DavyJones@c.im @dalias@hachyderm.io honestly, it doesn't fix it but you will hear countless examples of queer kids trapped in abusive homes only *surviving* because they did have unrestricted access to the internet. i might have killed myself as a teen without it, i've met many who say they would have like i said in another post, i'm more about educating kids and giving them the ability as a class to advocate for themselves and choose the risks that they want to take. u also need to take into account that children can hack things, they will get past things like "white lists" -
@futurebird@sauropods.win @DavyJones@c.im @dalias@hachyderm.io honestly, it doesn't fix it but you will hear countless examples of queer kids trapped in abusive homes only *surviving* because they did have unrestricted access to the internet. i might have killed myself as a teen without it, i've met many who say they would have like i said in another post, i'm more about educating kids and giving them the ability as a class to advocate for themselves and choose the risks that they want to take. u also need to take into account that children can hack things, they will get past things like "white lists"
@astronema @DavyJones @dalias @futurebird *raises hand* me too. I didn't have any internet friends, unfortunately. That would have really helped me.
I suspect the underlying motive behind the "kids on phones" moral panic is to isolate teens just like us so we die.
-
@futurebird@sauropods.win @DavyJones@c.im @dalias@hachyderm.io honestly, it doesn't fix it but you will hear countless examples of queer kids trapped in abusive homes only *surviving* because they did have unrestricted access to the internet. i might have killed myself as a teen without it, i've met many who say they would have like i said in another post, i'm more about educating kids and giving them the ability as a class to advocate for themselves and choose the risks that they want to take. u also need to take into account that children can hack things, they will get past things like "white lists"
"u also need to take into account that children can hack things, they will get past things like “white lists”
I should hope so. The point of such protections isn't to make it impossible, it's just a suggestion that it's not a curated space.
You'd be surprised how effective a simple "this site is for ages 18 and over" can be on people under that age. And if (and I'm thinking mostly about older teens here)
-
@astronema @DavyJones @dalias @futurebird *raises hand* me too. I didn't have any internet friends, unfortunately. That would have really helped me.
I suspect the underlying motive behind the "kids on phones" moral panic is to isolate teens just like us so we die.
@fluffykittycat @astronema @DavyJones @dalias
I also think it's important to have sex-ed content and age appropriate queer content that ISN'T behind such warnings because that's a kind of statment of acceptance. That isn't going to happen in a lot of communities but it among many things that aren't happening.
I don't think *not* having selected content at all is a good idea though.
-
If you got to write legislation to "protect young people online" and it will be passed and enacted in good faith what, if anything, would you propose?
@futurebird you know, we've been chewing on this and we don't have a good proposal yet
-
@futurebird you know, we've been chewing on this and we don't have a good proposal yet
I know what won't help, trying to age gate sites with IDs. It's nonsense and kind of tangental to the actual problems.
-
@guitargabe @futurebird If phones are distracting from your class, then mandate them be *put away and silent-except-emergency* during class. Don't take away kids' safety networks/lifelines/whatever because you're a mean adult who values your order over their safety.
If it's that much of an emergency, they can take the hit on their grade. The life lesson is that you actually should break the rules when it is warranted; and you actually should bare the consequences of breaking the rules when it is warranted. This "breaking the rules should have no consequences if it is warranted" meta is a psyop. -
If it's that much of an emergency, they can take the hit on their grade. The life lesson is that you actually should break the rules when it is warranted; and you actually should bare the consequences of breaking the rules when it is warranted. This "breaking the rules should have no consequences if it is warranted" meta is a psyop.
OK but the rule is that you can use a phone if it's an emergency. So it's not breaking the rules then?
-
OK but the rule is that you can use a phone if it's an emergency. So it's not breaking the rules then?
