[PatientTrades]

On one hand it is a good decision by Germany, but on the other hand its essentially telling parents that the government knows more about what your kids should and shouldn't wear than you do. I think a better approach would have been to raise awareness through a PSA about the dangers of children wearing these devices instead of an outright ban.

[Barrin92]

>but on the other hand its essentially telling parents that the government knows more about what your kids should and shouldn't wear than you do.

Here in Germany children are not just property of their parents, they are citizens in and of themselves. In this case it is the state's study to uphold their rights, which their parents are apparently not aware of or violating.

The argument that parents are somehow wise elders who know what the best thing is for their children has very little pull here.

[jawns]

So instead you substitute "The state is somehow a wise elder who knows what the best thing is for its child citizens"?

Clearly, both the parents and the state have an interest in ensuring the health and safety of children, and when the parents fail in that responsibility, there comes a time when the state must step in.

But let's not kid ourselves. Both parents and the state can make bad choices on behalf of children.

[Barrin92]

>there comes a time when the state must step in.But let's not kid ourselves. Both parents and the state can make bad choices on behalf of children.

No disagreement here. But I think especially in this case (parents neglecting the privacy of a child) is only going to become more relevant.

There are plenty of parents already who put the entire lives of their children on the internet, without the children having any say or ability to realise how exposed they are. If the German state steps in here occasionally to remind parents that the privacy of their children, and their right to their own information ought to be respected I do not consider this a bad idea.

It's admittedly a very new situation that will require new frameworks.

[jjawssd]

The basic assumption that Barrin92 is making is that the German government is benevolent and always puts the interests of its citizens first.

[freeflight]

The basic assumption that jjawssd is making is that government is never benevolent and always puts its own interest before that of citizens, regardless of the fact that government usually is made up of said citizens.

It's really scary how much distrust some people have towards representative democracies/republics and instead think going back to some kind of de-facto anarchy where the strong rule over the weak, is somehow the "better" solution that we've never even tried before.

We have plenty of human history not involving "government", guess what it did look like? Much worse.

[Xylakant]

It's not about telling parents what their kids should or should not wear. Hidden listening devices are illegal in germany, for children or adults the same. It just happens that no adult smart watch has a built-in functionality that allows people not present to start monitoring the surroundings.

[titzer]

Problem is, it's like vaccination (network effect). One kid with a hidden listening device could be in the vicinity of other kids whom it overhears, whose parents did not consent.

[PatientTrades]

> One kid with a hidden listening device could be in the vicinity of other kids whom it overhears, whose parents did not consent.

This ban doesn't solve that problem though. A child could wear an adult smartwatch that has a listening capability.

[detaro]

Which are just as illegal. The "ban" here is just the regulatory agency clarifying/informing the public that these products have been sold but are not legal to possess under existing laws in Germany.

[Xylakant]

That would be illegal (it's also generally not a feature on adult smart watches to have someone else quietly activate the microphone and listen in)

[tmrmn]

PSAs are not really a thing in Germany