[asne11]

You think you can protect them, but you can't. The best thing you can do is create an environment where they feel comfortable coming to you when they mess up.

Show genuine interest in their activities, and equip them to make their own decisions when using the internet.

[DavideNL]

> "You think you can protect them, but you can't."

While what you say is a good idea, i think it's not as black and white as "you can" or "you can't";

You can have some form of ... "technical protection" also, knowing it's not perfect.

[yau8edq12i]

You can't prevent home invasions altogether (someone can always bring a rocket launcher to blow your door off), so why bother locking your front door?

[JamesSwift]

But its not a near-guarantee that locking the door will be good enough. What percentage of homes do you think are broken into by force?

What percentage of kids do you think will ultimately circumvent your restrictions? I think its a very high likelihood they will access the information using another avenue (at friends house, on a different device, etc). So you are back at square 1 in terms of actually preparing your kid for life.

[slothtrop]

> I think its a very high likelihood they will access the information using another avenue (at friends house, on a different device, etc).

You're calling it "information" as though what concerns parents is tantamount to eating from the tree of knowledge. You have to account for frequency, because this isn't a question of finding out some dark truths, it's concern that they would recreationally watch content that is not fit for kids, which may have negative impacts especially if consumed on a regular basis.

How many hours did you spend trying to pirate pornography as a kid? Did that have a positive impact on your life? I can answer that readily for my part.

[JamesSwift]

I dont mean to imply anything about what you are protecting them from, and I dont know what the OP's end goal even is. Merely pointing out how inevitable life is, so dont try and solve human nature with technology. Or at least dont think your technical solution has effectively solved human nature.

[slothtrop]

Good thing this isn't about "solving human nature", nor (as far as I'm concerned) making sure a kid never sees a tit on screen.

[Syonyk]

> ...and equip them to make their own decisions when using the internet.

The problem here is that the tech providers have A/B tested "engagement" (overriding the will of the people using their product towards the tech providers own profit goals) on so many people that it's actually quite difficult to make one's own decisions with a default interaction these days.

Some writers have been doing some work lately on the concept of "Cognitive liberty" - freedom from undesired influences on ones thinking. It's worth pondering through in how one interacts with the common services on the internet these days.

But "kids" and "making wise decisions on their own" don't really go together. Not until well into young adulthood.

[bmitc]

Social media and most media these days are basically as addictive as drugs are, just in totally different ways. They are explicitly designed to bypass our decision making facilities and leave us craving for me. I'm totally aware of it, and I still catch myself scrolling or YouTube hopping.

We need legislation that bans these behaviors that companies use to hoodwink us. They're getting away with whatever they want to do.

[philsnow]

> The best thing you can do is create an environment where they feel comfortable coming to you when they mess up.

They also have to know that doing certain things online constitutes "messing up".