[31337Logic]

Pro Tip: Other parents sometimes need to be told NO, especially when it comes to matters of tech. I believe their heart is in the right place but most of them don't know the first thing about the dangers of social media, gps tracking, cellphone addiction, frequent video calls, etc. If enough pressure is applied, then it will be the norm for your local community of kids to spend time in real life together vs. 100% online in a digital scaremongered world. Can there be a balance? Sure. But that balance usually comes only after saying NO to unnecessary tech. NO, kids in elementary school don't need a phone (they really don't). NO, we don't need to digitally track our child's movements down to the meter (we really don't).

But don't take my word for it. In 2025, we now havea sea of well documented research that proves the extremely high cost we all pay (as a society) for damaging our kids this way.

[dpark]

> 100% online in a digital scaremongered world

The irony of posting scaremongering about video calls being dangerous on a digital forum while claiming to be offline to avoid scaremongering.

> If enough pressure is applied

You cannot force the rest if your community to align with your personal viewpoints. There is no amount of “pressure” that is going to bend society to your will.

[lrvick]

Smoking is dropping like a brick as a result of science, education, and social pressure. Just takes a while.

[dpark]

I was perhaps ambiguous. I am not saying societal change is not possible. I’m saying you, personally, will not change your local community as you imagine by simply telling other parents no.

Nowhere in your comment is there any indication you are running some sort of community initiative or anything else that might lead to actual change. Campaigning for a spot on the school board to advocate for banning cell phones in schools might be a useful strategy, for example. Telling parents who ask about FaceTime between friends that tablets are evil seems as effective as telling random smokers on the street that it’s going to kill them.

[lrvick]

> Telling parents who ask about FaceTime between friends that tablets are evil seems as effective as telling random smokers on the street that it’s going to kill them.

I would just simply say it is against our lifestyle and suggest alternatives just as a vegan family might suggest alternatives to a BBQ birthday party.

Facetime is not going to happen as my kids will never be be allowed Google or Apple accounts or smartphones, so friends parents will need to explore those alternatives if their kid wants to talk to my kid.

That is how change happens. One social graph node at a time.

Also I did in fact found a security, privacy, and digital sovereignty advocacy community called #! which has been operating for more than 20 years now, and has mentored hundreds of people looking to make healthier technology choices.

[dpark]

You should of course do what you feel is best for your children.

> Also I did in fact found a security, privacy, and digital sovereignty advocacy community called #! which has been operating for more than 20 years now, and has mentored hundreds of people looking to make healthier technology choices.

That’s awesome. I think we do need better choices (not just abstinence from the tech).

[lrvick]

I abstain from surveillance capitalism tech which is designed to track and distract. Google, Apple, and Qualcomm controlled devices are a non starter for me. I would rather be 20 years behind in tech and have sovereignty and reasonable privacy.

I am not at all opposed to useful tools in our pockets. Meshtastic messengers and the Precursor are the best candidates right now that might get tech back in my own pocket or that of kids, but they are not mature enough to daily drive just yet IMO.