[ipython]

Do you have kids? I'm not being glib.

Yes, I have set up technical guardrails.

But when your kid needs Internet access to do their homework, and you forget to turn off the WiFi to their device after they're done... then they sneak that Chromebook to their room and watch videos all night, you lose.

When you have a extra phone that was sitting on your desk that you were preparing to resell and your kid sneaks that to their room to watch a few hundred YouTube shorts before you catch him, you lose.

When you have parental controls set up on your wifi network, but it's trivial to shut the wifi off and use the cellular network instead, you lose.

When your friends all have personal cell phones but you don't, you lose.

Parents have their hands full enough. Make it easier for parents, don't poke at them with a pointy stick.

[nickthegreek]

> But when your kid needs Internet access to do their homework, and you forget to turn off the WiFi to their device after they're done... then they sneak that Chromebook to their room and watch videos all night, you lose.

You are at fault.

> When you have a extra phone that was sitting on your desk that you were preparing to resell and your kid sneaks that to their room to watch a few hundred YouTube shorts before you catch him, you lose.

You are at fault.

> When you have parental controls set up on your wifi network, but it's trivial to shut the wifi off and use the cellular network instead, you lose.

This can be controlled via Parental Controls on iOS via Screen Time. If you chose not to, you are at fault.

> When your friends all have personal cell phones but you don't, you lose.

Not sure what you want anyone to do about this. I recognize that life isnt fair.

> Parents have their hands full enough. Make it easier for parents, don't poke at them with a pointy stick.

No one is arguing against this. They are arguing how to implement this.

[ipython]

Glad to hear your life is so simple that you can track all this while working full time jobs, cooking healthy meals, driving the kids to the various activities and travel sports (because you could be arrested if you let your kids walk anywhere), making sure they complete their homework on time, monitoring their interactions with friends, tracking new tech trends to find new threats (is my kid interacting with character.io or ChatGPT in an unhealthy way?)... I'm sure I'm missing a few more.

And yes, you are arguing against "making it easier for parents" - my original post literally advocated for legislating tech companies to make controls available, effective, and easy to use. If you truly believe what you're saying, then you'd agree with me. Instead you're nitpicking my ability to parent my kids. Exactly the behavior that isn't working, so please continue - I'm sure it'll work now.

[nickthegreek]

> Instead you're nitpicking my ability to parent my kids.

You willingly invited that conversation. I obliged.

> If you truly believe what you're saying, then you'd agree with me.

Get over yourself. You have not made an attempt to ask for a solution from me to find common ground. You keep trying to remove yourself from the responsibilities of parenting in the modern world as shown in the examples you put forth and your initial post asking that parents not shoulder the blame for what is happening under their nose. Surely they have some level of culpability.

I believe that it would be good for Parental Controls on devices to have a toggle to say that the phone is being used by someone in under 13, or someone 14-18 (whatever bands you want). When enabled, this flag should be available to locally installed apps and remote connections. Laws can be passed that tell remote connections how they must act when receiving this flag. This keeps me, an free adult, from being subjected to more corpo/govt tracking.

[ipython]

> Get over yourself.... find common ground

Ad hominem attacks - great way to find common ground. I actually did try to find common ground, which is that we need to legislate. My argument is that the real entities that need legislation are the ones who can most afford to do so - in both time, resources, and ownership of the platforms that we are all beholden to. I will not advocate for even more punitive restrictions on parents (who already are subject to enough societal punitive pressures as it is - TBH your post is a great example. Instead of empathy, you reply with scorn and derision - as if I'm not good enough to parent my kids).

> I believe that it would be good for Parental Controls on devices to have a toggle to say that the phone is being used by someone in under 13, or someone 14-18 (whatever bands you want).

So you're admitting that parental controls are ineffective?

> Laws can be passed that tell remote connections how they must act when receiving this flag.

And those laws are enforced through what mechanism? What country enforces this law? Do ISPs now have to only accept connections from "legal" remote servers that have attested that they respect that flag? That sounds like an even more restrictive situation for you, as a free adult, than the current system.

But, I do have good news! What you described already exists! In fact, there are even W3C standards that have been around for 30 years to implement a machine readable content rating system! Just never got around to that whole passing a law thing to force all websites globally to adopt it...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_for_Internet_Content_... and more recently https://www.w3.org/2007/powder/. You can read the ACM paper on this, aptly titled "Internet Access Controls Without Censorship" here: https://www.w3.org/PICS/iacwcv2.htm.

And the most popular web browser of the early 2000s even has this functionality built in - to filter out remote connections that advertise content unsuitable for minors! https://www.isumsoft.com/internet/enable-content-advisor-in-...

[nickthegreek]

> Ad hominem attacks

Grow some skin. I used that ad hominem in response to your false dilemma/no true support comment of "If you truly believe what you're saying, then you'd agree with me". This comment ignores the obvious 3rd option that we can share underlying values (parental controls are helpful) while disagreeing on details, tradeoffs and the responsibility that comes with parenting.

> So you're admitting that parental controls are ineffective?

I never stated anything of the sort. I specifically pointed how they could be effective for you in the examples you brought forth. I think they could be made more effective, not that they are ineffective.

> And those laws are enforced through what mechanism?

If this is how you feel, than no solution you put forth is valid either.

At this point, I've stated how current parental controls can solve some of your issues, parental controls can be strengthen, outlined an implementation that does not disrupt the lives of Adults on the internet while also pointing out that parents are not immune from blame and are bare the majority of control over their childs lives. Ive engaged with you in good faith.

You just keeping shitting on everything. All because I stated that parents are not immune from blame. I stand by the ad hominem.