▲ 1927 ▼ Restricted Topics (lemmy.ml) submitted 3 years ago by Facelikeapotato@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml 134 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] 1984@lemmy.today 134 points 3 years ago (54 children) Stop spying on your kid... Jesus. permalink fedilink source hideshow 54 child comments replies: [–] Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world 93 points 3 years ago (25 children) Kids need access to the internet at a super young age these days for school. If you don't have some sort of filter in place when they are in single digits or tweens you are just negligent. The internet has some dark corners. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 25 child comments replies: [–] cynetri@midwest.social 29 points 3 years ago (5 children) I don't mind just filters, but reporting it to the parent doesn't sit right with me. It probably depends on the parent though permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] fluffery@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 years ago (4 children) Its to make sure the kid isnt searching those topics permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] kautau@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago Yeah can you imagine a world where crabs could read? permalink fedilink source parent [+] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fluffery@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) thats not the kid, thats the parent, how do I know? My parents used filter Software when i was younger. And if i was myself, i wouldnt want any of my kids to have raw unfiltered access to the Internet and thats coming me; a teenager. A teen can very easily develop a porn addiction, sorry if I'm a religous zealot and I'm a horrible being for going to church. but I also check your post history and I think you need a therapist or something. Your not ok in the head permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] name_NULL111653@pawb.social -2 points 3 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 22 points 3 years ago (10 children) Harder the surveillance, harder the kid works to bypass them Kids are smart, good on OOP to teach their kids to use a VPN, about dual booting, and more permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] candybrie@lemmy.world 37 points 3 years ago (3 children) If the kid is old enough to purposely bypass the security, they're probably around the right age to find some of the stuff on the other side. But you don't want them accidentally stumbling into it because they searched something seemingly innocent. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] MajickmanW@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 years ago (2 children) This brought a memory rushing back of me and a family friend in the mid 90s using the family computer to find funny websites. Us: "Let's search butt.com!" My godfather: "NOOOOO!!!" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Misconduct@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago (1 child) I just wanted to look up blueberry waffles but I was derping hard and couldn't remember the word for blueberries... I was an adult at that point but just imagine a kid doing that on accident iykyk 💀 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 2 points 3 years ago 😭 permalink fedilink source parent [–] Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago (5 children) If the kids old enough to figure out VPNs, dual booting, and all the other pretty simple workarounds then it is what it is. You can't control everything. I am talking about the little guys. And this dudes kid is googling how to teach crabs to talk. If someone is searching that they probably aren't ready to get completely unrestricted access because they are probably pretty young. Like I said, single digits or tweens. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) It is what it is If the parents still try to restrict, which most unreasonably will, then the kid will simply grow better at this This leads to the kid growing up with confiding in random people more than their family(this might lead to said friends being a bad influence on them, since they didn't learn how to differentiate good and bad people) That or a general sense of distrust and surveillance permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de -2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Parents can literally get sued by the state for letting their children watch inappropriate stuff (at least where I live). You are obligated as a parent to restrict the access of your children to inappropriate media. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 1 point 3 years ago There's a HUGE difference between restrictions via blockers and surveillance. I can assure you that no one here is arguing in favour of letting kids watch porn... permalink fedilink source parent [–] EatMyDick@lemmy.world -2 points 3 years ago (1 child) So many privacy zealots here with absolutely zero clue what it means to raise a kid. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mashbooq@infosec.pub 2 points 3 years ago Bold of you to assume us privacy zealots aren't successfully raising kids permalink fedilink source parent [–] StoicImpala@lemmy.world 12 points 3 years ago It's possible to block without spying on though. permalink fedilink source parent [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 8 points 3 years ago (5 children) And the proper way is to teach your kids about it and stop treating kids like super fragile glass beings. Your city probably has some dark corners too, but you don't set up geofenced tracking beacons to be alarmed if they stumble slightly off the path you intended them to go. Children should feel comfortable enough to talk to you about bad stuff they encounter, not feel frightened, that they broke a rule. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 15 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) By the time I was 17, at least on my windows PC, every search I made was reported. Every setting I touched was reported. Every app I use, and how long, reported. Every startup and shutdown reported. Games with chat features were banned. Online games were banned. Every week on Sunday, an email with all this went to my parents, and my dad would forward it to me as a kind of intimidation that "we know all"... And yes, they used geofenced tracking too. But I'm a geek, so my Linux laptop and phone were no longer bugged (my only access to other people at the time) by the time I figured it out (around age 16). Still had to turn the tracker on so they wouldn't ask why the location pings stopped though. This kind of obsessive control ought to be illegal. I propose privacy rights at age 16, enforceable by fines, with a safe hotline for those with obsessive parents. They were emotionally abusive, control by external restrictions is often only part of the story in cases like mine. I'm all for safety filters, but parental controls that can be classified as spyware have no place in a parent-child relationship after the age of 16... permalink fedilink source parent [–] Rukmer@lemmy.world 9 points 3 years ago (2 children) If you use these trackers and barge in "hey I saw what you did on the internet, you're in trouble." then you're doing it wrong. Kids need guidance. If you were negligent enough to let your kid roam the city without supervision, you SHOULD have a tracker on them. We're talking about little kids not 16+. Many young kids get themselves killed or groomed or into some kind of cult online. When that happens to young kids, parents are negligent. When 12 year olds get addicted to porn, negligence. You can guide your children without being an asshole. I know a lot of us grew up either completely neglected or completely terrified to make a mistake, but there is an in-between. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 9 points 3 years ago (1 child) When I look outside, there are 5 year olds playing without supervision. They get along just fine. Not every country is a paranoid dystopia. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply) [–] BudgetBandit@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 years ago thinking about my p history and that one video Wasn’t quite different back then, it is easier now, and full of advertisements and stuff that make the happy chemicals go brrrr permalink fedilink source parent [–] Solaris1789@jlai.lu 11 points 3 years ago (3 children) Even worse using kaspersky... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] President@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 years ago (2 children) How? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 3 points 3 years ago Invasive reports of literally everything. Making it way too easy to control your child to the point of psychical damage, and with some parents a tool for abuse. permalink fedilink source parent [–] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 years ago Kaspersky is part of Big C and actively tries to suppress knowledge of Rust. permalink fedilink source parent [+] TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (6 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 years ago (1 child) Teach them the old ways of flash games (or html5 nowadays) and they will have no time for drugs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent [+] ToyDork@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments load more comments (3 replies) [+] vegai@suppo.fi 0 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (13 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] Misconduct@lemmy.world 21 points 3 years ago (3 children) Not giving your kids access to the internet at all is insane. You're setting them up for failure by not actively teaching them how to navigate the Internet and what bs to look out for. Anyone that does this is just trying to indoctrinate their kid and prevent them from being exposed to any other ideas. The ego on parents that think they know enough to entirely prepare their kids for the world is ridiculous. Especially these days. You're just setting them up to be behind when they're older and they'll resent you while they struggle to catch up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments load more comments (3 replies) [–] Llewellyn@lemmy.ml 16 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children) Better yet, don't let them use the internet. Good luck with that. And also spying is the best way to lose your kid's trust. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] vegai@suppo.fi 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 5 points 3 years ago 'Monitoring' if anything is worse. After puberty a human needs some degree of privacy and autonomy. By all means use blockers, but reading their every google search, and especially making them aware of that, is only hurtful. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 years ago monitor* permalink fedilink source parent [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 6 points 3 years ago My parents used this as part of their obsessive-control emotional / psychological abuse. Mostly to try to indoctrinate me into their cult, and their extremist right-wing ideology. There is a place for filters, and even search reports - but search reports ought to end around 14 years, and by 16 there needs to be some form of legal recognition of privacy rights as a human being for cases of isolating abuse as a part of indoctrination. P*rn blockers etc on the router are fine though, the network legally belongs to the parents. But human being, at least after puberty, requires privacy for proper psychological development. Complete surveillance after that time is psychologically and emotionally harmful to both the child and the relationship. permalink fedilink source parent [–] archomrade@midwest.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) I'm reminiscing the days in school where we'd use proxy sites to get around the school blocklist/monitoring to play dolphin olympics permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] snowbell@beehaw.org 2 points 3 years ago I remember busting out an ssh tunnel and blowing everyone's mind permalink fedilink source parent [–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) Reduce it gradually to 0 until 16. Spare them the embarassement with their peers. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] vegai@suppo.fi 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] smellythief@beehaw.org 0 points 3 years ago (2 children) If there’s a reliable way to only be alerted to specific activity, then the parents aren’t really actively spying, in the sense that the kids still have privacy when they aren’t transgressing into prohibited space. As long as that prohibited space is reasonable (huge debate possible there of course) and the kids know about the restrictions. imo permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ChargedBasisGrand@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) this post is about a child being blocked then reported to their parents for 'teaching crabs to read' I don't think you can defend it as a reasonable prohibited space permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] smellythief@beehaw.org 1 point 3 years ago True. But the comment I was replying to was referencing the monitoring itself, not the outcome. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world 93 points 3 years ago (25 children) Kids need access to the internet at a super young age these days for school. If you don't have some sort of filter in place when they are in single digits or tweens you are just negligent. The internet has some dark corners. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 25 child comments replies: [–] cynetri@midwest.social 29 points 3 years ago (5 children) I don't mind just filters, but reporting it to the parent doesn't sit right with me. It probably depends on the parent though permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] fluffery@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 years ago (4 children) Its to make sure the kid isnt searching those topics permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] kautau@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago Yeah can you imagine a world where crabs could read? permalink fedilink source parent [+] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fluffery@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) thats not the kid, thats the parent, how do I know? My parents used filter Software when i was younger. And if i was myself, i wouldnt want any of my kids to have raw unfiltered access to the Internet and thats coming me; a teenager. A teen can very easily develop a porn addiction, sorry if I'm a religous zealot and I'm a horrible being for going to church. but I also check your post history and I think you need a therapist or something. Your not ok in the head permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] name_NULL111653@pawb.social -2 points 3 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 22 points 3 years ago (10 children) Harder the surveillance, harder the kid works to bypass them Kids are smart, good on OOP to teach their kids to use a VPN, about dual booting, and more permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] candybrie@lemmy.world 37 points 3 years ago (3 children) If the kid is old enough to purposely bypass the security, they're probably around the right age to find some of the stuff on the other side. But you don't want them accidentally stumbling into it because they searched something seemingly innocent. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] MajickmanW@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 years ago (2 children) This brought a memory rushing back of me and a family friend in the mid 90s using the family computer to find funny websites. Us: "Let's search butt.com!" My godfather: "NOOOOO!!!" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Misconduct@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago (1 child) I just wanted to look up blueberry waffles but I was derping hard and couldn't remember the word for blueberries... I was an adult at that point but just imagine a kid doing that on accident iykyk 💀 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 2 points 3 years ago 😭 permalink fedilink source parent [–] Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago (5 children) If the kids old enough to figure out VPNs, dual booting, and all the other pretty simple workarounds then it is what it is. You can't control everything. I am talking about the little guys. And this dudes kid is googling how to teach crabs to talk. If someone is searching that they probably aren't ready to get completely unrestricted access because they are probably pretty young. Like I said, single digits or tweens. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) It is what it is If the parents still try to restrict, which most unreasonably will, then the kid will simply grow better at this This leads to the kid growing up with confiding in random people more than their family(this might lead to said friends being a bad influence on them, since they didn't learn how to differentiate good and bad people) That or a general sense of distrust and surveillance permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de -2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Parents can literally get sued by the state for letting their children watch inappropriate stuff (at least where I live). You are obligated as a parent to restrict the access of your children to inappropriate media. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 1 point 3 years ago There's a HUGE difference between restrictions via blockers and surveillance. I can assure you that no one here is arguing in favour of letting kids watch porn... permalink fedilink source parent [–] EatMyDick@lemmy.world -2 points 3 years ago (1 child) So many privacy zealots here with absolutely zero clue what it means to raise a kid. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mashbooq@infosec.pub 2 points 3 years ago Bold of you to assume us privacy zealots aren't successfully raising kids permalink fedilink source parent [–] StoicImpala@lemmy.world 12 points 3 years ago It's possible to block without spying on though. permalink fedilink source parent [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 8 points 3 years ago (5 children) And the proper way is to teach your kids about it and stop treating kids like super fragile glass beings. Your city probably has some dark corners too, but you don't set up geofenced tracking beacons to be alarmed if they stumble slightly off the path you intended them to go. Children should feel comfortable enough to talk to you about bad stuff they encounter, not feel frightened, that they broke a rule. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 15 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) By the time I was 17, at least on my windows PC, every search I made was reported. Every setting I touched was reported. Every app I use, and how long, reported. Every startup and shutdown reported. Games with chat features were banned. Online games were banned. Every week on Sunday, an email with all this went to my parents, and my dad would forward it to me as a kind of intimidation that "we know all"... And yes, they used geofenced tracking too. But I'm a geek, so my Linux laptop and phone were no longer bugged (my only access to other people at the time) by the time I figured it out (around age 16). Still had to turn the tracker on so they wouldn't ask why the location pings stopped though. This kind of obsessive control ought to be illegal. I propose privacy rights at age 16, enforceable by fines, with a safe hotline for those with obsessive parents. They were emotionally abusive, control by external restrictions is often only part of the story in cases like mine. I'm all for safety filters, but parental controls that can be classified as spyware have no place in a parent-child relationship after the age of 16... permalink fedilink source parent [–] Rukmer@lemmy.world 9 points 3 years ago (2 children) If you use these trackers and barge in "hey I saw what you did on the internet, you're in trouble." then you're doing it wrong. Kids need guidance. If you were negligent enough to let your kid roam the city without supervision, you SHOULD have a tracker on them. We're talking about little kids not 16+. Many young kids get themselves killed or groomed or into some kind of cult online. When that happens to young kids, parents are negligent. When 12 year olds get addicted to porn, negligence. You can guide your children without being an asshole. I know a lot of us grew up either completely neglected or completely terrified to make a mistake, but there is an in-between. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 9 points 3 years ago (1 child) When I look outside, there are 5 year olds playing without supervision. They get along just fine. Not every country is a paranoid dystopia. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply) [–] BudgetBandit@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 years ago thinking about my p history and that one video Wasn’t quite different back then, it is easier now, and full of advertisements and stuff that make the happy chemicals go brrrr permalink fedilink source parent
[–] cynetri@midwest.social 29 points 3 years ago (5 children) I don't mind just filters, but reporting it to the parent doesn't sit right with me. It probably depends on the parent though permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] fluffery@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 years ago (4 children) Its to make sure the kid isnt searching those topics permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] kautau@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago Yeah can you imagine a world where crabs could read? permalink fedilink source parent [+] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fluffery@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) thats not the kid, thats the parent, how do I know? My parents used filter Software when i was younger. And if i was myself, i wouldnt want any of my kids to have raw unfiltered access to the Internet and thats coming me; a teenager. A teen can very easily develop a porn addiction, sorry if I'm a religous zealot and I'm a horrible being for going to church. but I also check your post history and I think you need a therapist or something. Your not ok in the head permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] name_NULL111653@pawb.social -2 points 3 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fluffery@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 years ago (4 children) Its to make sure the kid isnt searching those topics permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] kautau@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago Yeah can you imagine a world where crabs could read? permalink fedilink source parent [+] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fluffery@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) thats not the kid, thats the parent, how do I know? My parents used filter Software when i was younger. And if i was myself, i wouldnt want any of my kids to have raw unfiltered access to the Internet and thats coming me; a teenager. A teen can very easily develop a porn addiction, sorry if I'm a religous zealot and I'm a horrible being for going to church. but I also check your post history and I think you need a therapist or something. Your not ok in the head permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] name_NULL111653@pawb.social -2 points 3 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kautau@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago Yeah can you imagine a world where crabs could read? permalink fedilink source parent
[+] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fluffery@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) thats not the kid, thats the parent, how do I know? My parents used filter Software when i was younger. And if i was myself, i wouldnt want any of my kids to have raw unfiltered access to the Internet and thats coming me; a teenager. A teen can very easily develop a porn addiction, sorry if I'm a religous zealot and I'm a horrible being for going to church. but I also check your post history and I think you need a therapist or something. Your not ok in the head permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] name_NULL111653@pawb.social -2 points 3 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fluffery@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) thats not the kid, thats the parent, how do I know? My parents used filter Software when i was younger. And if i was myself, i wouldnt want any of my kids to have raw unfiltered access to the Internet and thats coming me; a teenager. A teen can very easily develop a porn addiction, sorry if I'm a religous zealot and I'm a horrible being for going to church. but I also check your post history and I think you need a therapist or something. Your not ok in the head permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] name_NULL111653@pawb.social -2 points 3 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 22 points 3 years ago (10 children) Harder the surveillance, harder the kid works to bypass them Kids are smart, good on OOP to teach their kids to use a VPN, about dual booting, and more permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] candybrie@lemmy.world 37 points 3 years ago (3 children) If the kid is old enough to purposely bypass the security, they're probably around the right age to find some of the stuff on the other side. But you don't want them accidentally stumbling into it because they searched something seemingly innocent. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] MajickmanW@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 years ago (2 children) This brought a memory rushing back of me and a family friend in the mid 90s using the family computer to find funny websites. Us: "Let's search butt.com!" My godfather: "NOOOOO!!!" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Misconduct@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago (1 child) I just wanted to look up blueberry waffles but I was derping hard and couldn't remember the word for blueberries... I was an adult at that point but just imagine a kid doing that on accident iykyk 💀 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 2 points 3 years ago 😭 permalink fedilink source parent [–] Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago (5 children) If the kids old enough to figure out VPNs, dual booting, and all the other pretty simple workarounds then it is what it is. You can't control everything. I am talking about the little guys. And this dudes kid is googling how to teach crabs to talk. If someone is searching that they probably aren't ready to get completely unrestricted access because they are probably pretty young. Like I said, single digits or tweens. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) It is what it is If the parents still try to restrict, which most unreasonably will, then the kid will simply grow better at this This leads to the kid growing up with confiding in random people more than their family(this might lead to said friends being a bad influence on them, since they didn't learn how to differentiate good and bad people) That or a general sense of distrust and surveillance permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de -2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Parents can literally get sued by the state for letting their children watch inappropriate stuff (at least where I live). You are obligated as a parent to restrict the access of your children to inappropriate media. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 1 point 3 years ago There's a HUGE difference between restrictions via blockers and surveillance. I can assure you that no one here is arguing in favour of letting kids watch porn... permalink fedilink source parent [–] EatMyDick@lemmy.world -2 points 3 years ago (1 child) So many privacy zealots here with absolutely zero clue what it means to raise a kid. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mashbooq@infosec.pub 2 points 3 years ago Bold of you to assume us privacy zealots aren't successfully raising kids permalink fedilink source parent
[–] candybrie@lemmy.world 37 points 3 years ago (3 children) If the kid is old enough to purposely bypass the security, they're probably around the right age to find some of the stuff on the other side. But you don't want them accidentally stumbling into it because they searched something seemingly innocent. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] MajickmanW@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 years ago (2 children) This brought a memory rushing back of me and a family friend in the mid 90s using the family computer to find funny websites. Us: "Let's search butt.com!" My godfather: "NOOOOO!!!" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Misconduct@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago (1 child) I just wanted to look up blueberry waffles but I was derping hard and couldn't remember the word for blueberries... I was an adult at that point but just imagine a kid doing that on accident iykyk 💀 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 2 points 3 years ago 😭 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MajickmanW@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 years ago (2 children) This brought a memory rushing back of me and a family friend in the mid 90s using the family computer to find funny websites. Us: "Let's search butt.com!" My godfather: "NOOOOO!!!" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Misconduct@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago (1 child) I just wanted to look up blueberry waffles but I was derping hard and couldn't remember the word for blueberries... I was an adult at that point but just imagine a kid doing that on accident iykyk 💀 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 2 points 3 years ago 😭 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Misconduct@lemmy.world 8 points 3 years ago (1 child) I just wanted to look up blueberry waffles but I was derping hard and couldn't remember the word for blueberries... I was an adult at that point but just imagine a kid doing that on accident iykyk 💀 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 2 points 3 years ago 😭 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago (5 children) If the kids old enough to figure out VPNs, dual booting, and all the other pretty simple workarounds then it is what it is. You can't control everything. I am talking about the little guys. And this dudes kid is googling how to teach crabs to talk. If someone is searching that they probably aren't ready to get completely unrestricted access because they are probably pretty young. Like I said, single digits or tweens. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) It is what it is If the parents still try to restrict, which most unreasonably will, then the kid will simply grow better at this This leads to the kid growing up with confiding in random people more than their family(this might lead to said friends being a bad influence on them, since they didn't learn how to differentiate good and bad people) That or a general sense of distrust and surveillance permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de -2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Parents can literally get sued by the state for letting their children watch inappropriate stuff (at least where I live). You are obligated as a parent to restrict the access of your children to inappropriate media. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 1 point 3 years ago There's a HUGE difference between restrictions via blockers and surveillance. I can assure you that no one here is arguing in favour of letting kids watch porn... permalink fedilink source parent [–] EatMyDick@lemmy.world -2 points 3 years ago (1 child) So many privacy zealots here with absolutely zero clue what it means to raise a kid. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mashbooq@infosec.pub 2 points 3 years ago Bold of you to assume us privacy zealots aren't successfully raising kids permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sounddrill@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 1 point 3 years ago (2 children) It is what it is If the parents still try to restrict, which most unreasonably will, then the kid will simply grow better at this This leads to the kid growing up with confiding in random people more than their family(this might lead to said friends being a bad influence on them, since they didn't learn how to differentiate good and bad people) That or a general sense of distrust and surveillance permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de -2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Parents can literally get sued by the state for letting their children watch inappropriate stuff (at least where I live). You are obligated as a parent to restrict the access of your children to inappropriate media. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 1 point 3 years ago There's a HUGE difference between restrictions via blockers and surveillance. I can assure you that no one here is arguing in favour of letting kids watch porn... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de -2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Parents can literally get sued by the state for letting their children watch inappropriate stuff (at least where I live). You are obligated as a parent to restrict the access of your children to inappropriate media. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 1 point 3 years ago There's a HUGE difference between restrictions via blockers and surveillance. I can assure you that no one here is arguing in favour of letting kids watch porn... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 1 point 3 years ago There's a HUGE difference between restrictions via blockers and surveillance. I can assure you that no one here is arguing in favour of letting kids watch porn... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] EatMyDick@lemmy.world -2 points 3 years ago (1 child) So many privacy zealots here with absolutely zero clue what it means to raise a kid. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] mashbooq@infosec.pub 2 points 3 years ago Bold of you to assume us privacy zealots aren't successfully raising kids permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mashbooq@infosec.pub 2 points 3 years ago Bold of you to assume us privacy zealots aren't successfully raising kids permalink fedilink source parent
[–] StoicImpala@lemmy.world 12 points 3 years ago It's possible to block without spying on though. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 8 points 3 years ago (5 children) And the proper way is to teach your kids about it and stop treating kids like super fragile glass beings. Your city probably has some dark corners too, but you don't set up geofenced tracking beacons to be alarmed if they stumble slightly off the path you intended them to go. Children should feel comfortable enough to talk to you about bad stuff they encounter, not feel frightened, that they broke a rule. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 15 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) By the time I was 17, at least on my windows PC, every search I made was reported. Every setting I touched was reported. Every app I use, and how long, reported. Every startup and shutdown reported. Games with chat features were banned. Online games were banned. Every week on Sunday, an email with all this went to my parents, and my dad would forward it to me as a kind of intimidation that "we know all"... And yes, they used geofenced tracking too. But I'm a geek, so my Linux laptop and phone were no longer bugged (my only access to other people at the time) by the time I figured it out (around age 16). Still had to turn the tracker on so they wouldn't ask why the location pings stopped though. This kind of obsessive control ought to be illegal. I propose privacy rights at age 16, enforceable by fines, with a safe hotline for those with obsessive parents. They were emotionally abusive, control by external restrictions is often only part of the story in cases like mine. I'm all for safety filters, but parental controls that can be classified as spyware have no place in a parent-child relationship after the age of 16... permalink fedilink source parent [–] Rukmer@lemmy.world 9 points 3 years ago (2 children) If you use these trackers and barge in "hey I saw what you did on the internet, you're in trouble." then you're doing it wrong. Kids need guidance. If you were negligent enough to let your kid roam the city without supervision, you SHOULD have a tracker on them. We're talking about little kids not 16+. Many young kids get themselves killed or groomed or into some kind of cult online. When that happens to young kids, parents are negligent. When 12 year olds get addicted to porn, negligence. You can guide your children without being an asshole. I know a lot of us grew up either completely neglected or completely terrified to make a mistake, but there is an in-between. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 9 points 3 years ago (1 child) When I look outside, there are 5 year olds playing without supervision. They get along just fine. Not every country is a paranoid dystopia. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply)
[–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 15 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) By the time I was 17, at least on my windows PC, every search I made was reported. Every setting I touched was reported. Every app I use, and how long, reported. Every startup and shutdown reported. Games with chat features were banned. Online games were banned. Every week on Sunday, an email with all this went to my parents, and my dad would forward it to me as a kind of intimidation that "we know all"... And yes, they used geofenced tracking too. But I'm a geek, so my Linux laptop and phone were no longer bugged (my only access to other people at the time) by the time I figured it out (around age 16). Still had to turn the tracker on so they wouldn't ask why the location pings stopped though. This kind of obsessive control ought to be illegal. I propose privacy rights at age 16, enforceable by fines, with a safe hotline for those with obsessive parents. They were emotionally abusive, control by external restrictions is often only part of the story in cases like mine. I'm all for safety filters, but parental controls that can be classified as spyware have no place in a parent-child relationship after the age of 16... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Rukmer@lemmy.world 9 points 3 years ago (2 children) If you use these trackers and barge in "hey I saw what you did on the internet, you're in trouble." then you're doing it wrong. Kids need guidance. If you were negligent enough to let your kid roam the city without supervision, you SHOULD have a tracker on them. We're talking about little kids not 16+. Many young kids get themselves killed or groomed or into some kind of cult online. When that happens to young kids, parents are negligent. When 12 year olds get addicted to porn, negligence. You can guide your children without being an asshole. I know a lot of us grew up either completely neglected or completely terrified to make a mistake, but there is an in-between. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 9 points 3 years ago (1 child) When I look outside, there are 5 year olds playing without supervision. They get along just fine. Not every country is a paranoid dystopia. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 9 points 3 years ago (1 child) When I look outside, there are 5 year olds playing without supervision. They get along just fine. Not every country is a paranoid dystopia. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] BudgetBandit@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 years ago thinking about my p history and that one video Wasn’t quite different back then, it is easier now, and full of advertisements and stuff that make the happy chemicals go brrrr permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Solaris1789@jlai.lu 11 points 3 years ago (3 children) Even worse using kaspersky... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] President@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 years ago (2 children) How? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 3 points 3 years ago Invasive reports of literally everything. Making it way too easy to control your child to the point of psychical damage, and with some parents a tool for abuse. permalink fedilink source parent [–] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 years ago Kaspersky is part of Big C and actively tries to suppress knowledge of Rust. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] President@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 years ago (2 children) How? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 3 points 3 years ago Invasive reports of literally everything. Making it way too easy to control your child to the point of psychical damage, and with some parents a tool for abuse. permalink fedilink source parent [–] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 years ago Kaspersky is part of Big C and actively tries to suppress knowledge of Rust. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 3 points 3 years ago Invasive reports of literally everything. Making it way too easy to control your child to the point of psychical damage, and with some parents a tool for abuse. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 years ago Kaspersky is part of Big C and actively tries to suppress knowledge of Rust. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (6 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 years ago (1 child) Teach them the old ways of flash games (or html5 nowadays) and they will have no time for drugs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent [+] ToyDork@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 years ago (1 child) Teach them the old ways of flash games (or html5 nowadays) and they will have no time for drugs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] ToyDork@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments load more comments (3 replies)
[+] vegai@suppo.fi 0 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (13 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] Misconduct@lemmy.world 21 points 3 years ago (3 children) Not giving your kids access to the internet at all is insane. You're setting them up for failure by not actively teaching them how to navigate the Internet and what bs to look out for. Anyone that does this is just trying to indoctrinate their kid and prevent them from being exposed to any other ideas. The ego on parents that think they know enough to entirely prepare their kids for the world is ridiculous. Especially these days. You're just setting them up to be behind when they're older and they'll resent you while they struggle to catch up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments load more comments (3 replies) [–] Llewellyn@lemmy.ml 16 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children) Better yet, don't let them use the internet. Good luck with that. And also spying is the best way to lose your kid's trust. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] vegai@suppo.fi 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 5 points 3 years ago 'Monitoring' if anything is worse. After puberty a human needs some degree of privacy and autonomy. By all means use blockers, but reading their every google search, and especially making them aware of that, is only hurtful. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 years ago monitor* permalink fedilink source parent [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 6 points 3 years ago My parents used this as part of their obsessive-control emotional / psychological abuse. Mostly to try to indoctrinate me into their cult, and their extremist right-wing ideology. There is a place for filters, and even search reports - but search reports ought to end around 14 years, and by 16 there needs to be some form of legal recognition of privacy rights as a human being for cases of isolating abuse as a part of indoctrination. P*rn blockers etc on the router are fine though, the network legally belongs to the parents. But human being, at least after puberty, requires privacy for proper psychological development. Complete surveillance after that time is psychologically and emotionally harmful to both the child and the relationship. permalink fedilink source parent [–] archomrade@midwest.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) I'm reminiscing the days in school where we'd use proxy sites to get around the school blocklist/monitoring to play dolphin olympics permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] snowbell@beehaw.org 2 points 3 years ago I remember busting out an ssh tunnel and blowing everyone's mind permalink fedilink source parent [–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) Reduce it gradually to 0 until 16. Spare them the embarassement with their peers. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] vegai@suppo.fi 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Misconduct@lemmy.world 21 points 3 years ago (3 children) Not giving your kids access to the internet at all is insane. You're setting them up for failure by not actively teaching them how to navigate the Internet and what bs to look out for. Anyone that does this is just trying to indoctrinate their kid and prevent them from being exposed to any other ideas. The ego on parents that think they know enough to entirely prepare their kids for the world is ridiculous. Especially these days. You're just setting them up to be behind when they're older and they'll resent you while they struggle to catch up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Llewellyn@lemmy.ml 16 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children) Better yet, don't let them use the internet. Good luck with that. And also spying is the best way to lose your kid's trust. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] vegai@suppo.fi 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 5 points 3 years ago 'Monitoring' if anything is worse. After puberty a human needs some degree of privacy and autonomy. By all means use blockers, but reading their every google search, and especially making them aware of that, is only hurtful. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 years ago monitor* permalink fedilink source parent
[+] vegai@suppo.fi 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 5 points 3 years ago 'Monitoring' if anything is worse. After puberty a human needs some degree of privacy and autonomy. By all means use blockers, but reading their every google search, and especially making them aware of that, is only hurtful. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 years ago monitor* permalink fedilink source parent
[–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 5 points 3 years ago 'Monitoring' if anything is worse. After puberty a human needs some degree of privacy and autonomy. By all means use blockers, but reading their every google search, and especially making them aware of that, is only hurtful. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 6 points 3 years ago My parents used this as part of their obsessive-control emotional / psychological abuse. Mostly to try to indoctrinate me into their cult, and their extremist right-wing ideology. There is a place for filters, and even search reports - but search reports ought to end around 14 years, and by 16 there needs to be some form of legal recognition of privacy rights as a human being for cases of isolating abuse as a part of indoctrination. P*rn blockers etc on the router are fine though, the network legally belongs to the parents. But human being, at least after puberty, requires privacy for proper psychological development. Complete surveillance after that time is psychologically and emotionally harmful to both the child and the relationship. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] archomrade@midwest.social 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) I'm reminiscing the days in school where we'd use proxy sites to get around the school blocklist/monitoring to play dolphin olympics permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] snowbell@beehaw.org 2 points 3 years ago I remember busting out an ssh tunnel and blowing everyone's mind permalink fedilink source parent
[–] snowbell@beehaw.org 2 points 3 years ago I remember busting out an ssh tunnel and blowing everyone's mind permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) Reduce it gradually to 0 until 16. Spare them the embarassement with their peers. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] vegai@suppo.fi 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] vegai@suppo.fi 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] smellythief@beehaw.org 0 points 3 years ago (2 children) If there’s a reliable way to only be alerted to specific activity, then the parents aren’t really actively spying, in the sense that the kids still have privacy when they aren’t transgressing into prohibited space. As long as that prohibited space is reasonable (huge debate possible there of course) and the kids know about the restrictions. imo permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ChargedBasisGrand@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) this post is about a child being blocked then reported to their parents for 'teaching crabs to read' I don't think you can defend it as a reasonable prohibited space permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] smellythief@beehaw.org 1 point 3 years ago True. But the comment I was replying to was referencing the monitoring itself, not the outcome. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ChargedBasisGrand@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) this post is about a child being blocked then reported to their parents for 'teaching crabs to read' I don't think you can defend it as a reasonable prohibited space permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] smellythief@beehaw.org 1 point 3 years ago True. But the comment I was replying to was referencing the monitoring itself, not the outcome. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] smellythief@beehaw.org 1 point 3 years ago True. But the comment I was replying to was referencing the monitoring itself, not the outcome. permalink fedilink source parent