FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[What's Burning?]

Personally, I'd rather teach children about the dangers of life and let them navigate through it, than directly shield them from everything that is potentially a danger.

Weird how the thread advocates for complete control, and simuktaneously states that kids get too much and have it too easy.

[CookinFlat6]

Yup, its the muddle headed do gooders who always have a simple one line solution for the biggest worries parents face - that confuse those who need any help worrying.

Worried about your kid falling in with the wrong crowd? simple, just lock them up at home and throw the key away

[sagi58]

http://www.gomcgruff.com/

The things you find on the web, eh? I'm sure some parents would appreciate knowing about that website, thanks!

...Now this is a random company making money by charging parents to monitor their kids activity. Anyone could have all those tools free. Even the ISPs now provide free tools for montioring and prtecting kids. For absolutely free anyone could monitor their kids traffic, keywords, keystrokes (anything typed on their PC), remote access, see what they are seeing at anytime, have snapshots of what they are seeing emailed at intervals - all without the kid knowing.
Just like the smarter parents do in real life, keep a close eye whilst allowing the impression of privacy etc

So... your suggestion is to monitor children, without their knowledge? Basically, have them believe in an
illusion of trust and respect, whilst spying on everything they do/say and with whom? Is that right?

Because, let me tell you, trust is a fragile filament that, once broken, is difficult to repair. I would suggest
to you that it's probably better that the child know you're keeping an eye out for their safety than to betray
that relationship, which can cause a breakdown in communication.

...But I understand we are been asked by you to worry less about something we can do something about and worry more about our biggest worries in the first place. So we should now remove the concept of kids having privacy and replace that with overt panicky reaction to an article about a guy and his high tech email forwarding? If he had spent more time bringing his kids up instead of communicating by email then maybe his kid wouldnt be online to make friends in the first place...

You still don't get it, do you? I am weighing the possibility of a child being lured because they are not being
monitored vs their right to online privacy. That doesn't preclude a parent teaching their child about safety,
be it online or not. It's not a "this or that" situation. The two opportunities to teach can co-exist.

By the way, you are making a judgement about a person you know nothing about. You have no way of knowing
how involved that parent is or isn't. You can't assume that just because he has his child's messages forwarded
to him it means he doesn't talk to his child. Children are curious. The internet is a fascinating place. Why
wouldn't a child want to explore it? Why shouldn't a parent be aware of where that journey takes their child?

...And in other news parents are advised not to swear in front of the children, apparently some may not be aware that kids are a quick study

You forgot to mention smoking, drinking, doing drugs, etc...

[sagi58]

Personally, I'd rather teach children about the dangers of life and let them navigate through it, than directly shield them from everything that is potentially a danger.

Weird how the thread advocates for complete control, and simuktaneously states that kids get too much and have it too easy.

First of all, you can teach your child about the dangers in life and shield them from potential dangers.
The two are not mutually exclusive.

Secondly, I'm not advocating for complete control; but, I am suggesting that it's not in the best interests
of children that they be given carte blanche on social media websites.

[sagi58]

Yup, its the muddle headed do gooders who always have a simple one line solution for the biggest worries parents face - that confuse those who need any help worrying.

Worried about your kid falling in with the wrong crowd? simple, just lock them up at home and throw the key away

I do not have a one-stop solution, that's what the whole idea of this thread was, to discuss possible solutions.

I don't believe that burying your head in the sand is the best solution. Nor is pretending that the world is a safe
place and that the internet is a wonderful place where children can navigate and parents need not worry.
Talk about lalalaland!!

Locking your child up doesn't work either; but, I would suggest to you that there is middle ground between these
two extremes.

[CookinFlat6]

So... your suggestion is to monitor children, without their knowledge? Basically, have them believe in an
illusion of trust and respect, whilst spying on everything they do/say and with whom? Is that right?

Because, let me tell you, trust is a fragile filament that, once broken, is difficult to repair. I would suggest
to you that it's probably better that the child know you're keeping an eye out for their safety than to betray
that relationship, which can cause a breakdown in communication.

Is this a trick question? are you really serious?

The kid knows his parents are aware of fragments but doesnt know exactly how. Its what religion does, you telling me you never heard of religious folk telling kids about a guy bringing presents down the chimney.
You dont seem to like the concept of listening or reading and then using what you heard. I told you the link was an illustration that theres a whole industry out there that will sell you anything yu might want. i.e there are enough parents out there who are as 'aware' as you and you buddy with the emails. And you were supposed to understand that it means there are a world of parents out there who are 'aware'

Anyway its the same as real life, the parents can invade the kids privacy or they can not yet remain very aware - this is not rocket science to work out. For example forwarding yur kids emails is just silly because you have to read them all, and thats the last thing you need or want, you can get software that scans words and looks for patterns. Thats aware without been intrusive enough to have to say to the kid 'sorry I am going to be reading thru all your emails from now. Its like in real life, you know the kids at the neigbours, you know who is also there or likely to be there but you are not standing there watching - you are aware

[sagi58]

So... your suggestion is to monitor children, without their knowledge? Basically, have them believe in an
illusion of trust and respect, whilst spying on everything they do/say and with whom? Is that right?

Because, let me tell you, trust is a fragile filament that, once broken, is difficult to repair. I would suggest
to you that it's probably better that the child know you're keeping an eye out for their safety than to betray
that relationship, which can cause a breakdown in communication.

Is this a trick question? are you really serious?

The kid knows his parents are aware of fragments but doesnt know exactly how...

...I told you the link was an illustration that theres a whole industry out there that will sell you anything yu might want. i.e there are enough parents out there who are as 'aware' as you and you buddy with the emails. And you were supposed to understand that it means there are a world of parents out there who are 'aware'

Actually, that's not what you said the first time, in fact it sounded more like a sales pitch!
And, your highlighted comment very clearly insinuates "spying"!

http://www.gomcgruff.com/...

...Now this is a random company making money by charging parents to monitor their kids activity. Anyone could have all those tools free. Even the ISPs now provide free tools for montioring and prtecting kids. For absolutely free anyone could monitor their kids traffic, keywords, keystrokes (anything typed on their PC), remote access, see what they are seeing at anytime, have snapshots of what they are seeing emailed at intervals - all without the kid knowing.
Just like the smarter parents do in real life, keep a close eye whilst allowing the impression of privacy etc ...

...Anyway its the same as real life, the parents can invade the kids privacy or they can not yet remain very aware - this is not rocket science to work out. For example forwarding yur kids emails is just silly because you have to read them all, and thats the last thing you need or want, you can get software that scans words and looks for patterns. Thats aware without been intrusive enough to have to say to the kid 'sorry I am going to be reading thru all your emails from now. Its like in real life, you know the kids at the neigbours, you know who is also there or likely to be there but you are not standing there watching - you are aware

I think part of the problem is that your focus is on an older child, whereas my concern is the younger one.
Of course, as a parent, you don't want to read all of your seventeen-year-old's emails, as that young adult
is likely to gush on and on about innocuous trivialities. However, if your child is 10-years-old and isn't
as likely to fall prey to verbosity, reading their emails wouldn't be difficult to muddle through. Sure,
that website, which scours messages for specific patterns / language might be useful for the parent
with an "almost of age" child; whereas, it wouldn't be necessary for that pre-teen.

I will repeat that using that sort of software without your child's knowledge is akin to spying, and likely
to cause trust issues, when the truth is out.

[CookinFlat6]

No ones using software, you are the one saying parents should worry less about their kids right to any privacy and replace it with an over bearing and ineffective constant monitoring

And I said theres a whole industry out there who will sell you anything you want between those extremes. They dont have to be monitored if they are not allowed online is one extreme, and monitoring them overtly and destroying the notion of privacy is at the other end. But it seems that you may be arguing both sides again.

I bet you dont have any kids of the age that raises concern about the webs dangers, that would explain ofcourse why your advise is so practical and a real eye opener

[sagi58]

No ones using software, you are the one saying parents should worry less about their kids right to any privacy and replace it with an over bearing and ineffective constant monitoring...

What I said, over and again, in a number of ways is that a child's right to ON-LINE
privacy is superceded by a parent's responsibility to keep that child SAFE.

You're using EXTREMES to justify your own position.
The world is NOT only about EXTREMES.

"overbearing and ineffective" are your own adjectives,
which are obviously subjectively chosen.
That's fine. That's your opinion.

...I bet you dont have any kids of the age...

Do you?

...that would explain ofcourse why your advise is so practical and a real eye opener

I am involved in raising 28 children of an age that are vulnerable to such dangers.

[myownalias]

I actually have a 10 year old boy and I allow him some freedoms, he even has his own laptop, but do I block such things as Facebook, Twitter, Google+, inappropriate websites, PG-13 or higher, I also monitor all the websites he visits to make sure he isn't doing or watching anything inappropriate, but he is unaware of this. The only thing he is aware of is time limits and allowed hours, no computer between 8pm and 12pm with a two hour max per day. We're not living in the 1980s now, we need to take appropriate steps to protect our children against the dangers of the modern world, too many predators out there. I make no apologies to anyone for protecting my children!

[CookinFlat6]

Well said MOA, only a parent actively faced with a child on the internet would have sensible solutions, - but they will have their own solutions and there is a wealth of free software out there to help. This idea of only overt full time monitoring with the politically correct 'buy in' from the child is ridiculous. Can only be a conceptual idea from someone without that ultimate responsibility

I have a 5 year old with a Nabi2 tablet that came with its own pre filtered tame sub internet, with everything locked down bar the safest possible child sites. But I found this way too childish even for a 5 year old, and so I created my own locked down kids net that is safer but more useful - She has Skype and can communicated with only the few people I alllowed. Shes obviously too young to be emailing or chattiing on FB, so for now I have it easy, but I am well prepared for what needs to be done as she gets older

I think when she starts stealing money from my wallet to go and buy handbags and shoes will be the time she needs the most protection

[What's Burning?]

Reading through this thread would make kids want to stay away from the Internet.

[CookinFlat6]

I am sure a Ferrari themed creche is high on the list of innovations we will get from the Culperia in the near future whilst they wait for the good old days to be rolled back

[racechick]

Myown and Cookie, you do the absolute right thing in taking all the steps you deem necessary to keep your children safe. But you two do have an advantage over many parents in that you are very technically adept regarding computers, not all parents are. And children are very quick learners, particularly with computer technology, look to where all the new ideas in computing come from. At some point your kids will find a way round your blocks, probably before the age you would like them to, so it's important that whilst keeping them safe you've also explained why. I think you have to be honest with kids right from the outset.
With very young children it can be done simply, the same way you would prepare them for the dangers they may meet in real live people. Something along the lines of.........' There are a few bad people in the world who would want to hurt children , and they might trick children by pretending to be a friend, sometimes they might try to talk to you on the computer, so mummy/ daddy has put something on our computer to stop anyone getting on who we don't want and you'll be safe'. From then on you add further explanation as the child grows older/ asks.

I'm sure I've told you this story before, about a four year old girl in my class, but it's an apt story so I'll tell it again...........

Teaching assistant came to me and said 'Have you seen what R******'s got on the computer.'
I went to look and she'd navigated away from cbeebies and was playing some machine gun shooting game.
'What's this game R*******? I asked
'Kill Bill' she replied
' How did you get that on the computer?' I asked
' I did, search for kill games' she answered without halting her killing spree. She'd also set it up for a couple of boys who liked the look of the game but were less technologically able than she.
This as I said was a four year old working on a school computer with restricted Internet access and safeguards in place. I couldn't get on the forum at school. I would hazard a guess that by ten she'll be navigating round anything her parents have in place at home. So it's imperatve that children like this understand why limits are in place and are equipped to deal with the dangers if they encounter them.

[Hammer278]

I remember the fundamental rule I had in my head during my childhood when we had a shared computer in the family - Internet Options -> Tools -> Delete Cookies&History