Slashdot Mirror


Verizon to Launch Mobile 'Chaperone' Service

Billosaur writes "CNET is reporting that Verizon will soon be offering a service (branded "Chaperone") which will allow parents to keep track of their cell phone-carrying children. Following on the heels of a similar service started by Sprint in April, the system will allow parents 'to set up geographic limits and receive text alerts if their children, who also carry phones, go too far from home. The service also lets parents check where their offspring are via a map on their cell phone or computer.' Disney will purportedly be offering a similar service when it begins selling mobile phones sometime this summer. It's 10pm -- do you know where you child's cell phone is?"

427 comments

  1. It's 10pm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > It's 10pm -- do you know where you child's cell phone is?

    Does someone else know where your child is?

    1. Re:It's 10pm... by dr_dank · · Score: 4, Funny

      I can't wait for the new Verizon commercials.

      Annoying Kid: Can you molest me now? Good.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    2. Re:It's 10pm... by enigmiac · · Score: 1

      This is, imho, not a great idea. All it's going to do is cause children to leave their cell phones at home, so parent's are totally unable to get into contact with them. At least that's what I'd have done as a child

    3. Re:It's 10pm... by elliotCarte · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Does someone else know where your child is?
      Also, does your stalker know where YOU are? Someone could hide THEIR phone in your car or something and track YOU as well. They'd just need to pick the phone up later, which wouldn't be difficult to find!... Small world, huh? Fancy meeting you here... again... and again... and here... and there. Yes, indeed. It IS a VERY small world.
      --
      If you can't just be yourself, then be more like me, ok?
    4. Re:It's 10pm... by Da_Weasel · · Score: 1

      Yea, or turn it off. That's what I would have done if I was a kid. They I could still make calls if I really needed to....

      --
      If you must!
    5. Re:It's 10pm... by freshman_a · · Score: 1


      All it's going to do is cause children to leave their cell phones at home, so parent's are totally unable to get into contact with them.

      Well, if you're like me, there were no such things as cell phones when I was a kid. I didn't know one single person with a cell phone when I was in high school. I didn't have my first cell phone until after I graduated college. How is that any different than a kid leaving their cell phone behind so their parents can't track them? And how did I ever survive in those dark ages...

    6. Re:It's 10pm... by itchy92 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but that was then. In this post-9/11 world, terr'rists are always looking to abduct your children.

      No, I'm not trying to start a flamewar, just a stupid comment

      --
      Slashdot: News for nerds. Stuff tha-- MICRO$OFT IS THE DEVIL!!1
    7. Re:It's 10pm... by Software · · Score: 1

      Tracking someone is already easy to do. Yes, Verizon makes it easier for a stalker by doing the method you mention, but it'd be kind of silly. What's the battery life of a typical cell phone? A week, maybe? Also, there's the not insignificant chance that the target would find the cell phone.

    8. Re:It's 10pm... by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1
      Yeah, but that was then. In this post-9/11 world, terr'rists are always looking to abduct your children.
      No, those are the pedophiles. The terrorists just want to kill your children. You need to watch more Fox News, clearly.
      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    9. Re:It's 10pm... by nizo · · Score: 1

      I need to figure out some way to find these little devices; just think of how much money I could make taking them off of tracked cars and selling them on ebay :-D

    10. Re:It's 10pm... by Saxerman · · Score: 1
      Well, if you're like me, there were no such things as cell phones when I was a kid. I didn't know one single person with a cell phone when I was in high school. I didn't have my first cell phone until after I graduated college. How is that any different than a kid leaving their cell phone behind so their parents can't track them? And how did I ever survive in those dark ages...

      Certainly there was a time before cell phones or even phones of any kind and we managed to survive. However, a bit more than 10 years ago when I started doing a gig as a Deliverator, there was a pay phone near every major corner and gas station. By the last year I was still without a cell phone, but the number of pay phones had diminished to the point that I kept a list of the eight 'working' pay phones I knew of in a city of more than 100k peoples.

      --

      A steaming cup of soykaf would be real wiz right now.

    11. Re:It's 10pm... by gujo-odori · · Score: 1

      That's already been done, this might just make it a little easier.

      As the father of a couple of young children, I see this technology as a good thing. So will you, when you have kids. Not to use it for spying them, but as a safety device. In the terrible event of a child obduction, a concealed cell phone could make all the difference. Think of it as a Lo Jack for your kid, and ditch the tinfoil hat.

    12. Re:It's 10pm... by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Because they couldn't just use a GPS tracker to begin with, and cellphone batteries last forever, right?

      On the plus side, someone stole your phone? Left it in a cab? Not sure? Now you can be. It's easy enough to defeat if you don't want to be tracked (turn the GPS function off, or the phone) and there are security measures in place to ensure that not just anyone can track the phone. Could they be defeated? Well, if it's got a web interface, then it's only secure as that is.. But I would wager that some sicko driving by is more likely to just snatch a kid than go through the hassle of trying to hack into their phone tracking system. It might happen, but if a system does largely more good than harm, it's acceptable. We make the same concessions for all technology, from cars to planes to power lines.

      Regardless, if this program was not available, it would not prevent bad people from doing bad things, but by enabling parents to keep tabs on their children, it gives people peace of mind. Also, the article (or at least one of the versions I read earlier on Google news) explicitly states that this is aimed at the small child, not teens who would just be clever enough to bypass it anyway; by leaving the phone where they're supposed to be and forwarding the calls, for example.

    13. Re:It's 10pm... by Kwesadilo · · Score: 1

      Snooping cellphone: $75
      Copper mesh: $10
      Soldering iron: $35

      A stylish cellphone carrying case that keeps you literally under the radar: priceless.

      --
      This space reserved for administrative use.
    14. Re:It's 10pm... by telekon · · Score: 1
      On the plus side, someone stole your phone? Left it in a cab? Not sure?


      In Soviet Russia, cell phone finds you.

      Oh, wait...

      --

      To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.

  2. Big Daddy by Kaa · · Score: 4, Funny

    which will allow parents to keep track of their cell phone-carrying children

    We are all NSA's children...

    --

    Kaa
    Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
    1. Re:Big Daddy by OctoberSky · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How long until we find out that every mobile phone has this feature and it has been activated by the NSA.
      Of course Verizon will say they were forced to submit the information to the NSA.

      -October Sky
      Cell phone free since 2003!

    2. Re:Big Daddy by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > > which will allow parents to keep track of their cell phone-carrying children
      >
      > We are all NSA's children...

      What the government taketh away, the government also giveth. When life gives you lemons, make lemonade.

      When the federal government drops a $100M unfunded liability in your lap to set up a citizen tracking system, you've gotta recoup your expenses somehow.

      Lobbyists: Reaming out the last scrapes of pulp from the lemon since at least a generation before 9/11.

    3. Re:Big Daddy by cortana · · Score: 1

      The Corps is mother, the Corps is father!

    4. Re:Big Daddy by timeOday · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "Oh don't worry, we're only monitoring where you go, not what you do when you get there. It's just traffic analysis, so it doesn't fall under the 4th Ammendment."

      You read it here first.

    5. Re:Big Daddy by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Interesting

      How long until we find out that every mobile phone has this feature and it has been activated by the NSA.

      Consider part 1 of your question answered with "now". Every mobile phone has this feature.

      If you are within range of two or more cell towers, then your position can be triangulated. The more towers nearby, the more accurate the reading will be. It's simply the nature of cell phones as broadcast devices. You can't broadcast a signal without revealing your location.

      The second part is a different story. Whether or not any government agency has used this ability is unknown; whether it would be accurate enough for their purposes is unknown to me as well. Nevertheless they certainly could use it to at least roughly track you.

      So if you really don't want your location known, do what the teenagers with these phones will do: Turn it off. And when mom/the G-men pick you up and want to know why they couldn't track you, tell them you couldn't get any service.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    6. Re:Big Daddy by eln · · Score: 5, Funny

      If Law and Order has taught me anything, it's that this capability can be easily defeated simlpy by uploading a virus to the phone company's switches to make them think I'm coming in from different towers every time they check.

      Unfortunately, the cops will figure this out and disable the software after I bury my victim alive, but not before she actually dies, and my whole operation will be foiled.

    7. Re:Big Daddy by supremebob · · Score: 5, Funny

      True, but if 24 has taught us anything, we all now know that the phone companies are protect by Phoenix poison pill firewalls that cause everything to self-destruct when you try to break in. Not that it matters, though, because Jack Bauer's cell phone has pre-programmed backdoors to every computer system and can make flash memory cards self-destruct on command.

    8. Re:Big Daddy by rdoger6424 · · Score: 1

      Great episode.

      --
      "Hello 911? I just tried to toast some bread, and the toaster grew an arm and stabbed me in the face!"
    9. Re:Big Daddy by cmdr_beeftaco · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do not post information like this. You are endangering Jack Bauer's critical mission. I am going to upload your position into his PDA so he can take you out.

    10. Re:Big Daddy by pid-3 · · Score: 1

      All phones are required to have GPS chips in them and so when you dial 911 the system can tell where you are. This has been the law for several years now and if you have replaced your phone in the last 2 years or so you have one of these new phones. I've read thru most of the comments and the one that I have not seen yet is the simply fact that it frees the phone user from having to call someone and tell them where they are going. I like having a phone in the first place because I know I can be reached if needed and I don't have to constantly check in.

    11. Re:Big Daddy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    12. Re:Big Daddy by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

      That's funny, I always thought that flash memory was non-volatile.

    13. Re:Big Daddy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought a new phone in Decemer. I called 911 once in March, and they didn't even know what state I calling from. Granted, I was only a few miles from a state border (I must have connected to a tower across the border, as I got the other state's 911), but I think most GPS units have slightly better resolution than that.

    14. Re:Big Daddy by alfrin · · Score: 1

      Well if there is one thing that Barney has taught us its that Sharing is Caring and we should always share our locations and phone conversations with the NSA. Jeez you selfish pigs

    15. Re:Big Daddy by sitarah · · Score: 1

      "If you are within range of two or more cell towers, then your position can be triangulated. The more towers nearby, the more accurate the reading will be. It's simply the nature of cell phones as broadcast devices. You can't broadcast a signal without revealing your location.

      The second part is a different story. Whether or not any government agency has used this ability is unknown; whether it would be accurate enough for their purposes is unknown to me as well. Nevertheless they certainly could use it to at least roughly track you."

      This ability was used in a well-known case in the New York area this spring. Darryl Littlejohn was booked for a rape and murder based, in part, on the fact that cell-phone pings showed him to be in the area at an appropriate time where the body was later found.

      It is not a very rigorous newspaper, but these are interesting quotes if correct: "When your cell phone is switched on, your network provider knows exactly where you are within 300 YARDS or less." "And a federal rule requires all cell phones to be able to pinpoint their locations within 1,000 feet when 911 is dialed."

      Not quite government use, but the law enforcement community is certainly employing the cell towers.

    16. Re:Big Daddy by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      I remembered after posting about the 911 location thing, but that's because I'm pretty sure they use the triangulation technique I'm talking about to do it. Specifically because this was something being asked of the cell service providers, not cell phone makers, implying that it was something that could be done with the existing setup. It would be better this way anyway, since it wouldn't require everyone to buy a new phone to get the service.

      It seems highly unlikely that all phones have GPS capabilities in them but don't advertise this feature and make it available to the consumer. GPS chips would increase the cost of the phone and it would be nuts to forgoe the opportunity to charge the customer more for them.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    17. Re:Big Daddy by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Not quite government use, but the law enforcement community is certainly employing the cell towers.

      Unless you're living in the crazy libertarian equivalent of a 60s commune, law enforcement == government.

      Nevertheless thanks for the article. Very interesting both for its use in gaining an arrest warrant and for the range information -- 300 yards is a little worse than I expected, but it does say "or less".

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    18. Re:Big Daddy by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      TDOA triangulation (forget what it stands for already, but it's time[d?] (something) of arrival, and it's like GPS, it's based on the time for a signal to get somewhere. Signal strength won't work, because your antenna isn't moving and you have to deal with reflections anyhow... er anyway, this sentence has gone to hell but TDOA allows accuracy of about 50-100 meters. Probably you could do better if phones had a more accurate clock... but that's 50% of a GPS, so at that point, might as well put a GPS in them.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    19. Re:Big Daddy by ChrisA90278 · · Score: 1
      Everty cell phone ALREADY has this feature. Once I misplaced my phone so I called the service and asked them where it was. They were able to give me the general location where they last saw it which was enough for me to recover the phone.

      Cell phones periodically broadcast a message that says "is there a cell tower nearby?" and by this method figure out which tower to use for calls. As the phone moves it uses new toweres. The cell phone companies keep logs that record which tower your phone ha used.

      Going one step farther, that "is there a cell tower nearby?" message might be heard by multiple towers and by looking at the signal strenght heard by each tower the phone can be located toeven better precision.

      So this new service is really just an applaction the looks at existing information logs

      Smart kids (and adults) who don't want to be tracked would siply turn the phones off.

    20. Re:Big Daddy by josecanuc · · Score: 1

      Time Difference-Of-Arrival is what you're looking for. It's a pretty simple technique. Amateur radio operators have been building simple TDOA circuits for decades for hidden transmitter hunts (a recreational use of radio).

      See: http://home.att.net/~jleggio/projects/rdf/tdoa2.ht m

      These simple ones with only a single reciever can only tell you a direction, not triangulate a position, but with more than one...

    21. Re:Big Daddy by electronerdz · · Score: 0

      Well, luckily for me, I have Nextel, so I guess I am safe. "No Service" should say "Safe from NSA"

      --
      Kernel Krunch - Part of a Complete OS
    22. Re:Big Daddy by nizo · · Score: 1

      Once this kind of service is offered by all companies, will we (the voters) get to establish boundaries for our congresscritters? Maybe let us know when they stray more than a few miles from the capitol building, so they don't miss any important votes? And do I get to see where they have been via the freedom of information act? Now THAT kind of tracking would be nice to have.

    23. Re:Big Daddy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you be TRIangulated, you need 3 points of reference.

      Two towers will get you to a 'circle' of known locations (and if that circle happens to intercept a mountain, thats a lot of places you could be.

      It requires three towers in order to reduce that circle to a point. It's all about intersecting spheres (like gps).

    24. Re:Big Daddy by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 1

      Triangulation? It's a little more direct than that. My CDMA phone (and it was a pretty basic phone) has Assisted GPS. It supposedly gives me the ability to switch it off (although it'll be re-enabled if I make an emergency call), but I really have no way of verifying that.

    25. Re:Big Daddy by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 1

      At least when the equipment is self-destructing, the area will be well-lit... unlike the rooms where autopsies are conducted on CSI.

    26. Re:Big Daddy by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Well, luckily for me, I have Nextel, so I guess I am safe. "No Service" should say "Safe from NSA"

      It's not a bug, it's a feature!

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    27. Re:Big Daddy by Random832 · · Score: 1

      CSI? geez, the autopsy rooms are as bright as day compared to the courtrooms.

      --
      We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.
  3. Steps for Workaround by tekiegreg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    1) Tell parent you are going to a friends house...
    2) At friend's house, tie Cellphone to family dog (make 'em think you're actually there and moving around)
    3) ???
    4) Profit!!!

    --
    ...in bed
    1. Re:Steps for Workaround by blueturffan · · Score: 1

      Would the dog be required to answer the phone when your parents call to check up on you?

    2. Re:Steps for Workaround by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The profit comes when some enterprising youngster figures out he can charge money to carry around his deviant friends' cellphones for the evening, maybe even send a text message every once in a while to complete the scenario.

      Or better yet, have a bunch of prepaid cell phones, which you loan out to people to use while you're carrying around their parentally-supplied one. After all, nobody wants to be without a phone: it's uncool.

      I look forward to watching the segment on CBS where they interview some kid who's doing this and everyone acts surprised that kids can actually think for themselves.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    3. Re:Steps for Workaround by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's certainly a possibility, but going on the kids I know, they'd sooner have teeth extracted with a blowtorch than let their cellphones get out of reach.

      Cellphones are crack for kids these days.

    4. Re:Steps for Workaround by gfxguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Have your calls forwarded to your friend's phone. Unless he's being tracked, too... deperate kids might just chip in and buy some pay-as-you-go phone.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    5. Re:Steps for Workaround by Ana10g · · Score: 1

      well, I'm not sure if it'll work (because most providers make you pay for the feature), but in addition to this, have your phone number from your RealCell(TM) forwarded to your temporary disposable, give the real one to a friend, and, voila! Instant deception device ;)

      --
      just an analog boy living in a digital age.
    6. Re:Steps for Workaround by kfg · · Score: 1

      I look forward to watching the segment on CBS where they interview some kid who's doing this and everyone acts surprised that kids can actually think for themselves.

      And insist on it.

      KFG

    7. Re:Steps for Workaround by Amouth · · Score: 1

      and if you set up call forwarding when you do the hand off.. well no one will even know. :)

      this is how guys at the office keep there US numbers when they are inthe UK..

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    8. Re:Steps for Workaround by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Scenario-- It is ten oclock. Your kid asks you if he could spend another hour at his friends house for whatever reason. Because of this system you know that he is there and not in the front yard of some keg party somewhere... so you let him hang out a little longer. What is so bad about this?

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    9. Re:Steps for Workaround by tekiegreg · · Score: 1

      Meh... "Oh I'm sorry the signal must be bad at my friend's house...try me when I'm not going there...". Just make a mental note that when you want to call Mom from said friend's house that you do it from their landline...

      --
      ...in bed
    10. Re:Steps for Workaround by nightsweat · · Score: 4, Funny

      You can't do this with a cat.

      My god, according to GPS, Johnny hasn't moved in hours. I think he's dead!

      --

      the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
    11. Re:Steps for Workaround by OO7david · · Score: 1

      If the parents are such that they will allow Verizon or Sprint or whoever to spy on the kid's location for them, I don't think it would be unbelievable if those parents sued the pants off of whoever had their kid's mobile when something happens to that kid.

    12. Re:Steps for Workaround by Tweekster · · Score: 1

      And that kid will be like "yeah good luck sueing me"
      And the parents will either A: have no money, so a lawsuit is meaningless...or B: have lots of money and will basically destroy the idiot family

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    13. Re:Steps for Workaround by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously, the keg is at his friend's house.

    14. Re:Steps for Workaround by CPT+Carl · · Score: 1

      "Or better yet, have a bunch of prepaid cell phones, which you loan out to people to use while you're carrying around their parentally-supplied one. After all, nobody wants to be without a phone: it's uncool."

      If possible, why not just use call forwarding from the "Nanny" phone to the prepaid cell phone. This may work if the location feature returns locale based on physical location of the target phone or the local "forwarded" phone (I think the former). In that case, just leave the phone on at a safe location (i.e. friend's family room). The "tracker" only gets locale of the now-stationary phone, but if a voice follow up is done, you can be reached. Cuts out the middle man...

      --
      THIS SPACE FOR RENT Call 1-800-555-CARL
    15. Re:Steps for Workaround by TWX · · Score: 1

      Call forwarding on my work's cell plan is $0.15 per minute, so I think that they'd notice, even if not initially...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    16. Re:Steps for Workaround by gstoddart · · Score: 1
      Have your calls forwarded to your friend's phone. Unless he's being tracked, too... deperate kids might just chip in and buy some pay-as-you-go phone.

      I realize kids have a different relationship with phones than adults, moreso than when I was a kid.

      But the pairing of "depreate kids" and "pay-as-you go" just seems rather odd to me. Little Billy's absolutely jonesing for a cell-phone and can't do without it? "The heck with the 'meth, I need minutes for my phone!!!"

      Are kids that depserate to have cell phones nowadays?
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    17. Re:Steps for Workaround by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I look forward to watching the segment on CBS where they interview some kid who's doing this and everyone acts surprised that kids can actually think for themselves.
      Why think for yourself when you can read Slashdot?
    18. Re:Steps for Workaround by fooDfighter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nothing, but if you can't trust your kids even a little I think underage drinking will be the least of your worries.

      Moreover I don't expect that a generation raised using surveillance will be particularly upset by increased government surveillance in their adult years. Or maybe that's the whole point.

    19. Re:Steps for Workaround by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps they were surprised that kids decided to turn a small favor for friends into a way to make money off their friends.

    20. Re:Steps for Workaround by TWX · · Score: 1

      How about this? Turn off the cell phone. Check one's voicemail every 1/2 hour or so, and immediately call the parents back from a landline or borrowed cell phone, complaining about the service.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    21. Re:Steps for Workaround by sharp-bang · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I believe this kid-tracking service was previously (c. 2000) marketed to parents in Europe, then subsequently the ability to turn it off was marketed to the kids.

      --
      #!
    22. Re:Steps for Workaround by GigG · · Score: 1

      Yes

      --
      Is buying a Harley Davidson as your first motorcycle since you were 16 at age 49 a midlife crisis issue?
    23. Re:Steps for Workaround by corerunner · · Score: 1

      how did everyone else miss the [obligatory] underpants gnome reference?

      --
      "Don't hate the media, become the media." -Jello Biafra
    24. Re:Steps for Workaround by Amouth · · Score: 1

      ouch.. for us it is jsut the cost of the call as it would normaly be..

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    25. Re:Steps for Workaround by 955301 · · Score: 1


      Can you forward your cell phone to another number? I wonder if this system will take into account the notion that the personing answering the forwarded call can be in a different location than the phone itself.

      One more fun condensation of this idea: Are the phone companies seriously getting in on the competition against kid's libidos? In the immortal words of the last english speaking fella to see Custer - Good luck!

      --
      You are checking your backups, aren't you?
    26. Re:Steps for Workaround by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      It's funny that you typoed my typo.

      Anyway, as GigG said, the sad answer is "yes."

      It's really quite pathetic, in my opinion, but it does seem to be the case.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    27. Re:Steps for Workaround by eekrano · · Score: 1

      Well the next step after someone figures out the phone is being left somewhere and forwarded is for Verizon to charge another premium to enable parents to see through the camera function of the child's phone.

      Then of course, when the kids figure out how to forward the camera to thier pay-as-you-go phone, you can always just put a little electronic dog collar on them.

      --
      -- Eekrano
    28. Re:Steps for Workaround by RM6f9 · · Score: 1

      I *so* wish I had Mod points - plus 5 insightful!!!

      --
      Take the 90-Day Challenge! http://rwmurker.bodybyvi.com/
    29. Re:Steps for Workaround by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It encourages your kid to figure out ways to lie to you without getting caught.

      Everytime they are successful (and assuming that they are lucky enough to avoid any of the dire circumstances that you might have warned them about), it will confirm to them that parents are over-controlling morons who need to be bypassed at every opportunity to "have fun".

      They will continue to push the envelope of what they can get away with until at some point they will get in over their head, and will not trust you (the over-controlling, untrusting moron parent) enough to come to you for help.

    30. Re:Steps for Workaround by Eternauta3k · · Score: 0

      After all, nobody wants to be without a phone: it's uncool.
      Please say you're kidding. It's impractical, not uncool.

      --
      Yeah. Would you choose a neurosurgeon who pokes around people's brains in his spare time? I wouldn't.
    31. Re:Steps for Workaround by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      Food for thought, this tracking feature is not designed to track where kids go voluntarily, it's to trask where kids go involuntarily. If your son intends to sneak off to sleep with his girlfriend as a teenager, this'll do jack to track him, cause he'll just remove the battery. But if he's kidnapped by some religious crazy as a small kid or in a traffic accident halfway to wherever he was driving, the feature could conceivably save his life.

      Seriously, do you really think that parents are stupid enough to try to use this to track a kid's illicit activities? Believe it or not, people have a vested interest in the safety of their children that has nothing to do with controlling them.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    32. Re:Steps for Workaround by jjr1 · · Score: 1

      I'm waiting for some enterprising kid in a fight with his parents to tell them he hates them and never wants to see them again. Then, he mails the phone to a buddy in another state, hides and waits until they freak out. I see this happening within a few months of the service being widely available.

      --
      Best Trivia answer ever... Name the largest aquatic man eater... Contestant: Tsunami
    33. Re:Steps for Workaround by mpe · · Score: 1

      1) Tell parent you are going to a friends house...
      2) At friend's house, tie Cellphone to family dog (make 'em think you're actually there and moving around)
      3) ???
      4) Profit!!!


      The profit would be for the kid who offers a paid for "phone minder" service.

    34. Re:Steps for Workaround by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't do this with a cat.

      That would be dangerous. Some cats are smart enough to use phones...

    35. Re:Steps for Workaround by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Because of this system you know that he is there and not in the front yard of some keg party somewhere... so you let him hang out a little longer. What is so bad about this?
      Because of this system, you believe that his phone is at his friend's house. You have no idea that the system is accurately reporting his position, or that the phone is actually in his possession. While you can probably safely assume that the position of the phone will be reported accurately, the latter is probably a bad assumption.

      If you're going to not trust him as to his whereabouts in the first place (which is why you'd use the system), then there's no reason to assume he hasn't stashed the phone somewhere and is just forwarding calls through it. I could think of lots of ways to defeat this, and I'm sure I would have come up with at least a few of them when I was 12 or 13. Even if the system notifies you if a call is being forwarded, there are always ways around it (am I the only person who remembers acoustic couplers?).

      What is so bad about this is the false sense of security that it gives you as a parent. Maybe not you personally -- I don't know you and therefore won't judge -- but I can think of a lot of people that would use something like this as an alternative to checking in on their kids. The end result, since it would be easily bypassed, is less supervision and not more, plus less parent/child interaction.
      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    36. Re:Steps for Workaround by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I believe this kid-tracking service was previously (c. 2000) marketed to parents in Europe, then subsequently the ability to turn it off was marketed to the kids.

      War is good for business. Selling to both sides, doubly so.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    37. Re:Steps for Workaround by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

      Actually I've always wanted to drop something like this into a FedEx package, and watch its progress in real-time across the country. I tried doing it once with a GPS receiver, but it almost never had signal and didn't get any fixes the whole trip, when I retrieved it. But cellphone signals are a little stronger, one of the triangulation-based systems might work.

      I have no idea why I think that would be so cool ... I just do.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    38. Re:Steps for Workaround by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Seriously, do you really think that parents are STUPID enough to try to use this to track a kid's illicit activities?"

      You are talking about americans here. Look at all the stupid shit parents do....give the college kid the credit card, give the 12 year old the phone, let the TV baby sit, abstenance only programs........do I need to go on?

    39. Re:Steps for Workaround by MoneyT · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, I do think that many parents are this stupid. Remember all the stupid kids you grew up with? The ones that were better at getting the girls than you were? They're parents now, and I assure you, they're no more intelligent now.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    40. Re:Steps for Workaround by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Actually, if they follow the game plan of most phone companies, it works something like this:

      1. Offer parents a way to track kids on the phone.
      2. Profit.
      3. Offer call-forwarding for a fee.
      4. Profit.
      5. Offer parents option to be notified when kids forward calls.
      6. Profit.
      7. Offer the ability to clone phones where only one is tracked.
      8. Profit.
      9. Offer ability for parents to be notified when a kid clones the phone.
      10. Profit.
      .
      .
      .

      It follows the long tradition of phone company abuses:

      1. Sell phone service.
      2. Profit.
      3. Sell phone numbers to advertisers.
      4. Profit.
      5. Allow people to PAY to be unlisted.
      6. Profit.
      7. Sell advertisers auto-dialers.
      8. Profit.
      9. Sell caller id to customers.
      10. Profit.
      11. Sell caller id blocking to advertisers.
      12. Profit.
      13. Sell anonymous call rejection to customers.
      14. Profit.

      I don't know where to go from there, because by this time we had the national do-not-call list. Of course, now every advertiser is a charity or a pollster, somehow.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    41. Re:Steps for Workaround by a.d.trick · · Score: 1

      Judging by the proportions of most of the kids here in Canada and the US; I figure that moving is rather rare activity for most of them.

    42. Re:Steps for Workaround by ottothecow · · Score: 1
      and what if they wanted that extra hour because they werent drinking and instead needed to take someone home who was. From the tracking standpoint, this would look terrible. First they are not where you expect them to be, they appear to be at a party, and then suddenly they are driving, and not driving back to your house...and since you thought they were at a party...

      Havnt you people seen the episode of Hogan Knows Best where he tracks his kid??? (ok so, it was under a rare circumstance that I saw it so I wont assume anyone else has time for such a bad show) They install a gps tracker in one of his cars...guess what...its a bad idea to spy on your kids. Let them know that they can actually tell you if there is something bad. If you know that they can do this, even if you dont know where they are or what they are up to at least you can know they are fine since its ok to call you if something's not alright. What are you going to do when they go to college? Keep tracking them in some other city where you dont know what the tracking data even means? If you REALLY want to know...you had better be willing to actually follow them around and be willing to deal with their anger when you get caught because that is essentially what you are doing.

      --
      Bottles.
    43. Re:Steps for Workaround by ottothecow · · Score: 1
      obviously a joke but...

      almost every girl that I know doesnt carry her phone on her person. They dont seem to like cramming them It's either in a purse where it gets set down when she arrives somewhere and doesnt move unless it rings until she leaves or it's in the pocket of some guy she convinced to carry it (thats assuming she brought it and didnt leave it sitting on her desk at home). Mobile phone tracking is nowhere near as effective as gps implants (and maybe gps implants would help people with directions)

      --
      Bottles.
  4. How pointless is that? by raitchison · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously, the kids will know this kind of watching is being done and will either turn off their phone or leave it behind (or ata friends house inside the "permitted area".

    Then if the kids really get into trouble they won't have the option of calling for help.

    Sounds like a great plan to me.

    1. Re:How pointless is that? by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      Seriously, the kids will know this kind of watching is being done and will either turn off their phone or leave it behind (or ata friends house inside the "permitted area".

      Except the service will be linked to an RFID chip planted inside the pain center of the child's brain. Then, if they get further than 5 feet from their cellphone or roam outside the allowed area, a jolt of pain sensation can be sent directly through their body. Think of it as a giant invisible fence!

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    2. Re:How pointless is that? by sidfaiwu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Obviously this technology would fail for teenagers. I think the intended audiance is that of parents with younger kids.

    3. Re:How pointless is that? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Except the service will be linked to an RFID chip planted inside the pain center of the child's brain.

      Thus teaching gadget obsession to the young and creating a new generation of mindless consumers.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    4. Re:How pointless is that? by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 1

      Not really. If this is applied with some intellegence by the parents, it will give kids more freedom and flexibility as opposed to 'be home by 9:30 or else!'

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    5. Re:How pointless is that? by birge · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm sure the people at Verizon have thought about this a little longer than you give them credit for. For one, the parents will be able to call the cell phone when they want, and bust the kid if he's not there. Any sufficiently clever parent will call at least once to check up on the kid, or establish a precedent of making it likely. Second, Verizon can alert parents when the number is forwarded, or disable forwarding of the number. There's really no way around that without unbelievably serious hacking. And if my kid could do that, then I'd be happy to let him go to where ever the hell he wants to go!

    6. Re:How pointless is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the intended audiance is that of parents with younger kids.

      I disagree. I think the intended audience is our ever-increasing federal government/NSA/FCC to add to their tools to control us. Just think, "Folks, we need to keep track of every single person in this country to... PROTECT our children from harm."

    7. Re:How pointless is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those would be the parents who can at least spell intelligence, right?

    8. Re:How pointless is that? by KU_Fletch · · Score: 1

      I'd like to think that when I have a kid one day, he/she will be smarter than this technology. If my kid was dumb enough to take their cell phone out of some "safe zone" I had set up, or not know to turn the freaking thing off, I'd be shocked. This is why my parents never tried this stuff when I was in high school. They tried to have a single conversation about the "world wide web" with me (this was 1995), and they soon figured out I knew way more about technology than they could ever hope to understand. Thus, they left me be and told me not to do anything stupid.

      --
      It's not stupid. It's advanced.
    9. Re:How pointless is that? by raitchison · · Score: 1

      I can picture it now:

      Why didn't you answer when I called you?

      Sorry Dad, I had a dead battery, no signal, it didn't ring, etc.

      Wireless service still doesn't have the reliability for a parent to make the "you'd better answer when I call" demand.

      In any case I submit that a sufficiently clever parent would merely raise their kids to actually be where they are supposed to, rather than rely on some easily defeated gizmo to parent for them.

      I give Verizon plenty of credit for figuring out new ways to soak more money out of their subscribers, between disabling bluetooth features (so you will have to pay them to backup your phone book or transfer camera phone pictures) and turning off MP3 playback (so you will have to buy your music yet again from their VCast service).

    10. Re:How pointless is that? by technomom · · Score: 1

      I can see it being good for those "Mom, I took a wrong turn out of Yankee Stadium and I have no idea where I am" kinds of calls.

      Maybe it's cheaper than putting the GPS in the car.

      Otherwise, meh.....if you want to know where they are, call them and ask. Or do what my mom did, "Where are you going? Who are you going to be with? Call me if you go somewhere else."

      JoAnn

    11. Re:How pointless is that? by birge · · Score: 1
      If Verizon's service is tracking the user, I'm sure it's also informing about the connection. I would imagine if the phone goes out of range, it tells the parent.

      But you may have a point about parents themselves, though I think you're underestimating the effect of society and peer groups on kids. I know some great people with, frankly, really shitty kids. I can only assume it's the fact that their kids unavoidably spend more time around their fellow punks (at school and after) than their parents. Plus, never underestimate the power of media to completely screw up kids' value systems. A couple good parents can't really compete with Madison Avenue in terms of persuasion. Even mainstream television, let alone commercials, display incredibly low moral standards. It occurred to me one day that virtually every episode of "Friends" (which I loved) involved them grossly decieving and conniving their close friends. But this is about to lead into one of my rants about how we're declining as a civilization, and I hardly think you want to hear that... :-)

    12. Re:How pointless is that? by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      Not designed to prevent trouble kids get into voluntarily. Designed to prevent trouble kids get into involuntarily. Kidnapping, traffic accidents, etc. In all honesty, a lot of people will carry these perfectly voluntarily, as having people know where you are can be useful in the same way/situations that, you know, having people able to contact you through a cell phone is useful.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    13. Re:How pointless is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you were going to use this thing to track your kid once, then that would be a problem.

      If you're using it all the time... well, how many times are you going to accept the same excuse? You can handle "dead battery" easily by making it your kid's responsibility, if he or she wants to go out, to have the battery fully charged.

      Yeah, if the kid's well enough behaved to make excuses credibly, then he or she can probably pull a fast one every now and then; but then, such a kid probably isn't using that "once in a while" to do anything all that horrible. And yeah, to make it fully effective will involve a certain amount of preparation and a certain amount of activity that the kid will think of as "prying". That's called "being a parent"; no tool removes that, they just change how it can be applied.

    14. Re:How pointless is that? by alshithead · · Score: 1

      By the time your kid is old enough to have a phone of their own they better have enough common sense/wisdom to stay out of serious trouble. Little things will come up occasionally of course but if they don't know enough to avoid the serious consequences from seriously bad actions then being able to track them by their cell phones probably won't help.

      --
      I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
    15. Re:How pointless is that? by raitchison · · Score: 1

      Yet another reason to control what your kids watch, I have 2 kids, one is 8 and the other is 12, shows like My Name is Earl are OK to watch, The War at Home, no freaking way. Other shows, such as Family Guy, they are allowed to watch but only if we are there with them also watching it, so we can (and we have) turn it off if it crosses the line.

      With the mainstream media as you accuratly pointed out for the most part in the toilet some parents try to shield their kids from all the bad stuff, which means when they are inevitably exposed to it they are unprepared and frequently get into trouble. Antoher school of thought is to treat the kids like adults and "let them maketheir own decisions", the underlying problem there is that kids are too empowered and actually think they are on equal footing as their parents, they are never shown responsible behavior so they nearly always make irresponsible choices.

      What we do is control their exposure, make it clear what the boundaries are and why they are what they are. As they demonstrate responsibility the boundaries are relaxed, as they demonstrate irresponsibility more restrictions are added.

    16. Re:How pointless is that? by mpe · · Score: 1

      I'm sure the people at Verizon have thought about this a little longer than you give them credit for. For one, the parents will be able to call the cell phone when they want, and bust the kid if he's not there. Any sufficiently clever parent will call at least once to check up on the kid, or establish a precedent of making it likely. Second, Verizon can alert parents when the number is forwarded, or disable forwarding of the number. There's really no way around that without unbelievably serious hacking. And if my kid could do that, then I'd be happy to let him go to where ever the hell he wants to go!

      So Verizon provide 100% coverage? Which should please the rest of their customers?
      Appartently "serious hacking" includes the off switch or removing the battery :)

    17. Re:How pointless is that? by mpe · · Score: 1

      Except the service will be linked to an RFID chip planted inside the pain center of the child's brain. Then, if they get further than 5 feet from their cellphone or roam outside the allowed area, a jolt of pain sensation can be sent directly through their body. Think of it as a giant invisible fence!

      So where's this "pain chip" going to get it's power from? If it's from the phone then simply removing the battery will disable it. It also isn't going to be long before someone works out how to hack such a system into a weapon.

    18. Re:How pointless is that? by birge · · Score: 1

      i wish there were more parents like you! i think you're right that a lot of the problem is parents who are too willing to treat their children as equals and who try to negotiate when dictating is neccesary. drives me bat shit when i see some sappy new age parents trying to reason with their screaming kids in the store when they really just need to lay down the law.

    19. Re:How pointless is that? by birge · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I should've addressed that in my first post. I think it's fair to assume that the cell phone will work the vast majority of the time. You wouldn't even try this if you lived in an area where the cell phone is spotty. Dropping out here and there is actually not a problem for the tracking service. Your kid's not going to warp from the library to a crack house in five minutes. As you suggest, though, I agree this won't work in an area where Verizon coverage isn't good, but I really think it's a solid idea otherwise. If the kid pulls out the battery, you'll know in a few minutes and his punk ass will be grass. And the broken phone things works once--ONCE--if the kid ever wants to see daylight before college. Man, I'm going to be a great Dad...

    20. Re:How pointless is that? by ampmouse · · Score: 1

      If I wanted to get around it, I would just Interface my cellphone with Asterisk and forward all calls to a friend's or prepaid cellphone. Thanks for the suggestion, I think I am going to start my own "phone company" soon!
      Too bad I spend all my free time reading Slashdot. As a result I don't have any friends to go anywhere with.

    21. Re:How pointless is that? by isometrick · · Score: 1

      It could gather plenty of wind power from the joke flying speedily over your head.

    22. Re:How pointless is that? by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      I know some great people with, frankly, really shitty kids. I can only assume it's the fact that their kids unavoidably spend more time around their fellow punks (at school and after) than their parents.

      Sounds like you know some shitty parents and neglected kids.

      A couple good parents can't really compete with Madison Avenue in terms of persuasion.

      What a lame-assed excuse. OF COURSE THEY CAN.

      But this is about to lead into one of my rants about how we're declining as a civilization

      Perhaps a lack of personal accountability is to blame?
      Whaaaa! Whaaa! Other people are influencing my kids!
      No shit they are. It's a parents job to counteract this influence. You can't expect the rest of society to raise your children for you.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    23. Re:How pointless is that? by birge · · Score: 1

      School is six hours. Kids are wont to spent time with friends after school. Even if you only allow them an hour or two, that's 8 hours they are not in your direct influence. That seems unavoidable to me. I certainly agree with your criticism of the lack of personal accountability. That's especially the case when it comes to kids watching TV and playing video games. But it's naive to think children won't be a function, to some significant extent, of their culture. Unless you want to live on a compound and home school your children into asocial oblivion. The fact that society affects kids is why people generally care so much about it. Otherwise, I wouldn't really give a shit about the general decline of it.

    24. Re:How pointless is that? by Joebert · · Score: 1

      It might just be a scare tactic, rumor has it the system will be nicknamed the Global Oversight Department (G.O.D.)

      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    25. Re:How pointless is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure that my parents are in the kind of school of thought that you're talking about. (The "let them make their own decisions" type.)
      They don't set boundaries. Often I find it difficult to know what responsible behavior is in situations that I'm in. They have thought of myself as mature-for-my-age enough to set my own boundaries over the years; but their method is obviously not working as well for my younger brother. He has practically no self control, he's failing Grade 10 after 2 years, smoking, drinking, and starting to waste his life.
      I, on the other hand, have tried to take good advantage of my freedom somewhat... but I still know that I lack a lot of self control and discipline. I guess I'm saying that I want their guidance a lot of times but I get none. I don't really want to ask my dad "what should I do today?" but it's like I want some pressure to buckle down on things like homework etc. and to make that a habit.
      Well, maybe I shouldn't be talking about this on Slashdot but you guys looked like the sort of parents that other kids who are excelling in school etc. have. (I envy those kids sometimes.)
      Er, maybe you guys could give me a couple tips on self-discipline for a guy like me who is 18 and wants to grow up but doesn't know how??? (This is definitely going to be posted AC :)

    26. Re:How pointless is that? by albanac · · Score: 1

      Why would a kid too young to think their way around this surveillance system have a cell phone on them at all? They'd have to be too young to responsibly use it.

      ~cHris
    27. Re:How pointless is that? by skuzz03 · · Score: 1

      Number forwarding won't change the ESN the GPS tracking is tied to. Also the phone Verizon is currently using (LG Migo) for the service doesn't support text messaging period, it only has 4 buttons for speed-dials. So neither of those ideas will work, period. (Well the latter will probably start working once they release VZStalkerNet to be used on all their phones...but until then...) Social engineering and creative solutions will certainly spring up. I salute our Red Communist Verizon Brothers and the government control the offer us!

    28. Re:How pointless is that? by birge · · Score: 1

      The number forwarding was mentioned not to forward the tracking but so that kids couldn't leave the phone one place and have calls forwarded to another, to make it look like they were staying put. Anyway, I hope you're joking about joking about this being a big brother issue. It's not. It's about parenting, something that needs to be rediscovered these days, and if technology can be used to that end (it's usually used the other way) why not?

    29. Re:How pointless is that? by raitchison · · Score: 1

      Heh, my parents ran the family like some sort of Democracy, it didn't either I or my brother well.

      I at least had the foresight to realize that I was headed nowhere slowly and did something drastic, I joined the Navy, which pretty much gave me the ass-kicking I needed.

      Fast forward and I have a family, a good job and a house and my brother was just fixing to move out of Mom & Dad's in his late 20s having finished college a couple years previously.

      But I think wer'e getting offtopic now. :)

    30. Re:How pointless is that? by skuzz03 · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah I'm joking! I think the practices Verizon continues to do are downright ridiculous. From the minor locking the phone themes hardcoded to Communist Red, to crippling bluetooth unnecessarily, to disabling mp3 player capabilities of their phones, to the ridiculous and stupid closed BREW system, to the incompatible-with-the-rest-of-the-world CDMA system, to billing of data plans on PDA and smartphones, to EV-DO deployment (or rather lack thereof) followed by charging customers in non-EV-DO markets for features that only work in EV-DO markets, to this GPS stalking issue - they just continue to become ever more ridiculous and nothing seems to stop their insane practices.

      The worst part is, at least in my market, everyone hops on the Communist VZ train like a pack of migrating otters so they can be "IN" - because being "in" the communist party is where it's at yo.

    31. Re:How pointless is that? by Random832 · · Score: 1

      No, but he could go somewhere that he could plausibly spend a reasonable amount of time at (say, a friend's house), turn it off, go do whatever bad things, come back to the same "good" location, turn it back on, and claim that "it must have been a dead zone. weird."

      --
      We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.
  5. This ought to make dating easier. by Trigun · · Score: 3, Funny

    Where can I check the maps?

    This brings a whole new meaning to those "find available women in your area" banner ads.

    1. Re:This ought to make dating easier. by denis-The-menace · · Score: 1

      Yea, if you're a child molester!

      --
      Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
    2. Re:This ought to make dating easier. by RumGunner · · Score: 1

      You got the joke! Congratulations. ;)

    3. Re:This ought to make dating easier. by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1
      Where can I check the maps?

      This brings a whole new meaning to those "find available women in your area" banner ads.

      Let me guess. You work for the Dept of Homeland Security, don't you? DHS has brought a whole new meaning to the oft-used knee-jerk phrase "but think of the children!"

  6. This seems like a violation of privacy rights... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    but children have no rights. Oh well.

  7. What did parents do before this? by ajiva · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously when I was growing up my parents never had any of this technology and yet they managed to keep me out of trouble. While I agree the world is a different place, and there are lots of new and different problems, it all boils down to the parents taking an active role in the child's life. Things like asking the kids how their day went, what sorts of issues they had, things that let the kid know that home is a safe place. Or how about
    making time to have dinner together, or helping with the homework or the millions of other things families should do together.

    Is this hard to do, hell yes. But nobody ever said life was easy, and in the long run spending time with your kids will be worth it. Remember it works both ways, when the parents are old and need someone to talk to, the children will be there.

    1. Re:What did parents do before this? by Billosaur · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seriously when I was growing up my parents never had any of this technology and yet they managed to keep me out of trouble. While I agree the world is a different place, and there are lots of new and different problems, it all boils down to the parents taking an active role in the child's life. Things like asking the kids how their day went, what sorts of issues they had, things that let the kid know that home is a safe place. Or how about making time to have dinner together, or helping with the homework or the millions of other things families should do together.

      But in this age of two parents working, those kinds of things don't happen anymore. I spend 12 hours out of my day commuting and working. I get maybe 4-5 hours of sleep a night; the rest of the time is spent trying to pay bills, fix the house, make dinner (occasionally), take children to events/activities, etc. There's precious little time enough to have a true family dinner let alone quality time where a family can be together and share ideas and exchange thoughts. Heck, it's hard enough just getting my kids to sit down for a meal, and they aren't even teenagers yet.

      Maybe some would see this as a panacea or a substitute for poor parenting, but it might prove a boon to parents who can't be available as often as they'd like and still want to be able to watch their kids no matter where they are.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    2. Re:What did parents do before this? by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      But in this age of two parents working, those kinds of things don't happen anymore. I spend 12 hours out of my day commuting and working. I get maybe 4-5 hours of sleep a night; the rest of the time is spent trying to pay bills, fix the house, make dinner (occasionally), take children to events/activities, etc. There's precious little time enough to have a true family dinner let alone quality time where a family can be together and share ideas and exchange thoughts. Heck, it's hard enough just getting my kids to sit down for a meal, and they aren't even teenagers yet.

      Right about now, I'd expect some smug jerk to chime in with such insight as "well, maybe if you cut back on the fancy SUV, bigger home than you need, meals out, blah blah, maybe you'd have enough time to spend with your kids rather than work to support material objects". Dual income households have become mandatory in most areas unless you're part of the relatively privileged few who can afford to have a spouse stay home and still maintain a roof over their heads and food on the table.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    3. Re:What did parents do before this? by Angostura · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You make good points. I am the primary carer for my to children (my wife works 4 days a week, I work one day a week, and a couple of hours via e-mail and IM each evening) and we do all those things - have meals together do lots of activities, read etc.

      My kids are much too young for this - the oldest is three, and yet I am interested in this service. Let's face it - it's absolutely no good as tool to attempt enforcement - any smart kid will simply circumvent it.

      But it may (I haven't decided yet) be a useful tool to allow the kids a bit more freedom where there is a good degree of trust between child and parent.

      So, for example if my kids, when they are 8 or so want to go and play in the park by themselves or go to a friends house just down the road, I may sit them down and say 'yes, but with one condition - I'm going to worry about you, so please take this with you and keep it switched on. That way if I need you back home, I can call you, if you have a problem you can call me, and it will also let me know where it is roughly, so don't leave it lying around. Do you agree?'

      Playing with your kids is great, letting them explore by themselves is important too. Personally, I like the idea of them being able to play and make dens in the woods near our house, but I'm a worrying dad. This technology used wisely might be able to help us all out, we'll see.

      But as a tool of control? Stupid idea.

    4. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      For years, I've found it astounding the amount of discrimination modern kids face.

      Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! :) Oh, wait... you're serious!

      Disclaimer: For what it's worth, I'm 20.

      Well there's the problem then. Cripes, your neural nets are still finalizing.

      Again, think about it.

      I have. For twice as long as you have.

    5. Re:What did parents do before this? by TheDarkener · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Dual income households have become mandatory in most areas unless you're part of the relatively privileged few who can afford to have a spouse stay home and still maintain a roof over their heads and food on the table.

      "Priviliged few"? Like people are 'chosen' to be priviliged.

      Seriously. I don't have kids, so you won't listen to a word I say most likely, but I'll say it anyway:

      YOU make your OWN life. Nobody TELLS you who to be or how to live. And if they do, you need to change that. You're in control of your life - not your wife/husband, not your kids. Get some guts and start making your own decisions. If you're living somewhere where it's necessary to fix your house and pay for your 12MPG SUV, then maybe you should relocate and find alternate means to travel.

      Nobody is locking you into your lifestyle, you're just acting a scapegoat because it's easier to accept than to change.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    6. Re:What did parents do before this? by onkelonkel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Our new neighbors moved into our white collar suburb, from a not too distant blue collar suburb. They went from owning, clear title, a big 4 bedroom house, to buying a much smaller house with a $250k mortgage. The wife couldn't stay home with the kids any more, and had to go back to work full time, the kids into afterschool day care and the husband switched shifts so he could be home when the kids got up.

      I couldn't figure out why they would go through all this just to get into a neighborhood they could barely afford. Then the mom explained that at the school they moved away from, parent volunteers had to clean the kids playground every morning and pick up all the discarded needles and used condoms before the kids came out to play.

      Sometimes it isn't about the SUV and the plasma TV.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    7. Re:What did parents do before this? by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 0, Troll

      I will be a smug jerk. I rent a house for 1000 MO and drive a 8 YO honda civic, but I see my kids all the time.

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    8. Re:What did parents do before this? by Stiletto · · Score: 2, Informative

      Dual income households have become mandatory in most areas unless you're part of the relatively privileged few who can afford to have a spouse stay home and still maintain a roof over their heads and food on the table.

      Waaaaah! Someone put a gun to my head and forced my lifestyle upon me!

      I mean, seriously... how much does it really cost to "keep a roof over 2 people and keep them fed" in a normal "middle class" neighborhood? One could live quite comfortably for under $2000 a month, which is just over $11 an hour. I wouldn't say someone making over $11/hr is part of the "privileged few".

      Now if you decide to start squeezing out kids you can't afford, that's another story. Again, nobody's putting a gun to your head.

    9. Re:What did parents do before this? by Lost+Race · · Score: 1
      Seriously when I was growing up my parents never had any of this technology and yet they managed to keep me out of trouble.
      Your parents didn't keep you out of trouble, you kept yourself out of trouble, assuming you stayed out of trouble that is. Most of us didn't. But in any event, we're the ones who survived. The ones who didn't survive might have, if their parents had managed to keep better track of them. Sometimes it's good/bad parenting, sometimes it's just good/bad luck. Most kids get a little wild sometimes, and whether they survive that wildness is not entirely under anybody's control. Giving kids a slightly greater chance of being rescued when the shit hits the fan, or parents a few more early warning signs about just how wild their kids are getting, might occasionally be enough to make the difference.
    10. Re:What did parents do before this? by spun · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You don't get it. The median household income in the US was $43,318 in 2003. Half of all households make less than that. Many people in the US are barely scraping by with both parents working, often more than one job each. This is not their fault, either. They are not lazy, and not all of them are stupid. They are just unlucky. We have built a system that accepts this reality in exchange for the ability of a few to make outrageous amounts of money. This isn't about people making bad financial choices and whining about being forced into living beyond their means. This is about people having no choice but to live beyond their means, because their means are so small.

      One of the major privileges of being a part of the dominant culture is that you never have to question your assumptions. People in the dominant culture assume that anyone can do what they did. People in subordinate and marginalized cultures know this is not true. They are forced by hard reality to question their assumptions. For instance, I'm guessing that you believe you got where you are through hard work and smart choices, and anyone in the US can do the same. Well, if you grew up poor, or a minority, or both, you hear the same thing. But reality shows you otherwise. Minorities and poor people see others like them working hard and making the smartest choices they can given their circumstances, yet still failing.

      I know this flies in the face of the idea of individualism. It seems to imply that we have a responsiblity for the system we create and the effects that system has on others. It also implies that our choices impact more than just ourselves. Luckily, one of the other privileges of being a part of the dominant culture is that you can simply dismiss theories such as this. In fact your culture gives you an indoctrination and training in exactly how to dismiss them and how to make the less fortunate feel as if all their problems are their fault.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    11. Re:What did parents do before this? by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      I mean, seriously... how much does it really cost to "keep a roof over 2 people and keep them fed" in a normal "middle class" neighborhood? One could live quite comfortably for under $2000 a month, which is just over $11 an hour. I wouldn't say someone making over $11/hr is part of the "privileged few".

      Now if you decide to start squeezing out kids you can't afford, that's another story. Again, nobody's putting a gun to your head.

      Apparently you a) don't live in NJ and b) don't intend to procreate. I don't live in an extravagant house -- far from it, it only cost $425K when the average price around us is closer to $600K. However, my house is assessed at $240K but I pay $10,000 a year in taxes.

      And yes, I have three kids, including a new daughter, barely 15 months old, and the best thing I ever did, even if she means that I have to work that much harder to support her and my family.

      BTW, I drive a Saturn VUE, so my SUV is getting 25 MPG. And that doesn't change the fact that gas has doubled in price in the span of three years.

      Nobody is putting a gun to my head, but they certainly are sticking a hand in my back pocket and cleaning out my wallet, a fact I resent ever day. I didn't ask for the housing market to soar and make houses too expensive to buy, or to have my local government raise my taxes so they could build a $55 million USD high school that is still filled with crappy teachers. I certainly didn't ask anyone to suicide planes into the Twin Towers or to elect Hugo Chavez so he could mess around with oil prices with his socialist rhetoric.

      It's always easy for the people with zero ambition in life to point a finger at the people busting their asses to have a good life and say "really, it's all your own damned fault." Unfortunately, the situation is never that cut-and-dried.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    12. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't have enough free time to actually be a parent to your children then you never should have had them in the first place. In this day and age children are a choice and you shouldn't choose to bring them into this world if you don't have the resources (both the time and the money) to do things the right way.

    13. Re:What did parents do before this? by hyfe · · Score: 4, Insightful
      But in this age of two parents working, those kinds of things don't happen anymore. I spend 12 hours out of my day commuting and working. I spend 12 hours out of my day commuting and working.

      Come again? You are two people working; You don't need long work-days. You don't need jobs with good pay, you need jobs with adequate pay. Seriously, find regular 8-hour work, preferably close to where you live.

      I mean, maybe you'll drop 20-30% in pay in the process, but you'll have time to actually enjoy life and actually meet your family.. and sleep occasionally :). Work is for getting for money you can spend on your freetime. Work is not your life.

      .. and before you say this is easy for me to say; you are right, it is really easy. Just as easy as doing it. There's nothing holding you back besides you... and your own preconceived notions of having to compete for having the biggest salary, having the least time to enjoy said money and having wasted the money on the most amount of crap you can show to friends in order to impress them with how successfull and well-adjusted you are. Free your mind :)

      --
      "" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
    14. Re:What did parents do before this? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      "But in this age of two parents working, those kinds of things don't happen anymore."

      Y'know, this confuses me.

      When I was a kid back in the 1970s, both of my parents worked. This was actually the deal between my parents--Mom stayed home until the youngest (me) got into first grade. My Dad worked a job and spent nights, mornings, and weekends doing freelance work to bring in extra money (though once Mom started working, he cut back on that). My Mom worked as a secretary, primarily so that she could get home at a reasonable hour. Personally, I had about an hour-and-a-half window between when I got home and my parents got home. I had older siblings to keep me in line, but there were a few times when I was home alone and could get into trouble (mix Dixie cups, water, and propane torches. "Question: Why won't the propane torch burn a hole in a paper cup filled with water?")

      Part of the issue I see is the concept that we, as Americans, have to "have it all" in our consumer-based society. We have to spend, spend, spend. So we have to work, work, work to make the money to be able to do this. We convince ourselves that we are doing it for our kids, so they won't have to "go without" like we had to.

    15. Re:What did parents do before this? by beef+curtains · · Score: 1

      I don't have kids

      YOU make your OWN life. Nobody TELLS you who to be or how to live. And if they do, you need to change that. You're in control of your life - not your wife/husband, not your kids. Get some guts and start making your own decisions.

      I found these two sentences to be redundant.

      If you had kids and a wife/husband, the "YOU make your OWN life" paragraph would never have come out of your mouth (or fingers, as is the case here). The fact of the matter is, when you have a spouse and/or kids, guess what? You've now got other people's wants/needs to think about. Ideally, you find yourself putting those people's wants/needs ahead of your own.

      For example: let's suppose the GP and his wife (I'm assuming the GP is a male from his screenname, "Billosaur") both work long hours to support their "lifestyle." The more self-righteous, single, childless, "everyone should life like me" geek instantly assumes that this lifestyle is comprised of leather-appointed SUV's, luxurious, mortgaged-to-the-hilt homes, and ritzy private school tuitions.

      But isn't it possible (I would even go out on a limb to say "probable") that the reality of their "lifestyle" is actually a lot more downscale? My guess: unremarkable 3- or 4-bedroom home in a good suburb (good school system, low crime, a mall, maybe one of those Best Buy/Bed Bath & Beyond/Chili's strip malls, property-values and -taxes through the roof), two late-model mid-sized family sedans in the garage, two kids in school, and electric/gas/water/DSL/car/mortgage payments due every month. In other words, a completely "standard" lifestyle...one which costs an arm & a leg these days.

      So why not move someplace cheaper? That would lower the mortgage & property tax payments! Well, maybe Billosaur doesn't want his kids going to a crappy, underfunded school, or have to shell out $10k/year/kid for private school. Maybe he doesn't want his wife/kids to be mugged, involved with jail-bound hoodlums, or feel afraid to leave their house after dark. Or maybe he wants his family to live someplace where his wife can be close to work/friends/family/whatever, and his kids can grow up with friends, join little league teams, be near grandparents/aunts/uncles/whatever, or safely walk down the street to the candy store after school.

      Why not trade in the wife's 2004 Camry for a 1983 Chevy Celebrity? That would put at least a few grand in his pocket! Hmmmm...maybe Billosaur doesn't want his wife to be stuck on the side of the road at night when her cheap, crappy car breaks down. Or maybe he feels better & worries less knowing that his wife is driving around with working seatbelts & front/side airbags, and that his kids are strapped into their car seats, which are attached to proper carseat anchors (not found in order cars).

      I could go on and on (more than I already have)...but my point is, isn't it possible that, rather than "[getting] some guts and...[making his] own decisions," Billosaur has chosen to sacrifice his free time in order to maintain a good quality of life for his family.

      Unfortunately, nothing anyone could every say would convince you of just how ridiculous your "maybe you should relocate and find alternate means to travel" is...but once you move out of your bachelor pad and get a family of your own, you'll start to see things from a very different perspective.

      --
      Just once I'd like someone to call me 'Sir' without adding 'You're making a scene.'
    16. Re:What did parents do before this? by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      You make a good point, but the Latch Key Kid part is what always strikes me. I was what they called a 'Latch Key Kid'. It was one of the better parts of my childhood. It is both healthy and enjoyable for a kid to come home, poor a glass of milk, and spend a hour or two alone. I fear for the day that we have 18 year olds who have never drank alchole, driven a car, held a job, had sex or even been alone for more than a few minutes, getting a bag on the doorstep for their birthday.

      Talk about a recipie for disaster!

    17. Re:What did parents do before this? by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      The CEO of my last company was black and he was a self made millionaire.

      Yeah, but you say "if you are poor or a minority it is impossible to make it, even if you make the smartest choices possible." - Wrong.

      I know lots of people who grew up poor and were able to do well in life. The hard part is that you have to make good choices as a child/young adult sometimes in spite of bad role models and bad parental advice in order to do this. It does not mean it is impossible.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    18. Re:What did parents do before this? by soft_guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Who forces you to live in New Jersey?

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    19. Re:What did parents do before this? by spun · · Score: 1

      I never said it was impossible, only unlikely, and that it takes far more luck than skill. Luck without skill will get you millions, skill without luck won't. I know this may be hard to accept because it would require you to change your self image, and probably your ideas about free will and individuality. You may never believe me, because your experiences have never forced you to question your assumptions, but please understand that many people's experiences have been different from yours, and they have just as hard of a time believing you when you say that if they make good choices as a child/young adult despite bad role models, they can succede.

      Many people who aren't as fortunate as you find that kind of attitude demeaning of their whole life experience, as if you are blaming them for their shitty circumstances and saying "If only you had made better choices, you would be successful. You have no one to blame but yourself."

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    20. Re:What did parents do before this? by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      A vindictive and psychotic ex-husband; it would require a court order to allow us to move.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    21. Re:What did parents do before this? by GalacticCmdr · · Score: 1
      I mean, seriously... how much does it really cost to "keep a roof over 2 people and keep them fed" in a normal "middle class" neighborhood? One could live quite comfortably for under $2000 a month, which is just over $11 an hour. I wouldn't say someone making over $11/hr is part of the "privileged few".

      To over-use the phrase - "spoken like someone that has not yet moved out of their parent's basement." When you do, and discover how much rent/mortgage + utilities cost in the real world, you can come back and fix your silly statement.

      --
      Programming: Its not just a job - its an indenture.
    22. Re:What did parents do before this? by ccmay · · Score: 1
      Seriously when I was growing up my parents never had any of this technology and yet they managed to keep me out of trouble.

      Yes, and they also had several busybodies on each block to keep tabs on you. I know when I was a kid, nosy neighbors turned me in to my parents for various misdeeds half a dozen times a year.

      Now, people don't even know their next-door neighbors, their neighbors are at work anyway, and nobody wants to commit the 21st-century mortal sin of being "judgmental". This cell phone trick seems to be the best available substitute for an involved community.

      -ccm

      --
      Too much Law; not enough Order.
    23. Re:What did parents do before this? by Bucc5062 · · Score: 1

      Nothing is black and white here. the original post responses that he doesn't drive fancy cars, doesn't live in a fancy home and three kids may be tough, but doable on an average income. Is he and his family "forced" to live in NJ? Of course not, but where does he go? perhaps he has lived in that region for years, established friends, family lives near by. is it that easy to up and leave such a support group?

      I also agree 9for I have seen this first hand) the rise of housing costs squeeze familes that in trying to find a better home for thier kids have Lady and the Tiger choices of low cost, bad neighborhood or higher cost, more comfortable neighborhood. it does not help that local, state governments rise taxes disguised as fees or rates and the populus has little control in the decision making.

      However, if thhis man continues working that hard then one day he will wonder what happened to the relationships around him. Why are the children not as communicative as they were, why is the wife looking bored and distracted when he is interested in bed room fun. Working for short periods to get a aleg on a better life is understandable. Working for years at that rate at the expense of family; one has to begin to weigh in on the question, "Am I forced to Live in NJ". I left Delaware for parts south and have only looked back because of friends. Otherwise I am thankful I left a high paying job fgor a less paying job, but more time in my life for life.

      No, it is not black and white statements when talking about life issues once you have really begun to live life. I do know this, family is worth more then any job, and no job or life style should be the root cause of problems in the family. Before they gain root, it is time to look around.

      --
      Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
    24. Re:What did parents do before this? by bcattwoo · · Score: 1
      To over-use the phrase - "spoken like someone that has not yet moved out of their parent's basement." When you do, and discover how much rent/mortgage + utilities cost in the real world, you can come back and fix your silly statement.

      And since this all in the context of "choosing" to have a stay-at-home wife and a couple kids, don't forget the health insurance that the $11/hr job likely does not provide for. Bye-bye 1/4+ of your paycheck!

      I am sure there are places where one can live in modest comfort on $2000/month, but they are also the same places that keep disappearing when the local fill-in-the-blank factory is moved overseas.

    25. Re:What did parents do before this? by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 1

      Yeah will what't the chances the kids can afford to live in NJ? You might as well cut to the chase and move out now. I moved out of that materialistic shithole and have never been happier. People running around like nuts trying to make ends meet and all there is to do is go to the mall.

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    26. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...or to elect Hugo Chavez so he could mess around with oil prices with his socialist rhetoric.
      Uh, oil price was less than half of what it is today before good ol' Dubya decided to invade Iraq back in 2003. Since then the price has been climbing steadily but that is just a coincidence, right? Because, after all, this is Chavez fault! It can't be because Iraq is in a state of fucking civil war pretty much ever since, bringing down any hope of stability in the Middle East, where, coincidentally, is located almost all of the oil.

      There's lots of blame to go around for the gas prices before we have to resort to go blaming them on a harmless talk-the-talk-but-dont-walk-the-walk sock puppet like Chavez.
    27. Re:What did parents do before this? by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, proof-by-anecdote. Always a sound basis for formulating good, solid social policy based on personal ideology.

    28. Re:What did parents do before this? by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 1

      Well then he should suck it up... take no risks and let the TV/school raise your kids (for sure) because their parents are not around. Somehow my parents raised us with hardly any money and shitty breaking down cars. We didn't even wear seatblets .

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    29. Re:What did parents do before this? by mpe · · Score: 1

      I had older siblings to keep me in line, but there were a few times when I was home alone and could get into trouble (mix Dixie cups, water, and propane torches. "Question: Why won't the propane torch burn a hole in a paper cup filled with water?")

      Actually it will if you have either a suitably small quantity of water or a suitably large quantity of propane. You need to first turn virtually all of the water into steam, which requires a lot of energy, until you do this the hottest the paper can get is the boiling point of water.

    30. Re:What did parents do before this? by zenrandom · · Score: 1

      Of course that 11/hr you mention apparently does not get taxed, have anything removed for social security/medicare or any deductions for other retirement funds or health care.

    31. Re:What did parents do before this? by TheDarkener · · Score: 1

      If you had kids and a wife/husband, the "YOU make your OWN life" paragraph would never have come out of your mouth (or fingers, as is the case here). The fact of the matter is, when you have a spouse and/or kids, guess what? You've now got other people's wants/needs to think about. Ideally, you find yourself putting those people's wants/needs ahead of your own.

      Actually, I'm married to the best girl in the world (I'm 25).

      I am not saying that parent poster didn't have other peoples' needs to think about, but there's a line to draw when you put others' before your own, as well as making good judgement for the good of the whole family.

      RE: All your hypotheticals, in every one of them there is a choice to be made. If you don't WANT your kids to live in lower-income housing/areas, that's your CHOICE. The blurbs about getting mugged, finding your '83 on the side of the road dead are just fears that are factoring into your decisions (fears, that IMHO, are imposed by a society that likes it's people to live in fear, so little change takes place and the hierarchy of classes continues instead of forcing yourself to change and possibly better the lives of you and your family).

      Unfortunately, nothing anyone could every say would convince you of just how ridiculous your "maybe you should relocate and find alternate means to travel" is...but once you move out of your bachelor pad and get a family of your own, you'll start to see things from a very different perspective.

      You have no idea how often I hear this. As I said before, I'm married. I have no kids (yet) but when I do, I'm going to teach them to stand up for themselves and make their lives what THEY want to make them, and not be "forced" into a particular class, lifestyle or personality by their society. It seems as though you've already "given up" and chosen to complain then to make your life better.

      Move to Europe. There's plenty of great transportation there. I live in Northern California - a place riddled with blocked freeways and 10-minute 3 mile drives. I absolutely hate it. But I know it's my choice to be here, I'm not doubting for a minute that I could hug my wife (and kids if we had any) and say "Sweetheart, we're moving."

      Head of the household is a term rarely referring to the husband/father in a family anymore, because complaining/bitchy/needy wives (and subsequentally children in these cases) as well as television/media become the head of the household when the fathers don't take a stand and put their feet down on basic lifestyle decisions that affect the whole family. Don't like your kids sitting in front of the TV all day after school? Cut the cable. Tell them why, and provide them with alternate means of entertainment, otherwise commercialism is going to form their little heads into SUV wanting, greedy adults which everyone stereotypes today. Same goes for your wife! You're the MAN of the house, and however many people cringe to that statement need to realise that the MAN of the house isn't always an asshole, he's the one that provides insight, focus and direction to a family. And yes, this concept was invented before "Leave it to Beaver" was on TV.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    32. Re:What did parents do before this? by TheDarkener · · Score: 1

      And is the court dissallowing this order for you to move? Is it impossible to get the court order?

      CHOICE!!!

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    33. Re:What did parents do before this? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      ...which I learned in later life and it was an "Aha!" kind of moment. "So that's why it didn't work!"

      I'd use a full cup. My theory was that I would burn a hole in the cup, the water would pour out and extinguish the fire. Imagine my surprise when it didn't work that way. I tried a half cup and was able to burn the cup right down to the water-line, but no further. I couldn't understand why this didn't work. And, of course, it's not like I could ask my Dad or anything. "Hey, Dad! While you and Mom were at work, I tried burning a dixie cup full of water with your propane torch, and [*WHACK!*]"

      In my defense, I think I was something like 8 or so when I was trying to figure this out.

    34. Re:What did parents do before this? by esper · · Score: 1

      Billosaur has chosen to sacrifice his free time in order to maintain a good quality of life for his family.

      Some of us consider "a good quality of life for [one's] family" to include being able to spend time together as a family. If you or Billosaur maintain a schedule/lifestyle which requires both parents to be working, at least one of them to be working/commuting for 12+ hours a day, hardly seeing each other, and being too tired from an excess of work and a shortage of sleep, then I question whether it is possible to have a truly good family life under those conditions.

    35. Re:What did parents do before this? by Deagol · · Score: 3, Insightful
      You don't get it. The median household income in the US was $43,318 in 2003. Half of all households make less than that. Many people in the US are barely scraping by with both parents working, often more than one job each. This is not their fault, either. They are not lazy, and not all of them are stupid. They are just unlucky. We have built a system that accepts this reality in exchange for the ability of a few to make outrageous amounts of money. This isn't about people making bad financial choices and whining about being forced into living beyond their means. This is about people having no choice but to live beyond their means, because their means are so small.

      I don't think you quite get it. How you do in life is usually more about your choices, rather than how you started out.

      My family of 4 lives comfortably on a gross income of around $17k/yr. My yearly income peaked 2 years ago at about $53k/yr. I'm able to live the way I do now because I planned and made wise choices with my money. I've been in the post-college workforce for about 10 years now. I consider myself "retired" from the 9-to-5 grind. I'm 34 and work half-time from home.

      No huge cash reserves anywhere -- in fact, my savings is pretty much nill right now. Just a modest bit of equity in some property I paid off a while ago when I was getting paid well, and low monthly financial commitments. I bought a $40k house in the "country" -- 75 miles from a large city where an average starter home costs $150k. I have a $275 home payment, a $320 auto payment, a couple of utilities, and the misc stuff required of the car (insurance, taxes, gas).

      We did the two-income thing for a few years early in our marriage, and it just wasn't worth it. The extra work wardrobe to maintain, the extra driving, the dining out because we were both too tired to cook. The need for TV to de-compress due to all the stress. When you break it down, most two-income families, in fact, come out worse at the end of the month.

      At the risk of being old-fashioned, if one of the parents stays home and actually makes food from scratch and does other productive things to save money by reducing consumption or creating consumables, you make out much better. Why? Because savings are tax free. That $15 dinner for 4 at McDonald's was really $20 if you count the gross income needed to buy it. Toss in a buck or two for the gas. Then there's the indirectly-related expenses, ones that allow for the 2nd job: daycare, the 2nd car (and insurance to go with), etc.. So that $15 McD's meal may, in reality, come out to $30.

      Now, a similar dinner made at home from scratch (where practical), may cost $7 in materials and a hour of time. Say it comes out to $10 when you count the applicable factors (outlined above) of a single working family member.

      Sure, I was "lucky" by getting to go to college and starting off on relatively secure footing in life. Many are not so lucky. However... I see many "poor" making simply dumb financial choises.

      I had a poor(-ish) neighbor that I would verbally assault on a regular basis due to her dog getting off his leash and harassing our livestock. I said, "Go spend $10 and get a body harness -- he'll never get loose again." She repsonded indignantly, "You have the money?!?", implying she had no money to spare. Yet she had a huge wide-screen TV and stereo set up in her house, she had a Dish subscription, and her high-school daughter would yap all night on the front porch with her cell phone.

      Drive down the "poorest" neighbourhoods in your town. Look at the people talking w/ cell phones on the porch/lawn, the fanicer-than-needed autos in the driveways, the cable/satellite installations, with big TVs in the living room. How many are smoking or drinking beer? Sure, this is a generalization, and some are better/worse than the average. But think what $100/month (cable, cell phone, plus cigarettes) could do to jumpstart a "poor" family if put into a simple savings acco

    36. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you, Spun!

      It's so refreshing to see someone on Slashdot who sees the real world rather than the rosy-tinted, sheltered fake world of the self-righteous libertarian techno-millionaire.

      Believing in the sort of Social Darwinism that seems so common here ("Everyone who makes it is a brilliant, wonderful, deserving person - hey, just look at me! Everyone who doesn't deserves whatever they get") is both sickeningly heartless and sickeningly self-serving. Luck happens. People get jobs because they get noticed, because they know the right people, because they happen to be charismatic, or because they're ruthless and will do anything to succeed. People lose jobs or opportunities because they just don't get picked, because they get sick, because they were born into the wrong family and never had the chance. Anecdotal "evidence" of self-made millionaires doesn't deny this.

      I'm not saying everyone who's rich is a conniving, incompetent scuzz who just happened to get lucky, and I'm not saying everyone who's poor is a saint. I've known irresponsible and unpleasant poor people, and I've known kind, skillful rich people. There are just no guarantees of success or failure. Well, having very wealthy parents almost guarantees inheritance, I suppose, unless they cut you out of the will or you squander it all immediately, but other than that. . .

      Thank you, also, Spun, for pointing out how demeaning and insulting this kind of attitude is people who are less fortunate.

      - Darkflame

    37. Re:What did parents do before this? by wtansill · · Score: 1
      I mean, seriously... how much does it really cost to "keep a roof over 2 people and keep them fed" in a normal "middle class" neighborhood? One could live quite comfortably for under $2000 a month, which is just over $11 an hour. I wouldn't say someone making over $11/hr is part of the "privileged few".
      Horseshit. My son's making about $11.00 an hour. He's about to move into a townhome with two friends, dividing the rent amongst them. He will pay the following:
      • Rent
      • Electricity (other utilities included)
      • Auto Insurance
      • Renter's Insurance
      • Food
      • Fuel
      • Taxes associated with his car
      • Other miscellaneous items (clothing, health care costs, vehicle upkeep, etc.)
      If he is fortunate, he will have approximately $75.00 a month left over after taxes, the expenses itemized above, and whatnot. In no way will he be living high on the hog, yet he will just barely be able to meet expenses in a modest neighborhood, and then only after most of those expenses are split three ways. Try living on your own in an area of any size before you spout off about how well one can live on such a relativly small sum.
      --
      The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power. -- Daniel Webster
    38. Re:What did parents do before this? by spun · · Score: 1

      You were lucky, even if you refuse to see it. You want to make yourself feel good by judging others when you haven't walked in their shoes. You want to feel free to ignore the suffering of others and so you make up stories in your head about how you made good choices and they made bad ones. You have no idea what free will really is or about how individuality is formed out of multiplicity. You refuse to look at the simple truth: there is an unbroken chain of cause and effect, and nothing in this world is a thing unto itself. Arguing with people like you is pointless and depressing, because you won't see the truth in front of your eyes, instead sticking to your comforting and self serving myths. Whatever, I'm out.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    39. Re:What did parents do before this? by spun · · Score: 1

      Also very close to the typical racist "Well I have a friend who's black!" defense. "Well I met a black millionaire once, therefore any black person can be a millionaire. If only the rest of them weren't so lazy and shiftless..." Sigh.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    40. Re:What did parents do before this? by gargletheape · · Score: 1

      Fine. And he can send his kid's future college bills to you then?

    41. Re:What did parents do before this? by Deagol · · Score: 1
      WTF are you talking about? That there is no free will in this world? Leave those arguments for the theologists and philosophers.

      The original article was about Verizon offering a baby-sitting by cell phone service, to which many countered "if parents would atually parent". Many responded with "the world is teh shits -- a dual-income household is necessary for survival any more". To which others responded, "bullshit -- don't be a dumb-ass and you can do okay." Then folks like you bring out the big time angst and say the deck is stacked in the favor of an elite few and against the majority.

      So, if my success was "luck", if someone started out like I did and made poor fiscal choices and ended up on the street or a homeless shelter, then you would call that "bad luck"?

      It doesn't matter if I've walked in a person's shoes or not. If I witness them spending cash on dumb shit like cable TV, a cell phone, and cigarettes then I certainly can and will judge them for their poor financial situation.

    42. Re:What did parents do before this? by VGR · · Score: 1
      Who forces you to live in New Jersey?
      I love the "If you don't like it, move" speech. Moving costs money, and it shatters your kids' friendships.

      Always makes me want to quote The Oblongs: "If the Valley is so toxic, why do you people still live there?!" (Very paraphrased from memory.)

      --
      The Internet is full. Go away.
    43. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TLDR

    44. Re:What did parents do before this? by hyfe · · Score: 1
      (Hi! I'm continuing my general advice rant. Sorry for being stereotyphical / off-topic)

      1. I live in a crazy socialist country where we believe in equal opportunities regardless of who your parents are, so education is free'ish here. So, I might not understand that aspect of American insanity too well :). He's welcome to move here though, there's *plenty* of room.

      2. If you're young with small children you're probably at the point in life where you're at your poorest, have the most stuff you want to do (family vacations ftw!) and the most need for free time to spend with your budding family. Trying to save money at this stage really is, well, stupid.. besides, as you grow more experienced and get better at what you to, you will earn more money. Premature saving is like premature optimization, a bloody waste of effort :)

      3. Money now is more worth now than later. When you were 5 100$ was a fortune, and when you were 20 5000$ was a fortune. Although this slows down, this trend continues. Spending the money you actually have *now* is in the majority of cases the best of maximizing your moneyquality-of-life exchange rate.

      4. Most families have two cars and shitloads of crap. If you're worried about the future, get cheaper cars, a cheaper house and stop buying crap. Minimizing your expenses is as important as maximizing your incomce, and can usually be done with far smaller impact in your quality of life (barring potentially ruining your ability to gather useless crap). (and if you're wondering what I'm referring to as useless crap, just take *one* look in your garage and your kitchen, or if you're young still, your parents'. How much of that stuff did you really need?)

      5. Saving money is nice and all, but don't let the future ruin the present. Being miserable now in order to potentially avoid misery later really only means maximizing the potential amount of misery. If you can do it while not ruining your life, sure, go ahead. If you can't; well.. don't!

      6. How many people do you know that's had their quality of life significantly reduced by having parents that were too poor (but still decent hard-working, stable and loving)? How many people do you know that's have severe scars from their childhood due parents not being there for them? Focusing on giving your kids stuff is easy, being their friends and whatever is easy, but it has never, and will never, be what they need, nor will it ever be what they will be thankfull for when they grow up.

      --
      "" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
    45. Re:What did parents do before this? by whitehatlurker · · Score: 1
      Well, does the "best girl in the world" also make her own life? Then the question becomes - what happens when your life and hers don't align?

      The thing about marriage is that it is a partnership. There will be times when your interests are mutual, some times when the interests of one don't interfere with those of the other, and some times when you have conflicts. It's all in how you resolve the last bunch.

      --
      .. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
    46. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is the way they want it...people arguing over whether or not $11 an hour is livable or not...

      i see it everyday, poor or middle class people arguing with other poor or middle class people over two bucks for a product that was most likely made by some kid in china. it makes me sick.

      doesn't everybody deserve a livable wage if they are willing to work for it?

      people may differ slightly what "livable wage" on the low end scale means ($11/hour...$15...$20?), but i think everyone sees that $20 million/year + stock options + deniable responsibility when things go wrong is way more than a livable wage. It seems to me that we are headed in reverse (before unions were formed) when people would work 100 hours/week in a factory (although now it's an office) just to feed their family. Although we are not there yet, that is the trend, and in a few years who knows. Huge corporations controlling everything, with the people at the very top making all the money and the people at the bottom feeling powerless to do anything about it. it sounds like the early 1900's to me.

    47. Re:What did parents do before this? by Unnngh! · · Score: 1

      Maybe he was lucky, but it sounds to me like he made his own luck. Some people really get shat on but I just don't see that the majority of the middle class in the US are in this camp. We are just brought up to believe in the dual-income-two-point-three-kid two-car-big-house dream and most people follow it. This guy clearly sacrificed some material wealth for his lifestyle, I would not be so cavalier with the criticism...

    48. Re:What did parents do before this? by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      to buying a much smaller house with a $250k mortgage

      WTF! They bought a $300,000+ house to get decent schools?
      I DON'T THINK SO.

      They bought a $300,000+ house the have decent schools AND LIVE IN A VERY EXCLUSIVE AREA.


      Your argument is stupid. It's like saying:
      "My Saab had a dangerous brake problem so I had to go buy a new BMW 7 series for the safety of my children."

      What a load of crap.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    49. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      parent volunteers had to clean the kids playground every morning and pick up all the discarded needles and used condoms before the kids came out to play.

      A few nights in that playground with a loaded shotgun would
      have elminated the problem. But we're too Politically Correct to
      actually do what needs to be done.

    50. Re:What did parents do before this? by nido · · Score: 1

      Liked your comment, but I think you're missing something.

      In Secrets of Power, Vol. 1, Ingo Swann talks about how social institutions have been set up to "depower" the masses. (Mr. Swann is something of a word nazi and notes that "depower" is not yet in the dictionary, but that it should be. It refers to how an individual loses his Power. The book is heavy heavy reading, so I don't recommend it - I've only been able to skim through it.)

      This is especially obvious in the perennially broken government schools. John Taylor Gatto tells us that the government schools were specifically set up to depower the population (to use Mr. Swann's word), and make them (us) suitable for factory work. Pre-government school, the american ideal was an independant livelihood. Post-government school, most people hope for a good job with a good company with good benefits.

      One of the side-effects of depowerment, is that people don't realize their creative potential. If the government schools taught people to use their power of creativity, more would figure out, like you, that the rat race isn't worth running.

      Also see my other comment in this story, about hidden inflation and making your own food.

      --
      Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
      www.teslabox.com
    51. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not a libertarian, but... yes!

    52. Re:What did parents do before this? by houghi · · Score: 1
      But as a tool of control? Stupid idea.

      and befor thet
      That way if I need you back home, I can call you,


      Sounds like control to me.

      When I was young, I had to be home by 17:30. No excuse of not having a watch. No excuse of forgetting the time, because I had fun. And obvious punishment when I came home late (again).

      I am sure it will still work with todays kids.
      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    53. Re:What did parents do before this? by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      Some of us consider "a good quality of life for [one's] family" to include being able to spend time together as a family. If you or Billosaur maintain a schedule/lifestyle which requires both parents to be working, at least one of them to be working/commuting for 12+ hours a day, hardly seeing each other, and being too tired from an excess of work and a shortage of sleep, then I question whether it is possible to have a truly good family life under those conditions.

      A good life, no... a life, yes. I'll be the first to admit it's not the life I want and yes, i am a slave to the choices I have made. But there are more interests than just mine, and I have to balance those and try to provide for my family. It's very hard. What I object to is the time-honored "make different choices" paradigm; of course I can make different choices, and it's just as likely that tjose choices would make me no better off. We are all at the mercy of forces that we cannot control -- simply because they operate on a global scale, on the macro level. I can and do make choices where I have them available, and I do try to make the best ones I can. But I've found than even when you think a choice is a good one, not all the ramifications are obvious and when they are, it's usually too late to go back the way you came. Such is life.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    54. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those who bray about "infinite choices" are generally nothing but elitist assholes.

    55. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because not everyone can live on 17k a year, dipshit. Things like housing costs and taxes get in the way.

    56. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I don't think you quite get it. How you do in life is usually more about your choices, rather than how you started out.[...]
      I consider myself "retired" from the 9-to-5 grind.[...]
      No huge cash reserves anywhere -- in fact, my savings is pretty much nill right now. Just a modest bit of equity in some property I paid off a while ago when I was getting paid well, and low monthly financial commitments.
      The irony is almost beyond belief. Here you are lecturing people about poor choices, while you are claiming to be "retired from the 9-to-5" at 34 with next to no savings and a minimal income. Unless you make some big changes soon, you are the one who is going to be paying for poor choices when you really want to retire.
    57. Re:What did parents do before this? by albanac · · Score: 1
      still want to be able to watch their kids no matter where they are.

      Why is this considered a good idea? The damage that can be done to a child if their parent can watch them *no matter where they are* is huge: they tend to not develop any kind of effective independence or personal strength, and they tend to have very bad relationships with their parents on trust grounds.

      Being able to monitor children effectively is one thing: considering that the desire to watch them *no matter where they are* is reasonable is quite a different thing. At what point does the need of the child for privacy and indepdendence of choice override the protective desire of the parent? I would argue that it is from this, virtually unanswerable, question that the entire debate depends.

      ~cHris
    58. Re:What did parents do before this? by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      What country is this and how hard is it to get a green card?

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    59. Re:What did parents do before this? by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      Sometimes the best schools are in the more exclusive areas. Sometimes those areas become a more exclusive area simply by the fact that they are a better place to live and so many people want to move there. Greater demand means higher prices. My office is located in an area like that.

      The fact is that there are so many variables in any decision that it's hard to generalize one way or another. I see houses on my way to work that are selling for ~$500,000 and they are smaller than the house I grew up in. Why do people move here? Because the schools are good. Because the crime is low. And maybe because they work out here and don't enjoy the long commute. (And around here a long commute is a given - when school is in session and when my shift doesn't start until 8, it takes me about 1.5 hours to drive 18 miles to work.) There are always trade-offs. It's too easy to quickly and simply dismiss somebody else's decisions instead of trusting that they are able to make them on their own.

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    60. Re:What did parents do before this? by Angostura · · Score: 1

      When I was young, I had to be home by 17:30. No excuse of not having a watch. No excuse of forgetting the time, because I had fun. And obvious punishment when I came home late (again).

      Well, that certainly sounds like a tool of control to me.

      I'm sure that I will use pretty much that line with my kids too, but that's not the point I was making. In the circumstances where it is possible - but not certain that the child will be needed at home early, the phone gives you the choice of saying "sure you can go out, I'll give you a buzz if need-be". The alternative may be "No, you can't go out." In that case, the phone is a tool of liberation, not control.

    61. Re:What did parents do before this? by molo · · Score: 1

      Sounds like it would have been easier to pay tuition for a private school in their previous home. However, local government/police should really do something about that playground.

      -molo

      --
      Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
    62. Re:What did parents do before this? by spun · · Score: 1

      There are poor people who are poor because of bad choices, and rich people who are rich because of good ones, sure. But I'm sick of people's self serving ideologies that let them endlessly congratulate themselves and dismiss the suffering of others. People talk about choices, but theyu don't realize that not everyone has had the same choices presented to them. No one can choose a course they are incapable of conceiving off, and you don't get to choose which choices you get to make. It's not angst, I'm actually happy, married, and have a decent job. I also don't presume that my philosophy makes me any better than anyone else, because according to my philosophy, I dind't choose to be presented with the kinds of choices that led me down that path. But I still want people to think about the kinds of ideas they believe in and how those ideas manifest themselves into actions that cause unneccessary suffering in the world. The individualist ideology denies the idea that our actions are part of a vast web of casue and effect, that free will is somehow outside that chain, and that good and bad choices can offset any conditions. I see that as a form of insanity.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    63. Re:What did parents do before this? by houghi · · Score: 1
      Well, that certainly sounds like a tool of control to me.


      It was. Never pretended or claimed that it wasn't. Them telling where they are and be back in time also works great.

      The moment you use the 'take your phone, or yoy can't go out' it becomes comtrol. I am not saying that control is a bad thing. One should just acknowledge when there is control.
      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    64. Re:What did parents do before this? by hyfe · · Score: 1
      The country is Norway. All of Scandinavia is pretty much interchangable though.

      How to get a work-permit (pretty much boils down to 'get a job'):
      http://www.udi.no/templates/Tema.aspx?id=4479

      Funcom (Anarchy Online, Longest Journey, Conan) is located in Oslo, they are hiring and English is their working language. Same goes for Opera (english, hiring and located in Oslo), but they generally pay really shit. I have no idea whether it's possible to get by at Trolltech (QT) without knowing Norwegian.. else I think there's employment in the oil industry where the working language is English (although quite often, this means you work three weeks at a rig, and then have two weeks off. The pay is ridicously good though).

      Other than that, all the Scandinivian langauges are quite easy to pick up. We basically use english sentence structure, german words and our own pronounciation. Alot of the sounds are quite hard for Americans to get completely right, so you're going to sound like a foreigner a looong time, but for the most part, you only need to understand what we say in Norwegian; as long as you speak clearly everybody will understand everything you say in English; always (we hear English daily through TV, but most people *never* speak it).

      --
      "" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
    65. Re:What did parents do before this? by TheDarkener · · Score: 1

      When our lives do not align, we comprimise - the comprimization (sp?) involves mutual sacrifices and understanding, so we both win. I know moving / drastic changes in lifestyle are hard to comprimize on, but if you are both true to wanting your family to thrive and be happy, then your seperate minds should be thinking alike anyway. The only thing that I can see holding either one of you back is fear of change.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    66. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...so when your child is 8 and wants to wander the park, it's OK...as long they have the cell phone on them?

      Why don't you just tell the kid to get in the nice man with the candy's white, windowless van?

    67. Re:What did parents do before this? by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      Doesn't it get kind of cold up there? :)

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    68. Re:What did parents do before this? by gymell · · Score: 1

      You know, I was with you until you brought up all this "MAN of the house" nonsense. Apparently in your world, the little woman is on the same level as the whiny kids who have to be told "No!" to expensive cell phones and cable TV. I am all for personal responsibility and choice, not having kids when you can't afford it and so on. However, the MAN of the house isn't the only one who gets to make those choices! And if you're treating your wife like some child who can't make responsible decisions instead of an adult partner in your marriage who actually has a brain, then yes, you are an asshole. Or if you married a whiny little girl who cares more about material things than she does about her family's needs, what does that say about YOUR choices in life?

    69. Re:What did parents do before this? by hyfe · · Score: 1
      Depends on what you're used to.

      Around 30C^ (86 on weird scale) here now. Winter is actually quite hot compared to the inland countries, we're usually just below freezing the entire winter (which is bloody great for skiiing). The air is ridicously clear, which is really, really nice; if you come here by air directly from a polluted city, atleast on a nice day, you can actually taste the difference. With the entire country being coastal, it's also quite windy. Autumns are really moody, rainy and dark. We tend to stend indoors a lot, so the weather isn't that big'a deal (except during summer, when everybody has three weeks vacation:).

      What will take some getting used to is barely seeing the sun at winter though (in Oslo you only get 2-3 hours of daylight at the worst.. although summer kinda makes up for it. At the moment I think the sun goes down at around 1:3o am, and comes at 3:30-4:00 am. On the other hand, it rarely gets *really* dark as the sun is usually just below the horizon :)

      --
      "" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
    70. Re:What did parents do before this? by lorcha · · Score: 1
      Hmm... touition at a decent private school: $10k-20k/yr.

      Annual payment on a 250k mortgage: $20k-30k/yr.

      Most private schools have need-based scholarship money, especially for folks with multiple children enrolled.

      Your neighbors have made for themselves some very poor financial decisions.

      --
      "Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
    71. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The country is Norway. All of Scandinavia is pretty much interchangable though.

      Thought so. (I live in Oslo, too)

      How to get a work-permit (pretty much boils down to 'get a job')

      Do it soon! Norway is getting increasingly xenophobic, as we are learning that not all people are nice, and not all immigrants are able or willing to become like us, ever. We know how to deal with a fairly homogenous society, and we never quite embraced urbanity. Heterogenous societies are just plain difficult and painful, and Norwegians will never be happy with a "cultural melting pot". If your complexion is not plausibly Northern European or your accent sounds foreign, you're not really Norwegian. That's just the way it is. Being American is OK, though, if you are positive and easy going, but not loud and assertive.

      Funcom (Anarchy Online, Longest Journey, Conan) is located in Oslo, they are hiring and English is their working language. Same goes for Opera

      These companies are not typical companies. Opera is probably more multi-nationality and less bigoted than most Norwegian companies. And they are fairly small.

      but they generally pay really shit.

      True, considering the Norwegian cost of living, especially in Oslo. Go for one of the Swedish offices. Living in Sweden on a Norwegian salary is a sweet deal.

    72. Re:What did parents do before this? by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

      I agree that "the system" is indeed rigged. It is designed to keep stupid people down. It is especially effective at keeping stupid people who make bad decisions down. People who live according to their wants instead of their needs. People who can't think long term, but are more concerned about immediate gratification.

      Of course, in your worldview, people are not responsible for their own decisions. Its "the system" thats keeping them down. What a pathetic self defeating ideology.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    73. Re:What did parents do before this? by spun · · Score: 1

      Wow, can I come live in your world? Are there magical unicorns and chocalate trees there, too? Because here in RealWorld land, I see stupid people rise to positions of power while smart, hard working people barely get by.

      What a magical place you live in, where the system has no impact on all the rugged individuals, all of whom can rise to positions of leadership and power through the merits of their actions, regardless of their circumstances. Yes in Magical Individualist Land, if everyone makes good choices, no one will be stuck doing the shit jobs which will instead be done by garden gnomes, who like that sort of thing.

      You know what's really pathetic? Smug self serving asshats who hold tight to their ideology in order to feel superior, never have to raise a hand to help a neighbor in need (He deserves it!), never have to work to change an unjust system yet feel that justice is being done, and just generally justify their asshatitude.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    74. Re:What did parents do before this? by Random832 · · Score: 1

      His claim was that for the particular people he was talking about, it was the satellite, cell phones, etc, that "got in the way" more than the housing and taxes.

      --
      We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.
    75. Re:What did parents do before this? by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

      I agree that life is not fair and that as you say, sometimes "stupid people rise to positions of power while smart, hard working people barely get by". A lot of things happen to people that they have no control over. Factories close, jobs get offshored, fisheries collapse, mines run out of ore. Smart hardworking people end up broke and desperate.

      But, and here is my point, a lot of people end up where they are, not because of misfortune, but as a result of their own decisions. I think we are getting too philosophical and abstract here so maybe an example is in order.

      My brother and his roommate, both from comfy middle class homes, both finished high school, both got a 2 year diploma from a community college, both found decent entry level jobs in industrial sales, both earning about the same salary. Roommate buys a new Camaro. Camaro costs $600/month loan plus $ 150/month insurance. Brother buy used POS Datsun B210. Costs $600 one time plus $75/month insurance. After 3 years brother has saved up $24000 and buys fixer-upper house. Camaro is now paid off and worth less than half what it was new. Fast forward 5 years. Brother has paid off mortgage, house is worth double what it was bought for. Roommate still renting, basically living paychek to paycheck, price of houses have gone up so much they may forever be out of his reach. My brother is not any smarter or harder working or luckier than his roommate. They both had exactly the same opportunities, the difference in outcomes was entirely due to the decisions they made.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    76. Re:What did parents do before this? by spun · · Score: 1

      Ah, the personal anecdote. Always a sound model to build a philosophy on, because everyone knows that one's friends and acquaintances are always a perfect representation of the population as a whole. When you can't come up with a sound logical rebuttal to an argument, there's nothing like a personal anecdote to prove your point.

      Your example is also self serving, in that it allows you to feel good about yourself, to believe that you are a better person because of your choices. It relieves you of the feeling that you should do something to help those less fortunate than you, because their bad fortune is most likely the result of bad choices.

      Sorry for the sarcasm. You do have a point. I'm not advocating shielding everyone from the consequences of their choices. Just saying that we can look at the system and make it more fair to everyone. Excellence, hard work, and good choices should be rewarded while laziness and stupidity should be punished. Not to be too abstract, but bad choices do not come from within. They are the result of understandable forces at work in the real world, not the result of some abstract free will. The system can be optimized to result in more people making better choices. If free will were really free, that would not be the case.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    77. Re:What did parents do before this? by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

      Actually I think they paid about $460k to move here.

      I should add some data. We are talking about Vancouver BC, which has insanely high priced housing. Prices have been going up 15% to 20% annually for about 7 or 8 years. At the time this happened, about three years ago, a house in $blue_collar_ville was worth about $225k, a house in $my_neighborhood was about $450k and a very_exclusive_area like West Vancouver started at about $750k. $My_neighborhood is hardly exclusive. I would call it middle class or maybe in some parts upper middle class. Most of the houses are 30+ years old. It does have decent schools and low crime.

      Today a house in $blue_collar_ville is worth about $375k, a house in $my_neighborhood is about $650k and West Vancouver is about $1.2M. I have no idea how somebody just starting out can afford to buy a house, even with 2 incomes.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    78. Re:What did parents do before this? by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

      I think the "system" is rigged to take advantage of people and to keep them down. Consumer credit is incredibly easy to get, and we are constantly bombarded by advertising and other media pushing the consumer lifestyle. "Buy now, don't pay till 2008", why wait if you can put it on your VISA now. Some of my younger relatives are living check to check with 2 or 3 maxed out credit cards because they want to have their parents lifestyle now. They have to have the new furniture and the big TV and the trip to Cabo San Lucas _NOW_. Each month they pay just the minimum balance on their cards, at %18+ per year. The scary part is they see nothing wrong with this at all, they think this is normal. They don't see that they are in a trap they may never dig themselves out of. Retirement savings - none. Savings for their kids education - none. Chance of owning their own home - zero. They are going to be part of the first generation since World War One that will end up less well off than their parents.

      The credit card companies are exploiting these people and their foolishness, and they are making obscene profits doing it. The goverment isn't going to step in, because consumer spending is what keeps the economy ticking. Meanwhile we are mortgaging our kids future to pay for shiny toys we want but don't really need.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    79. Re:What did parents do before this? by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      LOL. Well I've lived in the American South for the last, oh, 20 or so years so I'm not too used to cool weather. I actually have a good friend from Norway. He usually has good things to say about the place. (At which point I have to point out that Noway went from providing the world with Vikings to getting invaded by my ethnic ancestry in WWII, all in good fun. :))

      I am amazed that it is that easy to obtain a work visa. From what I've read about other countries in the past (UK, France, etc.) it can be rather hard to get a working visa in a lot of European countries. That said, I think I might keep living in the American South for a while where the temperatures rarely drop below 40F (4.4 on the normal scale used by the rest of the damn world). Heck, when I lived in New Orleans, I can't remember one single instance that I put on a sweater during the winter season. Still, I want to visit Scandanavia some time. It seems like a wonderfully different place to tour around as opposed to the usual touristy places such as Paris, Rome, etc.

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    80. Re:What did parents do before this? by hyfe · · Score: 1
      LOL. Well I've lived in the American South for the last, oh, 20 or so years so I'm not too used to cool weather.

      I lived in Moscow (for fun) last year. I shared a room with a guy from Miami who'd never seen snow. He learnt how to act in like 5 seconds. You just put on more clothers :) . The darkness during winter really did get to him though, and Moscow's way south of where I live now (although the smog made things *alot* worse there).

      Still, I want to visit Scandanavia some time. It seems like a wonderfully different place to tour around as opposed to the usual touristy places such as Paris, Rome, etc.

      Do so, it really is different. Assuming you're American enough, you'll probably find Norwegians to be a little stand-off'ish though, as there really isn't a culture for 'just talking to people' here. After the initial 'wtf, he's talking to me and I've never met him'-confusion people generally don't mind though. Just don't speak too loudly, and a tad slower/clearer than normal (and again, not too loudly. I think it's a cultural thing, it really does bother everybody here)

      --
      "" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
    81. Re:What did parents do before this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      (and again, not too loudly. I think it's a cultural thing, it really does bother everybody here)

      An anecdote, from a Greek women, married to a Norwegian guy, living in Oslo: "Norwegian children are at least 9 decibels quieter than Greek children." She aslo noted that Norwegians seemed very concious about keeping a sound level that would not bother neighbours or passers-by.

      Everybody should have access to absolute silence, as an option. Then you are free to add any sound you please to your personal space. Or just leave it silent, and listen to your own pulse.

      As Norwegians never fully embraced urbanity and multi-culturalism, it is still the norm that you should not be able to hear your neighbour. If you do, the walls in your appartment suck or your neighbour is too loud. You don't need to share your neighbour's taste of music, and hearing your neighbour getting laid feels inappropriate. If people violate that, resentment grows...

  8. Really Smart by Telvin_3d · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Great idea. Now, when your child is thinking about doing something less than smart, they will also intentionally NOT take their cell phone with them.

    1. Re:Really Smart by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1
      Great idea. Now, when your child is thinking about doing something less than smart, they will also intentionally NOT take their cell phone with them.

      Thus continuing the fine tradition of Charles Darwin. So what's the problem?

  9. This'll work by itsNothing · · Score: 1
    I forsee the "designated cell phone carrier" who carries a pack of phones so parents are happy. With call forwarding, most parents will be none-the-wiser where their kids are.

    This won't work until the phone gets embedded into their kids' skull. Or, perhaps an RFID chip in their arm and a proximity sensor in the phone; yeah, there's the ticket!

  10. How to defeat it: by Farrside · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1. Teen sets up Call Forwarding on their number, forwarding to a friend's non-tracked phone.
    2. Teen LEAVES their tracked phone within set boundaries.
    3. Teen goes where teen wants, able to intercept calls from the folks on the other phone.
    4. Profit! Or at least an unlimited party region...

    1. Re:How to defeat it: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until said folks decide to go over to location of phone and don't find said teen (yes, contrary to popular belief, parents aren't stupid either).

    2. Re:How to defeat it: by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 1

      caller ID?

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    3. Re:How to defeat it: by toleraen · · Score: 1

      1. Verizon disables call forwarding on phone numbers with this feature active. 2. ? 3. Grounded

    4. Re:How to defeat it: by mickey+knox · · Score: 1

      The problem with your theory is when the phone bill arrives. There's nothing like seeing:
      a) 100 forwarded calls on the phone bill
      b) the charges for all the per minute calls that were forwarded... above and beyond mom and dad's 1000 shared minutes.

      OUCH. Grounded for life.

      --
      Andrew 'Mickey Knox' Gearhart
  11. I had one of these as a kid by Quirk · · Score: 1
    I called it my mom's voice. If she called out to me and I was out of hearing range she'd instigate the hew and cry by voice and telephone. It was alarmingly effective.

    "You'd better get home right now. You're mom's looking for you."

    --
    "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
    Cohen
  12. So what? by Mr.+Competence · · Score: 1

    It's a service, if you don't like it either don't get it or put your tinfoil hat on the phone! I for one would probably use this, at least a little. My children aren't old enough yet, but this would be useful to spot-check on them periodically to be sure that the trust should still be there.

    Also useful in emergencies of course.

    --
    Those who open their minds too far often let their brains fall out.
    1. Re:So what? by pla · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's a service, if you don't like it either don't get it or put your tinfoil hat on the phone!

      Some of us - Even adults for a good many years now - Believe that kids have some right to privacy. Personal experience demonstrated to me, at least, that the more controlling someone's parents acted, the worse that person turned out. You can let them know that they can always turn to you for help, but you can't actually do their thinking for them.

      Therefore, you can either have them learn to think while still safely under your wing, or you can have them turn into human Spuds McKenzie impersonators their first year of college. You get to choose the "when", not the "if".


      I for one would probably use this, at least a little.

      Then you, for one, will someday understand the meaning of "false sense of security", when your merry little tracking device tells you Jimmy hasn't left the neighborhood, when he actually left the phone with a friend and has gone to a rave in another state.


      Also useful in emergencies of course.

      Gee, if only Jimmy hadn't left his phone with a friend, he could call when an emergency arises. Hope he makes the best of "ass, grass, or ass", eh?

    2. Re:So what? by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
      Some of us - Even adults for a good many years now - Believe that kids have some right to privacy. Personal experience demonstrated to me, at least, that the more controlling someone's parents acted, the worse that person turned out. You can let them know that they can always turn to you for help, but you can't actually do their thinking for them.
      Using this technology is not necessarily "acting controlling". Acting controlling is a matter of how it is used.
    3. Re:So what? by Tweekster · · Score: 1

      This is a fact of life. Your kid will lie about where he is going.

      They will set up alibi's to cover this. They will now just have to leave their phone at their alibi's house.

      It is a fact of life...

      You might as well A) Accept that they will lie about where they are going at times. B) Never even start with trust because it will be broken

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    4. Re:So what? by JoloK · · Score: 0
      spot-check on them periodically to be sure that the trust should still be there
      Spying to ensure trust... do you not see the irony in that?
      --
      JoloK
    5. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you use it, the trust is already gone. You can't use something like this to "keep" trust, if you use it, you've proven that you don't trust them. What you mean to say is that you'll spot-check them to be sure that the permission should still be there.

    6. Re:So what? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      "[...] this would be useful to spot-check on them periodically to be sure that the trust should still be there."

      I'm not a parent, though I've been known to play one.

      I always find comments like this funny. It harkens back back to the Reaganesque, "Trust, but verify." If you have to verify, then you don't really trust the person do you?

      When I was a kid, I did some things that my parents would have preferred that I didn't do. Now, what I was doing was bad, but where I was doing it wasn't. So a cell-phone doesn't tell you what the kid is doing, only where the kid is. In other words, it's pretty useless.

    7. Re:So what? by fooDfighter · · Score: 1

      Some of us - Even adults for a good many years now - Believe that kids have some right to privacy. Personal experience demonstrated to me, at least, that the more controlling someone's parents acted, the worse that person turned out. This has been my experience as well. I knew some very controlling parents in my day whose kids bordered on the edge of sociopathy. I realize that correlation != causation so you can take that comment with a grain of salt, but I think most kids need to learn to fend for themselves sooner or later.

    8. Re:So what? by CRWeaks23 · · Score: 1

      You're kind of missing the point. If "little Jimmy" wants to go to a rave, and is willing to leave the phone behind to do so, it doesn't really matter whether mom and pop put a tracer on his phone, he would have gone anyway. You'r making an extreme assumpion that all parents are stupid and will be using a service such as this to track their child's every move. Only ignorant parents will feel "falsely secure," and if it's not this service they use to try and control their kids it will be something else. A parent running to the computer as soon as the kids leave to check their every move is already untrusting and paranoid, and they'll undoubtedly be thinking about whether or not the kids gave their phone to a friend or shut it off anyway. You can't blame technology for this kind of behavior. The debate here should have nothing to do with invasion of privacy (in the parent/child sense... I'm purposely avoiding the conspiracist's Big Brother issue here altogether), and it has nothing to do with "keeping a leash" on a child. It has to do with adding another level of safety in the event that something ever does happen to them. A good parent with a good relationship with their children can use this to their advantage against all the "bad sh*t" that's out there, not an attempt to run surveillance.. Parent's trying to keep their children on a tight leash have been around forever, this isn't going to change that.

  13. No idea where the child actually is by OzPeter · · Score: 1

    Lets see,

    Ways to beat the system

    1/ Don't turn the phone on (sorry Mum, the battery went flat)

    2/ Leave the phone at a safe location while you go elsewhere (sorry Mum, I had the ringer turned off soo I wouldn't annoy people near me)

    Can anyone think of anymore ways?

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    1. Re:No idea where the child actually is by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2, Funny
      Can anyone think of anymore ways?


      3/Sorry mom, the dog ate my phone. I had to wait to retrieve it.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    2. Re:No idea where the child actually is by neonprimetime · · Score: 1

      3/ Call forwarding

      4/ Don't buy Verizon

      5/ Adopt parents that are technologically illiterate

      6/ Rub a big magnet on your phone

    3. Re:No idea where the child actually is by rabbit994 · · Score: 1

      Most teenagers will not want to be without their phone and while they can get it forwarded, I'm sure this system will come with the ability to turn off call forwarding or simply note that their phone is being forwarded so the parent knows. Second, if the parents are smart, they will not even tell the child monitoring is turned on. Biggest problem I can see is this probably just use GPS and in many places, GPS coverage is spotty esp if teenager keeps the phone in a pocket or such.

  14. Who will think this will work? by Transcendent · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ways around it:

    1) Turn off your cell phone.
    2) Leave it somewhere.
    3) Pay some kid to carry it around (making it look like you're still moving)
    4) Hang out in tunnels.
    5) Line pockets with tin foil.
    6) Get better parents.

    If the kid doesn't want their parents to know where they are... then the parent's won't know where they are. All the company is doing is marketing a product to paranoid and overly-protective parents.

    However... that being said it does have some merits for emergency situations, knowing where to pick your kid up from, and it could be a fun project to map the paths of a group/herd of friends.

    1. Re:Who will think this will work? by dsci · · Score: 1

      All the company is doing is marketing a product to paranoid and overly-protective parents.

      Isn't like 98% or so of ALL marketing based on fear*? So, how is this any different?

      * fear to get hurt, sick, be different, not cool, etc.

      --
      Computational Chemistry products and services.
    2. Re:Who will think this will work? by wfberg · · Score: 1

      You missed one; break it.

      Or even, pay some other kid for the one he broke, and present the broken phone to your parents, who will refuse to get you a new (non-spying one), while selling your working unit, and using the cash left over to buy a non-spying phone!

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
    3. Re:Who will think this will work? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1
      If the kid doesn't want their parents to know where they are... then the parent's won't know where they are.

      Yes, but the will know that the are not where they should be.

      Parents are responsible for their kids well-being, and have a legitimate need to be able to know where they are. There are far too many kids on the loose out there getting hurt, getting into trouble, getting lost. It's a parents responsibility to know where their kids are.

      If these kids where out there running around doing crimes, or picking up Johns, or getting raped, we would all be asking the parents "why didn't you know where your kid was?"

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    4. Re:Who will think this will work? by students · · Score: 2, Funny

      6) Get better parents.

      Parent 95 and Parent 98 crash all the time because they drink too much. Parent ME is terrible in every way. Parent NT is always in the hospital with the flu. Parent XP is somewhat better, but still has viruses and crashes. Parent Vista will never be released and has even worse DRM. Also, it constantly annoys people with safety warnings. MacParent Pro is too expensive. It wants to eat caviar and drive a Porsche. MacParent Mini looks stupid - I'm taller than it is!

      So, when does OpenParent come out? I want a parent I can modify to say "Hi honey, where are you? In a bar? Great! Don't forget to pick up some X on the way home. Bye." when it calls me on my nefarious cell phone.

    5. Re:Who will think this will work? by bogado · · Score: 1
      Isn't like 98% or so of ALL marketing based on fear*?


      Good for me that I live in a country that bases 98% of it's marketing on sex appeal, witch I find it, well... more appealing then fear. :-)
      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

    6. Re:Who will think this will work? by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      I think it may work for the parents who aren't control freaks, don't try to use it for routine monitoring, but do use it to help get leads on where to find their children if they are unexpectedly very late and unreachable.

      I think it won't work for parents who try to use it to keep minute-by-minute tabs on their children and fly off the handle with rage any time their child appears, from the information it provides, to have broken a parentally-imposed rule.

    7. Re:Who will think this will work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of people posting the obvious workarounds here are missing the entire reason for cellphone ubiquity--remaining in constant contact. This need is especially present in kids since everyone they know has a cellphone and always has. That being said, would the child's need for being "stealth" (cellphone turned off/left at a safe location) truly be worth severing the link between them and their friends? Even if they did turn on the phone to check up on voicemail/texts, their location would pop up intermittently updating their location.

      As far as rights go, I think that it's a fair situation that the party PAYING for the service be able to locate their interests at any given time. If the dependent doesnt like it, then they should at least be responsible enough to get their own service (prepaid if necessary for contract age limitations).

    8. Re:Who will think this will work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      7. Switch Phones with Mom ask her what she was doing in ????? then why she was ?????
      8. Find brainy kid at school that can remove tracking system (lock or unlock phone)
      9. Buy new phone insert old sim leave tracking phone in taxi
      10. Not care about what parents say go wherever and explain later that you didn't go anywhere that the Flash Memory RFID locator beacon was given a distorted signal and cross referenced another ID so that it looked like you were at the party when in fact you were not.

      Anyone that buys into this and thinks it'll be effective when it really matters is oblivious anyway

    9. Re:Who will think this will work? by esper · · Score: 1

      All it takes to avoid losing contact with the world is to be with one friend whose parents don't subscribe to a tracking service. Everyone else can turn theirs off and any calls can be made through the bug-free phone.

  15. what a win win for the telcos by woodsrunner · · Score: 1

    I guess it is a good way to keep kids from taking advantage of all of those free off peak minutes and it will probably encourage them to get their own personal phones the parents don't know about.

    So it's a big win: charge parents for an extra service and then make money off of the kids who need to buy cellphones to carry with them when they leave their tracking devices at the house of the friend they say they are "with".

  16. Does the service notify you by kimvette · · Score: 1

    . . . when the phone is shut off so that Mommy and Daddy does not know that little 11-yr-old Bobby went with Sally to see the foo boy band's concert in the next county? "Uh, yeah mom, see, the battery in my phone went dead, and I, uh, popped my bicyle tire? Yeah, that's it. My bicycle tire popped, and, uh, because my phone was dead I couldn't call home, and, uh, I had to make like the professor and rig up a tube patch kit and a tire pump from bamboo and a couple of coconuts."

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  17. Hey susan, could I leave my phone with you? by denis-The-menace · · Score: 2, Informative
    --
    Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
    1. Re:Hey susan, could I leave my phone with you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't have to leave the phone. You're not permitted to have your phone on in an airplane.

    2. Re:Hey susan, could I leave my phone with you? by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      I read the Reuters article about that kid yesterday. My favorite quote was something along the lines of "I can't believe that with all of the laws since 9/11 it's still this easy for a 16 year old to get out of the country." That's just it, blame the government for your poor parenting. (What the hell should the government care about people leaving the country anyway? It's the ones coming in that they need to worry about.) She also mentioned that her daughter seemed OK with the fact that she never had a boyfriend -- more evidence of a clueless parent. I wish I could find the link to the article.

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

  18. Missing Persons by Mets1fan · · Score: 1

    While this is an invasion of privacy of your children, this service can also have some benefits. If someone's child were to get kidnapped or abducted, all the kids would need to be taught is to turn on their phone, and they can be tracked. While the percentage of kids who get kidnapped is relatively small, they are also the most common group. Verizon obviously isn't marketing this system as a way to track your kids in case they get kidnapped, but it is a positive side effect.

    1. Re:Missing Persons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "If someone's child were to get kidnapped or abducted, all the kids would need to be taught is to turn on their phone, and they can be tracked"

      Do you think that the predators don't already ditch the kids' cell phones? Or convinve the kid thay aren't in danger until they are separated from the phone? Right now, I can call 911 from my cellphone, and get fairly close localization for the tower triangulation, or GPS-precise from the E911 location. Why add an automatic Big Brother-like tracking?

      How do I prep my kids for emergencies? They learn a martial art, so that if someone tries to abduct they, the perp gets a kickin the groin, a fist to the throat, etc.

    2. Re:Missing Persons by dex22 · · Score: 1

      My child does not have a right to privacy from me as a parent until I decide, or they reach 18 - whichever comes first. If I gove my kid a phone that lets me track their whereabouts, that's minimally invasive, unobtrusive and automatic, it strikes a wonderful new balance.

      What's more, it isn't when they are at places that you worry, it's when they're in transit between places that they're at the highest risk of accident, injury or assault.

      If it can also detect impact and fire off a distress call, or detect that a noise threshold was breached (load party, or a scream) and text me... Well, I'm all for it. Worried about false alarms? Just have a service call the phone and check everything is ok by asking for a password the child knows.

    3. Re:Missing Persons by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      My child does not have a right to privacy from me as a parent until I decide, or they reach 18 - whichever comes first

      Your job as a parent is to teach your kid to be an independant human.
      If they grow up under the banner of "I won't do anything bad because daddy is ALWAYS watching", and then magically at age 18 they are loosed on the world...you have failed in that job.

      If it can also detect impact and fire off a distress call
      Do you have any idea how many times (per day) kids drop their cell phone?

      detect that a noise threshold was breached (load party, or a scream) and text me
      Standard music playing volume.

      Kids privacy has to be balanced with free will and independance.

    4. Re:Missing Persons by dex22 · · Score: 1
      Your job as a parent is to teach your kid to be an independant human

      And I think I do that MUCh better than most American parents by taking an active interest in where my child is. I think *knowing* where they are is better than calling them up all the time and asking them, or telling them to be home at X hour - in front of all their friends. They're able to operate a lot more independently with this system. Criticism Denied.

      Do you have any idea how many times (per day) kids drop their cell phone?


      Which is why I said it should text them when this condition is met. This means they have, say, 90 seconds to respond without raising an alert. This would prevent 90% of false alerts, AND teach the kid to treat their phone as though it were fragile. Criticism Denied.

      Standard music playing volume.

      A child's scream is quite a bit louder than "standard music playing volume" - about 12dB louder. Again, if it falses, they'd have 90 seconds to enter a code to prevent an alert. A code an *attacker* won't know. Entering a wrong code could silence the phone and create a silent alarm, with tracking in place. Criticism Denied.

      Kids privacy has to be balanced with free will and independance.

      Ok, so you choose. Me calling you up every hour or two, or the moment you're late, to check up on you, embarassing you in front of your friends and causing parent/child hostility, or me passively knowing your location and having a way to know if certain 'exceptions' occur? As my child, you don't have a *right* to privacy in my home, and you certainly don't have a right to privacy out on a public street or in a car. If I want to track you, as my child, I can be intrusive or not. Which gives the child more privacy? Which allows the child to operate more independently? *RING RING* Where are you?

    5. Re:Missing Persons by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      "Verizon obviously isn't marketing this system as a way to track your kids in case they get kidnapped, but it is a positive side effect."

      Sure is. For the kidnapper.

      Let's run the scenario. I grab a kid and take their cellphone. I throw it into a nearby trash bin. Thus, you think your kid is still in the park and everything is rosy until the kid doesn't show up for dinner. You call the phone, get no answer, and head for the park where you find the phone in the trash and no sign of the kid. How is this better than what you have now?

      Secondary plan: I grab a kid and take their cellphone. I throw the cell phone into a cab, garbage truck, or someone else's car. While the cops waste valuable time chasing after the cellphone, I can get away.

    6. Re:Missing Persons by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      I think *knowing* where they are is better than calling them up all the time and asking them, or telling them to be home at X hour - in front of all their friends.
      That's very much an age thing. My son is currently 15. At age 11, I *knew* where he was. Either with us, or in the company of another trusted adult. And at age 11, he had no phone. At age 15, a certain amount of true independance is needed. If he is supposed to be at a certain place, and isn't, there wil be consequences.
      The key word is trust. If he blows that trust, then changes will be made. But I won't assume he's screwing up(badly), until he actually does.

      They're able to operate a lot more independently with this system.
      Having a 24/7 tether is a weird definition of independant. Even if it is an electronic tether.

      AND teach the kid to treat their phone as though it were fragile
      Easy way to do that. "You break it, you buy the replacement, or do without."

      I guess we'll just agree to disagree. Oh, and you could be a little less high handed with the "Criticism denied" thing. Makes conversations go much smoother.

  19. Not a new idea by celardore · · Score: 1

    This service has been around for years. Accutracking for example.

  20. ahahahahaha by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

    c'mon. If you NEED this service because you don't know where your kid is, your kid already has the solution figured out.

    What's that, you say?
     
     

    *** We're sorry, but the subscriber you have requested is not currently connected to the network.

  21. What's to worry.. by Presidential · · Score: 2, Funny

    Considering Verizon's crappy coverage in my area, I think the young delinquents here are perfectly invisible.

    --
    Whenever Mrs. Fitch breaks wind, we beat the dog.
  22. The thing is by alnjmshntr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    this is not really for tracking your children, that's just the cover story. More likely be used for tracking spouses - without their knowledge, of course.

    --
    If I had created the world I wouldn't have messed about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers
    1. Re:The thing is by gbjbaanb · · Score: 2, Interesting

      lol. quite right. I implemented a mobile tracking utility for a breakdown service here in the UK (so when you called the call centre, they could figure out where you were even if you had no idea).

      First thing that happened.. one woman did the location lookup 50 times... yup, her boyfriends' mobile.

      Second thing, the manager's wife had her handbag stolen, with mobile in it (and housekeys and address). He tracked the bag to see if the burglars were heading towards his house. (they weren't, the bag moved in the opposite direction and the bag was later found using it).

      The biggest issue with it though, it that the locations are not very accurate - good enough to see which section of motorway you're on, or which village you're in, but to determine exactly the location (like they find terrorists in 24) is fiction. The location is usually within a hundred to a thousand metres depending on the area (number of cells etc).

      In any case, tracking someone without their knowledge is illegal, you have to ask. But no doubt you asked your spouse quietly one day while the football was on and they said 'yes dear', so you'll be fine there :)

    2. Re:The thing is by mpe · · Score: 1

      lol. quite right. I implemented a mobile tracking utility for a breakdown service here in the UK (so when you called the call centre, they could figure out where you were even if you had no idea).
      First thing that happened.. one woman did the location lookup 50 times... yup, her boyfriends' mobile.

      Should such a call centre be able to locate the phone just be knowing the number? As opposed to only when a call is being made to them or for a short time afterwards.

      The biggest issue with it though, it that the locations are not very accurate - good enough to see which section of motorway you're on, or which village you're in, but to determine exactly the location (like they find terrorists in 24) is fiction. The location is usually within a hundred to a thousand metres depending on the area (number of cells etc).

      Which is a useful accuracy if you are trying to locate a stranded motorist.

      In any case, tracking someone without their knowledge is illegal, you have to ask.

      Whilst it might be illegal for a private individual, any employer, the AA/RAC, etc. It probably isn't if the police, GCHQ, MI5/6, etc decide to do it.
      There are issues such as how do you ensure that the police only track a phone which has been reported stolen, in the posession of a missing/abducted person, where there is a valid warrent in place, etc.

  23. False alarms by daybot · · Score: 1

    Can you imagine the terror some parents will feel when their child's battery runs out?

  24. Heh.. by Donniedarkness · · Score: 1
    Well, this makes me want to cancel my Verizon serice. Seriously.

    Seriously, this is just gonna cause a lot of trouble- Now, kids aren't gonna take their cell phones with them when they're going to do something stupid. Somebody gets hurt, nobody's gonna have a phone to call for help. Way to go, Verizon.

    Oh well, I've been wanting to change services for a while now. The iN network is great, but it's the only reason to have Verizon service (instead of Sprint or something else). They cripple their phones like hell to keep you from uploading your own sounds as ringtones and stuff, now.

    --
    Earn a % of cash back from Newegg, Tiger Direct, Walmart.com, and more: http://www.mrrebates.com?refid=458505
  25. Tower triangulation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Real quick - is this simple tower trianglulation? Or is this some GSM tracking trick? Or are we talking about GPS-enabled phones?

    1. Re:Tower triangulation? by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      Cell tower triangulation.

      This type service has been available in the Philippines for about 3 years or so now (maybe a little more). Surprised you are just getting it now! They market it in much the same way - 'save the children' It's a little too easy to set up - if I 'borrow' someones phone for a few moments I can add them to my list forever without their knowledge. I guess if you are the insecure type, you might use it to 'track the people you are supposed to love and trust unconditionally'... but then, you can go out and buy a new sim card for less than US $2 which renders it useless. (I do change my IMEI and IMSI regularly - this may be illegal in some parts of the world though)

      You can set the service up to track by time interval, it can send you an MMS with map... Can also track people on your list when they go overseas (roaming) A bunch of local celebrities have opted in and allow anyone to track them as well. (I suspect the phone companies manufacture the results though - little more than a money making scam)

      Like the guy above said, it's not very accurate though. Comparing the results with a GPS, it's usually about 1 kilometer from where I really am.

  26. So basically the cellphone gets left at a friends by Tweekster · · Score: 1

    house....wow what sort of idiot would actually buy this?

    Clue for parents, your kids are going to lie about where they are going, you wont stop that ever. Just set reasonable limits that will be somewhat broken but that your kids dont go TOO far over the line.

    Rules will be broken, but it just depends how badly, and tracking on a cellphone sure as shit isnt gonna do anything.

    --
    The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
  27. Can you hear me now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Commercial...

    Lauren: So like, ummm, did you see my new pics on MySpace, Debbie?
    Debbie: Yah, I left ya a msg. Check out Robbie, he put a hot pic up there
    -bad reception area-
    Lauren: What was that? Can you hear me now?
    Daddy: "Yes I can hear you Lauren"

  28. These phones don't go far enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My child wears a collar similar to those from the movie, The Running Man. If the little apple of my eye tries to stray outside his predetermined area of play, BLAMMO, the collar explodes and so does his head.

    Better a dead child then a kidnapped one.

  29. Not a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kids who need to be tracked like this will conviently "leave the phone in the car" and carpool to somewhere else.

    But this sort of thing is great for salespeople/techs too. You can tell exactly where they are and manage changes in schedules more easily. It helps them do their jobs more effectively and may be easier/cheaper than gps tracking the fleet of cars/trucks.

    1. Re:Not a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF does "conviently" mean?

  30. Mixed signals... by JayDot · · Score: 1

    It seems to me that the group of parents that would want this service is the same group that doesn't want their kids to have cellphones. If that's the case, this service will either, a) flop because of a lack of demand, or b) increase cell phone plan subscriptions because the parents feel better about letting Junior have a phone.

    --
    Meh, a real sig would take too long, and I have an MMORPG to play with....
  31. Such hypocrisy by Doches · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For years, I've found it astounding the amount of discrimination modern kids face. At school, their civil rights are limited; High school students are subject to what, if placed in any other context, would be blatantly illegal search and seizure. Federal law required that internet access at public high schools (and, for that matter, at public libraries) to be filtered for inappropriate content.

    This is really no different. Many Americans were furious to discover that the NSA had recently obtained their cell phone records, yet how many EFF members will raise a complaint against this system? None. Why? Because it's OK to discriminate against kids & students.

    Think about it. Afraid your kids will be negatively influenced by some content on the internet? Were you warped by exposure to foul language, racism, and pornography when you were in high school? I bet I know the answer to both of those questions, and I bet they're not the same.

    Read around on http://www.peacefire.org/. Again, think about it.

    Disclaimer: For what it's worth, I'm 20. It's been years since I endured any discimination because of my age.

    1. Re:Such hypocrisy by fwwr5007 · · Score: 1

      For what it's worth, I'm 20. It's been years since I endured any discimination because of my age.

      Ever tried to rent a car?

      Or, if you have a car, watch what happens to your insurance premium the moment you turn 25.

    2. Re:Such hypocrisy by ajrs · · Score: 1

      I'm 20. It's been years since I endured any discimination because of my age.
      20 eh? try to rent any cars lately?

    3. Re:Such hypocrisy by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, like when I was a kid and wanted to sleep over my friends house my bitch of a mom would speak with the other parent to make sure that it was okay. How fucking intrusive was that?

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    4. Re:Such hypocrisy by nasch · · Score: 1
      Many Americans were furious to discover that the NSA had recently obtained their cell phone records, yet how many EFF members will raise a complaint against this system? None. Why? Because it's OK to discriminate against kids & students.
      Your examples of schools and governments are not equivalent, morally or legally, to privacy invasions by parents of their own children. It is not only OK to discriminate between (treat differently) kids and adults, but necessary, and it would be unethical not to do so. Whether it's wise for parents to track their kids is separate from A) whether it's ethical and legal to do so and B) whether it would be ethical and legal for the government to do it.
    5. Re:Such hypocrisy by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1
      Federal law required that internet access at public high schools (and, for that matter, at public libraries) to be filtered for inappropriate content.

      Actually, Federal law does *not* require this across the board. It only requires it if the school or library applies for Federal funds. Kind of like the 55 mph speed limit - if you set a higher limit, you lost 10% of your highway funds or whatever.

      -b.

    6. Re:Such hypocrisy by AK+Marc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is really no different. Many Americans were furious to discover that the NSA had recently obtained their cell phone records, yet how many EFF members will raise a complaint against this system? None. Why? Because it's OK to discriminate against kids & students.

      I buy a cell phone. I track the cell phone I bought and pay the monthly fee on. Next you'll be telling me that using OnStar for directions makes me violate my own rights, since I shouldn't know where my car is. This isn't a problem regarding rights of students and such. This is an issue of trust between parents and their children, with technology used in a manner to verify the actions of the children.

      Or do you think it an unconstitutional violation of privacy for a parent to call the school their children attend and see if they are actually showing up to class? Perhaps the evil parent goes as far as to talk to the parents of their children's friends. I'm sure that should be punishable by death for that invasion of privacy.

      Disclaimer: For what it's worth, I'm 20. It's been years since I endured any discrimination because of my age.

      When is the last time you were in a bar? How about renting a car? And just because you are oblivious about the obvious, I'll assume that you experience discrimination on a regular basis in your job and personal life that you just don't see. Disclaimer: I'm 32 and I *still* experience age discrimination (and my mother is in her 60s and still experiences age discrimination and has her whole life).

    7. Re:Such hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read around on http://www.peacefire.org/. Again, think about it.

      Sorry, can't. That page is blocked by the filters here at my high school.

    8. Re:Such hypocrisy by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      Idiot. The same "illegal search and seizure" is practiced in many workplaces. You sign a form when you start that says they can search your locker, desk, tool box, whatever anytime they feel like it and may do so randomly just to check up on you. Why do employers do this? For the same reasons that high schools do it - people bring drugs to school and work.

      Sure, if you want to smoke pot at high school and let it all pass by you in a haze, I guess maybe that should be your right. You are young enough to recover from it.

      No, I do not think your average bus driver should have the right to toke up before taking the bus out for a spin. If searching his locker can prevent this by deterrance or remove the driver that does when it is discovered, I'm all for it.

    9. Re:Such hypocrisy by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      Next you'll be telling me that using OnStar for directions makes me violate my own rights, since I shouldn't know where my car is

      No, but now that I've taped my cellphone under your rear bumper, I know where your car is.

      People like to talk about how improper uses of things like this (see also: guns, VCRs, bittorrent, nmap) should not invalidate the proper uses, but at least with those there is no illusions about "someone can kill someone else with this" or "someone can infringe copyright with this". These days, from domestic surveillance to cellphone tracking, the people pushing the technology are trying very hard to hide the capability for misuse.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    10. Re:Such hypocrisy by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      No, but now that I've taped my cellphone under your rear bumper, I know where your car is.

      So what? At the very least, that is criminal mischief, already a crime. So should we make more laws against already illegal things? Track me all you like, you won't find it anything other than a waste of time. Track any one random person, you'll not find anything interesting. The only time it would be interesting is when you are tracking someone you already know to verify something you already suspect. It would do nothing that isn't already very easy (if a bit more expensive) with a private investigator. Give a PI the license plate and description of their car, home address, work address, and $250 a day (or whatever the rates are) and you'll have much more than bugging them, and it's perfectly legal. So why is a crappier way of doing what's already legal and easy getting you all riled up?

    11. Re:Such hypocrisy by asuffield · · Score: 1

      So what? At the very least, that is criminal mischief, already a crime. So should we make more laws against already illegal things?

      I think the problem here is that those laws don't apply to branches of the government, or to your corporate masters (who will simply require your permission to do these things, if you want to keep your job).

      You should make laws that actually work against the primary threats, instead of letting them do things that would be illegal if you did them yourself.

    12. Re:Such hypocrisy by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

      Idiot. The same "illegal search and seizure" is practiced in many workplaces. You sign a form when you start that says they can search your locker, desk, tool box, whatever anytime they feel like it and may do so randomly just to check up on you. Why do employers do this? For the same reasons that high schools do it - people bring drugs to school and work.

      Idiot. Public schools are government institutions, private employeers are not, and don't have to follow the same rules that the government does (i.e. the Bill of Rights).

    13. Re:Such hypocrisy by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

      I didn't know comparing apples to oranges was so insightful these days.

    14. Re:Such hypocrisy by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Because it's OK to discriminate against kids & students.
      It is.

      For all intents and purposes anything from a viable fetus to [your state's semi-arbitrary age] are treated as quasi-property.

      This status does not change until [your state's semi-arbitrary age] or a court says otherwise. This is why (in many states) 16 & 17 yr old runaways can spend a night in juvie before being given a police escort back to their parents, even if they do not want to go home.

      If the State decides that your parents are unfit, guess what, you do not go free. You become a "ward". A ward of the state, of a relative, of a family friend, of a foster family... etc.

      Minors are not treated equally by adults.
      Minors are not treated equally by the justice system.
      Heck, sometimes minors get more protection in the justice system & society.

      In the end though, everything hinges around the assumption that minors are the legal equivalent of an adult with diminished mental capacity IE someone who has a mental disorder/retardation.

      Minors are not little people. Until a certain level of brain maturation, there are non-trivial differences in the way decisions are made & consequences are weighed. The law gives them the benefit of the doubt by assuming they won't know any better and treats them as such.

      Once you start assuming minors should know better, their behavior is no longer a failure of parenting, it is a failure of the child & the law will punish them accordingly.

      Kids don't get equal treatment, because they don't get equal punishments.

      The 2nd worst thing that can happen to a minor is they get tossed in jail until they are 18.
      The #1 worst thing that can happen to a minor... is getting sentenced as an adult.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  32. Other uses by Thyamine · · Score: 1

    I'm guessing there's going to be some sort of account system so that people aren't able to track anyone they like, but I'd like to hear about a lot more safety with something like this. It's for safety, and yet it seems to me like they just put together the paedophile killer app. Track those kids! They're not at home! Meet new strangers!

    Or what about tracking spouses, or siblings, or parents. Is my phone going to have a special 'kid' chip that I can turn on and off so that I can't be tracked by this network, or is it tapping straight into which cell tower I'm associated to so it's phone independant? It's one thing if the company has access to this information, but making it available to everyone else is a liability waiting to happen. Maybe I'm just paranoid.

    --
    I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
  33. System Abuse by blank89 · · Score: 1

    The only real problem with this is that it would be easy for someone else to find the kid. There isn't any reason why parents shouldn't be able to use this to keep up with their kids though. If the kids don't like it, they'll just have to wait until they're 18.

  34. Who watches the watchers? by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For heaven's sake, think of the children!!!

    For heaven's sake, don't think of the identical chips in your own phone!!!

  35. mmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the hell with the kids. Where's my wife?

  36. Then comes the part.... by Flimzy · · Score: 1

    ...where the kid leaves their cell phone in the turbolift while they go over to Billy's quarters to watch pr0n.

    1. Re:Then comes the part.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The turbolift?

      "So honey, where is Billy now?"

      "Apparently approaching Qo'noS at warp 6..."

  37. You make a good point, but... by Quintios · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Seriously, the kids will know this kind of watching is being done and will either turn off their phone or leave it behind (or ata friends house inside the "permitted area". Then if the kids really get into trouble they won't have the option of calling for help.

    It's funny but I was thinking late last week that I would like to implant a GPS in my kids. They're quite young at the moment and would not be able to use a cell phone or other device to alert me to their location. When they play, they play in the backyard and are not allowed out front without an adult (me or a trusted neighbor) out there with them. That being said, it is darn near impossible to keep one eye on your kids at every moment. There are times that, when I do realize that they are out of eyesight; they may have gone from the front yard to the back yard through the garage, I have to look for them. I'm quite paranoid so not but a few seconds go by before I realize they aren't there. I shudder to imagine if they would get abducted.

    That's why a "child-locator" device would be so wonderful to have. Think about all the kids that walk home from school and such. I think this is a great idea. Pop the phone in their backpack or put it in their pocket and make sure it's recharged every night and never turned off. I would punish my kids for turning it off for sure.

    I think that, as was mentioned in another posts, if you have a good relationship with your kids and help them to understand that this device (or others that are similar) is for their protection, rather than punishment, I think it will be quite beneficial.

    --
    Anonymous Cowards are at -6...
    1. Re:You make a good point, but... by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      That's why a "child-locator" device would be so wonderful to have. Think about all the kids that walk home from school and such. I think this is a great idea. Pop the phone in their backpack or put it in their pocket and make sure it's recharged every night and never turned off. I would punish my kids for turning it off for sure.

      Add to that some form of "panic button", so they could send the folks an instant SOS with their location, and this turns into quite a useful service.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    2. Re:You make a good point, but... by johndunlop · · Score: 1

      What happened to trust and relax.

    3. Re:You make a good point, but... by Quintios · · Score: 1
      That's a good idea too. I guess in my mind I would rather the child didn't try to extricate the device as, if the abductors are tech-savvy at all, they'll ditch the phone/device as soon as they see it.

      Maybe we should sew it into the lining of their backpack and have a recharging receptacle or something.

      I wonder if a device like that could be fashioned into a belt, or perhaps physically attached to a belt. Just thinking of some way to prevent it from "falling off" or being removed without significant force. Hmmmm....

      --
      Anonymous Cowards are at -6...
    4. Re:You make a good point, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Sure, tell that to all the parents that have had kids abducted, raped and molested, and then murdered and left in some field somewhere.

      You must not have children, and if you do I hope you live in a safe area because you are the parent letting the kids run around and after a couple hours realizing they're gone and phoning your neighbors and going "uh, is Johnney over there?"

      Trust and relax. Please, get a frigging clue...

    5. Re:You make a good point, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happens when they turn 18, do you have the device removed from them or do you simply hand over control to the state? Or do you still get to set limits when they're 38?

    6. Re:You make a good point, but... by Twanfox · · Score: 1

      Here's the problem with a child-locator device, especially with the way you describe how it would be attached to them. Anything attached can be removed. Do you really think this is going to be some kind of Great Eliminator of Abductions? Hell no, the abductor just makes sure to shuck the kid of all his or her belongings (possibly clothes, if it gets to the point of being embedded in clothing) in order to defeat being tracked and the kid located. And let me guess, your kids have never ran off and left their backpack someplace, leaving the tracking device off their person?

      The problem I have with people going "Yay, a device to help me locate my child" are phrases like this...

      I'm quite paranoid so not but a few seconds go by before I realize they aren't there.

      Your problem is paranoia. Children, once they start to explore away from their parents, are going to eventually try to shirk all rules and unleash all tethers. This is a good thing. This guarontees that your children are growing up and are going to be capable of living independantly. Binding them to some 'device of protection' is likely to have one of several ill effects, ranging from a need to be watch and an inability to act independantly to purposefully deceptive and living their lives evasively.

      This kind of paranoia leads nowhere good. While you may be seeking your children's best interests, this kind of device only offers a false sense of security with how easy it is to come up with ways to defeat it.

    7. Re:You make a good point, but... by ShadowBlasko · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Sure, tell that to all the parents that have had kids abducted, raped and molested, and then murdered and left in some field somewhere.

      You must not have children, and if you do I hope you live in a safe area because you are the parent letting the kids run around and after a couple hours realizing they're gone and phoning your neighbors and going "uh, is Johnney over there?"

      Trust and relax. Please, get a frigging clue..

      Yep, trust and relax.

      Hey parents of kids who have had bad things happen, Newsflash for you: Bad things happen. Sometimes for no reason. You can teach your kids to deal, or you can end your life as it is...and become their 24/7 caretaker for the rest of their lives. But DO NOT EXPECT US TO DO IT FOR YOU, or put up with your poor parenting skills because you made their world "dangerproof".

      "Hey, is the little one over there?" is how we grew up. We lived. Most of the kids will you know.

      I will not tie my children to electronic leashes now, lest they become accustomed to it...and refuse to fight it, or even be alarmed by it in the future.

      Screw "It's for the children" Give them back real playgrounds... real toys, real punishment for injuring others or acting out.

      Give them real responsibility, and REAL consequences as they grow. Teach them how to learn from the enviroment, and stop protecting them from everything.

      I grew up in 2 places. One an industrial city, with pretty bad crime...and then on a farm during part of the time.

      And yes, I have a child, and she knows better in most cases than to do stupid things.

      Yours will probably be killed the first time they walk down a sidewalk because you were not holding their hand.

      /Come home when the streetlights come on, or call and tell us why you are late
      //Dont talk to strangers.
      ///Shut the gate, and don't piss off the bull.
      ////You break it... you make it right again.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order- Ed Howdershelt Via Tass
    8. Re:You make a good point, but... by technomom · · Score: 1

      Relax went out the window the day they started publicizing the locations of local sex offenders on the internet.

      Sad but true. Ignorance was bliss.

      JoAnn

    9. Re:You make a good point, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear obviously very close to 18 year-old, When they're 18, they can buy their own fucking cell phone. Oh, and if I've mistreated them so much, why the hell are they still living with me too?

    10. Re:You make a good point, but... by iSwitched · · Score: 1

      You comment as though there were no middle ground. Or are you saying that innocent children who are murdered or abused while "unleashing all tethers" is acceptable collateral damage? The Norman-Rockwell-esque innocence that punctuated past generations is gone. As a parent, my primary goal is to keep them alive, my secondary goal is teaching independence and self-sufficiency. Both important goals, but independence is irrelevant if you're dead.

      I don't have the answer, but when coupled with a pre-existing good relationship between child and parent, this device is nothing alarming. It may even work for some households, and if it does, that's great. I'll probably sign up when my kids get their first phones.

      --
      "That naive cube! How long must I suffer this!" --Sheldon J. Plankton
    11. Re:You make a good point, but... by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      Hey parents of kids who have had bad things happen, Newsflash for you: Bad things happen. Sometimes for no reason. You can teach your kids to deal, or you can end your life as it is...and become their 24/7 caretaker for the rest of their lives. But DO NOT EXPECT US TO DO IT FOR YOU, or put up with your poor parenting skills because you made their world "dangerproof".

      Who said anything about "danger-proof?" We could all be wiped out tomorrow by an asteroid, so the idea od "danger-proof" is idiotic. I'm talking about another tool to allow a concerned parent to check up on a kid. Yeah, it's got Big Brother written all over, but what doesn't in this day-and-age?

      You may find it easy to throw a kid to the wolves, but I don't. Yes, I agree kids get molly-coddled nowadays -- they aren't made to face the music for their transgressions, mainly because everyone is suddenly afarid the cops are going to come and take their kids away if they even look at them funny. I'm all for the suitable application of whatever punishment is necessary to get it through their heads that this is not a game for their amusement. Mind you, I don't advocate spanking a kid until they can't walk.

      It's pretty easy to say bad things happen, but it's that kind of laissez faire attitude that gets kids in trouble in the first place. Yeah, bad things happen, but a lot of bad things are preventable. And it's not just educating your kid; it's making sure they have the tools they need to stay safe. And if that means planting a bug in their cell phone, so be it. If that gives me peace of mind and makes it possible for my kid to be found or get out of a jam they might not ordinarily be able to get out of, then it's worth it. My kids are too valueable to me to take chances.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    12. Re:You make a good point, but... by mpe · · Score: 1

      It's pretty easy to say bad things happen, but it's that kind of laissez faire attitude that gets kids in trouble in the first place. Yeah, bad things happen, but a lot of bad things are preventable.

      The problem is that sometimes attempts to prevent "bad things" from happening actually make other "bad things" a lot more likely. It's even possible that the final result of badly though out actions is to make whatever they are intended to prevent more likely.

      And it's not just educating your kid; it's making sure they have the tools they need to stay safe. And if that means planting a bug in their cell phone, so be it. If that gives me peace of mind and makes it possible for my kid to be found or get out of a jam they might not ordinarily be able to get out of, then it's worth it. My kids are too valueable to me to take chances.

      You must be careful not to make them feel too safe. Since the result of that is that people tend to start taking foolish risks in order to get their feeling of risk back to the "right" level. N.B. this is a normal human behaviour...

    13. Re:You make a good point, but... by esper · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, I wasn't able to readily google up an annual number of incidents for "abuse" of abducted children, but I did find a statement from the Washington State Attorney General's Office that approximately 100 children are abducted and murdered each year. While I'm not going to call that "acceptable collateral damage", neither do I believe it to be suitable justification for curtailing the independence and self-sufficiency of the millions of kids who aren't abducted or killed.

      A little risk is OK. Really. It's part of the cost of growth. There are realistic risks which can and should be mitigated, sure, but if there are 10,000,000 children[1] in the US and 100 are abducted and killed each year, that's a 0.001% chance per year - far below what I consider the threshold of a realistic risk.

      [1] I'm sure children actually make up substantially more than 1/30 of the population, but picking 10 million makes the numbers prettier and artifically inflates the odds. The actual chance per year of your child being abducted and killed is less than the figure calculated above.

    14. Re:You make a good point, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both important goals, but independence is irrelevant if you're dead.

      Fine then, but when they turn out to be 30 year old virgins, don't nag at them unless you're prepared to pony up the goods, just like you've done the rest of their life.

    15. Re:You make a good point, but... by lgw · · Score: 1

      Your child has a higher chance of being struck by lightning than of being abducted by stranger. Children are routinely abducted by estranged parents, but almost never by strangers. The risk is a myth that sells the news. Get over it.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    16. Re:You make a good point, but... by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      If the number is quoted from Washington state, it is probably only for Washington State. For the Nation it has to be higher. I remember over 5 for the past year in Florida alone. Though maybe some of those were custody abductions.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    17. Re:You make a good point, but... by esper · · Score: 1

      Nope, it specifically states that it's a national number:

      According to a 1997 study by the State of Washington's Office of the Attorney General "the murder of a child who is abducted ... is a rare event. There are estimated to be about 100 such incidents in the United States each year, less than one-half of one percent of the murders committed";

    18. Re:You make a good point, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they should include a lightning strike indicator along with the GPS tracking...

    19. Re:You make a good point, but... by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      Here's an idea: educate your kids well and then trust them to make a wise decision. You can prevent many bad things from happening just by being well educated. I've never seen where keeping your kids on a leash can do anything but harm them. I can name half a dozen people off the top of my head whose parents kept them on a short leash and who practically broke down the first time they left home and were left to fend for themselves. Similarly, I can name an equal number of "leash kids" who never strayed too far from home.

      I can understand wanting to be protective of your kids. They are your responsibility and you probably love them to death. But eventually they have to learn to make their own decisions and their own mistakes. Better to let them do that while they still live at home and have your support, no?

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    20. Re:You make a good point, but... by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      I can understand wanting to be protective of your kids. They are your responsibility and you probably love them to death. But eventually they have to learn to make their own decisions and their own mistakes. Better to let them do that while they still live at home and have your support, no?

      The sad part of this whole debate, is that it is driven not by any desire to give modern parents more tools to be better parents, but by an overwhelming sense of Big Brother-ism, as if this technology is somehow going to stunt the growth of children. I have news for you: plenty of children are already having their growth as a person stunted by living in poverty, being exposed to violence in the home and on the street, and poor education. No amount of education of a child can adequately prepare them for an emergency; you have no idea how they will react, no matter how much you drill it into their heads. Right now, we have a lackadaisical generation (and no, not every kid is that way), with poor manners, poor morals in many cases, and not a lot of fundamental common sense. This is a tool, and how you use it determines its impact -- it is neither evil nor good. If its use might keep your kid out of trouble, perhaps trouble they are not prepared for or trouble even you could not forsee, isn't that worth it? Apparently not.

      Oh, BTW, how is this technology any different than when we were kids, and every mother and father on the block new you and watched over you, and reported your transgressions to your parents before you even got home? Communities used to be tight-knit affairs, but that has changed, and you cannot always rely on the people around you. And you cannot always be sure who is living on your block -- just because there's a Megan's law doesn't mean a sex offender can't move into your neighborhood without you knowing it. And how about the ones that haven't been caught.

      I'm tired of these knee-jerk reactions to technology and especially where it involves kids. What is so bad about wanting to protect them? If I didn't want them to fall down and go boom, I'd put them in a fscking bubble and feed them through a tube! I'm not talking A Clockwork Orange here! I want to have all the tools I can to ensure the safety of my children, especially when I work an hour's train ride away (and let's not start the whole find-a-job-closer-to-home-and-be-a-better-family argument: as usual, it's not as simple as everyone makes it out to be).

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    21. Re:You make a good point, but... by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      This is a tool, and how you use it determines its impact -- it is neither evil nor good.
      You, however sound like a more reasonable/responsible parent. You know that there will be the parents out there who will abuse this technology and hold this technology over their children's heads as a virtual leash. The technology will be used as more of a threat to the kids that they shouldn't do something instead of a useful tool to check up on your kids should they do something wrong.

      Right now, we have a lackadaisical generation (and no, not every kid is that way), with poor manners, poor morals in many cases, and not a lot of fundamental common sense. Why is that? My parents drilled in to me a strong sense of morals and a generally good set of manners. Common sense... I personally think a lot of that is learned from experiences.

      If its use might keep your kid out of trouble, perhaps trouble they are not prepared for or trouble even you could not forsee, isn't that worth it? Apparently not.
      What did we do without this tool when confronted with a situation our parents couldn't forsee and prepare us for? We thought for ourselves and figured it out on our own. Our parents couldn't prepare us for everything. We did occasionally have to trust our own judgement in some situations. Those are what tend to be known as learning experiences.

      Oh, BTW, how is this technology any different than when we were kids, and every mother and father on the block new you and watched over you, and reported your transgressions to your parents before you even got home? Communities used to be tight-knit affairs, but that has changed, and you cannot always rely on the people around you. And you cannot always be sure who is living on your block -- just because there's a Megan's law doesn't mean a sex offender can't move into your neighborhood without you knowing it. And how about the ones that haven't been caught.
      For the record, I didn't realy grow up in a community like this. I lived in a slightly more rural area where the houses typically sat on an acre or more. Granted a few of our neighbors knew who I was, but it certainly wasn't the same sort of suburban community that you speak of. Regarding the sex offenders, what makes you think that there are any more sex offenders today than there were when we were growing up? The only difference is that now, because of Megan's Law, we actually know who the convicted ones are. When we were growning up, a convicted sex offender could have moved next door and we would have never known the difference.

      I'm tired of these knee-jerk reactions to technology and especially where it involves kids.
      I'm just tired of many parents not giving their children a fair chance to grow up and learn important life lessons.

      If I didn't want them to fall down and go boom, I'd put them in a fscking bubble and feed them through a tube! I'm not talking A Clockwork Orange here! I want to have all the tools I can to ensure the safety of my children, especially when I work an hour's train ride away (and let's not start the whole find-a-job-closer-to-home-and-be-a-better-family argument: as usual, it's not as simple as everyone makes it out to be).
      As stated before, you at least sound like you seem to be resaonably responsible with tools like this. You seem to appreciate the value of our kids learning some of life's lessons. Many people, however, seem to think that they need to protect their children 24/7 from the big bad boogie man (or should I say Terrorist these days?) lurking around the next corner. I also agree with you regarding the "work closer to home" argument. I'd say that less than half of the people I know work within 20 minutes of their job.

      Here's some food for thought though: Is our world really any more dangerous than it used to be? Or has the reporting simply gotten better?

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    22. Re:You make a good point, but... by Twanfox · · Score: 1

      I did not say that innocent children being murdered or abused or abducted or anything else was acceptable. I did not even imply that the world was perfect, that there was no middle ground, that there was innocence left in the world. However, my take on things is that, when the children get old enough to roam away from home (go to friends, go party, etc), a trust between you and child needs to start developing. You need to teach them the things that will help keep them safe on their own, the tools they need to ascertain whether or not a stranger is safe or dangerous, the responsibility to check in every so often and BE HONEST with what they're doing.

      While my childhood was not perfect, something that I settled on after growing up was 'checking in' during travel. I'm an adult, I am capable of traveling several hundred (or thousand) miles on my own without incident. However, simply as precaution, I contact someone (usually my parents) to announce that I have arrived at my destination safely. Why? Because it's best if someone outside yourself is aware when you're traveling and (lacking that announcement) can alert the authorities should something go wrong (accident, etc) enroute. Someone is watching me when I travel, but it is a trusted relationship, it is not a GPS Transponder.

      It's a stupid phrase, but in this case it is apt. Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime. You are preparing your children for life. You're better off to give them the tools to do it themselves than to try to do it for them.

  38. Hello, who is this? by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    And don't forget what could happen if the cellphone rings because mom has a message for her daughter.

    Can anybody say "grounded for a year"?

  39. A.K.A. Acting responsibly... by JayDot · · Score: 1

    I'm just recently 21, and I can tell you that yes, the exposure I had in public high school has negatively effected me. Making kids (especially those who know what is right) behave responsibly isn't discrimination. It's funny how much negative attention you can avoid by simply not doing the things that attract the oversight of the administration. The principles/administrators/police liason officers had no idea who I was because I did what was asked and followed the rules. If kids (including myself) want to be treated like the sophisticated and responsible grown-ups that we like to think of ourselves as, then we need to act like it.

    --
    Meh, a real sig would take too long, and I have an MMORPG to play with....
    1. Re:A.K.A. Acting responsibly... by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

      But you can be a perfectly well behaved, responsible, mature young adult and still end up on your administrator's/teacher's shit list if he or she is a power tripping control freak. Anyone who's gone through high school and not seen this happen is either blind or the faculty is a bunch of pot smoking, peace loving hippies.

  40. Why not? by Evro · · Score: 1

    If the FBI and NSA can track your kids, why shouldn't you be able to? At least when you do it your kids will (ostensibly) know about it.

    --
    rooooar
  41. Would have been useful last week. by mypalmike · · Score: 1

    Mr. and Mrs. Lester -

    Your son/daughter from Michigan, USA is currently in:
    Amman, Jordan

    Would you like driving directions to her location?

    --
    There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
  42. This will only erode personal privacy further by TheDarkener · · Score: 1

    This service is being put in place primarily to:

    - BENIFIT CELL PHONE COMPANIES.

    This service will be of no real benefit as:

    - Children have brains as adults do
    - Children do not like to be 'leashed' as adults do not
    - Children are smarter than adults think and therefore will circumvent the system by any number of obvious means

    The ultimate outcome of this service will be:

    - Human tracking will be more accepted in society
    - Human tracking will continue to be precise only in governmental/highly paid commercial instances
    - Human tracking will lead to other various means to seemingly invade our privacy, take away more freedoms we enjoy today and further erode individuality and sense of personal privacy (which, IMHO, will lead to a really, really dull world where nobody truly benefits but those that are not tracked)

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  43. Exciting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So basically I can keep track of the movements of my family over time? How exciting that will be. Work, Home, Olive Garden, Home, Work, Home, Work, Home, Chuck-E-Cheese, Home... ad nauseum. Affirmation that my life is dull. I just hope Google picks it up so I can go to http://boringmovement.google.com/

  44. How about this? Watchdog watches by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    That reminds me of the new japanese watches with cellphone capabilities. Now imagine a future with watches transmitting the kids' pulse to their parents to make sure they're fine and not in danger (and NOT having sex! Teenagers will of course HATE this one :P )

    1. Re:How about this? Watchdog watches by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1
      That reminds me of the new japanese watches with cellphone capabilities. Now imagine a future with watches transmitting the kids' pulse to their parents to make sure they're fine and not in danger (and NOT having sex! Teenagers will of course HATE this one :P )
      Now that would be fun to put on the neighbor's dog...just hope he doesn't take off after the mailman.
      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  45. Adverse Effect by cyngus · · Score: 1

    So now kids will leave their phone somewhere and just go without it. Then if they really get into trouble they'll be without a phone. Also, does this work if the phone is off? If not, I'd just always claim I was going to the movies, go the direction of the theater, turn off the phone and then do whatever I wanted for five hours, cause I saw two shows. :-) Justin

  46. Re:This seems like a violation of privacy rights.. by minion · · Score: 4, Interesting

    but children have no rights. Oh well.
     
    This used to irritate me so much when I was under 18. It still irritates me, because no where in the constitution does it say anywhere, "these rights are only applicable to those 18 years old or older".
     
    What I find amusing is that a lot of emperors of China, etc, in centuries past were 13 years old. Somehow, recently, we decided an individual is too stupid to think for themselves until they turn 18.
     
    I think most can agree on here, age is no determining factor for intelligence - look at our politicians - most of them are in their 40s, and still brain dead.

    --

    -- If we don't stand up for our rights, now, there will be no right to stand up for them later.
  47. Turn off your cell phone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They won't turn off their cell phones in class when they're asked to. Ironically the tracking won't work then schools start shielding classrooms to block cell phone calls during class, the one place parents do want to track. I suppose that could be an excuse, turn the cell phone off and claim you were in class. But I doubt most kids could go cold turkey that long.

  48. Car alarm syndrome by boyfaceddog · · Score: 2, Interesting

    After the first 200 calls to 911 that "Tommy's cell phone has disapeared" (only to reappear an hour later when Tommy comes up from his freind's basement) the cops will stop replying to any calls based on this service.

    Utterly useless unless you want to find a lost/stolen cell phone which just happened to be left on.

    --
    Here will be an old abusing of God's patience and the king's English.
  49. Cheaperphone? by ToxikFetus · · Score: 1

    Damn, I though the title said 'Cheaperphone'. You know, the cheap minimalist phone service without all the extra crap that I don't use/want/need?

    1. Re:Cheaperphone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'Fetus,

      T-Mobile's to-go phones are pretty close to this. I bought one a year ago ($50 for the phone, $100 for 600 minutes of airtime.) I only used about 200 of the minutes in the year. I had to put $10 in recently, and now my old minutes plus the new expire in yet another year.

      So, in another year, I'll have put in $160 and gotten all the airtime I wanted. $6.66 per month - not bad, IMHO.

    2. Re:Cheaperphone? by itwasgreektome · · Score: 1

      That's a sweet deal. I really wish they did have phones out there without all that crap. All that extra stuff just makes the phone more likely to break down. I just want a really good reception, powerful, clear phone. I guess it really is a consumer market? Public saying they want video, camera, music...companies go where the money is. Ranting...I would love to pay $6.66/month like you did. That would be awesome.

  50. Just for children? by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

    While a lot of comments here have focussed on shortcomings that will undermine this system as used as a system of disciplinary control for children; used in a more restrained manner in a family that otherwise has good trust and communications, it could have good emergency uses. And not just for children -- I certainly wouldn't mind my wife having the additional information it would provide in the event of something happening to me. Now, of course, there are privacy concerns about keeping the information from unwanted monitors (yeah, NSA guy, I'm talking about you, among other people), but its a technology that certainly has good uses.

  51. This won't work and will cause harm by 99luftballon · · Score: 1

    Thins won't work as a tracker if the kid doesn't want to be tracked and will have devastating consequences for family relationships if the parent insists on their children using it. First off kids are smart. This system needs power to work so simply taking the battery out of the phone will make the child impossible to track. If this is similar to other tracking systems it will still work if the phone is switched off but take out the battery and there's no way to track it. For those kids that can't figure this out the kids will simply leave their phone at home and say they forgot it. Now many parents buy their children a mobile phone for safety, so if they get in trouble they can call for help. But if you're a kid wanting to go to an event they aren't allowed too, usually something where the parent perceives there to be danger like a party or concert, the kid leaves the phone at home and is in even more danger.

    The logical next step is for the parent to insist that the kid carries the phone at all times. What's that going to do to foster trust between the generations? "I love you Timmy and to show that love I'm going to destroy any privacy you have left and check obsessively to see where you are at all times and question you about it when you get back."

    I'm sure Verizon will make money on this but the social and emotional costs will also be high and the risk factor is likely to be untouched. The first thing a child snatcher will do is ditch the phone after all. What's next, implants?

  52. The real problem.... by dotoole · · Score: 1

    Treat your children like idiots incapable of making their own decisions and they'll probably grow up to be idots who can't make their own decisions. Establishing ground rules and boundaries is important, but that doesn't mean you have to spy on your kids. Give them your trust and respect. Monitor them if they violate that trust, but at least give them a chance to earn it.

  53. It depends on their purposes by MarkusQ · · Score: 1, Insightful

    whether it would be accurate enough for their purposes is unknown to me as well.

    For example, if they want to know what room you're in at the Budget-99 Motel, probably not.

    But if they want to

    • Produce "proof" that you've done something naughty because you were in a neighborhood where "naughty" is just one of many fine services they offer, in order to blackmail you
    • Drop a half ton of explosives on you, to kill you and anyone else who might be near you
    • Provide "credible intelligence" that you agree with / are working with someone because you were in the same large building as they were, and use it as an excuse to seize your assets
    • Etc.

    ...then the resolution should be more than sufficient. (And before anyone cries that they would never do these sorts of things, they already do them. They just haven't gotten around to doing them to white US taxpayers. Yet.)

    --MarkusQ

    1. Re:It depends on their purposes by mpe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...then the resolution should be more than sufficient. (And before anyone cries that they would never do these sorts of things, they already do them. They just haven't gotten around to doing them to white US taxpayers. Yet.)

      How would you know? Blackmail is most sucessful when it goes unreported. If the blackmailer is some shadowy arm of government or the police who are you going to report it to?

    2. Re:It depends on their purposes by MarkusQ · · Score: 2, Informative

      ...then the resolution should be more than sufficient. (And before anyone cries that they would never do these sorts of things, they already do them. They just haven't gotten around to doing them to white US taxpayers. Yet.)

      How would you know? Blackmail is most sucessful when it goes unreported. If the blackmailer is some shadowy arm of government or the police who are you going to report it to?

      Are you telling me you've never heard of J. Edgar Hoover's FBI? Thanks to the FOIA, we now at least know some of what was done in the past. And yes, it does include blackmail. The great thing about evil bureaucracies (as opposed to, say, most evil individuals) is they tend to keep a copious paper trail.

      --MarkusQ

    3. Re:It depends on their purposes by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      you do know that Verizon Phones have a GPS chip in them and if needed they could put you in the correct half of a good many rooms?
      One of the things that having a massive/dense grid of towers is most likely you are in range of probably 4-5 towers (maybe not good enough lock for a phone call but... ).

      (to be fair most major carriers due to federal law will also have the chip)

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    4. Re:It depends on their purposes by mpe · · Score: 1

      Are you telling me you've never heard of J. Edgar Hoover's FBI? Thanks to the FOIA, we now at least know some of what was done in the past. And yes, it does include blackmail. The great thing about evil bureaucracies (as opposed to, say, most evil individuals) is they tend to keep a copious paper trail.

      How often is this of use to their current victims? As opposed to people researching history though.

  54. What a great family life. by FatSean · · Score: 1

    Kids never see their parents...you said it yourself, there is hardly any time TO BE A FAMILY. Hope your kids turn out OK.

    --
    Blar.
    1. Re:What a great family life. by Billosaur · · Score: 1

      Kids never see their parents...you said it yourself, there is hardly any time TO BE A FAMILY. Hope your kids turn out OK.

      That's why I try to make every chance I do have count. ALl I'm saying is we don't live in the world of Ward and June Cleaver anymore, and to think it's so simple to just revert to that lifestyle is ludicrous. My kids will turn out OK because I'll make sure they do; I'll work as hard as I have to to make sure they never want for anything and I will be there for them no matter how badly they may screw up. And I'll make the most of whatever time is given me -- it's the best anyone can hope for in a world where someone wants to kill me simply because I live in the US.

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
  55. Re:How to defeat it: Cellphone blocked locations. by burnt_cajun_toast · · Score: 1

    And what happens in those places where they block cell-phone signals? Let's feed that to the lawyers when something happens to the kid...

  56. Call forwarding?? by siberian · · Score: 1

    Step 1: Enable call forwarding, forward to a friends cell.
    Step 2: Leave phone a site of the 'slumber party'
    Step 3: Rave all night, secure in the knowledge that Verizon is reporting you at Sally's slumber party while you do cocktails of meth and ecstasy in the middle of the desert.

    1. Re:Call forwarding?? by zerosix · · Score: 1

      Yeah, exactly, this is a pointless project to spend time on.

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. ~Albert Einstein
  57. How many kids would this actually affect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many kids have a cell phone these days? How can they possibly afford it? I have a 70k+ a year job and I can't afford a cell phone! It seems that they only way that kids could afford a cell phone is if there parents are subsidizing the cost, which in my experience means that parents are very wealthy. How many kids could this possibly affect?

  58. Not if it's a Treo 700p or a Picture Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No geeky kid spawn of a Slashdotter would tie a Treo 700p to a dog, or to leave it in their friend's house, granting them access to their myspace account saved passwords, and private pictures.

    Even if it's a cheapper phone, would they leave their phone's private and incriminating pictures at the mercy of their internet posting friends?

    The StarWars Kid won't, for sure.

    1. Re:Not if it's a Treo 700p or a Picture Phone by Urthwhyte · · Score: 1

      or import HTC Wizard/HTC Apache if they are on CDMA. I left my Palm Pilot on the lawn once, I've never seen an address book so quickly corrupted by a dog in my life, no way I'm tying a 650 to the dog's neck (especially if it has an electric fence and it's a particularly stupid dog.)

      --
      Base 13 FTW!
  59. Doctor Fun by jaweekes · · Score: 1
  60. good idea by carlosGames · · Score: 0

    Now the children would turn off the cell if they know they are being tracked and then would be completly impossible to comunicate with them

  61. Should work with every phone? by geo.georgi · · Score: 1

    I wonder why they claim it works on 10 phones only?
    They should be able to find the location of every phone connected to the network, only knowing the coordinates of the base station currently in connection with the phone.

    A little off topic
    I live in Germany and here one of the gsm operators (o2 Germany) sends the location of the base station as a cbs message. I developed a small aplication for Nokia Symbian phones to read and decode the message and to show the coordinates to the user. If you live or travel to Germany you can download the application here (english page) or a little better looking german page here.

    I entertained myself, I can add features like kids tracking but decided it is not worth, because simply the kids don't get a Symbian phone for the birthday :) Probably the next feature I'll implement is to show you the distance to some travel points like cities etc.

  62. culture of spying by sum.zero · · Score: 1

    let's indoctrinate everyone into a culture of spying. the kids, the parents, everyone. who needs freedom? come on, let's do it for the children.

    sum.zer0

  63. Watching us by lucienshand · · Score: 1

    Thank you, Big Brother, for allowing me to track my children while you are! I'm glad I'm a Beta.

  64. good job... by geoff+lane · · Score: 1

    ... that children are unable to use each others phones, nor swap sim cards.

  65. Field Force Manager by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Verizon Wireless released a full featured version in March. http://estore.vzwshop.com/overview/customapplicati ons/fieldforcemanager/

  66. Very delicate issue! by IMightB · · Score: 1

    I believe that this is a tool, like any other tool, it can be abused or used for good. I have a story to tell it's happening right now, and is causing two parent considerable grief...

    First of all let me frame this story. My wife and I own a duplex, we live in one side of it and rent the other. My tenants are good hard-working lower middle class Blue collar workers. They do their very best to raise their kids (2 boys). Their youngest who just turned 16 is feeling his oats and starting to challenge his parents authority. Talking back, swearing at his parents, staying out late and sometimes not coming home at all. They are at their wits end as to what to do with him. They recently had a friend of theirs a, county sheriff, stop by and talk to them about their options. I also managed to take part of some of this conversation, and related a tory of mine.

    When I was his age, I got into an argument with my mother, (I don't even remember what it was about now) feeling my oats and decided that it was a Good Idea to call her a "F*cking Bit.." I NEVER had a chance to finish that cuss, as unbeknownst to me my father had been standing behind me the whole time, and next thing I knew I was on the ground 5 feet away with my head on the other side of my shoulders. I NEVER attempted to call my parents names again as I had learned my lesson. My parents never abused me, this was the ONLY time I was EVER struck by my parents (other than being spanked occasionally when I was younger). I can count the times I was physically disciplined on 2 hands with a few fingers left over. I personally do not consider this abuse, but according to the sheriff, times have changed, and you can go to jail for this sort of "child abuse" now. It's rediculous!

    Anyways back to my story, their youngest has now not come home for 4 days, they have no idea where he is, and have now reported him as a "Runaway Child". He DOES however, have a cell phone on him that his parents provided him. I have recommended getting one of the "tracking services" that are being advertised by cell phone companies now so they can find out where he is. They are currently looking into this, and I hope that they can find him.

    In this case I think that GPS cell phone tracking is a good thing and an important tool that parents have at their disposal. On the other hand Government agency or private company tracking without a warrant or permission is abhorable.

  67. To add to the pointlessness... by Cctoide · · Score: 1

    Weren't PlayStations modded so that pirated games could be played? Aren't cellphones unlockable? Wasn't there a guy who disabled kid's nanny software for $5 a pop?
    I can see this going the same way - parents installed a Big Brother system on your cellphone? No problem, just go to the guy down the street and get it disabled for $5, then claim "it isn't working".
    At any rate, the cellphone companies are going to rejoice.

    --
    "Let's face it, it's a good story. Accuracy would kill it."
  68. This is the stupidest thing ever. by Gno · · Score: 0

    Okay. If you were sneaking out of the house. And your parents could tell where your cellphone is. Then leave it where it should be! Next to your bed! I'm sorry this is really stupid and full of holes and security issues! What if my phone "dies" and I "lose" the simcard temporarily? I dissapear! And what is with all theese kids with cellphones! Who is calling them that is sooo important. If your at home use the house phone! I tired of theese little 11 year old kids with cellphones! You only need a cellphone when your 16 and driving. If you really want to know where your kid is then buy a cheap gps set and tag the kid. It'll save you money in overages and downloads. Or better yet! Just put a chip in the kids neck!

    --
    It's not -1 Flamebait! It's +5 Funny. You just didn't get the joke...
  69. Still based on fear by spun · · Score: 1

    It is still based on fear: fear of not being sexually desireable. "Buy this NOW or you will NEVER get laid!"

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    1. Re:Still based on fear by bogado · · Score: 1

      Well, I am not so shure about this. I certainly could see this point of view in certain products like clothes, stetical products and even cars or other stuff that supose to give status (apple gear?). But not many people buy beer, for instance, for fearing not to ghet laid.

      I don't know where you live, but here many marketing pieces do target something you do want. They show people being happy, parting or doing something pleasant. If you relate to the sceene in some level, for instance desiring to be one of those fake persons in a fake party where everyone is smiling all the time, in theory you will see the product with better eyes. This is not exploring a fear, even if you do have a fear of not beign anti-social or something. It is exploring something you wish.

      Most marketing sucks anyway...

      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

    2. Re:Still based on fear by spun · · Score: 1

      The fear is not obvious, it is implied. What real person can compare to the fantasy presented in those ads featuring perfect people having outrageous amounts of fun? Real people fear that they fall short in comparison. The fear is not presented in an obvious way, but this is how all propaganda works: assume that what you wish to be true, is true. Never directly state what you are trying to make others believe. Never say that without buying our product, no one will like you, that won't work. Assume that people who don't buy the product won't be liked, and that buying the product will make one desireable, and write the ad from that point of view.

      You live in Brazil, yes? Brazil is much more open in some ways than the US, more relaxed. I envy you. I know parts of Brazil are not so good, as anywhere, but the climate and culture are wonderful. I hope to visit there some day.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    3. Re:Still based on fear by bogado · · Score: 1

      I don't know, the US culture is much more centered in fear and has a higher level of social pressure in several ways. Well at least is in that way that you sell your country thought a number of movies and TV series, since I never went there to see for myself but I do have seen thousands of your movies and TV shows.

      Every aspect of your lives, and I mean this in a broad way not personal, is ruled by a division of winners and loosers. This division is quite bad, a "looser" has a very heavy social burden, so I guess that this could be a source of this fear you talk.

      Here in Brazil, or at least here in Rio, Brazil is very big after all, we usually do not classify people, at least not to their "faces". We are very polite and what would be the "winners" or "popular" people here will treat everybody equally well, once again "to their faces". It is considered "bad mojo" to be rude and to put people down. In a certain way, in my experience at least, being popular here means have more friends possible, leave no one out. :-D

      This does not mean that there will not be discrimination and other social problems, it only means that usually those problems are more "under the surface". Some people will talk to you with a big smile as if you're their best friends and in your back they will still screw you up if they think it is needed.

      Sure most of us can find out who is only being polite and who is not quite easily, but many foreigner people can find this hard, mainly when they are used to a more sincere and to the face attitude. Witch way is better? I don't know, probably none, as each model has it's advantages.

      But returning to my point, this fear of not being accepted is not as common here as you see in US movies, my opinion is that many ads and marketing campaigns here target more a desire then a fear. The point here is not making people afraid, is more like making people relate to the trade marks in a positive way so when they see them they will be more likely to buy them. So they are funny and many of them show people having fun, surrounded by beautiful women, and every one is always smiling a fake smile with white teeth.

      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

  70. Re:This seems like a violation of privacy rights.. by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    What I find amusing is that a lot of emperors of China, etc, in centuries past were 13 years old.

    You don't really think that a 13-year-old was independently making empire-impacting decisions all on his own, do you? That culture as a serious venerate-the-greybeards take on things, and any teenage emperor would have had plenty of "handlers."

    I think most can agree on here, age is no determining factor for intelligence

    But age has everything to do with experience. Sure, there are some kids that are much more worldly than others, but there aren't many kids that are as across the board worldly as their parents (no matter what the kids would like to think that all of their MTV, MySpace time, and first person shooters have taught them).

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  71. Re:This seems like a violation of privacy rights.. by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

    Somehow, recently, we decided an individual is too stupid to think for themselves until they turn 18.

    No, I think the people under 18 decided that for themselves with their attitudes and behavior. (I'm 21 so it hasn't been long since I was that age)

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  72. Reminds me... by Belial6 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Reminds me of the kid that recently got lost in the woods. He nearly starved to death. Why? Because his parents made him so paranoid of strangers that he was hiding from the rescuers. What did his parents tell the press after the kid was found "I'm proud" that he was hiding from the strangers.

  73. This service is avaliable in Russia too by zlogic · · Score: 1

    I live in Russia, and all three major cellphone providers offer a simular service. Well, I've never seen anyone use it except tech-savvy people (and they usually play with the service for a week and then completely forget it).
    This may be convenient if, for example, your kid is unable to reply your phone call - in a noisy environment, while riding a bike or playing football. It can also be useful if your kid gets lost.
    And think how this service would be useful if your phone is stolen! You can track the bastard who stole it on a map and teach him a lesson.

  74. find the.... by derniers · · Score: 1

    geez, we'll use this just to find their backpacks (which are a whole lot harder to keep track of than where the kids are)

  75. Re:How to defeat it: Cellphone blocked locations. by Twanfox · · Score: 1

    How is the Cellular Phone company liable for any abductions that occur while the child is taking an active role in defeating tracking. Where, as well, do you think it will say in the service agreement that Verizon/etc will be in any way responsible for the activities conducted by the tracked children? I can tell you how it will read. Something like:

    "We (Verizon Wireless) will not be held accountable for any actions, discrepancies, or service failures while watching a tracked phone. This service is an INFORMATIONAL service and cannot prevent acts outside of parental or legal boundries."

    Oops. Guess the laywers are going to beat you to the punch, huh?

    Cellular telephone service is a 'best effort' service anyways, not guaronteed service by any stretch of the imagination.

  76. Re:This seems like a violation of privacy rights.. by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but as far as the government is concerned - if you can't vote, who gives a fuck what you think?

  77. Re:This seems like a violation of privacy rights.. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What I find amusing is that a lot of emperors of China, etc, in centuries past were 13 years old.

    Don't consider this as implying even the remotest knowledge of Chinese history, but were any of these 13-year-old emperors actually running the empire vs simply being crowned while adult aides ran the show?

    Somehow, recently, we decided an individual is too stupid to think for themselves until they turn 18.

    No, not true. 18 is not the age at which we believe you are no longer too stupid to take care of yourself.

    18 is the age at which we as a society stop caring if you aren't.

    I strongly disagree with a lot of the blatant abuses of children done by schools; I'm just pointing out that it is wrong to view it as "under 18 is incapable of being independent, over 18 is not". It's just the legal boundary at which societal protections/restrictions are lifted regardless of the consequences.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  78. Monitoring Children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    You are a country of in-effectual neurotics, and have skant idea
    how to deal with the problems you have, at any level.

    First you must QUICKLY, identify, prosecute, sentance and kill the
    psychotics within your community, who would harm children.

    Then you need to give the children their childhood back; here, in Switzerland,
    5-16 walk, skate, ski ... to and from school, play and enjoy the beautiful
    countryside. They know what their legs are for.

    1. Re:Monitoring Children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen!(but we're only paranoid about our kids 'cause the justice system is too weeny to do what should be done to the sickos) But I thought ya'll were against death penalties over there? Maybe I should move to Switzerland - it'd sure be hard to beat the scenery!

    2. Re:Monitoring Children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems that children in Switzerland spend a bit too much time in the beautiful countryside and not enough in school; the grammar lessons seem to be "in-effectual," and I'm not sure about your second "sentance" either.

  79. My Kid by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    My kid is going to learn about economics early. Given that I find this kind of service harmful to kids, you can guess who's kid is going to be making a killing offering forwarding services.

  80. Bzzzt.... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    Wrong. The threat (perticularly when you have the means) of tracking a person is just as controlling as actually tracking them.

  81. maybe the "AGE" isn't the problem by DM9290 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem in this "age" isn't a lack of time. It is that too many people accept it as entirely normal that you should have "precious little time enough to have a true family dinner let alone quality time where a family can be together and share ideas and exchange thoughts."

    We should not be finding ways to make slavery more convenient. We should demand the right to have the opportunity to raise our children PROPERLY OURSELVES.
    I wont even get into the moral issue of whether or not a parent even has any right to force their child to carry a homing device.

    --
    No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
  82. Re:How to defeat it: Cellphone blocked locations. by burnt_cajun_toast · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, we live in a place where, even if you take blatent actions to defeat a form of service or security, you can still wind up with a lawsuit. For example, a kid can cut through a chainlink fence at rail-road tracks, get amputated by the train that hits him, and the family can still sue the rail-road agency and win. I was just trying to point out that some parents might think the service is more than what it is, just informational, as you have pointed out.

  83. Car Theif by peterfa · · Score: 1
    This has been done before. A long time a go, when I was merely a tike, I heard on the news that this dude got busted when he stole a car and used the cell phone. They just tracked the towers he connected to. Stupid if you ask me. Then agian, how was he supposed to know.

    Also, a similar story on bash.org: http://bash.org/?3223

  84. Re:This seems like a violation of privacy rights.. by cyngus · · Score: 2, Funny

    Somehow, recently, we decided an individual is too stupid to think for themselves until they turn 18.

    Most, unfortunately, are still too stupid to think for themselves at this age and much older.

  85. Let me predict the next step: by Classic+Guy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A way to remotely enable the microphone, so you can "listen in" on your child (or wherever the phone happens to be).

    --
    Why can't they just collide a whole bunch of little hadrons?
  86. Not quite true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    While cellphones are supposed to have GPS chips in them, it's not required by law to have the GPS chip turned on. That is, it's not against the law for the user to turn off the GPS reporting.

    Now, name me one phone which does this. I'd buy one in an instant, but they don't exist.

    But you can buy mobile phone reference boards which don't have the GPS chip included. Unfortunately, you have to be a real hacker in order to use that for your cell phone.

    1. Re:Not quite true. by aculeus · · Score: 1

      My Samsung SPH-A760: Settings->Others->Location->Off

      Gives you this warning when you turn it off "Your location will be hidden from the network and all applications except 911" It even gives me a little icon on the screen to tell me location is turned off.

    2. Re:Not quite true. by Spectre · · Score: 1

      As does my LG PM225 model phone (purchased for Sprint service), running software version PM225V10.

      Settings > Location > Off

      The warning is much longer and mentions specifically that this will disable GPS location information (except for e911 service, which is always GPS-enabled where supported).

      --
      "Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
  87. beware of non clueless parents by MooseTick · · Score: 1

    Many have listed ways to beat this including...

    1) Turn off your cell phone.
    2) Leave it somewhere.
    3) Pay some kid to carry it around (making it look like you're still moving)
    4) Hang out in tunnels.
    5) Line pockets with tin foil.
    6) Get better parents.

    Any parent savvy enough to use a system like this won't be easily tricked. If you turn your cell phone off they will see it. When you get home you may not be able to go out anymore.

    If you leave it somewhere and they call, you won't be able to answer unless you forward your phone. Even then, all they need to do is ask you to call them back from your phone. If you can't then you are busted.

    Have someone else hold it? Again, you won't be able to answer it. It they want to track you and you won't/can't answer your phone, that sends a signal that something is up!

    For nearly all teens, the parents are the ones paying for the phone, car, clothes, etc and they can cut all that off if they like. I'm sure many of you will say I work xx hours per week and pay for everything. Good for you. Most others aren't so lucky!

    This system may not seem right/fair/trusting/etc. Still, it isn't as easy to beat as most here think.

  88. Great,.... by Rowanyote · · Score: 1

    So you get your child a cell phone because you want them to be able to call if they get in trouble, but then you set a tracker on it, so they end up leaving it at a friends house while they both go off somewhere else. Not so smart. "Hey tommy, can you hold on to my phone while I go downtown for some crack? I don't want my parents to know I was in that area." The first time a kid gets chewed on for going "out of bounds" is the last time they carry the phone with them....

  89. Re:This seems like a violation of privacy rights.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its easy to take away the rights of children ... and when you do so they don't fight back as hard when those same rights are being taken away when they become adults.

  90. Warning: Potential NSA wiretapping abuse here~! by plasmacutter · · Score: 1

    If they can offer this to you to monitor your children, they can offer this to the NSA to monitor you.

    Domestic call record monitoring then gets expanded into domestic physical surveillance.

    The NSA can now know where you are at all times... i'm sooo happy.

    --
    VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
    1. Re:Warning: Potential NSA wiretapping abuse here~! by mabu · · Score: 1

      If they can offer this to you to monitor your children, they can offer this to the NSA to monitor you.

      Not exactly. They've always offered this to the NSA and it's probably one of the myriad things we don't know about. Regardless of whether or not the service is offered to us.

  91. Simple by aepervius · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is as bad as having a permanent leash. I dunno for you, but having such a leash on me around my teen would have pushed me to rebellion (or rather a head on conflict), defiance toward my parents, and even complete and uter distrust. After all why should i trust somebody which do not trust me a bit. Trust is to be shared and exchanged. it ain't a one sided issue (unless you are waaaay naive). Worst case scenario if you are a leash for your whole teenage, you do not get to experience by yourself , and even mature. Making yourself unfit for society. maybe you think i am exagerating, but I know of two of such people. And it is quite sad....

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  92. Just lose your phone by LuminaireX · · Score: 1

    If you don't want your parents (or the NSA) tracking your every move, just leave the phone in your car, or in your locker at school. Or better yet, just turn it off, and turn it on only when you want to use it. Unless your mother is so OCD that she's constantly refreshing Verizon's tracking page every 5 seconds, your parents will never know where you are, short of the last known location.

  93. The real necessary alert by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1
    It's 10pm -- do you know where you child's cell phone is?

    The real use of this system will be when you get the message: CELL PHONE TRAVELING IN EXCESS OF 110MPH.

    Besides, my kids forget/lose/destroy so many cell phones, this service would be best simply for finding the missing phones again.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  94. Next up on Jerry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I just caught my spouse cheating on me!"
    "And I did it with this cell phone!"

    "Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!"

  95. Re:OFFTOPIC by magicchex · · Score: 1
    Get a free Mac MINI: http://www.freemacmini.com/?r=159363 plus I'll send you a GMAIL account!
    Just wondering.. is your signature a sarcastic joke or are you being serious?
    --
    How many fulltime jobs can one man have?
  96. Bzzt yourself by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
    Wrong. The threat (perticularly when you have the means) of tracking a person is just as controlling as actually tracking them.
    Sure. But having the means is not making the threat. Sure, if you threaten to use it for disciplinary tracking, its controlling. But merely having the capacity is not controlling; it may be taken as a threat if there is already a bad, untrusting relationship, but that has nothing to do with the technology.
    1. Re:Bzzt yourself by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Signing up for this service IS making the threat.

    2. Re:Bzzt yourself by pla · · Score: 1

      But merely having the capacity is not controlling; it may be taken as a threat if there is already a bad, untrusting relationship, but that has nothing to do with the technology.

      "There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live -- did live, from habit that became instinct -- in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized."

    3. Re:Bzzt yourself by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
      Signing up for this service IS making the threat.
      Signing up for this situation is having the capacity. It is no more making the threat to use it for disciplinary monitoring than owning a chef's knife is a threat to butcher your children with it if they stay out late. Now, depending on your relationship and what else you do or don't say about either tool, there may or may not be an express or implied threat along with just having the capacity. But the capacity itself is not a threat to use it.
    4. Re:Bzzt yourself by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Given that the tool has no other purpose, it is totally different than having a chef's knife. Hence it is a threat.

    5. Re:Bzzt yourself by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
      Given that the tool has no other purpose
      It has no other purpose but determining location, as much as a knife has no other purpose than cutting. But neither of those is inherently threatening purpose. Both functions can be used menacingly, and both can be used in manners that are inoffensive. In the case of the tracking device, that centers around communication and consent regarding the conditions in which it will be used.
  97. I wasn't in joe's house by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    smokkin' weed in the basement honest. Look it' my chaperone account, I was at mike's all night we went to bed early that's why I didn't hear you call. Boy if this isn't the biggest gimmick I've ever seen. Of course if you can put the words "good" and "parent" in any commercial every consumerist suburbanite can be tricked into buying anything.

  98. Virgin Alarm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Future versions of this device will also include a "Virgin Alarm",
    ("Designed to go off before you do.").

  99. the UK government has been doing that for awhile n by ClioCJS · · Score: 1

    the UK government has been doing that for awhile now...

    --
    -Clio
    Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
    Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
  100. Imagine This Scenario by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You teenage daughter is bipolar. She is self medicating with drugs and alcohol. When in the manic state, she has a tendency to run away for a few days, often placing herself in extremely dangerous circumstances. On a daily basis she tends to disappear and come home high or drunk.

    Since California law prevents you, the parent, from forcing into a treatment program without her permission (which she won't give) and both parents need to work to make ends meet, it's impossible to keep watch on her 24/7.

    This isn't imaginary. This was my life until we were finally able to get the State to pay for placing in her a facility in Utah (had to be out of state since in California she can simply walk out).

    A cell phone with the ability to track her would have been a godsend.

    --
    Posting anonymously for obvious reasons.

  101. Kids are smart... by itwasgreektome · · Score: 1

    ...I'm sure they'll be able to figure out all they need to do is call forward their number to a friend's phone, and leave their cell phone where they say they are going. Oh shoot. I think that statement just made this technology...useless? At least to the parents who really need to worry about their kids. My kids are going to be bastards, I know it. That's why I'm gonna staple GPS devices to their backs.

  102. Unintended consequences by HangingChad · · Score: 1
    You making a joke but you're probably more right than you know. If kids suspect they're being monitored by their cell phones, they'll leave them behind when not wanting people to know where they're going.

    Exactly the kind of situation where, if they got in a bind, you'd want them to have a cell phone to call for help. So at the times they're most likely to need a phone, they'll less likely to actually carry it.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  103. Make your phone call. by PlasticArmyMan · · Score: 1

    All your children are belong to us...

  104. Re: MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Head of the household is a term rarely referring to the husband/father in a family anymore, because complaining/bitchy/needy wives (and subsequentally children in these cases) as well as television/media become the head of the household when the fathers don't take a stand and put their feet down on basic lifestyle decisions that affect the whole family.

    Why must a MAN and ONLY a man be the "head" of a household? Do you think, for example, that a woman who lives alone, or a single mother, can't make good decisions? (And, before you spout off about how single mothers are all irresponsible sluts, not all single mothers are single by choice!)

    Are you saying only women are greedy and materialistic? Give me GOOD, LOGICAL reasons why a woman shouldn't make "basic lifestyle decisions."

    Wait, I shouldn't encourage you to spout more nonsense. Perhaps you see women as "complaining/bitchy/needy" because the ones you know are complaining and bitching about YOUR blatant lack of respect for them. Clearly you see women as eternal children who need a man to tell them what to do. A woman who complains about an autocratic man is complaining for a REASON. If you had a wife who insisted on making all your decisions for you and saw you as an irresponsible child just because you were a man, you'd complain too.

    >Same goes for your wife! You're the MAN of the house, and however many people cringe to that statement need to realise that the MAN of the house isn't always an asshole, he's the one that provides insight, focus and direction to a family.

    A man who thinks only a MAN can provide "insight, focus, and direction" (meaning a woman can't) IS an asshole. A man who believes that a man should control his wife's behavior and make all the decisions CERTAINLY is an asshole.

    Does your wife know you think of women this way? I'm really surprised you're "married to the best woman in the world." You certainly don't deserve her.

    Why the hell is this trash modded 2 instead of 1, by the way? We need more women on Slashdot. . .

    - Darkflame

  105. What really pisses me off is... by mabu · · Score: 1

    if you lose your phone the telcos know exactly where the thing is if it's turned on. Will they tell you? No. I wonder how many tens of thousands of phones were unnecessarily replaced because the phone company would rather you buy a new phone than tell you where you lost it.

    It's nice to see they're unrestricting some of these services, but I feel I've always had a right to access the Geolocation information on my own property.

  106. Re:This seems like a violation of privacy rights.. by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

    But age has everything to do with experience. Sure, there are some kids that are much more worldly than others, but there aren't many kids that are as across the board worldly as their parents (no matter what the kids would like to think that all of their MTV, MySpace time, and first person shooters have taught them).

    Indeed. Heck, I'm 26 now, and looking back at 21, it's surprising how much I've grown in just the last five years, despite how "worldly" I thought I was back then. Unfortunately, our society places far more emphasis on intellect than it does on experience (as is evidenced, I think, by our treatment of the elder members of our society), and so it's not surprising that young people have difficulty understanding why they aren't considered eligible for certain rights and responsibilities.

  107. Re: Big Father is watching by Dudukain · · Score: 1

    This is insane. I agree with the "can you molest me now? Good." comment, this is just going to help illegal use of this system. Some wacko can and will buy an extra one and stick it in his girlfriend's car. Also, kids can just leave them at home or put them in their parent's pockets (my god! little timmy is right on me...HE'S UNDER THE HOUSE!!!)

  108. I see far too many "Funny" comments here... by Khyber · · Score: 1

    I've been a kidnapping victim - this type of technology would've been A FUCKING MIRACLE FOR ME were I a little child around this time - I could have been saved two days before an Amber Alert was issued, instead of needing to wait 24 hours before an alert was issued - I've seen networks where news of potentially missing children hit the waves before the news even has a hint. I'm talking within MINUTES. Sadly, local networks are still going to be faster than nationwide networks. : We can only hope our bueraucracy catches up with commonplace social networks.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  109. Bait and Switch by NetSettler · · Score: 1

    Seriously, the kids will know this kind of watching is being done and will either turn off their phone...

    You need to go back and re-watch Max Headroom (a.k.a. Max Headroom - 20 Minutes Into the Future). In the future, it's illegal for televisions to have an "off" switch. (I imagine you now saying, "Yes, but this is about phones, not TV's." Then suddenly that look of sad realization as you realize why cell phones have been adding video displays...)

    ... or leave it behind

    It isn't exactly a Quantum Leap to imagine phones you can't leave behind... Moms in my day used to grind up birth control pills and sneak them into girls' orange juice in the morning. In the future we'll probably have parents making secret deals with the people selling piercings so that when they finally, unexpectedly agree to a piercing you'll later find that it was because there's an embedded GPS device going into your navel. Or perhaps an inertial sensor that can track your incremental movements and for later download -- just in case your friends build a network of Faraday cages for you to get lost in.

    --

    Kent M Pitman
    Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

    1. Re:Bait and Switch by Buran · · Score: 1

      Giving someone else your prescription drugs is illegal.

      So is food tampering.

      I sure as hell would have called the cops on anyone I caught doing that. Still would.

      If someone is deranged enough to spike someone's food with illegal substances, they need a serious morals adjustment. Or a boot to the head.

    2. Re:Bait and Switch by NetSettler · · Score: 1

      Moms in my day used to grind up birth control pills and sneak them into girls' orange juice in the morning. In the future we'll probably have parents making secret deals with the people selling piercings so that [...] there's an embedded GPS device going into your navel.

      Giving someone else your prescription drugs is illegal.

      If I understand the social context in which this is alleged to have happened, it was done by a mother asking the doctor to prescribe drugs for their children, not by women prescribed drugs for themselves and then diverting it. I'm not sure you could do that legally today, but I think a lot of ethical/social things were more "flexible" a few decades back--for better or worse (often worse, when seen in retrospect, though I don't think there was much public outrage at the time). The story could be apocryphal for all I know, but it was commonly enough cited in, say, the 60's and 70's when the so-called sexual revolution was happening. I probably should have said "are alleged to have". Nor was I advocating the practice. But to the extent it offends you, I hope the dark vision of the future it introduces offends you equally...

      --

      Kent M Pitman
      Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

  110. This is great news by elgaard · · Score: 1

    Of course the service in itself is bad.

    But this will teach generations of kids the value of privacy and how to protect their own private life.

    And that knowledge kan be used not only against their parents but also big brother.

  111. COOL as long as by hurfy · · Score: 1

    Kid = Salesperson :)

    Sure the kids will come up with 20 ways around it but my salesmen won't think of any of them ;)

    I just think it would be great to suggest the boss go play golf where a salesman is playing hooky ;p

    hehe, i do the A/P and get to cut the check for 15 verizon phones, got to be an up side somewhere :(

  112. Re:This seems like a violation of privacy rights.. by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    Indeed. Heck, I'm 26 now, and looking back at 21, it's surprising how much I've grown in just the last five years, despite how "worldly" I thought I was back then.

    If you think that's something, wait until you're 40! I've become convinced that most people born at any time after 1965 don't really grow up until they're 30+. Seen it with my own eyes, over and over. BTW, by "grown up," I mean able to truly see the big picture about most things, before dwelling on the little, distracting stuff.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  113. Disney is on the Sprint Network by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Disney is an MVNO on Sprint PCS. Verizon is third to market. Did Sprint get a /. story back in April?

  114. hidden inflation encourages both partners to work by nido · · Score: 1
    An ugly fact of the government's mismanagement of the U.S. "dollar" is that it now takes two incomes to provide for the standard of living that one income provided pre-federal reserve. Inflation has been especially bad since the 1970's, and government policy encouraging all the well-paying manufacturing jobs to move to Mexico, Canada and Asia has only made things worse for the working joe & jane.

    What's more, taken at all levels, tax rates are especially traumatic. The income tax in and of itself isn't too bad, but when you add Social Security's 14%, Medicare's ... 2% (?), state income tax, sales tax, property tax, etc - many of us are paying well in excess of 50%. Seen from this perspective, the husband works to put food on the table, and the wife works to support the government.

    Also see my comments here and here.

    With that said, I agree that there are many non-essentials that people waste their money one. Some of the best nutrition advice I've ever read:
    When Adelle Davis, the famous nutrition writer, appeared on the Johnny Carson show, she was asked to give a "rule of thumb" for healthy eating. She said, "If it is advertised in the media, don't buy it." An excellent rule indeeed. Unfortunately the TV station blipped her out. Viewers never heard the comment.

    When money goes into advertising, cuts must be made elsewhere so the cheapest ingredients are used -- hydrogenated vegetable oils, high fructose corn syrup, white flour and additives that mimic the taste of properly prepared whole food. SWF

    -Nourishing Traditions pg 141, by Sally W. Fallon


    Food ingredients are cheap, but buying prepared food is expensive because there's a whole chain of suppliers who are taking their cut.

    I made pizza for a date last night. I pre-made the dough in the morning by mixing 3.5 cups of freshly ground flour, 1/2 cup coconut oil (would've used a stick of butter, but I was out), 2 cups raw milk, and a scoop of probiotics in the food processor with a dough blade. Let the dough ferment for 12 hours or so (to make the wheat more digestable - something about digestion inhibitors in grains & beans; see the cookbook offered above). In the evening I spread my dough on a pizza pan, baked at 300 degrees for 30 minutes. Added a can of tomato sauce, cheese, chopped garlic, red bell pepper & carrot, and some kind of mildly spicy bell pepper I had around. Was going to make sausage to go on it, but I didn't have any ground meat handy. Bumped the temperature in the oven up to 350 and cooked for another half hour.

    The most expensive ingredient in my pizza was the cheese. I guess I paid $9 for the pound. If I had planned ahead, I could've ordered a 6 pound 'wheel' of cheese from the business formerly known as Tucson Cooperative warehouse (delivered to my local buying club) for 3.45/pound. Can of organic tomato sauce from Trader Joe's is ~$1.10. I think the cost of the wheat and vegetables were insignificant. Meat would've added another $2 or $3 (1/2 pound of grass-fed ground beef w/ spices from one of the sausage recipies in the cookbook above)

    She liked it, and I didn't pay someone else to cook for us. And while it was cooking, we had some nice private time to continue my touching (girls like to be rubbed). Couldn't do that at a restaurant.

    Grandpa had Papa John's pizza on Saturday. When I saw him on sunday, "Wasn't nearly as good as your's".

    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com
  115. Re:This seems like a violation of privacy rights.. by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

    societal protections/restrictions

    The protections are lifted at 18, but the restrictions are lifted at 21.

    Try buying alcohol, buying a handgun, renting a car, etc when you're 19.

    People are expected to contribute to society as full adults but are not given the same freedoms and protections as adults. People in our country aged 18-21 are second class citizens.

    --
    Life is too short to proofread.
  116. Until... by BronsCon · · Score: 0

    Until they let their friend borrow their phone while they go around the town...

    --
    APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
  117. lets pick on the english second language people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or you know, you could be less of a dick

  118. Re:This seems like a violation of privacy rights.. by westlake · · Score: 1
    This used to irritate me so much when I was under 18. It still irritates me, because no where in the constitution does it say anywhere, "these rights are only applicable to those 18 years old or older".

    The Constitution had almost nothing to say about the rights of wonen, children or slaves. Fundamentally, these were considered matters for state and local legislation.

    The Constitution did, however, set minimum age requirements for the President and members of Congress. Rather stiff rwquirements, when you look at the life expectancy of an eighteeth century male.

    The rights of children do not become a significant federal concern until the New Deal labor legislation of the nineteen thirties and the activist Supreme Court of ten, twenty, and thirty years later.

  119. Re: MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Why the hell is this trash modded 2 instead of 1, by the way? We need more women on Slashdot. . .


    I'm sorry, but it's not a priority since a lot of the "men" on slashdot have these same sexist attitudes. I've noticed this a lot more in the computer/technical industry than any other industry I've worked with. It's no wonder there aren't more women in this industry. I'm surprised that any women even want to work in the trade at all. Most of my fellow "men" in this industry lack personal hygiene and any form of social skills. It's as if they never grew up or had any sort of parental oversight when they were growing up.

    On slashdot, a lot of them really haven't left high school, so they aren't "grown up" yet and that's ok, but I'm talking about the industry in general. It's almost as if the boys who don't want to grow up are drawn to this industry. Until these juvenile attitudes change, the number of women will remain small.
  120. This will make matters worse by Rangsk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Do parents really think that their children won't find out that they can be tracked via their cellphone? That means that if they want to go do something without their parents finding out, then they will simply leave it at their friend's house who they are "staying overnight with" and go do what they want. Except now, they don't have the ability to use their cellphone to get help if they get into trouble - which is why they have it in the first place. It seems to be more detrimental than helpful.

    --
    "Don't believe anything you read on the net. Except this. Well, including this, I suppose." --Douglas Adams
  121. Would turning it off suffice? by Cybrex · · Score: 1

    Would turning the phone off be sufficient, or would the battery need to be pulled as well? I've heard that cell phones still "ping" and can be tracked while "off", but I don't have any reliable sources for this information.

    --
    Boundless Expansion, Self-Transformation, Dynamic Optimism, Intelligent Technology, Spontaneous Order- BEST DO IT SO!
  122. MOD PARENT UP by melandy · · Score: 1

    The thing about marriage is that it is a partnership. There will be times when your interests are mutual, some times when the interests of one don't interfere with those of the other, and some times when you have conflicts. It's all in how you resolve the last bunch.

    Wish I had mod points.

  123. Re: MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank you! It's good to know I'm not the only person on Slashdot who hates the utter lack of respect for women that so many people have here. . .and, if I read your post correctly (the bit about fellow "men"), you are also male. It's especially nice to see this comment from a man. (I'm female, by the way.)

    I guess I'm lucky. I work at a software company where, fortunately, anyone who voiced the kind of attitudes so often seen here would probably be ostracized.

    "But I get to be in charge, because I'm the booooyyy. Boooooyyyys are supposed to be the bosses! Waaaaaahhhh!" - translation of a lot of the stupid posts here

    (Note: I'm only posting as Anonymous Coward because I've been checking quickly in spare moments - I saw these posts casually and felt I had to respond!)

    - Darkflame

  124. Re:This seems like a violation of privacy rights.. by FlyGirl · · Score: 1
    Somehow, recently, we decided an individual is too stupid to think for themselves until they turn 18.

    No, we decided that an individual is too stupid to think for the government until he/she's 18 (i.e. voting age)

    Apparently we decided than an individual is too stupid to think for themselves when they're 21 (drinking age)

    Tell me that THAT makes sense!
  125. Re: MOD PARENT DOWN by gymell · · Score: 1

    Hey, I'm female and I've been in the IT industry for about 10 years. I do have to say in spite of a lot of the juvenile sexist crap posted on Slashdot, the vast majority of guys I've encountered in the workforce have been intelligent and non-sexist in their behavior toward me. There have been many cases where I was the only woman in the department, and even one case where I was the only woman in the company. I have worked in a lot of different companies in several states, but perhaps I have just been very fortunate in that regard.

    I think the GP poster was initially making a good point about personal responsibility, but unfortunately he had to ruin it with all the sexist BS ranting. I suspect that he, like alot of the other guys on here who post nonsense like that, feel safe in the relatively anonymous world of the internet, and post a lot of things that they'd never dare say in person - especially when they know their wife/girlfriend/mom will never see it. The more vehement they are online about it, the more I think they are compensating for their own shortcomings in real life relationships. I bet the GP poster's wife would get a good laugh to hear about how he's the big "MAN of the house."

  126. Just one question about your savings situation by zerofoo · · Score: 1

    How do you expect to live this lifestyle when you can no longer work? "No savings anywhere" means you will never be able to be without income.

    -ted