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?"

63 of 427 comments (clear)

  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 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?
  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 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.

    3. 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
    4. 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.

    5. 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.

    6. 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.

  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 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."
    2. 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.
    3. 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/
    4. 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
    5. 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.

    6. 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.

      --
      #!
    7. 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.

    8. 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."
    9. 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
    10. 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
  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 sidfaiwu · · Score: 2, Insightful

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

    2. 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!

  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.

  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 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.

    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.

    6. 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? """
    7. 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
    8. 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

  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.

  9. 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...

  10. 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 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.

  11. 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
  12. 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.
  13. 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 :)

  14. 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
  15. 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 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/
    2. 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).

    3. 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!
  16. 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!!!

  17. 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 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
  18. 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?

  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. 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.

  22. 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
  23. 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.
  24. 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.

  25. 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?
  26. 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?

  27. 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
  28. 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

  29. 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