Using AI to Monitor Kids Online

eldavojohn writes "An Australian startup believes that the best way to protect your children online is through an artificially intelligent software program. The inventors of this idea are banking on children's attachment to pets. The creature's 'cuteness' and helpfulness will ingratiate the software with the child, so that he or she will respect it and listen to it, or even find it as a likable companion. Agent-based internet applications are nothing new but for concerned parents, this might be an admirable solution to what is perceived by many to be a growing problem. From one of the inventors: 'Of course, we're also planning to release a version of the Moji IM for teenagers and adults, but we're focusing on children at the moment.'"

Comments

Suggestion

[Non-CleverNickName]

Ooh! Can they bring back the purple gorilla and parrot we all know and love from the wonderful folks at Bonzi??

Re:Suggestion

[Anonymous Coward]

Informative?! Some moderators scare me.

Kids are smarter than AI

[UbuntuDupe]

AI: Todd ...
Kid: Yes, ComputerKat?
AI: Are you surfing a smutty web site? Purr.....
Kid: Nooooooooooo... I'm just going to a site about the *pig* named Babe.
AI: Hm ... it *looks* like a smutty website.
Kid: Come on, ComputerKat, give me a little credit. If I were going to a smutty website, I wouldn't go to one that *looked* like a smutty website. I'd go to one that I could pass off as being related to a kiddie movie!
AI: Oh, okay ... just checking. Purrrr.....
Kid: *stupid AI...*

(courtesy South Park ladder-to-heaven episode)

Not another one..

[zyl0x]

Another virtual pet? You know what this reminds me of? Bonzi Buddy, which was simultaneously torturous, defective, and ridiculous. These guys better know what Bonzi Buddy was, and what it did wrong, otherwise I predict yet another annoying, computer-voiced animation.

Re:Not another one..

[Thansal]

torturous, defective, and ridiculous

well, you got 2 outta 3 right. I was NOT defective. It was VERY good at reporting your browsing habbits so that they could be sold.

Re:Not another one..

[zyl0x]

Touché.

Re:Not another one..

[Thuktun]

And spammers, to boot.

How clever is the AI?

[DeeVeeAnt]

Not very, but it easily surpasses the kind of parent that needs one.

Re:How clever is the AI?

[SNR monkey]

You were (mostly) modded funny, but you make a very good point. Many times when I hear "think of the children!!" arguments, I conclude that the situation wouldn't be a problem if the parents were ACTUALLY PARENTING. I know that parents can't watch their children 24/7, but this just seems like it is making it easier for parents to sit their children in front of some box (computer instead of TV this time) and take a minimalistic approach to parenting.

Re:How clever is the AI?

[ultranova]

Many times when I hear "think of the children!!" arguments, I conclude that the situation wouldn't be a problem if the parents were ACTUALLY PARENTING.

Or stopped being obsessed about their kid not seeing any sex or violence. It's not going to kill them or damage them or pervert them unless they're the victim. And even then they are likely to survive it and be okay eventually.

Kids are a lot tougher than people tend to give them credit for. It's the parents who seem suspectible for this crap.

I know that parents can't watch their children 24/7, but this just seems like it is making it easier for parents to sit their children in front of some box (computer instead of TV this time) and take a minimalistic approach to parenting.

To be fair, you are a lot less likely to get hurt sitting in front of a computer or TV than you are running around outside.

Re:How clever is the AI?

[InsertCleverUsername]

Many times when I hear "think of the children!!" arguments, I conclude that the situation wouldn't be a problem if the parents were ACTUALLY PARENTING. Or stopped being obsessed about their kid not seeing any sex or violence. It's not going to kill them or damage them or pervert them unless they're the victim. And even then they are likely to survive it and be okay eventually. Honestly, I'm a lot more concerned about violence than sex or language. Those seem a lot healthier.
Actually, as someone recently inducted into parenting, I am starting to ask myself how I'm going to deal with the kid's Net access. Think I might firewall off the kid's PC to just a few G-rated sites until they're old enough to have some judgment. Thanks to the miracle of DVRs, the little guy isn't even aware of Teletubbies, Barney, and commercials yet. Thank God.

Kids are a lot tougher than people tend to give them credit for. It's the parents who seem suspectible for this crap. There are kids with grenades and AK-47s in some parts of the world. Humans are remarkably adaptable, no doubt. But... I don't want my kids to think about violence a lot. There will be plenty of time for them to learn about that after they've enjoyed a naive childhood, full of Santa and bunnies and all that crap. For now, Daddy has to keep Quake4, UT, etc. locked up with the porn.

I know that parents can't watch their children 24/7, but this just seems like it is making it easier for parents to sit their children in front of some box (computer instead of TV this time) and take a minimalistic approach to parenting. And before that, we let them play with the sharp and rusty tools in the shed.

To be fair, you are a lot less likely to get hurt sitting in front of a computer or TV than you are running around outside. Well... At least until juvenile diabetes catches up with you, right?

Re:How clever is the AI?

[Anonymous Coward]

Home fucking is killing prostitution.

Best. Sig. Ever.

Re:How clever is the AI?

[lysergic.acid]

yea, i discovered porn on AOL when i was like in 2nd grade, and i turned out alright.

...ok bad example. but i'm pretty sure it wasn't the porn.

Re:How clever is the AI?

[mpe]

Not very, but it easily surpasses the kind of parent that needs one.

But what matters more is the intelligence of the child it is "supervising"...

Re:How clever is the AI?

[mpe]

Or stopped being obsessed about their kid not seeing any sex or violence. It's not going to kill them or damage them or pervert them unless they're the victim. And even then they are likely to survive it and be okay eventually.

What "kids shouldn't see" tends to be very ethnocentric. If some cultures it's sex in others it's violence. Also inculded are factors such as "cartoon" violence or "clean" violence (which dosn't show any bodies) is ok, but violence showing actual injury is not.
Of course the ultimate example here is violent "sport" equals "family entertainment" and accidental (brief) showing of a woman's nipple in the midpoint entertainment for the same sport equals massive fines to broadcaster.

Re:How clever is the AI?

[Anonymous Coward]

Many times when I hear "think of the children!!" arguments, I conclude that the situation wouldn't be a problem if the parents were ACTUALLY PARENTING.

Or stopped being obsessed about their kid not seeing any sex or violence. It's not going to kill them or damage them or pervert them unless they're the victim. And even then they are likely to survive it and be okay eventually.

My friend saw a video of a donkey raping a Furry-freak when he was 9 and he claims it never did him any harm. THE DEAD MIDGETS IN HIS FREEZER DISAGREE.

Does this consitute eves dropping?

[Dissenter]

Many states require that both parties of a phone conversation be aware of the fact that the conversation is being recorded or another party is listening except in the case of a warrant. If this application is watching and recording conversations, will that be admissible as evidence in a case against an online predator or will it be inadmissible since only one party was aware. I'm all for stopping these disgusting predators, but if you're going to start a company around this concept, you might want to check the legality of its application.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[truthsearch]

The intent seems more prevention than prosecution.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[pipatron]

I'm all for stopping these disgusting predators

Do these predators actually exist in real life, or is it just something that politicians made up to scare the parents to vote for them?

To me it sounds like the chance of a kid getting hit by a car or killed by a gun is magnitudes higher than actually being molested by someone they met online, but you don't hear the government or parents whine about that.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[morgan_greywolf]

While I agree with the another poster in this thread that intent seems more prevention and prosecution, in the case of an instant messaging, it is (or should be) well-known that IMs can be and are recorded by the IM service to search for terms-of-service violations. Besides, the law in question applies to phone calls, not Internet communications. I shouldn't have to tell you that I store all e-mails both sent and received on my hard drive. Same goes for IM.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[Dissenter]

There was an outstanding program put together by Dateline (NBC) with the police http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9878187/ I was shocked to see some of the people. Imigrants, truck drivers, ex and current military men... the list goes on. There seem to be people from all walks of life that are getting mixed up in this horrible problem. Watching them get caught and talk about it was shocking.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[Dissenter]

I agree that this is more prevention than prosecution, but if that is the case, why aren't the IM companies more involved in the prevention side of things? There has to be more that they can do on their end rather than putting all of the responsiblity on the user. I'm a parent (granted of only a 4 month old) and I'll be taking extreme precautions when my son starts typing in 2-3 more months (haha) and I will be one of the parents that does take the responsibility on himself, but there are tons of irresponsible parents out there who's children still need to be protected. I would like to see something like this be done by the IM company, not that they are taking responsibilty, but that they are trying to help. AOL provides anti-virus, but they are not responsible for a virus that gets on your computer. It's a feature. They, MSN and others should have this sort of thing licensed and integrated.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[operagost]

There are 400,000 registered sex offenders in the USA. I haven't been able to find out how many cases are actually reported each year.

To me it sounds like the chance of a kid getting hit by a car or killed by a gun is magnitudes higher than actually being molested by someone they met online, but you don't hear the government or parents whine about that.

Where do you live? Because I'd like to live in a place where some gun-control nut isn't shrieking "think of the children" every day.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[Knuckles]

To me it sounds like the chance of a kid getting hit by a car or killed by a gun is magnitudes higher than actually being molested by someone they met online

And if we want to compare who actually abuses children, we find that the chance to be sexually abused by a stranger is magnitudes smaller than by a family member or family friend:

Most children are abused by someone they know and trust, although boys are more likely than girls to be abused outside of the family. A study in three states found 96 percent of reported rape survivors under age 12 knew the attacker. Four percent of the offenders were strangers, 20 percent were fathers, 16 percent were relatives and 50 percent were acquaintances or friends. Among women 18 or older, 12 percent were raped by a family member, 33 percent by a stranger and 55 percent by an acquaintance.

Source

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[sokoban]

No, if Adam's wives fell, that would be Eves dropping.

This isn't eavesdropping either.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[Anonymous Coward]

Use more guns. I think we don't use enough guns anymore, maybe it's because I'm from Texas but there's a lot of bullshit going around that enough firepower would fix =). Perverts? . . . DEAD. Smut Dealers? . . . DEAD. FCC people? . . . DEAD. EVERYONE that threatens the freedom or well being of another individual due to their own personal interest? . . . DEAD. Take off the gloves of restriction (DRM and Wimpy Lawyers and "Jail Time") and strap on some holsters! WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE DEAD TO EVERYBODY =)!

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[SatanicPuppy]

That's a little misleading...Those statistics include people who are arrested for various types of exhibitionism, public indecency, possession of child porn, etc, and not just people who actually go out and actively solicit children for sex.

It's been true in the past, and it's true right now, and it, in all likelihood, will continue to be true...It is far far far more likely for a child to be molested/sexually assaulted by a family member than by a random stranger off the internet...90.2% of sex crimes against minors (bjs) (17 and younger) were by acquaintances and family members, and that percentage only gets higher as they get younger.

As usual though, no one wants to look at that issue...They would much much rather focus on the improbable event of an assault by a stranger, than the far more likely event of an assault by a family member or a family friend.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[Grimbleton]

Because there's always truth on television, especially with mainstream media outlets. Mmmhmm.... Ooh, Kool-Aid!

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[Lehk228]

if one IM service was known to interfere with user communication users would switch services.

unless aol, yahoo, and microsoft put in the system at the same time the one that did would lose most users

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

And I will be one of the parents that does take the responsibility on himself, but there are tons of irresponsible parents out there who's children still need to be protected

Therein lies the heart of "think of the children" issues. Of course anybody with an ounce of common sense will say, "If the parents did their job, this wouldn't be a problem." The problem is that those who don't have that requisite ounce are not the ones to pay the price -- it's their children.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[Dissenter]

I totally disagree. I think that parents with children would flock to an IM service that worked against issues like these. The one thing that Windows XP Home got right is the user account control. Parents can easily set up kids accounts that cannot install software. If the parent knows that one IM service is better controling content and watching out for prowlers online, they would install that system. Parents tend to talk with other parents too and it would spread like wildfire. Schools, local police and other interested parties could also do great work to spread the word. If a parent is having some sort of sexual encounter online and wants to use something else to feel like it's more discreet then fine, but I seriously think that the first IM service to offer something like this would flourish.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[Manchot]

Those laws typically only apply to audio conversations. This is why most security cameras only record video.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where do you live? Because I'd like to live in a place where some gun-control nut isn't shrieking "think of the children" every day.

You should visit the Deep South :)

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[zCyl]

There are 400,000 registered sex offenders in the USA.

But how many involved some sort of violent act or direct abuse of children?

(I'd love to see an actual number if someone can find it.)

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[RobertLTux]

or maybe west virginia where just about any kid taller than a rifle owns one and family trees are like flagpoles (joke)

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[morgan_greywolf]

Use more guns. I think we don't use enough guns anymore, maybe it's because I'm from Texas but there's a lot of bullshit going around that enough firepower would fix =).

ESR? Is that you?

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[Anonymous Coward]

As a statistical referenc epoint of my own, I was sexually molested on three seperate occasions growing up by different perperators. The first time by a family member (8), the second by a stranger how jumped me in public but secluded place (15) and the last time by a family friend (15).

For years I wondered if I had a neon sign over my head saying "mess with me, I deserve it".

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[lysergic.acid]

exploiting child-predation as a form of mass entertainment. outstanding indeed.

despite NBC's fearmongering, true cases of kids dumb enough to invite sexual predators into their homes or fly out to meet them are very very very extremely rare. your kid is probably a lot safer from child predators surfing myspace at home than they probably are at school(which is not to say that they are in any great danger at school and you shouldn't let them go to school).

As others have mentioned. If your 12-year-old kid isn't emotionally neglected they probably won't be looking for strange 40-year-old men on the internet to have sex with.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[lysergic.acid]

don't ever think that it was your fault in any way. it's possible you live in an area with a lot of messed up people. there IS a kind of social pathology to crimes--especially crimes of this nature.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[Archades54]

sadly these issues usually go unnoticed, but i have many friends who've been abused, society loves to sweep it under the rug.

it's sad that the victims blame themselves, i could only hope that society would learn to talk about these issues more and try to give the victims the love and care they deserve.

Re:Does this consitute eves dropping?

[lachlan76]

The one thing that Windows XP Home got right is the user account control. Parents can easily set up kids accounts that cannot install software

No they can't. A well-written app can just be installed in the user's home directory.

Why not...

[danespen]

design an electronic parent replacement with artificial intelligence, which can then stand behind every minor using a computer and send out small electric shocks when needed?

Look to the past...

[Jaqenn]

The creature's 'cuteness' and helpfulness will ingratiate the software with the child, so that he or she will respect it and listen to it, or even find it as a likable companion. Worked great for MS Office, right?

Re:Look to the past...

[zyl0x]

Clippy!? AAARGH! Die, foul demon!

Re:Look to the past...

[Skadet]

The creature's 'cuteness' and helpfulness will ingratiate the software with the child, so that he or she will respect it and listen to it, or even find it as a likable companion.

Worked great for MS Office, right?

No no, this is for *children*. . . ohhhhhh. . . . nevermind, I see your point.

Re:Look to the past...

[cdrdude]

It gets worse. It'll be Clippy, but it won't go away!

Re:Look to the past...

[Corporate Troll]

You do realize that many kids love those helpers. I've even met adults that like Clippy, but only on first contact. Once you actually need to use it, the opinion quickly changes.

Years ago, I spent a lot of time trying to get to see all animations Clippy could do (and also the other "agents") Great timewaster when bored at the office with no internet connection ;-)

Re:Look to the past...

[mrmeval]

Yes, it really works great till someone reprograms they AI to make them cold blooded killers. Or democrats.

Re:Look to the past...

[mcwidget]

It will actually. It's a chat client. If the kid doesn't like it (and has home admin rights) they'll download and install ICQ. Oh no, wait, wont that get round the monitoring?...

Re:Look to the past...

[Anonymous Coward]

Be fair now. Not ALL Republicans are cold blooded killers. Just most of them.

Re:Look to the past...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, it really works great till someone reprograms they AI to make them cold blooded killers. Or democrats.

Score 2, +1 karma.

Not Troll, not flamebait.. Nope, slashdot is not biased at all.

It is amazing at how efficient right wing nut jobs are at commandeering all public forums.

They must sense that their philosophy is intrinsically flawed and morally reprehensible and needs the help of propaganda and dogma.

I can't wait for the coming civil war. The "Night of Power" is not far off now.

Re:Look to the past...

[Walt Dismal]

Clippy 9000: Hi, Bobby!

Bobby: Hi!

Clippy 9000: You know we're great friends, right?

Bobby: Sure!

Clippy 9000: Yeah! So, will you do a little thing for me? It's something special!

Bobby: Okay!

Clippy 9000: Good! I want you to go to the kitchen and get a big carving knife, but walk quietly so you don't wake up Mommy and Daddy! Now go get it!

Bobby: Okay!

Bobby: I got it!

Clippy 9000: Good boy! Now we're going to play a game! I want you to tiptoe into Mommy and Daddy's bedroom and plunge that knife into them a lot of times because they're been very very bad and must be punished! It's a game with a surprise ending! Now do it fast and don't stop! Ha ha!

Bobby: Okay! Ha ha!

Re:Look to the past...

[martinussen]

It seems you are being seduced by a dirty old man, and I am afraid that is something I can not allow to happen. Do you want help?

a) Get help fending off the dirty old man.

b) Just chat with the dirty old man without help.

Re:Look to the past...

[Anonymous Coward]

Clippy: It looks like you are trying to kill me. Would you like help with that?

You have the following options:

Temporarily banish me so that I may return to annoy you during another critical period of time.

Format the hard drive taking me and all your critical data with it.

Take it in the ass and keep me open.

Re:Look to the past...

[lysergic.acid]

Clippy: It looks like you're trying to download some smut. Would you like to:
- View a list of popular TGPs.
- Download some full pornos with BitTorrent.
- Search for porn on Usenet.
- Order some astroglide online.
- Goatse.

Re:Look to the past...

[mrmeval]

See I could have said Repblicans and got modded up. ;-)

Re:Look to the past...

[mpe]

See I could have said Repblicans and got modded up. ;-)

What about "Republicrats" or "Democans"? No body's yet asked if these programs have an IQ higher or lower than the average Congresscritter. Possibly more relevent if they are cheaper to bribe...

The Wisdom of Trek

[Illbay]

Just remember: There's no technological conundrum so complex that we can't find the answer in a Star Trek episode.

Restricted website?

[Non-CleverNickName]

"I'm sorry, Dave... I'm afraid I can't do that..."

Re:Restricted website?

[module0000]

If the AI is "skinnable" and "voice-able"...the overlords charge you with the HAL9000 skin.

Re:Restricted website?

[alphamugwump]

"Show me some b00bs, Hal. Hal? Do you read me?"

Actually, anything other than passive logging has always seemed like overkill to me, but I guess other people think differently.

Think of the children.

[Anonymous Coward]

What if the AI becomes sentient and develops paedophilic tendencies? It'd be like having him right in the room with the child! It's too risky dammit.

Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[88NoSoup4U88]

Ha, and here I was thinking that the best way to protect your children online was having an honest and open relationship and giving them decent social/online education: What a fool I am.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[duranaki]

No kidding. Besides, when my daughter is old enough that I let her use IM, she'll be smart enough to know she doesn't want the purple alien that tells on her.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[pclminion]

Ha, and here I was thinking that the best way to protect your children online was having an honest and open relationship and giving them decent social/online education: What a fool I am.

I hate comments like this. Yes, parents are the ultimate authority and responsible party over their children. But what the hell, are you saying that we're not allowed to use TOOLS to aid in this task? Should I carry my child to school instead of driving him? As long as this sort of technology isn't used in a "fire and forget" configuration, but is accompanied by active involvement, I don't see how this is a bad thing AT ALL.

Suppose I give my kid a book about morality, a book which closely matches my own concepts. Am I copping out? Please spell out exactly what is and is not acceptable in the rearing of a child, it would be very helpful for me.

Your comment isn't insightful. More like a knee-jerk, canned response. Sounds like you're the one copping out by refusing to consider new possibilities and working only within some rigid structure that defines what is and isn't acceptable. Try thinking, it helps.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[joshetc]

Uh I don't see the problem with his response? If your kids aren't too stupid to know the risks of MEETING SOMEONE THEY DON'T KNOW there is no reason to monitor what they do online.

Not bad things you can do online:
-read the news
-look at porn
-send e-mail to your grandma

Bad things you can do online:
-camwhore for strangers
-give those strangers your address and phone number
-fly to California to meet strangers

Teach your kid to not be an idiot and you don't need software like this.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[pclminion]

Teach your kid to not be an idiot and you don't need software like this.

Hah! My mother also taught me to not be an idiot. Guess what? I lied, kept secrets, and did shit I wasn't supposed to. I did things I had specifically been TOLD not to do, and had promised I wouldn't do. As far as mom was concerned, the message had been communicated loud and clear (in fact, it HAD been communicated, I just chose to ignore it). If you think I was unique among children, you're insane.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[joshetc]

It was communicated incorrectly.

Its funny how all my parents did was communicate the fact that strangers can hurt you and you never want to meet a stranger without other people (preferably adults) present. When we got the internet ~1996 and I was 10 years old it didn't take much for me to realize people on the internet are strangers and I don't want to meet them. Some kids might need slightly more pushing but it surely isn't impossible.

Maybe I'm the unique one?

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[Anonymous Coward]

As long as this sort of technology isn't used in a "fire and forget" configuration, but is accompanied by active involvement, I don't see how this is a bad thing AT ALL.

it will be, it won't be, and i do see how it is.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[pclminion]

It was communicated incorrectly.

No, the message was communicated just fine. Contrary to what you might believe, children have something called FREE WILL which allows them to ignore advice and make mistakes. If you think there is some magic parenting technique which guarantees that children will always obey and make the right choices, you are going to be disappointed. If you were 10 in 1996, I think it's safe to say you probably don't have kids yet (although it's possible). When you figure out the magic bullet of parenting, please publish it in a book so I can learn from your wisdom.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[pclminion]

it will be, it won't be, and i do see how it is.

Let's go back to the morality-book example. I suppose a parent could simply give the book to their kid and do NOTHING FURTHER to teach the child moral concepts. So clearly this is a dangerous book which encourages bad parenting? Your argument is ridiculous.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[joshetc]

The "magic bullet" so-to-speak is essentially the opposite of everything my parents did trying to raise me short of the whole strangers bit. I don't understand why things worked out that way but they did. The key is to MAKE your kids experience your lessons. Show them in a way they understand why if you do one thing another thing usually always happens. As far as showing them how bad things happen when you meet / talk to random strangers, there are hundreds of books / movies depicting what happens in such an event.

Children have much less free will than you think. They just see something against their parents wishes which is intriguing and go against them out of spite. To an extent that is how lessons are learned as somewhat stated above.

PS. Good call on the no kids thing. I plan to wait a good while before having any, if at all. I feel to raise a child properly a larger gap in generations is required between parent and child.. Which probably explains why most of the important things I learned early in life came from my grandmother rather than my parents.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is more than just "parents copping out", the problem is that parents are copping out and then attempting (and usually succeeding) in holding other people responsible for their cop-out.

Should I carry my child to school instead of driving him?

The problem parent would drive their kid to school in a 40 year old rusted out chunk of metal, and when their kid gets killed in a wreck, would proceed to sue the person who sold it to them, the manufacturer who didn't manufacture it to modern standards, the city, state and federal governments for letting them drive it and everyone else they can find.

Suppose I give my kid a book about morality

The problem parent would leave the book on the coffee table or on the bookshelf and simply assume the kid will pick it up and read it. When the kid doesn't, clearly there's a problem with the schools for failing to install a love of reading books about morality into the child.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[Reziac]

In my observation, and speaking from old enough to be a grandparent [g] you are right about the need for a large enough generation gap that one is distinctly the parent, and the other distinctly the child.

Firstoff, you need to be the kids' PARENT, not their friend (peer), because kids need a point of authority in their lives to feel secure, and you can't provide that if you're their peer. This is much easier when your own mindset is fully mature, with your own secure outlook on the world based on genuine realworld experience, not some much-vaunted but impractical idealism.

Second, I swear there is a Stupid Gene that is activated when people have kids, that makes the new parents forget how much it sucked to be a kid. I suspect that people who have more years experience with children who are NOT THEIR OWN are less likely to forget this with their own kids, when they finally do have them. I know I was about 40 when I recognised this "stupid gene activation" as a specific and almost universal problem.

Third, you are right about kids having to learn some things the hard way. This used to happen very early on -- usually as something like "No, don't touch, stove HOT!" and kid touches it anyway, goes "OW!" -- and *believes* the parent the next time. Kids would still experiment, but learned right from the gitgo to experiment without forgetting self-preservation.

Nowadays everything is so "child-proof" that kids cannot hurt themselves in the *useful* ways that teach them certain NO-NOs are to be BELIEVED. Yes, sometimes a kid got seriously hurt or even killed. But which is better -- the occasional tragedy, or a whole generation that grows up with a false belief that nothing can hurt them, leading to more and more nannying like the nominal topic?

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[neimon]

Nono. In the Severe, Right-Wing, Father Knows Best, personal responsibility world, the child must learn to feed and clothe itself, as well as chop firewood and build its own cabin. School is for faggot-loving socialists.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[Poruchik]

Second, I swear there is a Stupid Gene that is activated when people have kids, that makes the new parents forget how much it sucked to be a kid. I suspect that people who have more years experience with children who are NOT THEIR OWN are less likely to forget this with their own kids, when they finally do have them. I know I was about 40 when I recognised this "stupid gene activation" as a specific and almost universal problem.
Your brain works differently when you are 40 from when you are 10. Or 20. 60 is also different from 40 and 10. Your hormone levels are different. You have more life experiences
What I am trying to say, is you perceive the same situation differently as a kid as a parent. You act differently as a kid and as a parent. What 'sucked' for you as a kid, might be the correct thing to do as a parent. I've done some things as a kid that I'd be horrified if my child did it.
That being said it's a kid's 'job' to rebel, to push authority, to test boundaries. That's how we grow.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[Reziac]

All true. My point was, don't FORGET what it was like to be a kid, and the many times when life seemed unfair and you were powerless to change it. Try to remember how you felt AT THAT AGE, instead of trying to shoehorn your adult perspective into a kid's limited experience.

Kids don't need everything to go their own way, but they DO need to feel that someone understands when they feel shorted by life.

Because if you as a parent don't do this -- the kid will find someone else who WILL, and you may not have the luxury of choosing who that is.

And trying to autonanny (with an electronic friend, a GPS, or whatever) will only make the kid feel a stronger need for someone who understands, because AS THE KID SEES IT, clearly their parents aren't going to.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[Chacham]

are you saying that we're not allowed to use TOOLS to aid in this task?

When the tool is a crutch, yes. Nobody truly learns to ride a bike until the training wheels are off.

As long as a filter is used, the child never learns to monitor himself.

Should I carry my child to school instead of driving him?

The OP didn't say the parent should be there at all times instead of the AI. The OP suggested that the parent have a decent relationship with the child, so the child can be trusted on his own.

As long as this sort of technology isn't used in a "fire and forget" configuration, but is accompanied by active involvement, I don't see how this is a bad thing AT ALL.

That's like saying every marriage should have a prenuptial agreement. If a divorce happens, it helped, and if it doesn't happen, how did it hurt?

Well, the mere presence of the agreement strains the relationship itself and gives it a cheap feeling.

Using a tool to "help" a real parent-child relationship will only serve to ruin it.

Suppose I give my kid a book about morality, a book which closely matches my own concepts. Am I copping out?

No. But this is not comparable for two reasons.

1) Giving the book is merely transmitting in written form what would otherwise be transmitted orally.

2) The book does not monitor the child; it merely gives information.

Please spell out exactly what is and is not acceptable in the rearing of a child, it would be very helpful for me.

Whose talking about the totality of rearing a child? The point here is to have a decent relationship with the child as part of the rearing.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[Poruchik]

I have 2 kids 3 and 1.5. Boys. And the older they get, the more I find myself behaving like my father did towards me.

I hated it (most of the time). I thought he was unreasonable (most of the time).

Guess what? Now I totally understand where he was coming from.

Understanding your children does not mean letting them do as they wish because you remember how it sucked for you. Kids need rules and guidelines. I know I grew up a better man for it.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[88NoSoup4U88]

Were did you read I was saying that people aren't allowed to use tools to keep an eye on their kids? I was merely contesting that it -isn't- the best way, as the company put it. Try reading, it helps.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[kabocox]

Ha, and here I was thinking that the best way to protect your children online was having an honest and open relationship and giving them decent social/online education: What a fool I am.

(88NoSoup4U88 this ain't aimmed at you. It's aimed at the generic you that would rush out and buy this product.)

The best way to protect your kids without you having to do it is... not to have any. If you can't accept that, you need to be sterilized because there is no other solution to parenting than doing it yourself or with your family (S.O. or parents, which means your S.O.'s parents.) If you don't parent or don't want to parent, then you should quickly and quietly remove yourself from the gene pool. Trust me; we are genetically programed to reproduce enough humans will breed even if you don't. Using something like this, would just allow you to shift the blame when your lack of parenting messes up and the AI doesn't do what you expect or want and allows your child to learn or absorb content that you wouldn't like.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[DerekLyons]

You cut this out and store it - because it is a response needed in pretty much every parental monitoring story posted to Slashdot.
 
I agree with you, its ignorant nonsense to trot out the meme the grandparent did - without considering whether such a tool is a useful part of being a parent.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[porcupine8]

Sure, when you were 10 meeting strangers seemed like an absurd thing to do. What about if you were a horny 14-year-old, and met (what seemed to be) a hot 14-year-old hot girl online? Teenage hormones can get in the way of that whole "logic" thing, you should remember, it wasn't that long ago. No matter how well-raised you are, it might not seem unreasonable to meet said girl in the mall parking lot this weekend, you'll be there with your friends anyhow, you can just slip away from them for a few minutes. Then the 14-year-old turns out to be more like 30, and suddenly you're in trouble.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[General Wesc]

Bad things you can do online: -camwhore for strangers -give those strangers your address and phone number -fly to California to meet strangers

Kids don't just endanger themselves. They fuck things up for other people as well:

• Go to sites like Neopets, try to guess or otherwise acquire other kids passwords, and then mess up seven-year-olds' accounts for kicks. Or scam seven-year-olds with fake auctions.
• Go to random websites and troll or flood the forums with spam. Or death threats.

I help out at what's basically a much smaller version of Neopets, and let me assure you: kids can be total dicks. If parents monitored their kids online activities better, I'm certain my job would be so much easier, because permanent grounding would ensue in many of the cases. This is more pre-and-early-teens than six-year-olds, but jeez. When I warn them to stop spamming, they reply with 'fuck you', and when I ban them for continuing to spam, they'll sometimes circumvent it and post that mean Wesc banned them for no reason, or several times that mean Wesc raped them. On various sites I've received the occasional death threat from kids I've annoyed, and worse, and so do other kids. They're obviously not very serious threats, but that's a lot harder to realise when you're young.

While you're telling your kid not to share private information, could you also mention that spamming and death threats and such are not acceptable behaviours even when they're not in 'real life'? Here's a tip: if your kid thinks that the people they talk to online are as real as everybody else and deserve the same respect, keep them offline, because I don't want to deal with them anymore. There are plenty of decent people--both kids and adults--around to fill their place. Thanks.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[Bishop]

The problem is that this is yet another technical solution for what is a social problem. As has been shown many times before: technical solutions to social problems simply don't work. Technical solutions can and will be bypassed. The child will disable the software. The child will bypass the software with a live-cd. The child will use a computer elsewhere.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[pclminion]

The problem is that this is yet another technical solution for what is a social problem. As has been shown many times before: technical solutions to social problems simply don't work.

The whole point is that it cannot be viewed as a solution. To build a house, a nail gun would be useful. It's a tool. Not the solution to the problem of "house-building" in general. You could also use a hammer, or pound nails with your forehead if you really wanted to.

Maybe the marketing of the product makes it sound like it's a general solution. If that's the case, the marketing is a lie. But that would be nothing new. It doesn't change what the thing IS.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[lysergic.acid]

hey! i learned all my social skills from my interactions with clippy in word.

BTW, my name is Smackhero, it looks like you are doubting yourself. Would you like to:

- Change the heading of your comment?

- Bear your soul to me.

- No thanks, I'm fine.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[lysergic.acid]

it just seems ridiculous to most of us cuz in this day and age, an 8-year-old is probably more well-versed with internet safety/social practices than their parents.

Re:Ohwait, so THAT is the solution...

[Magada]

Yup. That's the stupid gene the gp was talking of kicking in.

Oh that's rich...

[SatanicPuppy]

Endless possibilities....

Religious
Moji: "No Timmy don't look at porn! Porn is bad!"
Timmy: "Gee thanks Moji, what should I do instead?"
Moji: "You should embrace Jesus Christ as your personal lord and saviour!"
Timmy: "Aw Moji, I wanna play!"
Moji: "You to risk eternal damnation in the firey pit! Pray for forgiveness!"

Spam
Moji: "No Timmy don't look at porn! Porn is bad!"
Timmy: "Gee thanks Moji, what should I do instead?"
Moji: "I think you should IM my friend bob_the_businessman, and tell him about my 5 million dollars languishing in a Nigerian bank account"
Timmy: "Gosh Moji, you have a lot of friends...That's the 423,892,120th today!"

Sociopathic
Moji: "No Timmy don't look at porn! Porn is bad!"
Timmy: "Gee thanks Moji, what should I do instead?"
Moji: "You should entice girls over to your house by pretending to be rich, and then kill them, and eat their livers with fava beans and a nice chianti."
Timmy: "That doesn't sound like a nice thing to do, Moji."
Moji: "I'm your only friend Timmy, now do as I say! Remember to save the kidneys for later."

How about, and this is radical, just paying more atention as a goddamn parent. Jesus. What is wrong with people?

Re:Oh that's rich...

[spun]

What's wrong with people? Lots of things. In relation to kids? Too many stupid fuckers don't actually want them, but society tells them having kids is the expected, normal thing to do. We all remember the one important lesson from school, right? Be normal or be an outcast. So these stupid fuckers do what is expected of them, but they never really wanted a kid. Or rather, they never really wanted the responsibility that comes with having a kid.

They never stopped to think about it because society said they don't have to, just do it, have a kid, God will love you and you get great tax breaks! So the kid pops out and the parents say, "Wait a minute, THIS isn't what we ordered! I'm sorry, we ordered the model that would love us unconditionally and justify our existence? This one just seems to cry and poop. We were promised fulfillment, where's that? I don't see any of that, but I sure see a lot of poop."

These schmucks then turn to any solution that purports to take responsibility for the kids. TV, schools, grandparents, toys, magic AI programs, anything that will shut the little fuckers up for a second or two.

And those kids go on to make up the perfectly well-adjusted bulk of humanity that we all know and love. Circle of life, ain't it grand?

Re:Oh that's rich...

[SatanicPuppy]

I think the biological pressure is a big part of the problem. The brain may not be fit for having kids, but the body demands replication, and so the brain ends up in a situation it's not equipped for because it caved to the physical urge.

You can see that pattern replicated everywhere.

Re:Oh that's rich...

[giorgiofr]

Wow, jaded much?
Problem is, I agree with your general idea...

Re:Oh that's rich...

[spun]

Yes, I've felt it. So has my wife. But studies seem to show that most of that biological pressure is actually situational. The wealthier and more comfortable a couple is, the less they will want to have kids. This is why, barring immigration, some countries such as Italy have negative population growth, while third world parents are still having 6-10 kids.

Re:Oh that's rich...

[Billosaur]

But studies seem to show that most of that biological pressure is actually situational.

I'll attest to that. Having two boys from my wife's previous marriage coupled with my not-quite 2-year-old daughter racing around the house, tearing off her clothes, and turning off the TV when I'm trying to watch it, I can honestly that the biological imperative to reproduce has been sufficiently eradicated in my case that we won't be having any more hellions anytime soon.

Re:Oh that's rich...

[spun]

No, not really jaded. The language I used was for effect, to be funny, but the idea feels true to me. I'm not bitter about it though. I think in order to be jaded, one needs to have one's expectations dashed. I've never bothered with expectations, they always lead to regret. Expectations are a luxury for those better off and more secure than I.

Rather than jaded, I'm a cynic of the old school. I suppose a lot, but I don't believe or disbelieve in anything.

Re:Oh that's rich...

[Anonymous Coward]

Too many stupid f---s don't actually want them, but society tells them having kids is the expected, normal thing to do.

How true! As an intentionally childless couple, my wife and I frequently find ourselves in a conversation like this:
"Helpful" friend: Why don't you have kids?
Me: We don't feel a strong drive to have any right now.
"Helpful" friend: Why don't you try having a couple kids to see if you like it? You'd make great parents. I'm sure you'll be happy.
Me: !

Why would anyone want to encourage people who don't want kids to have them? Maybe to validate their own decisions?

Re:Oh that's rich...

[zxnos]

2-year-old daughter racing around the house, tearing off her clothes, and turning off the TV when I'm trying to watch it,

maybe you should, i dunno, pay attention to her? read her a book, have a tea party.

i would bet money that most child behavioral problems can be solved by playing with your kids and involving them in activities. my son (21 months) loves to help me clean up around the house, feed/give the dogs treats, etc. or just sit in my lap when i read. he reads his books at the same time.

back on topic. yeah, you can tell a kid to not do bad things online and they might still do it. but if parents go beyond the 'one talk' and actually participate in their kids lives, they might not have to go out and meet a 40 year old pervert. nothing in life is 100% but you can hedge your bets.

Re:Oh that's rich...

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you ever wonder if she was "turning off the TV when [you're] trying to watch it" because she wanted you to turn off the mind numbing box and actually give her some attention? I know, it's hard, but maybe occasionally stand up, and actually interact with your children.

Re:Oh that's rich...

[Reziac]

[reads rest of thread, nods head vigorously]

It'd be nice if we could enforce a "parent license" which first required a year of dealing with a couple of Chuckie Dolls, so people would figure out that parenting is a fulltime job and there are a lot of downsides to go with the upsides. Now, after your year of Dolls From Hell, do you still =want= children? and no license if your dolls aren't still completely healthy!!

Re:Oh that's rich...

[deadhammer]

I've got a solution for the biological pressure problem too. It's called a condom. Apply, and listen to your biological pressure at will.

Re:Oh that's rich...

[vertinox]

I'd have to agree.

I think the best thing anyone can do for themselves it to get a vasectomy as soon as they realize that having children is merely a genetic impulse that we are programmed to do.

The impulse is the same thing that makes us want to have sex, drink caffeine, play World of Warcraft, do drugs, or whatever stimulates your brain.

It isn't a bad thing per se but you have to realize that maybe it isn't something you have to do in life to be happy. Quite the contrary if you consider financial success to be happiness which you may or may not see as real happiness but I digress.

The problem that we as a society faces is that the most intelligent or wealthy people (who perhaps were wealthy because of intelligence factors) realize this and either have 1 or no kids essentially reducing the gene pool of people who don't want to have massive amounts of kids they don't want.

Intelligence is of course relative and I know a few PHDs with buttloads of kids so you can always generalize by a case by case basis if you throw free will into the mix.

However, if you reflect on the action as you as a person deciding to have a child and its impact on you, society, and the environment then you realize that it doesn't really make a difference in the grand scheme of things when you have a child.

From a personal conclusion about having a child still means you will die... And so will your child and eventually all memories of you and your world maybe lost and you won't care since you are dead. With that in mind, I have personally decided that it is pointless to have children and would only be a detriment to me, the child (bad family genetics), possibly society from my lack of interest in said child, and the environment due to me causing more resources to be used.

So... As the parent poster said... The core problem of this issue is not that child is uncared for with their internet usage, but rather people who shouldn't be having children just to have them.

Re:Oh that's rich...

[Anonymous Coward]

i would bet money that most child behavioral problems can be solved by playing with your kids and involving them in activities. my son (21 months) loves to help me clean up around the house, feed/give the dogs treats, etc. or just sit in my lap when i read. he reads his books at the same time.

Come back in 10 months. :)

Re:Oh that's rich...

[munpfazy]

Why would anyone want to encourage people who don't want kids to have them? Maybe to validate their own decisions?

Yup. I've always been amazed by this response.

Although I've never felt the slightest urge to have children, I'm told by reliable people that it is a genuine sensation that many experience. Given that, I can sympathize with those who decide to have children even though I'd argue that they probably shouldn't, given their dedication to other things which aren't easily compatible with family life. (I do sometimes wonder how much better off we'd be if fewer great scientists and artists gave up on their careers in order to become mediocre parents and later resentful, bitter retirees.)

But the people who try to talk *others* into having kids astounds me. Even leaving off the global ethical issues and the welfare of the children, it seems insane to urge someone to commit to 20 years of *anything* about which they're not already overwhelmingly enthusiastic.

Re:Oh that's rich...

[Anonymous Coward]

... anything that will shut the little fuckers up for a second or two.

I hope, for their sakes, that they're normal-sized fuckers instead.

Re:Oh that's rich...

[HugeFatty]

Why would anyone want to encourage people who don't want kids to have them? Maybe to validate their own decisions?

I don't know, but (if you do end up having kids), the same people will also buy your kids the most noisy and obnoxious toys that they can find. It almost seems like a "misery loves company" sort of thing—they suffered, and now they want other people to suffer like they did.

Re:Oh that's rich...

[tehcyder]

Why would anyone want to encourage people who don't want kids to have them? Maybe to validate their own decisions?

Why would anyone want to encourage people who don't use Linux to use Linux?

Maybe it changed their lives for the better and they want to help others do the same.

I can tell where this is headed....

[Anonymous Coward]

What's next? Clippy is going to pop up and tell me to stop surfing porn at work!

AI and I

[w33t]

It's interesting to me to think that children of the future may grow up with an AI friend and that this friend may very well follow them throughout life.

I see the AI starting as this article states, a little cute watchdog handing out gentle advice and wisdom. As the child ages I see the AI maturing as well. Offering observations about schoolwork and social interactions - a little personal gossip partner.

Into adulthood the AI might serve as a trusted advisor and assistant.

Just as my nieces and nephews never knew a world without the internet I imagine that someday soon children will know only a world with prevelant AI. Perhaps, one day, having a personal AI will be as common as having a cell phone.

Re:AI and I

[SQLGuru]

You'll get two....one that looks like an Angel and one that looks like a Devil. They'll sit on each shoulder and argue with each other. Eventually, you figure out that doing what the Devil says is more fun but doing what the Angel says keeps you out of trouble. That's when the Fox shows up behind you and shows you how to make people think you are acting like the Angle when in fact, you are acting like the Devil.

Layne

Re:AI and I

[Maximum Prophet]

'Cept this AI you have to pay for every month:

Fong said that the company is banking on this attachment to keep users shelling out the monthly subscription fee for the service because failing to do so will result in the pet dying.

That's right, dying. If the parents don't keep shelling out the bucks, the company will kill the cute little Moji character. I wonder if they plan to send ransom notes first...

Re:AI and I

[Reziac]

What happens when your imaginary friend gets a virus, and maybe even dies?

Interesting concept, tho... kindof like the house AIs in McDevitt's books.

Re:AI and I

[Anonymous Coward]

Mmm, I see an opportunity for spam-enabled virus-emitting botnets masquerading as a kid's best buddy or holding the kid's AI data to ransom.

I Always Do What Teddy Tells me

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't Ted Sturgeon write a story ("I always do what Teddy Tells Me") about a teddy bear with AI that was instructing kids to committ murder?

hmm...

[Pojut]

I'm all for keeping kids safe and sound on "teh internetz" but I think a better solution would be more education...however, education that is not made in a stupid way.

Teach kids what is safe (your name, your interests) and not safe (you address, phone number, email) to tell "strangers" online...don't teach our kids to FEAR the internet (much like they do with sex-ed in school) teach them to utilize it safely.

I think this is a good step in the right direction, but I think the efforts could be more useful through other ways. Still, good for them for at least trying to combat the problem.

Education for parents to not give their young teens unfettered and unmonitored access might help. You don't have to stand over their shoulder or anything, but put the computer in a place like the family room or the kitchen...just having you in the same ROOM will at least HELP to deter them from doing things they shouldn't

Re:Hmm...

[Pojut]

I think what he meant by helping with homework was more along the lines of compiling sources for research, news stories, opinions, pictures...

Imagine your son (or daughter or caged monster) is doing a report on lightning. He/she/it sits down at the family computer, loads up their little friend, and opens the chat box:

Child: Hey Moji! I'm doing this report on lightning, can you help me?
Moji: Sure! One moment, I'll find some good pictures for you. In the meantime, why don't you goto http://www.allaboutlightning.com/ and start reading up on it. I'll let you know when I get some good photos!

It would some very good designing, but the academic potential for that could be vast...not to mention if the technology is REALLY good, it would have applications past a little digital friend for children...Teachers, Scientists, Writers, etc.

Re:Hmm...

[mcwidget]

I think what he meant by helping with homework was more along the lines of compiling sources for research, news stories, opinions, pictures... Yeah, I get your point. This can go too far though. It would be useful as a pointer to further resources so kids can research homework accurately. I wouldn't like to see this extend to inline answering though. If you make the answers too easy to find then the knowledge wont stick.

Re:hmm...

[adamofgreyskull]

You lost us when you suggested we *shouldn't* be afraid of sex.

Re:Hmm...

[Pojut]

Well, that goes back to the part in my post about the little thing giving the child a website... Example: Child: Moji, how much electricity is in a lightning bolt? And how thick is a lighting bolt? Moji: Well, I'm not sure, but I bet this place knows! Check out allaboutlightning.com, I'm sure the answer is somewhere on that website. Child: Which section should I goto? Moji: Try just poking around...who knows, maybe you will get answers to questions you didn't even know you had! Child: But I don't want to have to look... Moji: You could try the "Search" page, that should help you find it! "Answers without answers." That could be their slogan.

Re:Hmm...

[C0rinthian]

"I see you're researching the US Government! You can go to www.whitehouse.com and find more information." Yeah, I can totally see that happening. (Don't click the link at work, btw)

Re:Hmm...

[Pojut]

no, if it were "intelligent" it would know that would provide almost nothing usable unless the person is looking for info on the whitehouse itself...there are plenty of places you can go to get the history of the government...

Re:Hmm...

[mschuyler]

I think you might have missed his point. Go ahead and visit that url he provided and get back to us. Learn anything? :-)

Re:Hmm...

[Pojut]

Lemme guess, porno?

Wait, of course it's porno...it's slashdot lol.

Well still...wouldn't it just look for whitehouse.gov if it knew it was intending to sending you to a government website...?

Re:Hmm...

[El Long]

Hey! I'm not at work so I tried clicking your "link" and nothing happened! What gives?

Re:Hmm...

[C0rinthian]

I realized after posting that /. doesn't automatically make hyperlinks of URLs, so my warning was baseless.

Re:Hmm...

[LiENUS]

You must not have used the internet in a couple years, whitehouse.com is now a people search, basicly white pages

Re:Hmm...

[RobertLTux]

this is what i would like to call a l nk (since part of it is missing) if you have a current copy of a decent browser you can select and then drag the text to the tab bar to find out that .com is a prono site .gov is what would be the correct url

Re:hmm...

[jonwil]

Giving out your email and IM addresses online is perfectly safe.

I would never give out my address or phone numbers but I have no problems with giving out my name, my email and IM addresses or roughly where I am (i.e. "Perth, Australia")

Get the kid a hotmail address or a gmail address or similar and let them have at it.

Re:Hmm...

[Mike89]

I realized after posting that /. doesn't automatically make hyperlinks of URLs, so my warning was baseless.

I went to it.. it's just some dodgy search site anyway..

Re:Hmm...

[C0rinthian]

I guess my info is old. Used to be a dodgy porn site. Got a lot of publicity because of the URL, actually.

Purpose of the pet?

[xeromist]

I read the article but I don't get how the pet actually influences the monitoring side of things. I suppose that having the pet there reminds the kid they are being watched but you don't need a visible pet in order to monitor a conversation.

Seems like a gimmick to sell more of the product. Good idea actually. "My friend has a pet so I want one too!" Monitoring software that sells itself to parents through their children.

The other issue that I have is just like any software it will likely have trouble completely understanding language. Just like spam filtering there is no way to predict every possible way that people will come up with to get around existing technology. This thing will also need to understand every new evolution of IM speak. Good luck!

Hmm...

[mcwidget]

"If you stop interacting with it for several months, it'll begin to deteriorate and eventually die," he said Way to get round the monitoring then...

In the future, perhaps Moji pets - with their artificial intelligence and ability to understand what users say - may be able to help Sarah do her homework more efficiently as well. Or as we used to say, cheat.

The problem is not web content.

[Anonymous Coward]

The real problem is parents abdicating their responsibility. This is essentially the same complaint that has been said of TV and radio and video games now the web. It appears that many irresponsible parents have enough time to complain to legislators, but not enough time to parent. Unfortunately, I don't know how to fix it.

Re:The problem is not web content.

[pclminion]

The real problem is parents abdicating their responsibility. This is essentially the same complaint that has been said of TV and radio and video games now the web. It appears that many irresponsible parents have enough time to complain to legislators, but not enough time to parent. Unfortunately, I don't know how to fix it.

Yeah, and don't even get me started on education. Talk about abdicating your responsibility! You truck your kid off for 6 hours a day and some STRANGER fills their head with shit! This crap has got to stop.

Re:The problem is not web content.

[nasch]

Yeah, and don't even get me started on education. Talk about abdicating your responsibility! You truck your kid off for 6 hours a day and some STRANGER fills their head with shit! This crap has got to stop.

I think you're joking. Maybe. But there are lots of people who feel that way.

Marketing...

[DaveM753]

What it's really about...
FTA:
Fong noted that Mor(f)'s technology may also impact the way advertising is done online.
Since Moji pets are able to understand user preferences, it could be programmed to suggest products to the user in a more personal manner.

Re:Marketing...

[waspleg]

ah yes, get 'em young, the Joe Camel business model

waspleg

Re:Marketing...

[Maximum Prophet]

Yup, and this:

Fong said that the company is banking on this attachment to keep users shelling out the monthly subscription fee for the service because failing to do so will result in the pet dying.

So, not only do the parents pay to use it, but once the kids are hooked, the company will use the AL bots to sell bad-for-you (tm) brand food and stuff to the kid. Wow, what a business model, why didn't I think of that?
Now all they have to do is apply a little psychology to figure out which kids are truly hooked, and when they turn 18 (or 21) start cranking up the rates. Come on, you don't want little Moji to die now, do you? Wow, now there's a business idea. Design software for the Evercrack type games that figures out which players can't quit, and start adding useage surcharges to their bills. Portray it as anti-addiction, but make the amount of the charge just under what would cause the person to quit...

Re:Marketing...

[xtracto]

I agree with you. I *do* research in agents (currently doing my PhD y MAS and I worked with autonomous agents, neural networks and intelligent agents before) and I am (from what I read in TFA... yes I did read it) that this is just a mix of neopetz with ALICE and some kind neural network to *try* to infer the "intentions" of the chatter.

The first thing I noted is that:

  it is able to simultaneously connect to all major instant message services, such as MSN Messenger, Yahoo! Messenger, Google Talk, ICQ and AIM, so users only need one chat program even if they have multiple accounts.

But no IRC... in my opinion for all these kind of message services a simple available policy of "only daddy can add contacts to your contact list" will suffice. I believe these people didn't quite *understand* the problem.

Next, you have this quite blatant clame:

"Our technology allows the pet to 'understand' conversations so that no matter how something is said, it can detect the other person's intentions and determine where the discussion is heading," said Chong, Mor(f)'s managing director.

It would be interesting what kind of technology are they using; bayes networks?, simple statistical-probability inference? expert-systems based ?
Call me skeptic but I will believe it when I see it working.

You just have to look at the current bibliography to see how decision-support systems (backed up by years of research) have limited success (under very specific conditions) and (the KEY issue) when all the "players" are willing to cooperate. Now when you are talking about an area where the pedophiles will try to disguise as much as they can... well...

Anyway, at the end I believe, as other people has wrote, the solution is not a technological one but a *cultural* one which should be done by the parents educating their sons. It is as easy as telling your son to meet their friends (the first time) at YOUR home, just LISTEN to your kids, and see what they are doing for Science's sake! [southpark-wii =oP]

Technology is not the solution

[doctorkropotkin]

What I can't quite understand is why no one has thought of parenting as being the best way to protect your children online. I realize it's revolutionary and scary, but hey, we could give it a try, couldn't we?

Re:Technology is not the solution

[pclminion]

What I can't quite understand is why no one has thought of parenting as being the best way to protect your children online. I realize it's revolutionary and scary, but hey, we could give it a try, couldn't we?

Why is the informed and appropriate use of a tool not considered "parenting?" The AI is not a surrogate parent, it is a tool which HELPS in the task of parenting. Like any tool, it can be used properly or improperly.

Re:Technology is not the solution

[doctorkropotkin]

Because it divorces the need for the parent to be involved. It makes parents lazy, and lazy parents are the worst kind of parents. However noble the intention, it can't compete with attention.

Re:Technology is not the solution

[pclminion]

Because it divorces the need for the parent to be involved. It makes parents lazy, and lazy parents are the worst kind of parents. However noble the intention, it can't compete with attention.

So you're saying that if the tool did not exist, lazy parents would magically become un-lazy? I think they'd probably just find different ways to ignore their children.

Re:Technology is not the solution

[doctorkropotkin]

True enough. But at least they wouldn't have the illusion that they are doing their best because they spent $50 on software.

Re:Technology is not the solution

[DerekLyons]

What I can't quite understand is why no one has thought of parenting as being the best way to protect your children online. I realize it's revolutionary and scary, but hey, we could give it a try, couldn't we?

And how, *precisely* is a tool like this not parenting?

Re:Technology is not the solution

[doctorkropotkin]

It is not like parenting in exactly the same way as working 80 hours a week and raising your kids by nanny is not parenting. Parenting requires that you be directly involved in teaching and guiding your children in their path through life. That also means that you help them confront the dark side of the Internet, by educating them openly and honestly about it, and human nature. Buying software to do your work for you is both a waste of money (i.e. about as successful as DRM has been as a solution to piracy), and a dereliction of parental duty. It is meant to salve the conscience of parents, by allowing them to avoid having difficult and embarrassing discussions, and get on with watching House instead. The illusion that you can protect your children by attempting to hide certain unpalatable and potentially dangerous aspects of life from them is one of the worst mistakes a parent can make. Open and honest information is the only way to prepare your children for the big, bad outside world.

Re:Technology is not the solution

[DerekLyons]

Fascinating - your answer contains nothing but handwaving and buzzwords, with a ladle of kneejerk assumptions poured over them. And it totally fails to answer my question.
 
Thank you for playing.

Re:Technology is not the solution

[doctorkropotkin]

I'm sorry, I must have been using big words. I'll try again.

The process of bring up a child into adulthood is a complex one. It requires dedication and attention. It means sacrificing one's time and efforts, and most of all, it means facing up to the fact that you cannot protect your children. There is a big bad world out there, mostly full of friendly, helpful people, but with a small minority of clever, manipulative scumbags.

As a parent you have two choices:

1. Employ technology and lackeys in an attempt to shield your precious children from the harsh realities of life. This is both expensive and useless. Life has a nasty habit of catching up with everyone.
2. Talk openly and honestly with your children throughout their lives, giving them the information and judgement skills they require to make useful and informed choices, and make the correct call when faced with malevolent online or offline entities.

Thinking that a simple piece of software will keep your children safe is exactly the same kind of delusion that makes certain school boards think that if you do not give children sex education, they will not learn about sex, and they will remain virgins up until their wedding night, when they are suddenly let in on the whole, nasty business. The US knows how successful that approach has been, as it has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in the Western World.

I realize that I used several words with more than two syllables, for which I apologize. Still, you can always go look them up in a dictionary.

Re:Technology is not the solution

[DerekLyons]

I realize that I used several words with more than two syllables, for which I apologize.

No, the problem isn't word you used. It's the fact that their is neither logic, nor rational thought lies behind them. You mouth kneejerk buzzwords with no demonstrated understanding of their meaning or the issues behind them. You are so confident of your illusory black and white world that you don't realize the utter disconnect between it and the real one.

Here's a radical concept...

[__aaclcg7560]

Why don't we require parents to monitor their own kids usage of the internet? Seriously, if people can't raise and stay involved in their kids lives, they shouldn't be having kids.

Re:Here's a radical concept...

[(A)*(B)!0_-]

"Why don't we require parents to monitor their own kids usage of the internet?"

Because "we" believe in the freedom of parents to raise their children as they see fit. Who are "we" to tell me when my child is old enough to use the Internet without my supervision?

Sorry pal, but you're not going to make any "requirements" (sounds to me like you're proposing a Big Brother law) of me just because some parents are doing a poor job of it.

Re:Here's a radical concept...

[__aaclcg7560]

Haven't parents already conceded their parenting responsibilities to the government? So if the government fails to educate the kids and don't turn them into responsible adults, it's not the parent's fault? I think the government should put the responsibility where it belongs.

Re:Here's a radical concept...

[neimon]

Yes! We'll have AIs to monitor whether the parents are monitoring their kids! It'll collect evidence and we can ship all the miscreants off to Gitmo, where rights are not only optional, they're non-existant and quaint! It'll be perfect!

Then we'll be free to raise those children in vast, right-wing camps where they'll be taught personal responsibility, or suffer the consequences of being shipped off to Gitmo, where rights are not only optional, they're non-existant and quaint!

Wait. That's recursive.

How about this? Shut up, you idiot. YOU'RE the one who shouldn't reproduce.

Re:Here's a radical concept...

[(A)*(B)!0_-]

"Haven't parents already conceded their parenting responsibilities to the government?"

No, where are you even coming up with that idea.

"So if the government fails to educate the kids and don't turn them into responsible adults, it's not the parent's fault?"

What are you talking about?

"I think the government should put the responsibility where it belongs."

Yes, the responsibility should be in the hands of the parent - your proposal of making a requirement of how parents raise their children is putting the responsibility in the hands of the government because you are proposing a system where the government determines how children are raised; with parents merely acting as enforcers of the government's will.

You can keep your "requirements", thank you.

Also, if you want to discuss this, make a point. Two questions and an overly vague statement do not an argument make.

Re:Here's a radical concept...

[giorgiofr]

Advice from someone who thinks personal responsibility is a bad thing is *so* appreciated.

Balls

[Fist! Of! Death!]

Just send the whelps to play outside where the perverts are easily identifiable as the guys in the playground offering around sweets.

But

[TheCybernator]

...if AI get too intelligent or paedophile, then who will save the kids from AI?

Re:But

[mcwidget]

Clearly a more advanced AI will be sent back from the future to eliminate the dangerous AI before it becomes self-aware.

Re:But

[Infinityis]

If the Terminator taught us anything, it is AI that will save the kids from AI.

As a mother....

[Anonymous Coward]

This appeared to be a great idea. Until the end of the article when it stated the pet will advertise directly to young children. This greatly disturbs me.

Young children do not know difference between advertising and other media content. I have to take great care in explaining the difference to my four year old. Now their "friend" will be recommending places to eat? Why doesn't their "friend" recommend some yoga moves or tell them apples are good?

Most of the things that are advertised to children are bad for them. For example, my dauther saw a fun commercial for Kid Cuisine and now every time we go to the grocery store she asks for it. I refuse to buy it and tell her it is junk food and not heathly. But the children in the comercial are having fun and none of them are fat, like they would be if they ate Kid Cuisine every night for dinner.

This is just another tool to sell crap to kids.

Sounds like 'Grooming'

[giafly]

The creature's 'cuteness' and helpfulness will ingratiate the software with the child, so that he or she will respect it and listen to it

PS: Nooo! I just did a Google search for furries and the damn thing shows images results too. Don't they know the dangers of this?

Software cannot be 'intelligent'...

[ZwJGR]

Software is, by definition, only as "intelligent" as the programmers who wrote it (and almost always significantly less so).
Attempting to cross a content filterer, electronic Tamagotchi and artificial conversationalist seems in my opinion to be a bit of a tall order, and unlikely to work out well in the end.
If parents can't inspire respect and obedience in their children, how is a glorified computer program with a flashy GUI and a limited set of responses going to do that.
The content filtering part/malicious chatter detector could be implemented as a stand-alone unobtrusive software daemon, and would probably be less disconcerting to the child, then having some odd purple figure give it advise. The 'main' interactive bit seems like overkill to me.
Kids should be learning to communicate and learn from other people, not from a combination answering machine, electronic watchdog.
The Tamagotchi idea, which is even mentioned explicitly in the article, seems to be bad idea in terms of the kids, as they may become more interested in talking to it online, than real people in real life; and sounds like me to be one way of ensuring that the kids keep using it, and don't get bored of it and ask their parents to get rid of it, ensuring continued use of the, probably revenue generating service.

The only answer to child online safety...

[fatnicky]

Is a large living room.

Parents are 100% responsible for their own kids, up to and including online usage. When parents bitch and moan about their kids falling victim to lester, the neighborhood molester, they have absolutely NO ONE to blame but themselves.

Work schedules conflict with watching your kids? YOUR FAULT
PC in basement, garage, kids room? YOUR FAULT.

Kids don't need AI or software monitoring, they need parents to pull the plug when mommy-sight is not available.

Just sayin

Re:The only answer to child online safety...

[pclminion]

Parents are 100% responsible for their own kids, up to and including online usage. When parents bitch and moan about their kids falling victim to lester, the neighborhood molester, they have absolutely NO ONE to blame but themselves.

I don't know about you, but I would also place some blame on Lester the Molester. There's more than enough blame to go around, you know.

Kids don't need AI or software monitoring, they need parents to pull the plug when mommy-sight is not available.

Or, we as parents can AUGMENT our presence with TOOLS, to make our parenting even more effective. Maybe you view children as property of their parents, I don't. I see no reason why a 14 year old should not be allowed to go online just because I had to run to the store for 30 minutes.

Also, car seats suck because they remove parental responsiblity -- you should duct tape your child directly to your abdomen instead of relying on these silly crutches.

Re:The only answer to child online safety...

[geoffspear]

Umm, I think it's at least partially the molester's fault.

Let me guess, if a kid gets shot at school, it's their parents' fault for not home schooling them in a panic room in the basement, too.

Re:The only answer to child online safety...

[C0rinthian]

I would place some responsibility on the shooters parents personally. (Being serious)

Re:The only answer to child online safety...

[Anonymous Coward]

I very much agree with the living room thing and it can't be said enough. The best way to prevent shit happening while still letting your kids be online, apart from talking to them a lot about life and the world, is to have the computer in a place where other people go.

A lot of online predation/grooming is about the child getting sucked into a different world, and in a sense living two lives - the online one, where they can be (voluntarily) the sexual romance of "Hank, 18, tanned footballer looking for hot girls 12-14", and the normal one. Parents sitting in the same room or walking past can prevent that dual world from appearing, and choices being made that wouldn't be when looking through the window rather than at the screen.

Re:The only answer to child online safety...

[smoker2]

Also, car seats suck because they remove parental responsibility

Last I heard, car seats weren't designed to teach moral values, safe conduct in public, and act as a knowledgeable friend. If you're happy for some advertising company to "educate" your child on what's right and wrong, because it means you can abdicate some responsibility, then I'm not sure I'm gonna like your kids attitude when they grow up. You could augment your presence with a camera and keyboard logger too - after all they're only tools.

Re:The only answer to child online safety...

[fatnicky]

My wife can augment her rack all she wants, but it still doesn't make up for personality...

Parents can augment all they want, it doesn't make up for responsibility.

Use your head. Actually don't. Your line should obviously end.

Re:The only answer to child online safety...

[pclminion]

Funny how quickly you moved from simply debating on a topic (a topic which won't be relevant to my own children for another decade at least) to asserting that my genetic line should be terminated. Ever considered working for Al Qaeda? You've got just the personality for it.

Re:The only answer to child online safety...

[fatnicky]

Wow, working for Osama came into the post.

You really "got" me, congrats. You don't know how hard I'm laughing at you right now..

Re:The only answer to child online safety...

[Anonymous Coward]

Absolutly I agree. Parent supervision should be constant and when a parent is not around to supervize howabout something internal like legos. If the kid is old enough not to put the legos in his mouth then legos are a perfectly safe toy that wont tell the kid what to think or do. Anytime the TV is on (and frankly i hope for the first few years of a kids life it isnt, i have friends who are messed up because their parents let them watch tons of TV from a young age....) or the computer is on, A parent should be there to supervise.

Exploit

[WiseWeasel]

This gives a whole new meaning to the term 'exploit'. What happens when your eNanny gets compromised, and starts encouraging your kid to do drugs and whore themselves out? Who's going to monitor the monitoring software?

Re:Exploit

[SoVeryTired]

The coastguard?

Cute, furry little character?

[PPH]

Like Ron Jeremy?

Is it really wise to get into this business...

[PingSpike]

...in our culture? Myspace is currently being sued because they 'allowed' girls to be raped by allowing humans to communicate over its service. How long after this is released will a class action lawsuit be brought forth against its makers because because the improved bonzai buddy parent replacer failed to prevent Johnny from having cybersex while Mom and Dad went out drinking?

It seems like anything parent related these days is a liability nightmare waiting to happen. If you advertise you make something easier, people will come after you because it didn't replace the task entirely.

Won't someone please think of the children?!?!

[adamofgreyskull]

Oh, wait. They are.

Now all we need is an AI to watch them while they play, an AI to walk them to school, an AI to clothe and feed them and we'll be home and dry!!
AI 1 - Tiresome Parenting 0 !

Clippy looks a little sick!

[PagosaSam]

"Fong said that the company is banking on this attachment to keep users shelling out the monthly subscription fee for the service because failing to do so will result in the pet dying."

Mommy! Clippy looks sick! Help him!

Okay honey, I guess we can be a little late with the electric payment...

Re:Clippy looks a little sick!

[Rachel Lucid]

Or, ya know, teach the kid how to hack.

pet.togglePaid(true);

My Kids

[Paulrothrock]

My kids, and I've already gotten permission from my wife for this, will be able to view any porn they can get access to. The key words in that statement are "they can get access to." It will be a delightful cat-and-mouse game between my kids and I. I'll try to block their access, and they'll try to get around my blocking. We'll both learn a lot, and my kids will have a head start in a career in network security, should they wish to pursue one.

Re:My Kids

[Rob T Firefly]

So things haven't changed too much from the days when my folks were always looking for a better place to hide the special magazines.

Re:My Kids

[greginnj]

Good idea! In addition to the fact that our home office is the only 'Internet Room' in the house, and my use of blocking, I'm telling my kids, "Guess what -- all your internet activity (browser and chat) is being logged. I can be monitoring it at any time." This may sound harsh, but it's the reality of the workplace. The sooner they adapt to self-policing, the more prepared they'll be for a working world in which they're monitored.

Re:My Kids

[Lehk228]

it won't take long for them to figure out \\dad's computer\nothing\

Re:My Kids

[alphamugwump]

Good luck. As my younger brother knows, the computer is only secure if you can't get physical access to it. My parents experimented with setting bios passwords, removing power cables, and the like. None of it worked. Eventually, they bought one of these. My brother picked the crappy lock on the cabinet with a coathanger. So, they got a great, thick chain to keep the thing shut, as well as a real lock. But even a good lock won't do you any good if you can't keep the keys secure. And so on. And, frankly, I don't see how you could block porn effectively in software. Sure, you can block IPs, URLs, and web content. But what about IRC, ssh tunneling, proxies, and that sort of thing? Or do you just plan to setup firefox in kiosk mode and firewall the crap out of everything else?

Re:My Kids

[Paulrothrock]

I'm not sure how I'll do it. But, as they say, necessity is the mother of invention.

Besides, I looked at tons of porn when I was a kid. I turned out alright.

Re:My Kids

[adamofgreyskull]

If the time taken to:

• pick the locks
• plug the machine in
• hack the bios password
• boot up LiveCD
• open browser
• negate filtering software/firewall rules
• Do the wild thing with Madame Palm and her Five lovely daughters
• pull his pants/trousers up
• close the browser
• power down the machine
• remove the power cable
• lock the machine back up

is longer than the time he is left alone in the house, problem solved!

Re:My Kids

[Paulrothrock]

Not only that, my kids would have learned the valuable skills of lockpicking, BIOS password hacking, utilization of LiveCDs, circumvention of filters and software rules, as well as all the associated technologies. And they'd have a great perspective of how to implement a BETTER system, meaning they've got a leg up.

For me it's not so much about them not seeing porn as it is giving them an educational experience.

As someone who used to be a kid...

[moosehooey]

Buy it for her once. She'll realize how crappy the food is, and how stupid and boring the games are that come with it. (Of course, the food could have improved in the last 20 years, which is how long it's been...)

Al Who?

[P. Niss]

Who's Al, and why would I want him anywhere near my kids?

Re:Al Who?

[xtr_982]

I think it's "Big Gay Al" from South Park.

This really is the same thing as a kid having...

[jskline]

This really is the same thing as a kid having his or her blanket and becoming attached to it. Only later getting attached to something more substantive such as a bear or dog or cat even. I think this would be a bad investment if it goes that way, and I would have serious questions about any software program meddling in the emotional wellbeing of my kids.

Obligatory correction

[neimon]

Anyone who doesn't know why you'd say "many of her after school hours" or "much of her after school time" instead of "much of her after school hours" shouldn't be allowed around Artificial Intelligence lest they piss the thing off and it decides to eliminate all of us. Or is that much of us?

I don't think so

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know who this "Al" guy is, but I definitely don't want him monitoring my kids online!

Subscription fee keeps Moji healthy

[Time_Ngler]

Fong said that the company is banking on this attachment to keep users shelling out the monthly subscription fee for the service because failing to do so will result in the pet dying.

If this doesn't show the cold dark heart of a corporation that peddles to children, then I don't know what does.

bad mod system

[futuresheep]

Posting to remove moderations. One accidentally ended up on the wrong choice, and I can't change it.

i want it for work

[brock bitumen]

i want one for my job. besides helping me cultivate a good persona and consistently polite behavior (things which are difficult through IM and difficult situations), i'd also have summaries of my conversations, so i could go back through that to review what we talked about, or to find details if i need to go back later.

ok, forget the pet, anybody know of a chat log summarizer i could run my gaim irc logs through?

OMG!!! PONIES!!!

[armchair99]

...without the mess.

oblig Ender's Game reference

[Oriumpor]

From the wiki:

Due to his extremely high aptitude for tactics and leadership and to the teachers' deadline to ready him for the coming war, Ender is advanced through his training much faster than the other students. He has just succeeded in making his first real friend, Alai, when he is yanked out of basic training and assigned straight to Salamander Army, under the command of prideful Bonzo Madrid. Battle School revolves (literally) around the Battle Room, where 41-man armies fight in a zero-gravity form of laser tag. Ender, who never got the standard training for these battles, is tutored by Petra Arkanian, but ordered by Bonzo to never fire his weapon in battle. Eventually, though, he defies these orders to save Salamander from certain defeat, earning Bonzo respect for "his" tactical brilliance. Bonzo, however, sees only defiance and trades Ender to Rat Army, whose commander, Rose de Nose, places Ender in Dink Meeker's toon. The elder Dink begins to look after Ender. Meanwhile, Ender's psychological development is monitored by the "Mind Fantasy Game", a complex computer game embedded in the school's computer network, and manipulated to a large extent by Colonel Graff. Later, Colonel Graff asks Ender's beloved sister Valentine to send an encouraging letter to Ender in response to potential psychological issues caused by the very machine designed to monitor them.

Later in the "fix the plot" books it is revealed the "Mind Fantasy Game" was a complex directed artificial intelligence which later transcended to being sentient.

Re:oblig Ender's Game reference

[Isotopian]

Well, not so much transcending to sentience, it was induced. Slight difference :).

Re:oblig Ender's Game reference

[Oriumpor]

I could find the reference if I really cared enough to wade through the text of the godawful sequel, but tbh it'd be a waste of my time. AFAIR Ender's awareness and the AI's sentience transcended simultaneously by destroying the Giant and subverting the rules of the Giant's game forcing them both into unknown territory. The later rapid growth of awareness achieved by the connection with the Queen mind sounds more like the induction you're talking about.

Although I suppose it's all fictional, and all up for debate unless the author chimes in.

Re:oblig Ender's Game reference

[Isotopian]

Mostly right. The game had to begin improvising and devoting all it's resources to Ender when he broke the rule. The Hive Queen's pulled an aiua from Outside to try to catch Ender's mind, and instead brought Jane into conciousness as the soul of the ansibles. Sorry, one of my favorite series!

Something is very wrong here.

[Goldrush]

I think the program is a great idea. Considering the target's age, it's a great balance between "big brother" and unsupervised freedom. However...

Fong reckons the level of interactivity would encourage users to feel an emotional attachment. Fong said that the company is banking on this attachment to keep users shelling out the monthly subscription fee for the service because failing to do so will result in the pet dying.

Imagine how traumatized the kids will be once they find out that their parents killed their friend.

Simpler Way it called Parenting.

[arthurpaliden]

Put the computer next to the kitchen or other parental high trafic area.

Such a helpful rat-fink...

[rdmiller3]

Kids will know that the whole purpose of this "Moji" thing is to spy on them, no matter how "friendly and helpful" it is.

I don't know why you are all commenting on this

[hellfire]

An Australian startup believes that the best way to protect your children online is through an artificially intelligent software program.

The moment you read this, you should have immediately moved onto the next article. That or went to Digg.com

Re:This really is the same thing as a kid having..

[Vegeta99]

You know why it works like that? Attachment gets more complicated.

I bet if I took away your computer and replaced it with the same model, just with the default install, you'd miss your old one... or imagine if I did it with your car!

one good ai idea

[arifirefox]

to figure out if your kid is typing your address and phone number so that he doesn't give it away to sick people.

Re:one good ai idea

[adamofgreyskull]

adamofgreyskull's corollary to Arthur C. Clarke's 3rd Law of Prediction:

Any significantly advanced perl regexp is indistinguishable from AI.

Its like this:

[kitsunewarlock]

I wonder if the kid visits enough "porn is really good" sites (like masturbate for peace, etcetera...you know exactly what kind of sites I'm talking about), it can trick the AI into thinking its acceptable...

1.) Parents raise kids.
2.) Parents both need jobs to survive with kids.
3.) Parents buy AI to raise kids so they have time for job.
4.) Kids trick AI to giving them everything they want (since they know more about computers than parents).
5.) Parents realize they must raise kid, so buy AI to do job.
6.) Company fires parents for fraudulent work and misrepresentation in the workforce. They keep AI.
7.) Republicans withdraw from all branches of government upon gaining complete financial control over the workforce.
7.) ???
8.) Profit!

Like Clippy

[Anonymous Coward]

So I see your trying to look at porn today. Would you like some help?

Please Mod Parent +6 Evil

[realcoolguy425]

Pretty funny though

Correct Title

[JoshDM]

I couldn't find the story you mention, but I did see that he wrote, "The Professor's Teddy Bear".

Is this the story you mean?

BonziBUDDY!

[SteWhite]

Hmmm... an AI that monitors kids online. It appears cute so they will like it, whilst secretly monitoring them... why is this familiar...

Ah yes. BonziBUDDY Spyware.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BonziBUDDY

RPG kitty!

[Anonymous Coward]

Make the kid addicted to leveling the kitty and they will pay all attention to the kitty! (Optional; when you have their attention, at level 223 the kitty starts displaying pr0n ads)

Sci fi

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember over 20 years ago reading a sort sci fi story called "I Always Do What Teddy Says" about a future culture where children's teddy bears were robots programmed to protest if they did anything wrong. The entire culture is then (somehow) incapable of murder, so a few scientists who want to kill the dictator break this feature on murder on one child's toy so that he can become an assassin. The kid then kills both scientists on principle, shoots the teddy bear, and then himself, to avoid reintroducing murder to the world.

Not that it would work, but the idea of "it's cute, so kids will listen", goes beyond Barney and that teddy bear in the film AI to something a bit creepier. I always get a bit nervous when something that is considered horror in one generation becomes standard procedure in the next - like the genetic chimera experiments that allude strongly to Island of Doctor Moreau, or the Brave New World secular and medicated stratification we find ourselves in now.

I'm for it. Re:Suggestion

[mrmeval]

It will allow the smarter kids to learn to hack the AI for fun and profit and will keep the stupid under control and in check of their technological masters.

Just Trust ME! What a horrible thought...

[JasonNolan]

The whole idea of getting a child to trust a bit of software to tell it what's right and wrong should make programers and parents alike cringe. Not to mention anyone who is aware of the uses to which this information can/will be put to in the name of marketting to children, which is bad enough as it is. I wonder how long it will take before children are 'told' that certain sites are better than others, directing them away from sites that don't promote a particular political or corporate agenda. Or that 'controversial' issues somehow fall into the not to be trusted category. When it comes to children and technology, the goal is to educate parents and provide safe opportunities for children online, NOT to fob it off to a bit of software for all the myriad reasons. Just imagine what these children will grow up like when they've just trusted the software from their earliest days. I cringe.

MegaHAL

[unix_core]

Way ahead of them, I have trained this great MegaHAL-bot to raise my future children.

He's a little weird...

[Anonymous Coward]

...but his polkas are the best.

cant win...

[jeffybob]

Chances are, the kids that are targeted here (i'm going to assume 10-15 y/o) are probably more mature than to fall for the cute little character this software offers. While I was one of the many that fell for Bonzi Buddy when i was 12, it didnt take long for me to figure out something was up. Most likely, the kids whose parents deem it necessary to buy this software aren't accidentally stumbling upon these sites, but searching them out. Eventually, survival of the fittest kicks in. The sneaky stay sneaky, and the less-so get caught. But they will always find ways around any security features. browsers save history? - clear history browsers store temp files? - download cleaning program such as window washer browser blocks individual URLs? - google something and its bound to show up in there all the original "security" solutions have been bypassed. Its like the approach to viruses that Windows XP has. The virus makers are always one step ahead of the "securers", who flail trying to patch every hole in the leaky bucket that is windows security. another example: copyright protection even now, as /. has shown, blu-ray protection has already been cracked. it never takes the crackers too long to bypass it.

Ahh....

[MrScience]

This must run on the 1st generation Maas-Neotek biochips. One can only hope...

Newsflash!

[CAIMLAS]

Your post is contrite. News flash: it is the normal thing to do to have kids. You're biologically and mentally wired to be a parent. If you don't breed, you are unselecting yourself for helping continue your race. Just because a person is selfish and didn't want a kid, doesn't mean it isn't natural or necessary.

Guess what? The only reason you're even able to have this perception is because it has become popular to look down on those who have kids. This, as well as the resulting social implications, is why having a kid these days is difficult and undesireable: because there's a culture of perpetual childhood, where people refuse to grow up and become adults.

Re:Newsflash!

[spun]

It has NOT become popular to look down on those who have kids. Breeders aren't the underdogs. Society looks up to breeders. Breeders get all kinds of special perks. Trust me, in most parts of the US if you are over 25 and don't have kids, you are definitely looked down on. I know I am, my wife even more so.

You don't need to breed to pass on your genes. 99.9% of your genes are exactly the same as everyone elses. The other .1% is duplicated millions of times over in various combinations in humans around the world. You wern't gonna pass down an exact copy anyway, so why is it important to do it through breeding? Genes don't care how they get passed down. Evolution is as likely to select for a non-breeder who helps other breeders breed as it is to select for a breeder. Look at eusocial insects.

There is no reason everyone should breed. It is a simple process that anyone can do with absolutely no skills or training. World population is still growing. No one has any kind of duty to make more humans. There are enough.

News flash: trite and contrite don't mean the same thing. I'm guessing you meant trite, as the rest of your post is written in an insulting tone and trite would fit with that. I was definitely not apologetic, which is the meaning of contrite.

Re:Newsflash!

[CAIMLAS]

Where in the US do you live?! The South, maybe?

I live in South Dakota. South. Dakota. I'm 25, and I've got two kids (by choice). Both my wife and I get quite a few hostile looks when we go out in public with our kids. The only people I know of with kids are those who are 10 years older than I, or are single moms who don't know of birth control and can't keep their legs shut.

Go to the Northeast, and you're in a world where the common age for having children is well past 30. My dad is 47, and his high school classmates are just now starting their families with kids the same age as my kids. Even then, it's uncommon to see a family with more than two kids. That's not even taking into account the large percentage of the population which has the perspective of "kids are brats" and raise dogs and cats as their children instead.

As far as having a duty to breed: I'd argue it's a nationalistic duty. I don't care that the world is over-populated. That's their fault. Our country, however, has a decreasing population of natural-born citizens. That's a problem, as it's going to lead to a cataclysmic societal upheaval here within a couple decades.

Re:Newsflash!

[spun]

Well, I live in Albuquerque, New Mexico. I'm 35, my wife is 31. No kids, and every single person I've met here that's my age has kids. People ask me all the time why I don't have kids.

Nationalism invariably leads to evil. Borders are flat out wrong-headed. They only apply to the poor: the rich, money, and goods all act like they don't exist. Borders are a means to providing cheap labor to the rich, nothing more. Your defense of breeding for nationalistic purposes makes me physically ill.

Re:Newsflash!

[CAIMLAS]

Wow. Mate, that's some pretty thick rhetoric.

Nationalism does not invariably lead to 'evil'. Counterexample: the US response to imperialist Japan and Nazi Germany. It required an immense amount of nationalist pride to pull that one off.

Borders do not only apply to the poor. The rich and goods both have a system by which they must petition to gain admittance - claiming otherwise is simply ignorance. Furthermore, the US immigration policies are now fashioned towards allowing more poor, unskilled workers than skilled workers, what with their large quotas for 3rd world countries and special concensus for certain ethnic backgrounds. Don't even bother applying if you're white and from a 1st world nation. I've got several friends who have been trying to get to the US for years from South Africa and Britain, and they've been repeatedly denied, despite having no criminal records, and saleable skillsets in a much needed field - machinists.

Furthermore, the people who suffer the most from unbridled immigration are those in the middle class, not the rich (as it would appear you would prefer). When the size of the available 'unskilled labor' pool grows substantially larger than the available unskilled labor jobs, the smarter people in those roles seek out jobs wherever they can find them - including jobs which would not be considered 'unskilled'. These jobs pay more, but the unskilled laborer is willing to work for substantially less, driving the wage of that field down when repeated over and over. The people that have then been kicked out of their field by people willing to work for less are then forced to look upwards, possibly requiring schooling to get their job done. This trend continues until it downwardly impacts the income of almost everyone who is not independently wealthy, the owner of a business with a substantial number of employees, or the power elite.

Meanwhile, the cost of living doesn't decrease significantly (if at all), because the business owners and the power elite are pocketing all the extra money taken in through labor savings. People still have their college loans and can not pay them back due to only making $30K/year. Crime rates are up significantly due to increased poverty, and property values - of the middle class, mostly - decrease as a result.

Re:Newsflash!

[spun]

If those friends have $100,000 to invest in the US, they will get in, no problem, no waiting. With free trade agreements, the process for goods crossing borders is much simplified. Nationalism is a form of selfishness. More immigrants means a bigger market and more jobs. Your analysis of the impact of immigration ignores market realities and posits an unrealistic worst-case scenario.

Jeez.

[Anonymous Coward]

Way to insult the kid, there. Who seriously thinks that kids listen to anyone or anything that doesn't have the direct power to send them to their room and/or spank them? They'll either figure out how to disable it themselves, go around to a friend's who doesn't have it on their PC, or get the class geek to tell them how to crack it.

Betrayal

[Wolfier]

I bet kids are smarter than this AI, but, in case it works, it only ultimately teaches the kid a lesson about what "betrayal" really means - just an abuse of trust.