Slashdot Mirror
Parents To Block Kids From Joining MySpace
Reservoir Hill writes "A New York Times blog notes that attorneys general of 49 states are announcing a partnership with MySpace to fight sexual predators on social networks by letting parents submit the e-mail addresses of their children, so the company can prevent anyone from using that address to set up a profile. MySpace will also set up a 'closed' section for users under age 18 so only their established online friends can visit their pages. MySpace also promises to hire a contractor to identify and delete pornographic images on the site. 'This set of principles is a landmark and milestone because it involves an acknowledgment of the importance of age and identity authentication,' said Connecticut attorney General Richard Blumenthal." Blumenthal also actually said "If we can put a man on the moon..."
I've seen on Slashdot all month. Parents can submit email addresses all day long, and their kids will create disposable addresses all day long.
Pointless, but I suppose it makes the parents feel like they're doing something.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
And exactly how many rapes and molestations occur because of MySpace? How about we place the same restrictions on schools and churches, where you are certainly more likely to end up being molested.
Also, since when did we place the responsibility on the WEBSITE to prevent an IP address from reaching it? And what about DHCP? What about the next person that gets your IP in a few months? Why can't you filter out access on your own rather than placing the burden of your absurd paranoia on websites that have nothing to do with your ridiculous "my baby gonna get raped" fantasies?
And no, I didn't RTFA. Look at my UID. I'm old school and that's how I roll.
well I don't know about you, but in my house, everyones email login and password is saved locally on every machine in the house.
My son could bypass any system to verify parental consent easily. However, in my house we practice this apparently rare thing called, 'mutual respect' whereby he doesn't do such things, and I don't invade his privacy. It's all about trust really, and that has to be taught, it can't be either assumed or enforced by stupid schemes like this one.
"Your honor, I trusted myspace to verify the age of the people I met online. I know she only looks 13 your honor, but her profile said she was 19!"
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
Most of the people that I know who are old enough to have kids on MySpace know a LOT less about using the Internet than their kids do. (Yeah, I know; there will be a few
Any "security" measures designed to "protect" kids don't have a chance of working unless either:
Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
That takes me back. I used to scam my parents all the time too, and it won't be long until my kids are old enough to look me in the eye with a straight face and lie through their teeth. They grow up so fast. :(
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
This is just another attempt by some politicians to claim that they are fighting to protect our children. Later on, when nobody actually remembers any of this, these politicians can tell a cheering crowd, "I worked hard to give parents the ability to limit their child's MySpace access, and help shield their children from sexual predators online." Of course it is idiotic, and children will find a way around it in less than a minute, but if this were really about protecting our children, it would be an educational program, not another pathetic attempt at technical measures to block their access.
Palm trees and 8
Oh well, we haven't encouraged parents to actually speak to their kids about this stuff for a long time, opting to shield children from anything deemed harmful by anyone.
Palm trees and 8
Today, the Attorneys General of 49 states took another step towards running for governor by knocking down yet another straw-man.
There, fixed that story for you. No need to thank me.
Blogging Weight Loss, Distance Education, and more at verlin.com
So? Fake problem, fake solution, everybody's happy.
...but myspace will be able to say "hey, we are doing our best to stop them". I'm assuming that I'm one of a million ofOn the bright side, the effect may aid start-ups...
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
I bet your parents weren't capable of putting a sniffer on the network and recording all of your traffic, either.
...and don't give me crap about "kids have a right to privacy." They don't, especially when it comes to communication with strangers.
You, on the other hand...
Love sees no species.
Its about myspace getting some publicity and paying lip service to doing the right thing.
I disagree. This was all about elected politicians getting publicity and paying lip service to make it appear they are doing something about a "problem" that was way overblown by the media to begin with.
Myspace is going along with it because they have to--but the horse and pony show belongs to the state attorney generals, not Myspace.
So rather then deal with many times a day actual sexual abuse of young people AGAINST THEIR WILL by adults, they're choosing to put all attention, and diverting everyone else's attention, to a problem that is at least 50% the fault of the young person and happens maybe twice a month at the most.
Occasionally, adults 18-25 "lure" young girls 14-17 into sexual encounters. What usually happens is some socially inept 18-22 year old spends several weeks/months talking to a 14-16 year old online, the usually talk on the phone a bit, sometimes talk via web cam, etc. then they meet. If the older person isnt' arrested before the meeting, they sometimes have sex and everything blows up.
Despite shows like "Catch a Predator", 13-15 year old girls who have casual sex with 40 year olds they've talked to for a few hours online don't show up in news articles or in victimization reports-I'm betting they're rare to the point of extinction. More importantly, I SERIOUSLY doubt that 13-15 year olds are inviting strangers they've never talked to over the phone or seen via web cam to their homes for sex. Even the dumbest teen girls seem to have some ability to read body language and facial expressions via video and/or hear tone, inflection over audio. I don't think they're inviting total strangers to their house.
BUT, this is what we've been led to believe. We've been told there's a problem based solely on the existence of demand. We know there's no shortage of adult men willing to engage in casual sex with 13 year old girls, but we haven't been shown that there's even 1 girl willing to reciprocate for every 1000 guys.
Everybody goes nuts over this manufactured problem and take attention away from real victimization-that is young people being sexually abused against their will and without their consent. Real abuse is ignored in favor of virtually non-existent abuse.
Even worse is the fact that any teen girls meeting men online for sex is going of her own free will, whether her consent is informed or not is another issue. It seem that she would bear at least 40% of the blame for anything that happens.
The persons most likely to sexually abuse young people are the same people being constantly implored to monitor their teens every move-parents, step parents, aunts/uncles, grandparents, teachers, priests, coaches, neighbors. Strange guy on the internet is somewhere above that guy that works the 7-11 on Tuesdays and Thursdays between noon and 5pm.
You are right. I only wish it was possible for parents, you know, take away the kids computer privileges (or the computer itself).
Too bad it is impossible.
morcego
If we're teaching kids that they don't have a right to privacy, it's no wonder they don't value it as adults. Now I see why there's been so little uproar over Big Daddy Government listening in our phone calls.
Sure, newborns have no right to privacy, couldn't even understand the concept. But the right of privacy doesn't suddenly switch on at 18. It's a continuous function of maturation.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Considering the fact that there was no such thing as a "home network" to monitor until sometime in the last 20 years, not having the skills to do so actually seems quite reasonable.
But I don't know why you think that kids don't have a right to privacy. If you seriously expect your kids to share everything with you, then you're a moron of the highest degree. If you try to invade what privacy kids attempt to make for themselves (I.E. "tell me what Janie said or you're grounded") then you're setting yourself up for one hell of a rebellion later in their life. It will not be pretty, to think it might turn out all right is naive.
I can understand not wanting your kids to not talk to strangers, but that's better handled by teaching your children not to talk to strangers than attempting to monitor their communication. You can either punish a kid every time they talk to strangers, or you can teach them that bad things can happen because there are bad people out there.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
However, in my house we practice this apparently rare thing called, 'mutual respect' whereby he doesn't do such things, and I don't invade his privacy.
Actually, in your house, you practice this thing called willful ignorance, where by not checking you let yourself believe he's not doing anything.
I used to be a kid, so I know the only way you can know what your kid is up to is to trust, but validate.
paintball
Why do kids not have a right to privacy?
And why would such a right magically turn on at 18?
Tell you what -- before I had a computer entirely my own, I was certainly allowed to have a pencil and paper. And I was allowed to keep it in a secret place, if I wanted to. And my parents did not read my various diaries (though there weren't many attempts).
When I went out, I could go pretty much anywhere, I just had to tell them where I was going, and not stay out too late (most of the time). When I got a cell phone, they didn't screen my calls, they didn't have access to my call logs.
My parents apparently did a good job teaching me mutual respect. And the process has nothing to do with the Internet. I suspect this sudden Puritanical paranoia has much more to do with the tendency of people to suspend all reason when it comes to computers.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Wow. And yeah, since drugs are available in school, from friends, etc. etc. etc. might as well give up on that argument.
In fact, let's just throw up our hands and let the children do anything they want with no limits, responsibility, or guidelines. I mean, they're just going to do it anyway. Right?
If you are a parent, I have to say you're a very bad one. If you're not, don't have kids. We don't need to protect and insulate our kids from the world, we need to educate them and raise them to be aware of what's around them.
You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.