Slashdot Mirror


Children's Watch Allows Parents To Track Their Kid

pickens writes "The Telegraph reports that a new wristwatch called num8 has a GPS tracking device and satellite positioning system concealed inside so parents can locate the wearer to within 10 feet with Google maps. The watch sends an alert if it is forcibly removed. The makers of the watch claim it gives peace of mind to parents and makes children more independent. 'Losing your child, if only for a brief moment, leads to a state of panic and makes parents feel powerless. The overriding aim of num8 is to give children their freedom and parents peace of mind,' says a company spokesman. Critics of the watch say tagging children is a step too far in paranoia about child safety. 'Is the world really that unsafe that parents need to track their children electronically? I don't think so,' says Dr Michele Elliott, director of children's charity Kidscape."

607 comments

  1. Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sometimes I wish for some apocalypse just so the "Please won't someone take care of me!" dolts realize that the only person who can take care of you - IS YOU!.

    1. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by TrisexualPuppy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      RMH101 puts it best...

      Is the world really that unsafe that parents need to track their children electronically? I don't think so,

      So what's to lose? Say you have a 6 year old kid: is it really going to harm them to wear one of these? Sure, chances are very very high that this'll never be needed, but so what? It's kind of like Pascal's wager, isn't it? The bit that irritates me most about this is the retailer's website "Loc8r", "Where R U" etc. I'd be more worried about the effects of this on their spelling than their general well being.

    2. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah? How do you expect a 6 year old to take care of themselves if they wander off somewhere? The only person that can take care of them is themselves? The parents can't take care of them?

      What crap. There is nothing wrong with having your younger kids wear these devices. You can still give them privacy, but you can at least know where they are at any given moment.

      You are the parent. You are responsible for their safety. If this device helps you in fulfilling that responsibility, it's a good device.

      Now for teenage kids the use is a bit more debatable. Once I felt that I could trust my kid to make at least reasonable decisions I wouldn't do it anymore.

      Your 6 year old kids rights to privacy - which aren't rights where the parent is concerned because they basically own the kid - are easily trumped by the child's safety.

    3. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by malkavian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When you're 5 or 6, you can't take care of you though.. That's what family and parents are for; the world's one big adventure, and you can cross oceans sailing in a top hat, with no food or water, and it'll be fine!
      For every hour of every day, it's overkill, but if you're going out to the local mall, and your kid's just at the age where they're free to wander a little, it may be a good idea.. I can remember (very vaguely) as a kid starting to explore away from the parents' house. I wandered up some side streets and got lost.. I was absolutely terrified, and so were they.. I wanted to go home and had no idea where home was, and they had no idea where I was.. Thankfully, back then, the community was more closely knit, and one of my mother's friends saw me and escorted me back home.
      So, yes, I can see some perfectly valid cases where this'll head off a lot of grief on both sides if used judiciously.
      Think it could sell as a student tool too (if I pass out in a ditch after a few too many, come pick me up please!!)..

    4. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm all for self-reliance, and for not being a paranoid nitwit; but the notion that all the problems of the world are solvable by rugged self-reliance and insolvable by other means would be merely absurd, were it not so common.

      Until the advent of mass spectrometers in every household, the difference between a nice cool drink and a delicious cup of cancer comes down to what someobody else may or may not have been dumping into your water supply. The difference between a safe commute and exciting fiery death comes down to whether or not some multinational car company decided to do a recall on the car the guy behind you is driving in response to a defect report from one of their subcontractors.

      There are, to be sure, loads of problems that are best solved yourself, ideally by means of not being a moron. However, pretending that all problems are such is nothing more than a good way to end up alone and helpless against people who are neither.

      In fact, that is the reason why you have to "wish for some apocalypse" for people to "realize that the only person who can take care of you is you". Under non-apocalyptic conditions, there are loads of people who can take care of you. Like your doctor, and the guy who makes your garbage go away, and the chap who (eventually) comes out when your internet connection isn't working, and the whole massive supply chain that keeps your widgets flowing. Contemporary society, really anything beyond the barest forms of subsistence scavenging, absolutely depends on division of labor and specialization. And, the necessary consequence of specialization is dependence on others. Not absolute, Smith's pin factory isn't a hive society; but pretending that you can have autarchic self reliance and division of labor at the same time is silly.

    5. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 4, Funny

      It costs 150 pounds ($240-250 USD). I think I can think of things more valuable to a growing child than an overpriced watch/GPS combo.

      Of course, remembering how I treated watches as a child, I think the GPS functionality might come in handy more often than you suspect. No, your child isn't going to be kidnapped, but he *will* lose his watch. Except this time you have a chance to find it. If this happens 10-20 times, it will pay for itself (vs. the cost of a visually identical non-GPS watch). If my parents hadn't stopped buying me watches after I lost the fourth one, I definitely would have come out ahead on this.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    6. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

      Excellent post! i don't have points for you but this is +1 insightful. There's so much knee-jerk paranoia and cynicism on /. It's heartening to see such sanity.

      --
      Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
    7. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I can remember (very vaguely) as a kid starting to explore away from the parents' house. I wandered up some side streets and got lost.. I was absolutely terrified, and so were they..

      That experience taught you something. It was a small step towards being a more responsible person. Kids who are under 24/7 surveillance never learn that freedom comes with responsibility, that their parents' trust to let them wander around by themselves must be earned by not getting lost. Getting lost taught you to be cautious.

      The grand-parent AC is right: Preempting every bad decision and the following consequences creates irresponsible children who turn into irresponsible adults.

    8. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by R2.0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Contemporary society, really anything beyond the barest forms of subsistence scavenging, absolutely depends on division of labor and specialization."

      That's a hell of a jump there. Besides which, you are setting up a strawman. The GP didn't say "all the problems of the world are solvable by rugged self-reliance and insolvable by other means". He was bemoaning the fact that people expect others to take care of them and keep them safe. One can be responsible for oneself without roaming across the post apocalyptic wilderness.

      Let's take an example. Who is responsible for keeping you safe from criminals? Most would say "the police". But are you aware that, legally, the police are NOT responsible for that? Their job is to deal with crime AFTER it happens. To take it further, "police" as we know them didn't exist until 1829 with the founding of the London police. Prior to that, who was responsible for keeping people safe? The answer is that the individual, or family, was responsible.

      There's a big difference between the interactions of specialists in trade and a state of perpetual childhood. It's the difference between knowing some people make and sell shoes and it's my responsibility to acquire them by fair and legal means, and believing that it's the cobbler's responsibility to ensure that you have shoes. Or someone elses responsibility to force the cobbler to give you shoes.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    9. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by AvitarX · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I could where one at the mall myself.

      Then I could wander around and get lost, and when shopping was done my wife could find me, wherever my whims took me.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    10. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by ByOhTek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, but the child may not know the parent can find them.

      The child could be lost a lot longer before the parents are worried (the child is not lost to the parents, but the child doesn't know that), therefore actually *enhancing* the educational experience for the child.

      Seriously, aside from the price, it isn't invasive, and it does help the parents do their jobs.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    11. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You can still give them privacy, but you can at least know where they are at any given moment

      I don't remember having any privacy as a 6 year old.

    12. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by ByOhTek · · Score: 0

      Not just widges - food!

      Seriously to the GP: Do you grow your own food, make your own building materials, build every component of all of your devices and then assemble them?

      What makes the human race so impressive, so powerful is that we help each other, we work together. We accomplish more as a team than as individuals.

      Also, if you think of it, /this is a self reliance device/. Now, you can have a resource (not given to you, but bought, from your [hopefully] earned money) to solve your problem. You don't have to go around asking strangers "have you seen this kid", etc.

      You can't watch your child every moment of every day (not if you have a job). This is a nice advance for helping yourself in doing an at-minimum decent job at raising your kids.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    13. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Publikwerks · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I betcha Jaycee Dugard learned her lesson. The argument that kids make stupid mistakes to learn from only holds up if the repercussions are not catastropic. Death, sexual assault, ect... don't build character. I don't have a problem with this watch, as long as it was used at tool and not a leash

    14. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by clickety6 · · Score: 1

      the only person who can take care of you - IS YOU!.

      "Dad, I think I broke my ankle."

      "Stop yer whining, boy. When my appendix burst I didn't even have a penknife to cut that sucker out. I had to gnaw through my abdominal wall and rip it out with my bare teeth, then staple the hole closed using my own toe-nail clippings. So you just shove that there bone back inside the skin where it belongs and stick some mud on it... that'll do yer..."

      --
      ----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
    15. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by h4rm0ny · · Score: 2, Insightful


      True. But if these things become prevalent then the parents that don't track and log their children's movements will be seen as irresponsible. Woe to the parent in court having her children taken away by Social Services because she's a negligent parent that obviously doesn't care.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    16. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "Seriously to the GP: Do you grow your own food, make your own building materials, build every component of all of your devices and then assemble them?"

      No, but it IS my responsibility to acquire the means with which to purchase or trade for such. There are those that believe that an individual has a right for certain things to be provided for them.

      Big difference

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    17. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until the advent of mass spectrometers in every household, the difference between a nice cool drink and a delicious cup of cancer comes down to what someobody else may or may not have been dumping into your water supply.

      You do know that most municipal water supplies have hundreds of toxic chemicals intentionally dumped into it? For example, there is a strong link between fouride and bone cancer or flouride and brain damage.

      Also, don't forget that our Science Czar advocates putting sterilents in the drinking water and food. The government is full of eugenicists.

    18. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You'd probably get a lot of good from reading about Berentain Bears Learn About Strangers. Sure kids are vulnerable. Bad things could and may happen to them. But there's such a thing of being too scared and too cautious. Basic moral of the story is this: You should wary and careful around strangers, but most people aren't all that bad, and you shouldn't go around living your life in fear. I'm not sure how something like this wouldn't be used as a leash. If you really have to know the exact pinpointed location of your kids every second of the day, then you have too much fear.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    19. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Let's take an example. Who is responsible for keeping you safe from criminals? Most would say "the police". But are you aware that, legally, the police are NOT responsible for that?

      Warren v. District of Columbia is one of the pertinent cases on this subject. From the link:

      Warren v. District of Columbia is a U.S. Court of Appeals case in which three rape victims sued the District of Columbia because of negligence on the part of the police. Two of three female roommates were upstairs when they heard men break in and attack the third. After repeated calls to the police over half an hour, the roommate's screams stopped, and they assumed the police had arrived. They went downstairs and were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, and forced to commit sexual acts upon one another and to submit to the attackers' sexual demands for 14 hours. The police had lost track of the repeated calls for assistance. DC's highest court ruled that the police do not have a legal responsibility to provide personal protection to individuals, and absolved the police and the city of any liability.

      Cute, isn't it? The police "lose" the phone calls, don't respond for hours and then get absolved of all liability for the hell that those people had to go through. Remember that story the next time you are talking to someone who tells you that the police will protect you. They won't -- even if you live somewhere with a police force that's more competent than DC, it will still take them several minutes to arrive. Until they get there you are on your own. You'd best be prepared.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    20. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Cheesetrap · · Score: 1

      Exactly. As a parallel, every time I hear someone say "Derpy-derp derrr.. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger...", it gives me an overwhelming urge to snap their spine. By their logic, I'm turning them into fricken superman!

      Oh, and I think I'd invest the several hundred dollars in some judo lessons instead. When my kid's 6 he/she will be able to kill you with a toenail.

    21. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by gtbritishskull · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't have a problem with this watch, as long as it was used at tool and not a leash

      I think that's why people are against it. Because it will probably be used as a leash. It will be one more way of controlling your kids in lieu of good parenting.

    22. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exactly. like karate lessons. How about teaching your kid how to defend themselves, along with all the goodness that comes with learning a discipline and being able to utterly kick the crap out of the playground bullies.

      $250.00 USD will pay for a few months of kids Karate, and the monthly fee for the watch will make up 1/2 the cost of the rest of their education.

      Plus, they are highly active 2 times a week, learn focus, attention and a skill that will save them a lot of pain and grief throughout life. You carry yourself differently when you can easily rip off someone's ears and shove them in their nose. This makes you less of a target to the scum of the world, and even gives you an air of confidence that get's you further.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    23. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You're SUPPOSED to take care of your children. If you can't take care of your children, don't have any. I don't know where the "Please won't someone take care of me!" comes from, nobody is demanding that the government buy these things for their kids. This device IS for self-reliant people.

    24. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, the sky could be falling. We are all going to die.

      By and large, the world is not terribly unsafe for a child which is old enough that you could consider letting it roam a little. If you can't trust your child to go outside without getting itself killed in traffic, then why do you think a GPS tag is going to change that? If you allow the child to leave your direct supervision, then a GPS tag won't prevent anything that can happen to it, except getting lost. A child at that age doesn't die if gets lost. It starts crying and, without knowing, it learns its boundaries. It will also learn that his parents are overwhelmingly happy to have their child back, and not that they knew all along where it was and are now angry about a broken rule.

    25. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      you already have that, it's called a CELLPHONE.

      unless you are of he mentality of a 6 year old and leave it everywhere or lose such a device and need it strapped to your arm.

      P.S. I have yet to fin a GPS that works inside a mall.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    26. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by timeOday · · Score: 1

      if you're going out to the local mall, and your kid's just at the age where they're free to wander a little, it may be a good idea

      If they were cheaper, I would definitely get these for my kids when we go backpacking. The problem isn't so much crazy people roaming the hills, but simply an absent-minded kid wandering off and freezing to death. It does happen. (I am assuming there's some way to use this without a cellular network around?) Heck, I would buy one for myself if they were cheaper, I go out by myself sometimes and if you break your leg in the backcountry it would save everybody a lot of time and expense.

    27. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuzzyfuzzyfungus' post is about the best one I've seen in years here on /.

    28. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Hertzyscowicz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      On the other hand, the watch is said to send an alert signal if forcibly removed. I'm guessing that the system will be swamped with false alarms by bedtime. That, or the child-abducting pedophiles prowling the streets will get a hold of the manual to figure out the correct way to remove it without sending an alarm.

      And they'll find these kids by cracking the tracking system. /alarmism

    29. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Karate is for losers. Will make them confident until they get the shit kicked out of them in middle school for their glorified choreography class.

    30. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by b4upoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are towns in the US in which every aid need be applied to protect kids. Some places are simply way too dangerous.
                    This might also be useful for law enforcement as well as personal protection in that people can prove that they were not in a certain place at a certain time. For example many men have a problem with former wives who imagine that the old ex is stalking them. Having solid proof that your former mate is a dingbat could offer serious legal protections.

    31. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to think outside of the box.... This sounds like what my father-in-law needs for his wife with Alzheimer. Last time she wandered off in a mall, he spent 45 minutes with security trying to track her down... Didn't see anything about indoor sensitivity in the article though.

    32. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Informative

      You carry yourself differently when you can easily rip off someone's ears and shove them in their nose

      I don't know that I'd have that much confidence in karate. It's a great activity for the kids (builds self-confidence and discipline) and even adults (for the cardio workout if nothing else) but as a self-defense discipline many have found it lacking. Personally I felt like I came away with more from a single class of unarmed self-defense taught by ex-cops than I did from a year and a half of karate. Whatever confidence I did have in karate evaporated when our 6th DAN instructor got mugged by two teenage thugs armed with knives.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    33. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      And, pray tell, how is /buying/ this device having it provided for them.

      They aren't asking others to provide it for them, they aren't asking that the government assign one for every child. The device is simply available to all who want to purchase it. Much like a computer at at a computer store, or food at a grocery store.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    34. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "is it really going to harm them to wear one of these?"

      As with most "think of the children" babbling, this is just a disguised indoctrination. Once it starts to catch on, it will be mandated for ALL children, ages ~3-15. Of course, once a child has worn the thing for 12 years, he'll be "used to it", the next step will be ALL MINOR CHILDREN. Justification will be a double whammy: "Think of the girls being victimized" along with "Male teens are responsible for 3/4 of all criminal acts, so we need to track them!" After the first generation of people who have been indoctrinated becomes voters, everyone will agree that ALL CITIZENS should wear such a device - and again, the double whammy. "Think of the helpless" right beside "We've got to track those dangerous males".

      I remind people of the theory, "People get the government that they deserve". Eventually, anyone who does something "out of character" as defined by a computer program designed to track them will be hauled in for questioning. "Why did you skip work today, then go to the beach? Are you a subversive? Are you a deviant? Were you looking at little girls?"

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    35. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You carry yourself differently when you can easily rip off someone's ears and shove them in their nose. This makes you less of a target to the scum of the world, and even gives you an air of confidence that get's you further.

      An air of confidence that only lasts as long everybody else can't "easily rip off someone's ears and shove them in their nose" - so be careful what you advocate.

    36. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know someone who was paralyzed in a swimming accident. He and his whole family are stronger than I could possibly imagine being. Not physically, obviously, but mentally and emotionally. That doesn't mean I'd like to be in his same situation. In fact, it means just the opposite.

    37. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "How do you expect a 6 year old to take care of themselves if they wander off somewhere?"

      In today's world? How many people live where a 6 year old can wander very far from SOME ADULT? Do you live in outback Australia, where the nearest neighbor is 30 miles away? If so, the GPS probably isn't available anyway.

      But, back to the 6 years old thing. Notice my nick. At six years old, a kid may not have great judgement, but they CAN take care of themselves. At age six, I had explored almost all of the township that I lived in. By age 10 I had covered almost all of my county. Get a grip - children are more capable than a lot of people want to give them credit for. Toddlers are the ones most likely to benefit from this idea, but if a parent NEEDS GPS to track their toddler, they aren't very good parents.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    38. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      A lot of this depends on how it is used.

      If the parents use it to find their kids when they are actually lost, late, or perhaps for the very occasional spot check, it could be a lifesaver.

      If the parents use it to constantly monitor their child's whereabouts, it could be detrimental to their development. I know I used to go into places that my parents might have thought would be iffy when I was younger. Getting into things you shouldn't is a learning experience for kids, as long as those places are not so dangerous as to get you killed. More to the point, your child should feel that they have enough of your trust to be able to go outside the lines a little so that they develop initiative.

      In and of itself, it is a voluntarily bought device that helps parents keep track of their kids. I can't see a problem with that unless it is combined with overprotective parenting. Of course, it is a valid point that many parents today are becoming overprotective, but this device shouldn't be criticized for something it did not start.

    39. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by DemonBeaver · · Score: 1

      But think of the children!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      --
      This message was brought to you by Sarcasm and Troll Feeders United (STFU)
    40. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by InsertCleverUsername · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Exactly. like karate lessons. How about teaching your kid how to defend themselves,
      > along with all the goodness that comes with learning a discipline and being able to
      > utterly kick the crap out of the playground bullies.

      Um... So how does this address the little people getting abducted or lost? Even if they were 2nd degree black belts, it's not like they have the mass to defend themselves against most adults. Sounds like somebody has watched Ninja Kids one time too many.

      (BTW: I am enrolling both my toddlers in karate when they're old enough, but mostly for the discipline and a physical outlet.)

      --
      Ask me about my sig!
    41. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know why that would evaporate your confidence.

      Just because he's a 6th DAN instructor, doesn't mean he's going to willingly take on two guys armed with knives (teenagers or not). Knives are deadly weapons. Nick one artery and you are fucked. In fact, it would be stupid to take them on, regardless of whatever level of training you have. Your instructor made the right choice in not fighting them.

      Any decent martial arts instructor should have taught you the same thing - that if someone threatens you with a weapon, you don't fight back unless you feel your life or the life of someone you care about is in serious danger. Moreso when there's a group of people.

      Do you want to lose your money or your life? It's not a difficult decision.

      Martial arts isn't meant to make you invincible like in Hollywood - but it can help you fight for your life if you need to.

    42. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DC? Yeah, it's a good thing they've finally figured out that having an armed populace is a good thing. The third or fourth time you call the police, you'll probably find that they respond a whole HELL of a lot faster when you tell them "and since it's taking you guys so god damned long I'm calling my boyfriend, he should be here in fifteen minutes with his Glock. Maybe a little longer if he brings a couple buddies for backup." Now that the unconstitutional ban on handguns has been overturned this is actually a possible course of action.

      Whether or not it actually gets the cops to drop their donuts and move their asses to your assistance, you'd better believe it changes the whole situation.

    43. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      When you have children then you can have an opinion.

    44. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Hatta · · Score: 1

      If only there were some way to physically attach the watch to your body.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    45. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      If you have a point, you don't need to resort to hyperbole to make it. "Hundreds" and "one" are two quite different amounts. Most municipalities probably have less than half a dozen chemicals that they routinely add to the water.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    46. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not the fact that he didn't "take them on" that shakes my confidence. From the account of the incident that I read it wasn't as simple as him handing over his wallet and going on his way. He went with them off the main drag into an alleyway, surrendered his wallet/car keys/cell phone/etc and was then clubbed over the head and left for dead.

      Anyone that would allow such a thing to happen to themselves while they still draw breath is not someone who has any business teaching self-defense. I would happily surrender my wallet to avoid a confrontation. I'd hand it over even if I knew I could win, because a wallet is not worth killing or maiming someone over.

      I draw the line at going with them. If someone demands that you go with them you should fight as though your life depends on it. Whatever they intend to do to you they obviously aren't comfortable doing it in your current location. It's sheer dumb luck that the instructor lived through this incident. He surrendered control of the situation and left himself at the mercy of criminal thugs. The fact that he's still in business amazes me.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    47. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Heh. Pretty good point there. Prior to my own divorce, I used to wonder about those guys who spent all their time "stalking" their ex. I learned first hand how ridiculous those claims can be. Despite the fact that I didn't even return to the COUNTY that my ex lived in for over a year, she saw me numerous times during that year. "You were sitting right down the road, in your car, watching the house!" Yeah, right. Get a grip, ya ditzy broad - I was chasing women everyplace between New Orleans and Toronto!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    48. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by shentino · · Score: 1

      And neither should you have.

      Kids these days clamor for freedom so much these days they forget the fact that they have parents that are responsible for them.

      Children need to learn that until they are 18, mom and dad are boss. Period! No backtalk, no mouthing off, no disobeying, no anything unless the parents say so. And that's that!

      It would definitely cut down on a lot of problems, such as juvenile delinquency, gangs, bullying, and so on.

      Why kids these days think it's a God given right to do as they please before legal adulthood is beyond me.

    49. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by jandersen · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I wish for some apocalypse just so the "Please won't someone take care of me!" dolts realize that the only person who can take care of you - IS YOU!.

      Hmm, I think the "thought" that gone into this statement have run something like: "I would hate having somebody keeping a tag on me; ergo, this is crap and evil".

      The sad facts are that:

      1. It is not safe for children to go out on their own in many areas.
      2. Young children are not equipped to take care of themselves; nor should they be.

      One can discuss at which age children can fend for themselves - it is probably earlier than many parents think. But you don't learn to be a strong, independently minded member of society by growing up having to fend for yourself; the social skills required can only be learned in a good, nurturing family environment. Neglected children are much more likely to end up at the bottom of society.

    50. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      You don't have kids do you? Karate will not allow a kid to defend himself.

      My older son, who is 8, has been playing hockey for 4 years. His legs are strong enough to throw me off of him when we're horsing around. And I weigh 225 lbs.

      However, if I needed to, I could still beat him without any issue.

      This device helps in those situations - adult vs kid, not kid vs kid. It's definitely not a panacea, but I could see where if you lived where you might be worried about your child wandering off or being lured away that you might consider something like this. And for those of you who say that it's my responsibility, that's true. However, I don't watch my 8 yr old every second of the day. I doubt any parent does.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    51. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by cnvandev · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh I agree that it's like Pascal's wager, but that's more of a bad thing than you'd think. Granted, I've never raised a kid so I don't know how difficult any of this is, but the Pascal's wager logic is just weird.

      Yes, Pascal's wager is a decent justification for being religious but it proposes a pretty terrible way to get into a spiritual life, as a way of basically covering your ass in case God exists. It's basically the tattoo on the ass of the "Archbishop" in Johnny English: "Jesus is coming - look busy." Sure, you end up with a lot of people going to church, but they're going 'just in case,' rather than honestly believing that God is someone who should be praised. It's a lousy excuse for showing up to mass, and you'd probably be better off concentrating on being a decent, moral, secular person than faking that you believe in God, however well you manage to halfway convince yourself.

      Same thing with this watch. I mean a protection "just in case" your child gets abducted sounds great, but it's also a lousy excuse for not teaching your child to think about what they're doing when a stranger in a van offers them candy, or , or just in general. Sure, you end up with a lot of parents feeling safe about their children, but it's because they trust some strange device they're paying a monthly fee for, not because they trust their actual child, and which would you rather trust, some company called Lok8r, or your own offspring?

      Plus, there's plenty of technical reasons why this is a terrible idea. Ignoring the very real possibility for someone other than you to track your kid, you're saying you can't think of a way for someone to get the watch off without "forcibly removing" it in the ways they've come up with? I can, and they're more horrifying than a simple abduction.

    52. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by richardellisjr · · Score: 1

      As someone who spends a lot of time around Mexico City (my wife's family lives there) I'd love to buy one of these for each of my kids. There are far too Americans getting kidnapped in that area for someone to argue that it's not worth the price. Of course it probably wouldn't take long for a kidnapper to find it and get rid of it, but if it takes 30 minutes that may be enough time.

      And additional FYI, they aren't just kidnapping the rich anymore. Now they've resorted to kidnapping for several thousand dollars which makes anyone in that area very vulnerable.

    53. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by tmosley · · Score: 0

      Rather than teaching them karate, you should enroll them in Brazilian Jujitsu. It is far more effective than karate (which relies on strength rather than leverage). Even a small child (8 or 9) can break an adult's arm or choke them to unconsciousness (you might want to take a few lessons yourself, so they don't use it on you!). A few months of training makes them as effective in a fight as someone ~3 times their mass. As someone who sparred with a 55 year old woman that was about a third my weight, I can tell you that they can get you into a submission against your will, and if you don't tap out, they are perfectly capable of leaving you there.

    54. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      The answer is obvious. Its not YOUR job to protect yourself, that's why we have a police force. I mean, why have police if not to protect us, right?

    55. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Xaedalus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your post is intriguing. I'm going to argue that this isn't 'indoctrination'; rather, this is the product created to serve a particular market: new parents over the age of 35 with one or two children. For these folks, they've had children late in life because they put their career first. Now they're at a point where they feel they have enough money to have children. But because they're late in life, it's harder to have kids. So, once they actually do get a kid, they will gravitate towards being over-protective because of how hard it was to have a child, how much older they are as parents, etc. In my experience, I've found that these parents are more prone towards overprotecting and worrying about the world. They're usually the ones that want to coddle and protect and control everything, because their whole lives have been about control. From there, it's only a short step to 'indoctrination' as you put it - or simply a large population subset with the mentality that it's better to keep track of everyone because control is good and chaos is bad. If it works for them, it must work for everyone.

      --
      Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
    56. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Well, ignore that karate is crap for actually defending yourself.. there ARE classes which can teach this. Your statement about mass is silly. Women are taught self defense courses all the time.

      Size isn't everything, knowing the RIGHT spot to hit is crucial, oh and the attacker is likely unprepared for the fact that you ARE TRAINED to defend yourself... its unlikely the attacker is trained at all.

      Of course, there's also the great equializer... a gun. But to go that route realistically we need to get people over their irrational fear of gun owners.

    57. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by quanticle · · Score: 1

      Do you live in outback Australia, where the nearest neighbor is 30 miles away? If so, the GPS probably isn't available anyway.

      Actually, given the lack of terrain obstacles, like tall buildings, mountains, and the like, GPS would probably be more accessible in the Australian Outback than in many other places in the world.

      --
      We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
    58. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by v1 · · Score: 1

      There are towns in the US in which every aid need be applied to protect kids. Some places are simply way too dangerous.

      Another example of people having kids without considering the circumstances they're in if you ask me. If you insist on raising your kids in bad conditions, it does not automatically become society's responsibility to care for them for you.

      Another vote for "don't child-proof the world - world-proof the child"

      If you can't afford to have a kid. If you don't have time to take care of a kid. If you live in an unsafe place to raise a kid. don't have a kid.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    59. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by JohnFen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I believe it does harm the child. It conditions the child to the idea of pervasive surveillance. This not only lays the groundwork for tolerance of oppressive governments, but also lays the groundwork for growing adults who can't handle life on their own.

    60. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by bhebing · · Score: 1

      Do you live in outback Australia, where the nearest neighbor is 30 miles away? If so, the GPS probably isn't available anyway.

      Because GPS satellites are somehow programmed to skip outback Australia? When they dubbed it Global Positioning System they weren't exactly joking, you know.

    61. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Jhon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So what's to lose? Say you have a 6 year old kid: is it really going to harm them to wear one of these? Sure, chances are very very high that this'll never be needed, but so what? It's kind of like Pascal's wager, isn't it?

      As someone who has lost a family member to kidnapping, I see very little wrong with such technology. Spot on with Pascal's wager, too.

    62. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by quatin · · Score: 1

      BJJ is a good fighting style, but the problem is it's on the ground. You do not want to fight on the ground in the "streets". It's almost never 1 vs 1 if you get attacked. An accomplice can come from behind and kick you in the head while you're pulling guard. However, BJJ is still more legitimate than most karate programs since sparring is a key part of belt promotion.

      99% of kids karate programs are just after school day care. They keep your kids occupied and exercising. In fact 99% of adult karate programs are like this as well. There's too many dojos popping up and trying to cash in on the post-Bruce Lee martial arts hysteria that it completely overwhelms legitimate dojos.

    63. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Runaway1956 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Yeah, it works great, globally. IF there is a service provider. John Q. Citizen isn't invited to purchase some hardware and tap into the system. How do those cell phones work with GPS, exactly?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    64. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Define good using only scientific facts rather than opinion.

    65. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by dlsmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Once it starts to catch on, it will be mandated for ALL children, ages ~3-15.

      Arguing against a "think of the children" fallacy with a slippery slope fallacy. Classic.

    66. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Out of curiosity, which ass did you pull the number 18 out of?

      Kids clamoring for freedom is a direct backlash against the ever increasing length of adolescence.

    67. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have got to be kidding. The average adult male, can easily overpower a 7 or 8 year old, even if said child has a blackbelt. There is a wonderful children's video put out by safeside (safeside.com) that talks about how children handle various situations involving strangers. They even address this issue by showing a kids who is a blackbelt, and how an adult walks up to them, and simply grabs them and walks away, even though the child is fighting to get away. They tell the kids flat out "You might think you are tough, but even a child your age who is a blackbelt is no match for an adult who wants to take you".

    68. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Publikwerks · · Score: 1

      Is there a Berentain Bears Learn About not getting overpowered and thrown into a van? Guess what, children can get overpowered. And I'm not saying sitting there with Google maps open. Hell, my son can get into trouble within 10 feet of me. But, God forbid, someone kidnapps him, I'm on the SOB like the fist of an angry God. This is like saying vaccines are a bad, because you should learn to avoid sick people. Because unless you are completely out of control watching your kids, parents make mistakes, and people take advantage. So I see nothing wrong with lojacking your kids. Yeah, it could be abused, but better to be safe than sorry

    69. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by KingSkippus · · Score: 2, Funny

      Thanks, I was about to post this. It's amusing that the poster used wild and baseless paranoia to "prove" wild and baseless paranoia. Wish I had a mod point to give out.

    70. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever, cince you know nothing about Karate we'll label you as idiot dork.

      I took down 3 kids that were 3X larger than me. The rest of them took off when I ripped the nose off the face of one of the idiots. I also crushed the windpipe of the asshole that had the baseball bat.

      when you use karate, try to fucking kill the assholes that attack you.

      I did that in 9th grade, the entire football team was deathly afraid of me for the next 3 years.

    71. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by smoker2 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Karate DOES NOT rely on strength. Ideally you never hold someone at all, you keep your distance - unless they have a long weapon in which case you step inside the effective range of the weapon. Either way, you let them do the work.

    72. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Say you have a 6 year old kid: is it really going to harm them to wear one of these?

      That depends on how easy it is for perverts to tap into it to find out when the wearer is in a secluded location. It might also act as a handy way to track the whole family for the government.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    73. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      unless you are of he mentality of a 6 year old and leave it everywhere or lose such a device and need it strapped to your arm.

      Doesn't wandering off and getting lost at the mall already imply that I do?

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    74. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    75. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by PitaBred · · Score: 1
    76. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by jmac_the_man · · Score: 1

      Isn't this watch hardware being offered to John Q. Public? It reads GPS data directly. So do any number of in-car/plane/battle tank navigation systems. Your phone, on the other hand, most likely does not.

    77. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      I do. My parents let me have my bedroom, and my things, and only if they thought something was going on would I lose my privacy. A common punishment when my brother and I were fighting was the removal of our doors from their hinges. You fight, you lose your privacy. We learned to get along pretty well. Still good friends to this day.

    78. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      No need to worry; the ass's owner was 18 too.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    79. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, most of the deadliest fighters in the world come from Tom's Dojo in the strip mall next to Lucy's Famous Nails.

    80. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Reading comprehension, much? More fairly, maybe, did you RTFA?

      "The num8 watch costs £149.99 and is sold with a monthly subscription contract"

      There's a middle man. You pay the fee, or it's cut off. If you were accessing GPS directly, there would be no subscription fee, most likely. Which brings me back to the original post: is there a service provider in the middle of Outback, Nowhere in Australia, or in Canada, or even some areas of the United States? I won't even TRY to guess what may be available on the African continent.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    81. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      I do have kids, I still think these watches are a bad idea.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    82. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by bugi · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you mean the reference to Pascal's wager as an endorsement, please see the wikipedia entry under section Criticisms.

      (In short, Pascal inadvertently rendered religion to its proper ridiculous essence.)

    83. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to disagree. There's no law that says this is required, and responsible adults can fight to prevent such a law from being put in place. The reality is that I think this is a relatively good idea to have. No doubt any kidnapper would be more likely to take a kid without such a watch, (which may seem unfair to children who can't afford it). But seriously, your kids are at school, and on any given day, you could have some creep take them away, and this device would let you know when it happened.

      I'd think once a kid is entering puberty, they are much more likely to take responsibility for themselves, or at least, they would truly resent the hovering parent. The world IS as dangerous that this device seems like at least one deterrent that is worth it, IMHO. You can tell your kids not to talk to strangers, but if there's an active adult competing against a kid, I'd like to know that where my child is.

    84. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 1

      As someone who spends a lot of time around Mexico City (my wife's family lives there) I'd love to buy one of these for each of my kids.

      That's good. Get a his-and-hers set for your wife and yourself while you're at it. As a device it has its uses, but that doesn't mean it's worth it for the populace in general. If I spent a lot of time in Afghanistan I'd love to buy a bulletproof vest, but I'm not going to wear one when the furthest I range is a drive into the North American suburban wasteland.

    85. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by supernova_hq · · Score: 1

      I strongly recommend you look at these for backpacking needs.
      I would not recommned them for children, but we use one all the time when doing back-country (scouting/guiding/geocaching/etc) stuff. They have a "i'm ok" button, a "general assistance required" button and another button with a DIRECT link to a monitored station that will immediately dispatch 911 to your exact location.

    86. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's good reasons to be afraid of morons who call guns a "great equalizer"

    87. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, John Q. Citizen IS invited to purchase hardware and "tap into the system", in that the hardware will read the GPS signal as transmitted by the satellites. This is a read-only operation and it functions for all GPS enabled hardware whether it be military, survey-grade, consumer level receivers, or cell phones and whatnot that have the GPS components. You do not have to subscribe to the GPS signal, you only need to have hardware capable of receiving and making use of it.

    88. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Sandbags · · Score: 1

      Look, using a watch, cell phone, car GPS, etc to track a kids whereabouts is not a leash, it's a lie detector. It's really no different from my parents calling my friends parents to ensure I really was where I said I'd be when I said I'd be there, except now i don't have to bother them, and I don't have to give my number to 50 other parents...

      My kids not old enough to be out on her own yet, but be damned, i will have SOME way of making sure I know where she is. Not for fear she'll be abducted, but for proof she's not deceiving me, doing things she should not be, and with people she should not be. If she's claimed to be going to a movie, I'd expect I'd not find her across town at a night club having lied about her age to get in...

      If the kids know they're being tracked, they don't do stupid shit. A cell phone they can forget somewhere, smarter kids even set up call forwarding to leave the GPS cell phone in one place and have call routed to their friend's non-tracked phone so they can still get out and about without the parent's knowledge. Cars are equally easy to leave somewhere.

      A watch is a simple device, especially with removal detection. It's even better if it would have an accelerometer, as a watch that doesn't move for 10 minutes is either on a sleeping person, or not on a writs at all.... that would guarantee it had not been taken off. If it's stylish enough, it should not be an issue for the kids to wear (especially if they want me to buy them a car and trust them to drive around and see who they want to see, and have freedom in their lives).

      The only thing I'd like to see with this device is a way to have the child notified (maybe a vibrate mechanism, or some on-screen indicator, but in a way noone else can notice) that when a parent does track the device manually, the kid is notified they're being actively tracked. Such an inclusion should keep parental interference to a minimum as truly obnoxious parents would be lectured by their kids.

      Good parenting does NOT prevent peer pressure, or kids telling white lies and disobeying orders when they know they can get away with it.

      If you want to call it a leash, fine. My parents had a leash on me equally the same, it just required a few phone calls... Having the GPS means i can not only call at the moment, but if I'm not able to, i still have log I can check later...

      --
      There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
    89. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 1

      Sure kids are vulnerable. Bad things could and may happen to them. But there's such a thing of being too scared and too cautious.

      And how. Sometimes kids get lost in the forest and then run/hide from search parties because said rescuers are strangers, and apparently dying of exposure or starvation is more attractive than whatever kids are being convinced EVERYONE is out to do to them.

      Here's the thing people don't realize - if a kid gets lost, the BEST thing to do is (or was, before we all got lawsuit/arrest happy) ask someone for help. If a stranger approaches a kid and wants to take them away, odds are very high it's a person with ill intent. But if a child approaches a random person, the odds of it being a bad person is low. Society works because people are, by and large, fundamentally good.

      Besides, the stranger-with-a-van stereotype is overplayed. It happens, but there's more danger from people the child (or his/her parents) trust. A statement like "Sure, little Johnny can spend some time with Father Campbell! He's a Catholic priest and serves God, what could he possibly do to hurt a little boy?" wasn't considered ironic at all for a LOT of years.

    90. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by bjdevil66 · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up!

      I just went through this talk with my two young children (in early elementary school), and my wife pulled out this book and handed it to me - in the middle of my stumbling, bumbling, "ummm - don't let grown ups touch your balls," speech - and it was perfect. I couldn't have explained it any better to my boys if I'd tried a dozen times...

      BTW - IMO, the watches are for the overly paranoid - or the overly controlling - parent that doesn't trust other people enough, including their own children. There's another word P.T. Barnum for these kinds of parents - suckers...

      (quick, pedantic spelling edit for parent post - It's Berenstain with an s).

    91. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems to me bad parents will still be bad, good parents will still be good, and everything in between will continue with or without a GPS tracking watch. I'm sure some paranoid or controlling parents will use this device to an arguably harmful extent but I'm also pretty sure that those people are good at smothering or dominating their kids sans-GPS.

    92. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by fluffy99 · · Score: 1

      You don't need high technology for this. Put a loud whistle around the kids neck, and show him how to blow on it if he can't see an adult. For older kids and traveling companions, I recommend checking out the Garmin Rhino series of GPS enabled walkie-talkies. They show your position and the position of the other walkie-talkies.

    93. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Jane_Dozey · · Score: 1

      I'd imagine the GPS works just fine if you don't pay the subscription. Access to the information that it relays back would be the part of it that you lose, not the ability of the watch to pick up GPS signals or talk to the satellites.

      Which brings me back to the original post: is there a service provider in the middle of Outback

      Yes. The middleman will have the ability to know where your kid is, they just won't tell you without the subscription.

      --
      Silly rabbit
    94. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With that training and attitude, you will need all you got when assigned to a level 4 classification in prison. I'm sure you can find someone your skill there, perhaps multiple encounters.

      I don't know any real karateka would be taking pride in permanently disfiguring other people, even though they did have it coming. Self defense is one thing. Bragging about how you maimed people on a public forum is another.

    95. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When did you meet my dad? That is EXACTLY what he would have said.

    96. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey kid, I trust you. Wear this cattle tag so that I can check up on you.

    97. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Sandbags · · Score: 1

      and, like I said, how is this different than making phone calls behind their back to check on them?

      If your not at least VALIDATING the trust relationship works, then you are not parenting.

      --
      There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
    98. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by vivaelamor · · Score: 1

      Karate is such a big subject that you should not judge it on such a limited experience. Having said that, martial arts clubs (Karate ones included) are not often focused towards self defence. Here is an in depth opinion piece on the divide between martial arts and self defence. I do not agree with everything in that article, the picture the author paints of martial arts is a bit biased towards describing the arts that ignore the divide but the basic premise that you will learn street effective self defence quicker in a self defence class is correct. If you find a good martial arts club that knows the limits of their training method then this should not be a big issue in the long term and the tools from training in martial arts are a lot more effective than anything you can learn in a self defence class.

      The experience you describe is one you hear a lot about in martial arts, the art and the time you commit are no where near as important as the understanding of the people involved. If you consider that a lot of martial art forms view black belt as the starting point and the progress to sixth Dan may just be the counting of years then the story isn't too surprising.

    99. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      I guess you could look into bujinkan; one of the major things I noticed when I was involved in it in maryland was that half the blackbelts were current cops looking for something between strong words and firearms. That said, two guys with knives are going to fuck you sideways if they know what they're doing. Unless you know you can take them (for instance, if you've been in combat at close quarters), just give them what they want. And yes, you never go somewhere with someone like that.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    100. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Zalbik · · Score: 1

      Access to the information that it relays back would be the part of it that you lose, not the ability of the watch to pick up GPS signals or talk to the satellites.

      Which brings me back to the original post: is there a service provider in the middle of Outback

      Yes. The middleman will have the ability to know where your kid is, they just won't tell you without the subscription

      No, they won't know where your kid is. GPS signals are read only. This watch does not "talk" to the satellites, it only listens. My guess is they use cellular SMS messaging to broadcast the data back to the middleman.

      That's why this watch won't work in the middle of the Outback. It has no way to communicate back to the middleman as cell phone service is not available.

    101. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      every time I hear someone say "Derpy-derp derrr.. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger...", it gives me an overwhelming urge to snap their spine.

      Don't do that. You'll only make them stronger...

    102. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, this line of reasoning is just ridiculous.

      There's lots of things out there that are good ideas, or not, but are not mandated by government. Lots of people and businesses, for instance, have security cameras in both their homes and businesses. Are these mandated by the government? Of course not, despite the fact that security cameras have been around for ages. Are they monitored by the government? Again, of course not, that would take tremendous resources.

      There's no slippery slope here. This is just another tool you can purchase if you wish, or not, if you don't think it's helpful. It's just like a security camera, or a home security system, or a door lock, or an antivirus software application, or an internet filtering proxy appliance. All of these are available on the market, and are not required by the government (and the last two are completely useless IMO). While some f'ed-up countries like Australia may be trying to mandate some of these, in any decent country they're completely voluntary, and there's no sign that's going to change. Even authoritarian China thought of mandating internet censoring software and decided against it when people complained.

    103. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      "Think of the children" isn't a fallacy, it's a proven strategy for getting ridiculous things (like amber alerts and absurd penalties for sex offenders) passed. Also, slippery slopes aren't fallacies when you can demonstrate evidence for the slope actually existing. For that, look at the current surveillance society in britain and also how they implemented their gun ban. It's entirely plausible when the people in charge presume to know what's best and claim the power to do things for our own good.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    104. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by eggnoglatte · · Score: 1

      You realize of course that GPS is a passive service - there is not back communication to the satellite. So how do the parent get to know where the watch (and presumably their kid) is located? Well, through cell phone network. So yes, coverage is an issue.

    105. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by shiftless · · Score: 1

      ...I'm guessing this is a joke?

    106. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      GPS is a read-only system. What good is a watch with a GPS receiver inside in case it (or its wearer) gets lost, if there's no way to communicate that location information to someone else?

      If you drop your watch somewhere, it's not going to be much good that it has a GPS inside if you have to find the watch first before you can read the GPS data!

      "talk to the satellites"? Maybe you shouldn't be posting on Slashdot...

    107. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Heh, the first thing I thought about was one of the small bears mauling the pervert to death. Not really the lesson we want to send.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    108. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by gtbritishskull · · Score: 1

      Your parents calling you regularly to "make sure" of what you are doing is a leash. How you are describing that you would use this is a leash. Kids are going to lie to you. Live with that fact. They are growing up and learning how to cope with the world, and lying is a part of that. How often do you lie in your everyday life? Or tell the truth in a way to give someone the wrong impression? Or just omit parts of the truth to not tell the whole story? Kids have to learn how to do that, and the only way to learn is to practice. And I bet you that within a week some kid is going to put the watch on a friend's dog and then go out to a party and get drunk. Then you don't even have to tell your parents why you were out late. They will "know" you were at your friend's house.

      Also, if you rely on a gps wristwatch to keep them in check, what do you think is going to happen when they don't have to wear the gps anymore? The reason I don't like parents who use a "leash" is because they usually use it as a prop for their bad parenting. And it results in kids going to college and getting put in the hospital for alcohol poisoning (or worse) because they didn't know how to control themselves without mommy or daddy looking over their shoulder. And then mommy and daddy sue everyone in sight over their bad parenting.

      I am not necessarily opposed to the wristwatch, I am more opposed to what a lot of parent will use it for.

    109. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For someone with all those violent fantasies, you sure are terrified.

    110. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Psmylie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What it boils down to is that you never let your attacker get total control over you. If you do, then you are reliant only on either their mercy or their incompetence for your survival, and neither is something you should bet your life on. Someone with a gun demands your wallet/purse/phone, whatever, yeah you give it to them because you are not giving them any more control then they already have. HOWEVER, if that person tries to enter your home with you, get you into a car, or tries to drag you off somewhere, that means that they are trying to take away the chance of you even running away. Don't let them do that.

      I told my niece and nephew this, also, when they were young. If someone tries to get you into a car, you fight like a maniac, and when you can, you run away. Even if they have a gun, run away. Even though that runs counter to what a lot of people think (that you always obey someone with a gun) you're better off running and hoping they either won't shoot or that they're a lousy shot than you are in hoping they will let you go relatively unharmed once they finish doing whatever it is they want to do to you.

      --

      psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo

    111. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      This is why calling the police is generally a waste of time. Keep guns in your house, and if someone breaks in, deal with the problem yourself. Don't be stupid, though: stay in your room and wait for the intruder to come to you, so you retain the element of surprise. Don't go looking for him, unless (as in this case) someone else in the home is in danger, and the risk of leaving your safe area is worth it. Also, get a pump shotgun with an 18" barrel, like a Mossberg 590, and load it with buckshot. Your accuracy with a handgun under duress is not that good, and lead shotgun shot is less likely to penetrate walls and hurt others, unlike jacketed bullets fired from rifled barrels. A handgun is still good for carrying around the house though.

      As for the police, call them after you've shot and killed the intruder(s). Otherwise, the police will enter the house, see you with your gun, and shoot you in the back, and then shoot you again while you're on the floor (this is especially a problem if you're not white). This just happened here in Phoenix.

    112. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Uhm, Karate is a bludgeoning martial art. You punch, hit with your wrists, forearms, elbows, kick, hit with the knee. You don't "let them do the work". You defend yourself with active blocking and a strong physique (to absorb blows that make it through) and pummel them until they give up. It is a lot like boxing.

    113. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to look up "trust" in a dictionary. What you describe is a set of rules and two enforcement schemes, not a trust relationship.

    114. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Hubbell · · Score: 1

      The job of the police is only to enforce the law after it has been broken, see Warren v DC. Also, since that site will probably make you cry: Try this one.

    115. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      and lead shotgun shot is less likely to penetrate walls and hurt others

      I agree with all of what you say except this part. Any shotgun load powerful enough to stop a determined human aggressor is powerful enough to easily slice through interior walls. Here's an interesting test of the ability of shot to penetrate drywall. #4 buckshot went through six pieces of drywall without issue. 00 buckshot went through seven and a rifled slug went through all twelve (no surprise there). They did the same test with various pistol and rifle rounds. A 9mm went through six walls (the same as the #4 buckshot). The .357 went through nine walls. Not much of a difference between the handgun loads and the shotgun loads, though I'm a little disappointed they didn't test the .45 ACP.

      A handgun is still good for carrying around the house though.

      That's one of the reasons I picked a handgun as my home defense weapon. You don't get as many strange looks if you answer the door with a concealed handgun as you would if you answered it with a shotgun slung across your back ;) The handgun is also easier to maneuver around tight quarters if you have to leave your safe area to get the kids and it leaves you with a free hand if you need one. The shotgun is probably still a better bet for the new gun owner though.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    116. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      That's one of the reasons I picked a handgun as my home defense weapon. You don't get as many strange looks if you answer the door with a concealed handgun as you would if you answered it with a shotgun slung across your back ;) The handgun is also easier to maneuver around tight quarters if you have to leave your safe area to get the kids and it leaves you with a free hand if you need one. The shotgun is probably still a better bet for the new gun owner though.

      I use both. A shotgun is too inconvenient for carrying around the house, so it stays in the bedroom. The idea is, if anyone breaks in the house at night, we stay holed up in the bedroom, and blast them when they enter. (There's two of us anyway, so one would have a handgun.) But for carrying around the house, a handgun is the best choice just for convenience. If you only had a shotgun, most people probably would end up just leaving it someplace because it's such a pain, and then wouldn't have it handy when they really needed it.

      I agree with all of what you say except this part. Any shotgun load powerful enough to stop a determined human aggressor is powerful enough to easily slice through interior walls. Here's an interesting test of the ability of shot to penetrate drywall. #4 buckshot went through six pieces of drywall without issue. 00 buckshot went through seven and a rifled slug went through all twelve (no surprise there). They did the same test with various pistol and rifle rounds. A 9mm went through six walls (the same as the #4 buckshot). The .357 went through nine walls. Not much of a difference between the handgun loads and the shotgun loads, though I'm a little disappointed they didn't test the .45 ACP.

      This is interesting, but I wonder what would happen if they fired all these different rounds at drywall, at a 45-degree angle instead of straight-on.

    117. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "You do know that most municipal water supplies have hundreds of toxic chemicals intentionally dumped into it? For example, there is a strong link between fouride and bone cancer or flouride and brain damage."

      I'd take your concern for our precious bodily fluids more seriously if you hadn't misspelled fluoride. Twice.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    118. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      But if these things become prevalent then the parents that don't track and log their children's movements will be seen as irresponsible.

      Highly doubtful, especially if you argued that you wanted to protect your child's privacy - well at least here in Canada where privacy is taken seriously. Having said that I see no problem with the watch as long as the child knows that it contains a tracker device. Frankly though a better device would be one which has a "panic" button to alert your parents. That way the child is not tracked until they want to be. I think they already have such things for hikers in remote locations.

    119. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Well, sarcasm... but that seems to be the attitude of our government.

    120. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by sharkman67 · · Score: 1

      I guess it depends on your school and instructor. I also assume you are using Karate as a generic name for all similar martial arts. I study TKD and we do lots of self defense in our class. Just a week ago we did a drill where you stand up against a wall and one person squeezed your windpipe (standing from the side) while another came at you with a blocking pad. You had to fight through the discomfort of being choked and fight off the attacker with the pad. Prior to that we did a drill where your partner two hand choked you and you had to get out of it. Of course prior to doing the drill we went through 5 or 6 ways to get out of the choke. Just the other night we did a self defense drill where your partner got a piece of kids sidewalk chalk and used it as a knife. It was really easy to see who did a good job defending themselves and who didn't via their white uniforms at the end of the night!

      In addition to these type of drills we have basic self defense moves such as getting out of wrist grabs or headlocks which must be mastered for belt testing.

      If that's not enough there is an additional class called Masters which deals with street fighting scenarios such as knife or gun attacks. The class is entirely devoted to how to deal with these situations and trains a lot with rubber weapons. Finally there is also a MMA (mixed martial arts) course where you can really get into the grappling type fighting you see on UFC. So all schools are not created equal and I'd hate to run into most of my instructors in an alley.

    121. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      I know those cases.. and then at the same time our government is trying to eliminate the second amendment, in most states won't allow you to shoot on sight an intruder in your own home, and people have been sued for hurting someone that was mugging them.

      I'd LOVE if all the police did was enforce the law after it was broken... but that doesn't mean they won't be sitting on the sides of the interstate tonight on my way home looking for people to pull over.

      The post to which you replied was intended as sarcasm... probably should have made it more clear.

    122. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      This is interesting, but I wonder what would happen if they fired all these different rounds at drywall, at a 45-degree angle instead of straight-on.

      Even if you halve the penetration it's still going through enough interior walls to maim someone in the next room. Understand that I'm not poo-poo'ing the shotgun as a home defense weapon. I just hear novice shooters saying that they bought a shotgun because they don't have to worry about it killing their kids in the next room and I want to pull my hair out. If it's powerful enough to stop a determined attacker it's powerful enough to worry about it going through drywall.

      Some people advocate using bird shot but I think that presents a whole new set of problems. It might be a great deterrent if you are up against some punk kid who just wants to steal your stereo but what happens if you run into someone else? If I'm facing someone who is bound and determined to kill me I want them to stop right now. That isn't going to happen with birdshot.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    123. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Even if you halve the penetration it's still going through enough interior walls to maim someone in the next room. Understand that I'm not poo-poo'ing the shotgun as a home defense weapon. I just hear novice shooters saying that they bought a shotgun because they don't have to worry about it killing their kids in the next room and I want to pull my hair out. If it's powerful enough to stop a determined attacker it's powerful enough to worry about it going through drywall

      Yeah, I agree with this. What I'm more worried about is going through exterior walls and hitting people in neighboring houses. Obviously, this will depend a lot on what kind of siding you have (where I live, it's all stucco).

      Some people advocate using bird shot but I think that presents a whole new set of problems. It might be a great deterrent if you are up against some punk kid who just wants to steal your stereo but what happens if you run into someone else? If I'm facing someone who is bound and determined to kill me I want them to stop right now. That isn't going to happen with birdshot.

      No, birdshot isn't very good for taking down humans. Dick Cheney tried it and it didn't work :-)

    124. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Sandbags · · Score: 1

      Ya know, there are a ton of bad parents out there who don't even take the time to care and check up at all. I'd prefer at least a computer check up on them when the parents don't. We can't make a bad parent into a better one, but we can give bad parents tools and bad kids limits. Also, how is the child to learn accountability if there's no follow up and validation of the trust?

      the kids DO need to be on a leash, if there are no boundaries, then how are they to learn restrain, and to follow instructions.

      I'm not talking about locking them down, I'm talking about LETTING them have a life, make their own decisions, not PESTER them about where and what they're doing, and simply trust them (but VALIDATE that trust). After a few years of them not making mistakes, and when they're mature enough to handle it, 17-18 years old, then we experiment with even less controlls.

      SURE, lying is a part of life and growing up. They'll lie in lots of ways. However, they also need to learn punishment, accountability, and saccrifice, and if you can't find out when they lied, you can't punish them. I'm not talking about tracking their social activities. I'm talking about validating the truth of where they went.

      As I said, if you set the device only to report manually, not automatically, and give the kids themselves a feedback mechanism to when when the monitoring occured, then the kids can push back on their own parents when the monitoring is being abused.

      I'm also not suggesting kids don;t experiewnce life. Granted in most states (it;s insane, but the case) a parent can't allow their own kid to drink, so they GO off to college and get poisoned. I'm suggesting letting them HAVE the fun, enjoy youth, just put up some rules and hold them accountable. once they have a car, or their friends do, monitoring their activities becomes a difficult issue. I can't guarantee, even with the BEST parenting, that they'll be mature enough to handle being on their own unsupervised before it becomes socially unacceptible for me to keep them under supervised control. Once they getk into unsupervised situations, they may not be ready to handle it without some level of control. You can not take the leash off a chained dog, you have to make a longer leash first...

      --
      There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
    125. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Hubbell · · Score: 1

      Sarcasm or not, a lot of people honestly are that retarded.

    126. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Sandbags · · Score: 1

      permission is granted, trust is earned.

      Once the child has unsupervised transportation, they'll need to be given permission to go complaces, prove that they do, and consistently perform before trust will be granted.

      Trust has many levels.

      First we'll trust you to behave when you're with friends, in public, on your own.

      Later we'll trust you to ride alone with them.

      We'll trust you to drive on your own place to place, later we may let you take sublings with you, and later still (if local law allows) you can drive with your friends once you've earned that trust.

      We'll trust you to go to have a life on your own, but not until you've proven you actually do go where you say will all of the levels of checking and supervision be removed.

      This is a process. I'm not saying the kids need this every waking day until they're off to college. I'm just saying until they prove they can be trusted with a car, friends, and a life on their own, monitoring still needs to occur.

      When you have a pet, you use a leash until they obey commands, you let them off the leash in the yard to run free, but behind a fence, you walk down sidewalks and let the leash get longer and longer until they don;t pull at it anymore, eventually you don;t need the fense anymore and can trust the dog to still be there when you come home. It's steps in a process.

      Are you saying that you're going to go from night to day with your kids, from supervised only handling to complete freedom with no steps in between, at only 15 years old? I think most psychologists would call that a skewed sense of personal freedom, and unsafe parenting.

      --
      There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
    127. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by kdemetter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      With that training and attitude, you will need all you got when assigned to a level 4 classification in prison. I'm sure you can find someone your skill there, perhaps multiple encounters.

      I don't know any real karateka would be taking pride in permanently disfiguring other people, even though they did have it coming. Self defense is one thing. Bragging about how you maimed people on a public forum is another.

      As a practioner of karate , for 14 years , i have to agree with you.

      The first objective of karate , is to improve one's character . The karateka has to train with (not against ) other people , and learns respect.

      To quote Gisjin Funakoshi : "the purpose of karate , is not victory or defeat , but the improvement of the character , and personality of the practioner. Karate is sport , self-defence and body culture . If violence erupts , it is only the because of disharmony between body and spirt . "

      "To be violent , is to be weak" .

      While i can understand that , in the above mentioned situation , it might have been necessary to break someone's nose , to survive , this is nothing to be happy about . You survived , you can learn from the situation , but if you truly feel good about hurting someone , you are not practicing karate , as that mindset doesn't fit in karate.

    128. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not trust if you must constantly "validate" it. Sometimes you just have to be curious, and hope for the best. That is when trust is made. When the parent takes a leap of faith in their child, and their child lives up to it.

      Making calls behind their backs is as invasive and stunting as listening in on their phone calls. Or "validating" that they're where they say they are with GPS.

      I remember one time, I was 15 or so, and "got lost". I was supposed to meet my mom some place, and she was already two hours late, so I walked some place else to get a bite to eat, because I had skipped lunch. If she's going to make me wait, she can afford to wait some too. Do you know what she did when she finally got there? She didn't look around, or wait, like I did. She called the police. She thought she had so much control over what I did that any deviation was evidence of a crime taking place. It never even crossed her mind that I might have had needs more important than meeting her whims. I wasn't gone for more than 15 minutes. GPS might have solved this particular situation, but do you really think my life would have been better because of it?

      Parents need to realize that they are not permanently the center of their children's lives. Children need to learn to develop healthy relationships with others, and that can't happen if the child knows every "relationship" is in fact a three-way relationship with an overbearing mommy or daddy. Every child in this position knows it. You might think you are being clever, but there are tried and tested methods for ferreting out these kinds of secrets. The mind games have already begun.

      The funniest is when this sort of parents' efforts are frustrated, even innocently. They start accusing the child/teen of the worst things they can think of. They begin to actively distrust their kids, because they can't find any evidence of wrongdoing. They think the child is lying. And all because the child wants to keep something to himself.

      Like the time I put "my" copy of the Kama Sutra in my little hidden cubby hole with my lingerie pictures. While I was at school one day, she decided to search my room for the Kama Sutra, and didn't find it. So she "naturally" assumed I had taken it to school, to show off the pictures. Possibly even to masturbate with! When I got home, she demanded to search my backpack. She demanded to search my locker. She demanded I produce the book. Eventually, I convinced her that if she "held" my backpack and let me close my door, I would get it. I think she started rummaging through my backpack while I got the damn book, too.

      What did I do wrong? Nothing. I carved out some space for myself, and she invaded it. It didn't even occur to her that I might need privacy. Every male has a private cache of things somewhere. Heck, I bet females do it too. For a little boy those things might be favorite toys or trinkets. It is innocent, even if it becomes sexual through adolescence.

      But the problem is what really happens when a child/teen sees through the manipulation, and the developmental difficulties it causes. The child withdraws from relationships, actively frustrates or subverts the parents' monitoring, and most importantly, stunts the child's ability to engage in meaningful relationships in later life.

      You are walking down this path. Your kids are going to run away, and never talk to you again.

    129. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      And how. Sometimes kids get lost in the forest and then run/hide from search parties because said rescuers are strangers, and apparently dying of exposure or starvation is more attractive than whatever kids are being convinced EVERYONE is out to do to them.

      I'm sort of torn on that. On one hand, it isn't the kid's fault for having defective parents, but on the other hand, anyone stupid enough to hide from search and rescue deserves death.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    130. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by swillden · · Score: 1

      Exactly

      If you want to stop an attacker quickly, you need to stop the brain from working. There are two ways to do that: Directly disable the central nervous system, or interrupt blood flow to the brain. The easiest way to do that is by causing rapid blood loss so that the blood pressure drops dramatically, and to do that you need to open a major blood vessel. Now, there are a few exposed large vessels (jugular, carotid, femoral, brachial), but the maximum odds are achieved by hitting the torso and penetrating deeply, because there are a whole bunch of huge blood vessels there. Birdshot to the chest will make a nasty surface wound that looks ugly and does a lot of tissue/muscle damage, but it won't significantly lower the blood pressure.

      So, per FBI recommendations, what you need is something with 12-18 inches of penetration. Buckshot achieves that, as do all decent self-defense handgun calibers. But anything that is going to penetrate 12 inches through human flesh is ALSO going to go through several walls. There's no magic caliber, or ammunition, that can can distinguish between drywall and skin and muscle, stopping instantly when it hits the former, but tearing right through the latter.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    131. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's talking to something. Most likely satellites are part of that system. Perhaps you should read up on the concept of widespread communications networks before posting on /.

      I think perhaps the poster you were replying to has a point that you were either missing or glossing over. The middleman is still getting some information unless the watch is outside of communications range and that the 'middleman' probably* has access to the info required to find the watch.

      *Exceptional circumstances aside. The watch is still getting GPS data though, which is what I think the OP was trying to point out.

    132. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      It's not the fact that he didn't "take them on" that shakes my confidence. From the account of the incident that I read it wasn't as simple as him handing over his wallet and going on his way. He went with them off the main drag into an alleyway, surrendered his wallet/car keys/cell phone/etc and was then clubbed over the head and left for dead.

      Anyone that would allow such a thing to happen to themselves while they still draw breath is not someone who has any business teaching self-defense. I would happily surrender my wallet to avoid a confrontation. I'd hand it over even if I knew I could win, because a wallet is not worth killing or maiming someone over.

      I draw the line at going with them. If someone demands that you go with them you should fight as though your life depends on it. Whatever they intend to do to you they obviously aren't comfortable doing it in your current location. It's sheer dumb luck that the instructor lived through this incident. He surrendered control of the situation and left himself at the mercy of criminal thugs. The fact that he's still in business amazes me.

      Not to be rude , but you are judging a situation , of which no one can know the outcome. The sensei made a decision , and it wasn't the right one ( in your eyes ) . Was there even a right decision in this case ? If he had persisted , they might have stabbed him , and killed him easily . There is nothing wrong with letting go of your pride , and choosing life .

      Even then , it's his decision , and his consequences . He survived , and that's the most important thing . From the rest , everyone can learn.

      "If someone demands that you go with them you should fight as though your life depends on it."

      Actually , we did some training in this . You would be surprised how difficult it is to defend against a knife. It's basically kamikaze , in which you hope to strike them fast enough , before they can seriously cut you.

    133. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RMH101 puts it best...

      Is the world really that unsafe that parents need to track their children electronically? I don't think so,

      So what's to lose? Say you have a 6 year old kid: is it really going to harm them to wear one of these? Sure, chances are very very high that this'll never be needed, but so what? It's kind of like Pascal's wager, isn't it?

      The bit that irritates me most about this is the retailer's website "Loc8r", "Where R U" etc. I'd be more worried about the effects of this on their spelling than their general well being.

      The dangerous part is, now your kid is emitting an active GPS signal. With the right equipment, or system access, it gives predators an easy way to find and track your kids. A little wait time will give them the ability to track movement patterns so as to best identify a time to snatch them.
      Chances of that happening, very small. Chances of the GPS beacon being used to find the kind, somewhat likely on occasion. Chances of the parents using it to locate the lost watch, very high. Chances of parents freaking the fuck out anytime their kids take it off, nearly 100%.
      Overall, I'd say it's not a bad idea, especially if you live in a more dangerous area, or have a bunch of kids, are disabled and can't chase the little bastards, etc. But as with any technology, there is a potential for abuse.

    134. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by msimm · · Score: 1

      Eh? Do you really want to sue the people who help protect you for making mistakes? I mean, if it was done with malice it's a criminal issue but the piece you quote says the they lost track of the calls which is terrible and the results even more so, but the problem with taking responsibility for anything, particularly safety, is that at some point we all are guaranteed to make some form of mistake.

      Imagine for a second if you were sued for every mistake that you made. That would be the life eh? You misconfigured apache, please see the judge in his chambers.

      --
      Quack, quack.
    135. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Starting them off with kids classes can't hurt and then you can move them onto a more serious art.

      Kickboxing would be a better choice IMO though.

    136. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      It's natural to feel good about beating the crap out of someone. It's a primal survival instinct sorta thing.

      If you're worried about your kids defending themselves, don't go with karate. It does teach things like respect and discipline and is great for exercise, but if it's not practical in a real-world fight as well then it's a waste of time and money on the "this will keep my kids safe" front.

    137. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Easiest iPhone app ever, "Find My Husband". It uses GPS and plugs in directions to the closest HOOTERS.

    138. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      Uhm, Karate is a bludgeoning martial art. You punch, hit with your wrists, forearms, elbows, kick, hit with the knee. You don't "let them do the work". You defend yourself with active blocking and a strong physique (to absorb blows that make it through) and pummel them until they give up. It is a lot like boxing.

      Sorry , but that's all nonsense.

      Karate is a lot more than just strength. First , it's not about hitting with your wrists , it uses your entire body . That's what makes it powerfull , and clearly seperates it from boxing .

      Second , karate is much more than closed fists . Most open hand techniques , require almost no strength , to use effectively.

      Also , who thought you that karate is about absorbing blows ? most interesting parts of karate are about avoiding the attacker , and moving into a position where you have the advantage.

      Also , you shouldn't 'pummel them until they give up' . after a succefull strike (the idea being one very effective strike ) , you should try to put them on the ground , or in an other position where you can control them.

      Sorry to put it so blunt , but you kind off hurt my feelings with your reaction.

    139. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its kind of sad that we always say the parents have to watch their kids. and its the parents fault when something bad happens to them, Then when a new device is introduced to do just that everyone rips on it.

    140. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They already track us with our cell phones. Remember, the US government has mandated the ability to pinpoint your cell phone via gps. Nearly everyone old enough to understand wearing one of these owns a cell phone. Your slippery slope won't happen because we're already at the bottom of it.

    141. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      ' it's not practical in a real-world fight '

      There is nothing that is , as a real world fight , has no definition to it. It has no rules.

      But karate can teach you techniques , which can help in such situations. As can any other martial arts , as they have a lot of common ground ( the human body is , after all , the same in all martial arts ).

      But you have a point , that this won't keep your childeren safe, simply because it takes a lot of time to learn karate , and it requires a certain maturity , to really be able to defend yourself , and deal with the consequences of your actions.

    142. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Avalain · · Score: 1

      No, the Police are not legally responsible for the crimes that are committed and can't be held responsible for not being able to protect their citizens. However, not being legally responsible does not necessarily mean that it isn't their responsibility. You say that it is the job of the police to deal with crime after it happens but they aren't legally responsible for that either. When is the last time someone was able to successfully sue the police because they were not able to catch the criminal?

      The police will try to help when they can. This doesn't mean that they can guarantee your safety; unfortunately no one can. The case given by Shakrai is horrifying, true, but it is also more the exception rather than the norm. It is much more common for the police to respond to a 911 call that ends up being a false alarm then it is for them to lose the call. They aren't perfect, but if someone breaks into your house and you're hiding in the closet it is better to call 911 rather than your Uncle Albert (ok, maybe if Uncle Albert lives next door that wouldn't be such a terrible idea). The police also act as a deterrent for criminals. Obviously this doesn't work for everyone or criminal activity would be zero, but it does help.

      There has almost always been someone who is responsible (legally or otherwise) for keeping the citizens safe from criminals in any effective society, to varying degrees. Before the London police people were protected by the Crown. Before that serfs would swear fealty to a Lord who would in turn protect them. The extent that you were protected may come into question, but it certainly wasn't complete anarchy.

    143. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Think of the Children" isn't a classic fallacy (read your own link).
      The "Slippery Slope" fallacy is only a fallacy when you state that the logical conclusion is drastic and inevitable.... and only because it does not allow for the possibility of an even ground. That does not make it untrue, or unrealistic. In fact, you can find plenty of examples in history.

      I'll whip out the Holocaust example, and simply point out that Hitler intentionally used the "think of the children" argument to intentionally start a slippery slope. According to classic definition the argument can only be fulfilled if the end of the slope is actually reached.

      So to sum it up, the argument that you are ON a slippery slope already is not a fallacy, but arguing that it WILL lead to the ultimate end, is.
      In this case, I really don't think we'll ever finally reach the Orwellian end in terms of total control over the population, but we can certainly reach a point that is certainly unpalatable well before then... and probably will.

    144. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Karate has a couple of weaknesses over other martial arts, but the primary one is that you almost never do a serious, round-based full contact fight in competition. If you take boxing/kickboxing, you're going to be fighting until someone gets knocked out, DQs, or loses on points.

      Then again, that's a problem with a lot of martial arts, but from what I've seen from Karate it seems to go pretty easy on you for sparring - although also it's mostly the cookie cutter schools that are like this.

    145. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by moortak · · Score: 1

      http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/us/13water.html

      Not exactly, in an ideal world that might be true, but many water systems are contaminated.

      --
      Xavier Rabourdin for president 2012
    146. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Judging situation or not the advice is the same. Don't go with someone anywhere. Give them anything they want but if they want you to go somewhere then you run, fight or whatever, just don't go with them.

      That is standard self defense advice across the board, it has nothing to do with being able to judge this situation.

    147. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In today's world? How many people live where a 6 year old can wander very far from SOME ADULT? Do you live in outback Australia, where the nearest neighbor is 30 miles away? If so, the GPS probably isn't available anyway.

      I'm not sure you understand what GPS is. Unless your view of the sky is obstructed you will almost always find that GPS is available. Even in outback Australia.

      What may be lacking is some sort of back-channel that a device, such as this watch, can use to communicate its location to others. I'm assuming that the watch requires mobile coverage to communicate its location back to the servers. That is likely not available in outback Australia (our broadest mobile network touts itself as covering 98% of the population - but at a rough estimate that would leave 90% of the land area of Australia without coverage).

    148. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if there are no boundaries, then how are they to learn restrain, and to follow instructions.

      If you give them meaningful rules, then violating the rules will have natural consequences. Make sure they have to deal with them. Help them when they need help, but don't take the consequences off their shoulders. A small child that is told not to wander off might experience how it feels to be lost if it gets distracted and does wander off. Telling a teenager that you have to know where he is at all times creates an artificial rule with artificial consequences. This rule will be broken, either in your face or behind your back. Your lack of trust in your child's judgment will be perceived as an injustice and result in a lack of respect for your authority.

    149. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. This is a tool, like any other, which can be used beneficially or maliciously. It's *how* you use it that's important.

      It doesn't prevent mistakes, like getting lost, but it certainly helps to resolve them. The child won't be any less distraught (especially if you don't tell him what the watch does), so he'll still learn his lesson, but it removes "finding his body in the woods 5 days later" from the set of possible outcomes.

    150. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by WCLPeter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Lets not also forget the dangers of teaching a whole generation of kids that its perfectly okay for those in authority over us to track our every movement.

    151. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Alarindris · · Score: 1

      DC's highest court ruled that the police do not have a legal responsibility to provide personal protection to individuals, and absolved the police and the city of any liability.

      What. The. Fuck.

      Next thing you know, congress won't be responsible to pass laws in the best interest of American citizens.

      Wait...

    152. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, although rather than Karate, I strongly recommend Krav Maga, a self defense course.

      The main principle is to escape the situation and be able to walk away in one piece. The details are to decide to act preemptively, attack with maximum speed and using any common objects around you to be able to get out of the situation and run away and NOT prolong the fight.

      Karate is a very nice sport but that's it - a sport, not a dirty-life-or-death fight for your life in a situation where you can be maimed or killed.

      Karate is about form, Krav Maga is about survival in one piece.

    153. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by KingSkippus · · Score: 1

      Well, damn, I got some mod points today, but since I posted a reply, I can't mod posts in this topic now. Of all the friggin' luck... :(

    154. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Sandbags · · Score: 1

      and, uh, how do you propose exactly to validate the rules were followed?

      Prior to 16, when their friends and they can't drive, and get about on their own unsupervised, it;s easy. After that, what?

      AGAIN, I AM NOT SAYING THIS IS A COMPLETE MEASURE OF CONTROL, THIS IS SIMPLY A VALIDATION TOOL, THEY STILL GET TO HAVE A LOFE AND LEARN LESSONS THE HARD WAY!

      This watch does NOT protect them from uncomfortable encounters in places they're allowed to go, does not keep them from getting in trouble staying out too late, does not keep them from getting date raped, it doesn't does not keep them from lying and getting punished, it's simply a reminder, on their wrists all the time, to think about what they're doing and where they're going before they get there.

      Until they PROVE themselves, and trust is EARNED, they take baby steps. First it;s supervised dates, then we drop them at the movies alone, then they get to wander the shopping center alone, then they get to drive to school, then later work, then later around town with friends, eventually the layers of control peel back and they earn more and more freedom, but they're not going to fall to peer pressure and drive across the state to a concert when they're supposed to be at a friend's house (because if they asked, I'd likely buy them tickets, but if they lie about it, they'll never see the inside of a colosseum for a year!)

      Long before they go to college, we'd start having days they got to leave the watch behind. by the latter half of high school, they should have earned enough trust to not take it at all. (but I'd still randomly follow up with other parents to validate, and likely, as my parents did, find they still lie at least occasionally, especially where boy/girlfriends are concerned.

      Again, to sum up for everyone who throws around absolutes without forethought, the watch is a trust BUILDING tool, not a deterrent; it's for parental validation of boundaries and respect, not for monitoring their habits; it's a short term stopgap that replaces the calls and pestering my parents did in the old days, using call lists of parents to track us down to see if we'd lied (which we often DID). It does NOT prevent them from getting hurt, it does NOT detract from their life, it will not protect them, it;s simply ONE tool to keep track of how far they take the trust you HAVE given them. It's also a two way street if properly enabled to let the CHILD know when you actually HAVE spied on them (which I feel it SHOULD do), so continual pestering WILL show the child you lack trust, and that should limit how often the tool is actually used.

      --
      There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
    155. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Reziac · · Score: 1

      As I recall the FBI's stats on the matter, if you meekly hand over your wallet, you're about twice as likely to be injured (and twice as likely to lose your wallet) as if you resist. It's counterintuitive, but apparently true.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    156. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      "Karate has a couple of weaknesses over other martial arts, but the primary one is that you almost never do a serious, round-based full contact fight in competition. "

      Competition itself , is the weakness . It teaches the wrongs things ( round based ? ) , which won't help you in a real situation.

    157. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      That may be true in theory , but that doesn't necessarily make it so in practice . That's why i said , you can't judge the situation. Criminals mainly acts by taking you by suprise , before you realize it .

      Also , he might have made good or bad decisions , but in such a situation , you have to decide so fast , that you are bound to make mistakes . I find it a bit arrogant of you to be pointing fingers.

      Not everything is textbook. Certainly not in situations like this.

    158. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by h4rm0ny · · Score: 1


      Honestly, I don't think it's highly doubtful. Children are a highly emotive subject, If a group of parents are tracking their children's every move and you say that they're wrong to do so - even if only by implication because you're not - then you risk a lot of hostility. The subject of parenting can rapidly become a for us or against us divider.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    159. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

      You're confusing karate training with "The Bourne Identity", don't worry, it's a common mistake.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    160. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Cheesetrap · · Score: 1

      Don't do that. You'll only make them stronger...

      Do you always stop reading halfway through a post? :p

      Take your Ritalin, dude :)

    161. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by jesset77 · · Score: 1

      Lets not also forget the dangers of teaching a whole generation of kids that its perfectly okay for those in authority over us to track our every movement.

      WCLPeter is right, these are important values to instill in our youth. Electronic surveillance of this kind can really do the job of re-enforcing the mindset that you are always watched, you are never alone. Gone are the problems that ensue when children "assume" noone knows what they are up to. Combine this with CCTV networks, and parents can have an on-demand, live video feed of their children in the broad world.

      Still, aside from bringing the price point down, the other major improvement this system needs is implantation, similar to RFID tags for pets, yet obviously much more versatile. That way, this won't be a piece of jewelry the user will ever "outgrow". When the child grows beyond the bounds of their parent's responsibility and into the workforce, then their new guardians in upper management will be able to keep tabs on human resources more efficiently. Popularization of technology like this is important to protect your employees from the corruptive influence of hazardous personal lifestyle choices and from competitive job offers.

      Well, it's a change that's been a long time coming. I am glad that Lok8u's parent company had the insight to introduce this product to the younger, more impressionable generation by way of leveraging the desperation of overwhelmed parents. Older generations have already been raised in an environment which rewards selfish rebellion, and products like this could not easily be marketed to them. So, let's start with the children and make sure they never have an opportunity to even question the wisdom of the rules we lay out for their well being. :D

      --
      People willing to trade their freedom of expression for temporary entertainment deserve neither and will lose both.
    162. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you know what a Panopticon is? Even a parent who doesn't constantly check the location has the ability to check at any time, which creates the feeling of constant supervision. You'll have to do a lot of validating, because your kids won't entrust you with their worries and troubles on their own.

    163. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by h4rm0ny · · Score: 1


      And keep in mind that it's not merely parents that will be tracking the children. The next logical step is for schools and "child-care" companies to spring up keeping an eye on them for the busy children". They don't need to just be able to say where the child is, either. Next thing you know they'll be offering services to "parent" your child as well - e.g. they'll do random "listen ins" on children to listen out for "bad language", bullying, talk of misbehaviour, whatever. And parents will pay for this privilege.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    164. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Eh? Do you really want to sue the people who help protect you for making mistakes?

      Yes. If they felt responsible, then maybe they'd work harder at not losing a long string of repeated calls.

      I mean, if it was done with malice it's a criminal issue but the piece you quote says the they lost track of the calls which is terrible and the results even more so, but the problem with taking responsibility for anything, particularly safety, is that at some point we all are guaranteed to make some form of mistake.

      Yes. And we should be held responsible for our mistakes. When the government sets the example, and the government states that no one is accountable for mistkes that kill or cause great harm, then people start believing it. The "do as I say, not as I do" mantra never works. Not on your children, and certainly not on adults. There is no responsibility in the US, and rulings like that are the reason.

      The real reason for the ruling was that those making it decided that they didn't think that the people were justified in receiving money, and then worked backwards from that to try to find law to justify their personal opinion. It's called "activist judges" and it's practiced by all of them, not just the ones that Rush doesn't like.

    165. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      you're better off running and hoping they either won't shoot or that they're a lousy shot

      Even a good shot won't hit a person. The stats are something like a 4% hit rate against a running human in real-world scenarios. Cops almost never hit what they are aiming at (unless, as it seems, they are aiming at someone with a toy gun in an ambiguous situation). Besides, most criminals don't practice with guns would hit a stationary person at 20 ft by sheer luck alone.

    166. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      That's why i said , you can't judge the situation.

      No, you can judge the situation. The situation of criminals asking you to remove yourself from safety and witnesses to an undisclosed location of cover is *never* the right choice. That you defend it indicates that you aren't doing anything other than sticking up for someone against logic and reason. He should be dead. And it's silly that someone with instincts contrary to his teachings would persist on teaching. Reinforces the offensive adage, "if you can't do, teach."

    167. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      GPS devices never "talk" to the GPS satellites. They "listen".

      Any "talking" the device does is done via other avenues. In this case, it's cellular, and most likely the cellular module can't connect to the network if it's not activated (subscribed). If it's not connected, it can't send its location.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    168. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      *facepalm*

      Whoosh.

    169. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by VeNoM0619 · · Score: 1

      I wandered up some side streets and got lost.. I was absolutely terrified, and so were they.. I wanted to go home and had no idea where home was, and they had no idea where I was.. Thankfully, back then, the community was more closely knit, and one of my mother's friends saw me and escorted me back home. So, yes, I can see some perfectly valid cases where this'll head off a lot of grief on both sides if used judiciously.

      Yes, agreed. But in the wrong hands, let's say I could track your kid 24/7 and find him wandering off to a place where no one normally goes. I now know when he will be alone which means an easier target.

      Taken a step farther: is there a possibility to spoof the location of the watch (send the parents to the bottom of the river just for shits and giggles?)

      --
      Disclaimer: I am not god.
      We may not be created equal
      But we can be treated equal.
    170. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seconded.

      Krav Maga is what you want to train, if you want to learn some form of self-defense. It's as simple as it gets (which is good - it's based on one's natural reflexes - nothing fancy) and focused on staying alive, and that's it.

      Basic principles:
      - If you can avoid a potentially dangerous situation, then avoid it (i.e. don't go there in the first place.)
      - If you can run away from a potentially dangerous situation, then run away.
      - If you can defuse a situation, then do so.
      - If you have to defend yourself, then do so as effectively as possible, using whatever means you have (hands, knees, feet, legs, head, elbows, key-chain, stone, gravel, anything you may have or see) as quickly and disruptively as you can, and then run away.

      Krav Maga is very dirty, even ugly. There is no finesse, and no fancy moves. Nothing unnecessary. You don't compete in Krav Maga, since that's not the purpose and there are no rules. The sole focus is to be able to defend yourself if you absolutely have to and get away, alive.

      Also, it happens to work.

      (In closing: If you have to fight someone who is armed with a knife, you will get hurt, unless you are either extremely lucky, extremely skilled, the opponent very stupid/unskilled/slow, or a combination of these factors. You don't want to delude yourself that you can defend yourself against an attacker armed with a knife without getting hurt. It is very, very likely that you will. Avoid it by any means possible.)

    171. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by motorhead · · Score: 1

      Let's get to the finish line. Have the tracker implanted in their head when they're born and tattoo a bar code on the back of their neck.

      --
      Employee Of the Month - Cyberdyne Systems Corporation - September 1997
    172. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, we should put that bracelet on the phone calls?

    173. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by h4rm0ny · · Score: 1


      It's the only way to keep us safe, you know.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    174. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Digital+Magus · · Score: 1

      "...No, your child isn't going to be kidnapped..." O'rly? Tell that to the parents so thankful of the Amber Alert plan that has contributed to the salvation of over 430 children since its inception. I'm certain they would disagree....

    175. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Painted · · Score: 1

      Your argument sounds suspiciously like the one I've heard regarding growing up in a small town vs. the city; namely that in a small town "everyone knows what everyone's doing so the kids don't get into trouble." Problem is that statistics quite clearly show that there is far, far more teen drinking and sex in rural areas, simply because there's nothing else to do. The "everyone knows" argument does nothing whatsoever to prevent these activities.

      There's also a difference between your parents calling a friends parents to make sure you're there and being able to track you to 10' every minute of the day...

      --
      http://marsandmore.com - Posters of space, spacecraft, and astronomy.
    176. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by Painted · · Score: 1

      Interesting- you seem to have lived what I've often considered a simple solution to the problems of the penal system in general. Most criminals (non-insane/exceptionally violent) do not need to be incarcerated, fed & clothed for years when a simple removal of privacy could do the trick.

      Topically, I think that the most basic loss-of-privacy punishment would be 24/7 tracking of an un-removable GPS device, graduating up to complete loss of privacy (ie, cameras throughout the home, broadcasting on the internet for any to see). You can't get away with much if anyone can check on you at anytime. Plus it would have the added benefit that most offenders in for shorter sentences would remain productive citizens, renting living space and feeding themselves, rather than getting room & board for free from society (albeit with certain other pound-me-in-the-ass disadvantages).

      --
      http://marsandmore.com - Posters of space, spacecraft, and astronomy.
    177. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

      Most of them kidnapped by family, usually as a result of a custody dispute. And the first thing they'd do is remove the tracking watch in a non-forceful manner.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    178. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      My point is , you are going over this , as is it's something everyday , as if he miscalculated his income tax and now has to pay for it.

      The situation is not so easy , not so predictable. I'm sure that , looking back on it , he would have wished he took other actions , and so he learns from it . But you can't know that , until you get into this situation. Not only that , but other people also learn from it , because he's their teacher.

      You can't know beforehand how you are going to react. Well , there are ways to train it , but that would bring me to far . I would say google tengu no michi , but it's mostly french and german texts.

    179. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      I knew this would come up.

      As you said , Krav Maga is very dirty and ugly.
      It lacks morality , and thus teaches the wrong things.

      If you want it with morality , go for tengu-no-michi

    180. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      My point is , you are going over this , as is it's something everyday , as if he miscalculated his income tax and now has to pay for it.

      For one, your sentences are nearly unreadable. You have many extra commas with spaces before them. And secondly, would you get your taxes done by someone convicted of tax evasion? If not, then don't take defense classes from someone that, when having been in one and only one situation in his life to actually use the skills, failed miserably at it.

    181. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      Well , actually , those comma's are there to make it more readable . I was in a hurry , so i didn't have time to check the grammar. But that's what the grammar nazis are for.

      Your analogy is also flawed. It's not me hiring someone convicted for tax evasion.

      A more correct analogy would be this : a very good bookkeeper made a mistake , and had to pay for the consequences ( received a drop in salary , and nearly got fired ).

      Now add to it that the bookkeeper had to make decisions , in less than a second . How likely is he to make mistakes ?

      I'm sure you know the answer to that.

      Feel free to remove any excess commas and spaces.

    182. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      "Karate is a very nice sport but that's it - a sport"

      No , karate is not just a sport by origin.
      Sadly , it has become that way for many , but it's much more , if only you which to seek it.

      People talk about Krav Maga , as something new , but they have forgotten that karate still has all that potential, but they refuse to use it like that.Offcourse , karate also required morality , which Krav Maga doesn't care about.

    183. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You place spaces before your punctuation. It is unreadable. If you wish to format your words in a way that is the custom so that others can read it, feel free to do so and I will read it. Otherwise, it isn't worth my time.

      Oh, and your commas were misplaced and made it more difficult to read, not easier. And with the odd spacing with extra commas, it was painful to read and I will not do that again.

    184. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      Well, you are the first person to make a fuss about that here. So i never really noticed.

      While i don't see my text as unreadable, I will try to improve this in the future.

      Thanks for your remarks.

    185. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by siriuskase · · Score: 1

      Getting lost can certainly be a learning experience, but it can be a very dangerous lesson for a child too young to deal with the task of surviving until he is found. My son got lost when he was 5. We didn't find him until the next day. He was fine, but hungry. We were all scared while he was gone, and then, since this is the US, we all had to undergo a harrowing Child Services investigation before we could take him home. A few decades ago, his father did exactly the same thing. And of course, everyone reminded me that 2000 years ago, Mary and Joseph lost a very irresponsible 12 year old. Kids get lost, separated, and kidnapped, and not all kids are found alive or undamaged.

      --
      If you must moderate, please moderate as irrelevent, not something bad, because I'm sure someone will find this interest
    186. Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult by corrie · · Score: 1

      Indeed. It is like Pascal's Wager.

      The downside of wearing are:
      1) The child receives early training on how to be an electronically emprisoned parolee
      2) The child grows up as a prisoner
      3) The child grows up without trust
      4) The child learns that activities with no pay-off but that costs a lot of energy end effort are good, perpetuating the faulty logic of Pascal's Wager that made a prisoner of people like you.

  2. Good for pre-teens, but not older by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Personally I wouldn't use this for teenagers because at that age, they have matured enough that they deserve a little privacy, and they will be going to difference places and such as part of their normal social life. However, for pre-teens, they generally will not be going anywhere but the places you expect them to. If they're not at those places, then they're generally in trouble (whether they've wandered off on accident, been abducted, or are just being mischievous). I don't see how this bracelet really compromises much convenience on their part, so personally I wouldn't hesitate to use it on younger children.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    1. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by muckracer · · Score: 4, Funny

      > I don't see how this bracelet really compromises much convenience on their
      > part, so personally I wouldn't hesitate to use it on younger children.

      20 years later:
      "Dad...about that nasty cancer growth... :-/"

    2. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by gninnor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      At 12 I was biking to work, a carnival type job and legal. Preteen. Really you have to know your child, but I also think you have to prepare them. For some I think those the do the former, would not do the latter. And those that would track their child, wouldn't care to teach them to take care of themselves. I don't know what the cut off should be, but either they should have direct supervision in a safe environment, limited freedom, or full freedom. A lot can happen when you are looking up the child's location on the computer.

      It reminds me of dog owners. A leash is less necessary for a well trained dog, than one that hasn't received it.

    3. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by mysidia · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you think 13 is a magic age where children suddenly deserve privacy of their whereabouts, heck no.

      That privilege is @ the parents' discretion. Usually people under age 17 must at all times tell their parents where exactly they are going, at what times. Typically parents just have to believe them, because it would be too inconvenient to have them watched at every moment, and well-behaved teens don't need it.

      And their parents may use any method at their disposal to verify the children are at the places they say they are. Privacy of location is not a right children have at any age.

      But usually if Children have demonstrated they can't be trusted the response isn't "Ok, wear this tracking bracelet", the response is "You can't go out, you're grounded." IOW, removal of privacy of location by disallowing them to leave.

    4. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will also get them used to the fact that they're always under surveillance, which is a requirement for the well-adjusted citizen of our future society. Evil feeds on ill-conceived good intentions.

    5. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by IBBoard · · Score: 4, Informative

      Personally I wouldn't use this for teenagers because at that age, they have matured enough that they deserve a little privacy

      That, plus if you look at the picture then there's no way in hell that any teenager would be seen dead with that thing on their wrist :D

    6. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Personally I wouldn't use this for teenagers because at that age, they have matured enough that they deserve a little privacy

      Exactly - if you put the wristwatch on a teenage boy, all they'll find is that he's spending most of his time in the bathroom rapidly jumping back and forth about 4" at a time.

    7. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And then your kids will sneak out of your house or get very, very lonely.

    8. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Swizec · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you think 13 is a magic age where children suddenly deserve privacy of their whereabouts, heck no.

      That privilege is @ the parents' discretion. Usually people under age 17 must at all times tell their parents where exactly they are going, at what times. Typically parents just have to believe them, because it would be too inconvenient to have them watched at every moment, and well-behaved teens don't need it.

      Why would people under the age of 17 have to have little locational privacy? Personally when I was 13-ish I simply stopped telling my parents where I am, usually through either flat out lying or through giving nonspecific information, simply felt I didn't want them quite knowing where I am. Besides, if there was any sort of trouble, I always had my cell phone with me so it wasn't like I magically vanished out of sight ... having to know where children are was, imho, important only before the age of mobile communication.

      However, nowadays, when I'm 21-ish my parents still keep pestering me about where I am and I _still_ don't tell them. Just goes to show parents never learn, ever.

    9. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Personally I wouldn't use this for teenagers because at that age, they have matured enough that they deserve a little privacy, and they will be going to difference places and such as part of their normal social life. However, for pre-teens, they generally will not be going anywhere but the places you expect them to. If they're not at those places, then they're generally in trouble (whether they've wandered off on accident, been abducted, or are just being mischievous). I don't see how this bracelet really compromises much convenience on their part, so personally I wouldn't hesitate to use it on younger children."

      The problem is that it leads to a false sense of security and/or a state of hyper-vigilance. When you say "If they're not at those places, then they're generally in trouble (whether they've wandered off on accident, been abducted, or are just being mischievous)", it implies (by a logical fallacy, I know) that is they are at those places, then they are safe.

      So Jane Parent sends her kid off to Tommie Walker's house. She drills the specific route to there, so as to avoid the sex offender she found on the web (public urination) and tracks him on her computer, confident in his safety. Of course, the fact that Billie's uncle Ernie and cousin Kevin are visiting doesn't show up on the bracelet's software. So as she's checking every 5 minutes, confident that the sex offender hasn't snatched him up and taken him to his secret lair, while instead she is "witnessing" he precious be molested in front of her virtual eyes.

      As for the other 2 examples, if a child goes wandering off, they shouldn't be allowed to go places alone - they are either too young or have attentional problems and need more supervision. As for being mischievous, that's a discipline problem - if a kid goes where he isn't supposed to KNOWING he's being tracked, the parents have bigger problems.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    10. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Your statement assumes that teenagers and pre-teens won't find a way of circumventing this device. That is never a wise assumption.

    11. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "Besides, if there was any sort of trouble, I always had my cell phone with me so it wasn't like I magically vanished out of sight ... having to know where children are was, imho, important only before the age of mobile communication."

      Yeah, because cell phone never get lost, or stolen, or forgotten. And the batteries never die.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    12. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Charles+Dodgeson · · Score: 1

      Personally I wouldn't use this for [...]

      This isn't for your children or for mine. But this is for the parent who is not letting their kids out unsupervised. If this enables kids in such families to have to chance to go out on their own without constant adult supervision then this is a good thing for them.

      --
      Prime numbers are exactly what Alan Greenspan says they are -S. Minsky
    13. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's almost certainly against the google maps TOS as well. They prohibit the display of any personal or private information using the API. Also against the rules to put behind a paywall.

    14. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by mysidia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why would people under the age of 17 have to have little locational privacy? Personally when I was 13-ish I simply stopped telling my parents where I am, usually through either flat out lying or through giving nonspecific information,

      If they accepted non-specific info then they allowed you that privacy as a privilege for you out of their own free choice, which is different from you having a right to that privacy.

      As for flat out lying, that's misbehavior, and prone to result in the grounding response when eventually discovered by parents either by asking around, or by covert tracking (covertly following you, or sending someone to covertly follow you and report on your whereabouts to the parents).

    15. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm no emo, I just accidentally cut myself while removing my tracking device!

    16. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by natehoy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exactly!

      We live in an age where we learn about children being kidnapped thousands of miles away as if it was local news. We and our kids are safer than any time in history, but thanks to instant mass communication and the simple fact that bad news gets more attention and therefore sells more ad space and Lemon Joy, we hear about a number of kidnappings on a daily basis. I'm not saying the world is absolutely safe, and kids do get kidnapped, but we hear about it so much today that the risk rules a lot more of our world than it should. Of 1,000,000 kids, let's say one gets kidnapped by a stranger. But if all 1,000,000 parents keep their kids indoors, probably 20 of them will die of something related to the fact that they aren't outside burning off energy like kids should be.

      Result: A *Big Deal* is made of a mother allowing a preteen to ride the subways alone. Parents can no longer allow their 10-year-olds to play at the park all day, unsupervised, because someone from Child Protective Services will be knocking on their door as soon as it is discovered.

      If this tool allows a parent (who otherwise lives in fear of Something Bad happening to their child the instant the child leaves the house) to let Little Jimmy or Janie engage in a solid day of unsupervised free play, then for that family it's probably the single greatest tool they could purchase for the mental and emotional development of their child. Unsupervised free play is incredibly important to fostering the development of an independent, imaginative child.

      The kid doesn't need this. But some parents do.

      Is it right that the parents need this? No, of course not. But we live in an age of paranoia and fear, and this might help overcome that fear for a few parents.

      Is this profiteering on irrational fear? Yes, it is. But it may also help mitigate that fear.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    17. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Cheesetrap · · Score: 1

      And then your kids will get very, very lonely.

      A blogger is born!

    18. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 1

      Of course these will be primarily purchased by overprotective and controlling parents who want to keep tabs on their children's every movement like they were under some kind of house arrest. However, they do have legitimate uses, such as hiking. It would be nice to know that if your 4 year old somehow wanders off when you should have been looking, while walking in the woods, that you can track them by GPS on your blackberry. I can see why anyone might want to wear one of these, just so that someone knows where you are. ( again walks in the woods come to mind - if you fall down a hill and break your leg, it would be nice if someone could find you ) There's probably a code that you have to enter to remove it though. If the child knows their numbers, they ought to know the code.

      --
      ...
    19. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My 17 year old daughter cant be left alone to wander. She is easily influenced by friends.. "here try this meth, it's fun.... Ok giggle" and will trust random people. We tried for a LONG time to get her to be wary of strangers and others, but she for some whacked out reason thinks everyone is trust-able. This has put her in danger a LOT, and caused a lot of pain and suffering in the family and for her.

      She get's tracked by her cellphone, and she has to call and tell me where she is and who she is with at all times. We have a strict schedule, and if she is 5 minutes late we fire off the panic mode. We really need to, she is that ditsy.

      Some are not even safe to wander on their own at 17-18. She is starting to get it though, it took a very very very bad thing to happen to her to get her to realize that people are mostly evil and they have to prove themselves to you to trust them. Just glad the cops got him before I did, I certainly would have killed the guy if I got to him first.

    20. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Swizec · · Score: 1

      If they accepted non-specific info then they allowed you that privacy as a privilege for you out of their own free choice, which is different from you having a right to that privacy.

      As for flat out lying, that's misbehavior, and prone to result in the grounding response when eventually discovered by parents either by asking around, or by covert tracking (covertly following you, or sending someone to covertly follow you and report on your whereabouts to the parents).

      Yeah it was probably a covert social contract that they allowed me to give nonspecific info, but my info was very broad. I basically told them I wouldn't leave the city or go anywhere that requires money to take a ride ... which I don't consider very useful info at all.

      And about flat out lying, yes it's misbehaviour and yet I was never grounded, not even when I was constantly coming in 2+ hours late. It's very difficult to punish someone who simply doesn't give two shits. In fact if they were to call me while I was out and ask where I am, I'd usually just tell them despite having flat out lied beforehand, this naturally increased their "aw he can't lie to us" reflex and I could lie much more easily about the big things :)

      So what about that, what if you have a child whom lets you catch them on small lies, but never on big ones?

    21. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 1

      Hehe, I haven't seen the picture, but maybe being unfashionable enhances it's deterrent value. "If you don't behave, then I'll have to make you wear the stupid watch for a week. Your friends will laugh themselves silly at your expense!"

      --
      ...
    22. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Same here, and I was a teenager in the '60s. They'd ask me where I was going, and the answer would be "for a walk". It wasn't a lie since I was walking.

    23. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 1

      A device like this communicates to your child that you don't trust it. That's why I plan to secretly have GPS trackers surgically implanted in my children's skulls.

      (Note to the humor impaired: I'm joking.)

    24. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by thisnamestoolong · · Score: 1

      And their parents may use any method at their disposal to verify the children are at the places they say they are. Privacy of location is not a right children have at any age.

      You are certainly right about this, in the fact that this is what the law states. In practice, however, this will completely f*ck your kids up.

      It is my opinion that children (especially teenagers) NEED a degree of freedom to learn about the world around them. Let's look at teen drinking, for instance.

      Scenario 1: A child is raised in a strict Baptist household. They are told from a young age that alcohol is bad, and they should just not do it. They are heavily monitored all the time to prevent them from going to parties and such where drinking will occur. This child gets to college, and sees everyone around them drinking all the time. Because they never had any experience with alcohol, they will have no concept of moderation. Since the overall behavior is entirely off-limits, they will have no sense of limits within this behavior, so to speak.

      Scenario 2: A different child is raised in a household where they are given a degree of freedom. Mom and dad will occasionally let them have a beer or glass of wine, just as long as they aren't driving anywhere. They are allowed to go to parties, but told that if they drive drunk, they can expect a can of whoop ass to be opened as soon as their parents find out. This child will have a sense of boundaries about alcohol. They will understand that you can drink to moderation. They will have a sense that it is ok to be drunk, but not to drive drunk.

      We can see this even more clearly in the real sex-ed vs. abstinence only debate -- kids who are only taught abstinence and take abstinence pledges are every bit as likely to have sex, but are significantly less likely to use condoms.

      All this being said, if your child is seriously in trouble (addicted to heroin, involved in a street gang, etc.) it is your job as a parent to take extraordinary measures to get your child back on the right track. It seems, however, that many parents seek to abuse these extraordinary measures and seek to use them against the ordinary dangers children face, which is entirely unacceptable. Your children need to get hurt sometimes, it is the only way to really learn about the world. For instance, you can tell a child 1,000 times not to touch the hot stove, but if you actually let them do it once you can be sure it will never happen again.

      --
      To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    25. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention teenagers know more about tracking than their parents. I'm sure sticking the watch to a strangers car would be a great laugh to them.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    26. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by pipatron · · Score: 1

      realize that people are mostly evil

      Citation needed. How do you figure this? If people were mostly evil, most people would have a criminal record.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    27. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily. I think in most cases for YOUNGER children the case here isn't communicating that you don't trust the child, but rather that you don't trust the world. The simple fact is with younger children you generally don't have an issue of trusting that they're going where they say they are because most really young children aren't going anywhere without adult supervision anyways. I see this primarily as a way to track children that are abducted and the like. Now if this became too common then I'm sure most abductors will just look for such things and pull them off ASAP, but in this transitional period between there and now, I see this as possibly helping some there, without interfering in much.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    28. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Well, I do think that if all the laws on the books were enforced 100% of the time virtually every person on the planet WOULD have a criminal record, but whether or not those laws constitute "evil" is another matter entirely.

      Personally though, I have found it useful to take at least a cautionary view of the world. I don't trust anyone until they've earned my trust.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    29. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by giorgiofr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So what about that, what if you have a child whom lets you catch them on small lies, but never on big ones?

      Then you wonder why the hell your son is lying all the time and why you can't trust each other. I guess.

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    30. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      I see your point, but if there's a true correlation I think it's much more vague, and to a large degree comes down to personalities as much as upbringing.

      My observations are all anecdotal, but I was raised up in a strict Baptist household (though I've been to church maybe 4 times since I turned 18 almost 10 years ago - generally for a few Christmas services. I'm just not that religious these days).

      I too was given a strict "no alcohol" rule as a kid (despite my father being a borderline alcoholic - I was in one of those weird families where the dad was a heathen who never went to church and the mom didn't miss a service). My brother and sister were given the same talk. All 3 of us turned out different.

      I personally never took a drink - literally not even a sip - of alcohol until about 3 or 4 months after my 21st birthday. Even then it was only a few beers here and there. I've been drunk less than 6 times in my life - always at parties where I was spending the night anyways, and never completely plastered. I'll often volunteer as the DD for friends because in general I just don't drink very often.

      My brother came out in between. He drank with friends growing up. Never got too bad off. He got caught once for underage drinking when he was 18 but wasn't actually drunk. He's now 25 and is in general a frequent, but responsible drinker. He never drinks and drives and generally only drinks socially on the weekends, and rarely to excess.

      My sister is the opposite. She never learned limits. Around 18 or 19 she pretty much turned into an alchoholic, drinking constantly, and has now wrecked 3 vehicles while intoxicated, and gotten a DUI for one of those accidents. All 3 were her ending up in a ditch which her friends usually would pull her car out of and no accident report was filed, but one night she hit the ditch and passed out and a cop came by while she was passed out.

      3 different kids, same household, 3 different outcomes. Transfer to when I was at college, and you had the same dichotomy. There were some responsible drinkers. There were some idiots that were throwing up all over the dorm every Saturday morning. Some were brought up in strict households, some weren't. There was also a lot of on-campus religious group types who never drank at all, were raised that way, and remained that way.

      While it may have some bearing, the reasons behind drinking (or doing anything) excessively are a lot more complicated than just being the forbidden fruit.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    31. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think 13 is a magic age where children suddenly deserve privacy of their whereabouts, heck no.

      That privilege is @ the parents' discretion. Usually people under age 17 must at all times tell their parents where exactly they are going, at what times.
      Typically parents just have to believe them, because it would be too inconvenient to have them watched at every moment, and well-behaved teens don't need it.

      Why would people under the age of 17 have to have little locational privacy? Personally when I was 13-ish I simply stopped telling my parents where I am, usually through either flat out lying or through giving nonspecific information, simply felt I didn't want them quite knowing where I am. Besides, if there was any sort of trouble, I always had my cell phone with me so it wasn't like I magically vanished out of sight ... having to know where children are was, imho, important only before the age of mobile communication.

      However, nowadays, when I'm 21-ish my parents still keep pestering me about where I am and I _still_ don't tell them. Just goes to show parents never learn, ever.

      No, that just goes to show me that you don't have any respect for your parents.

    32. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Four inches? Was your high school nick name "Stubby?"

    33. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Swizec · · Score: 1

      So what about that, what if you have a child whom lets you catch them on small lies, but never on big ones?

      Then you wonder why the hell your son is lying all the time and why you can't trust each other. I guess.

      And the simple answer is that you're obviously sticking your nose in other people's (your son in this case) business.

      Seriously, if my parents weren't so nosy they'd probably know a lot more about what I do day to day.

    34. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by PitaBred · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or just learn to fucking behave and tell the truth. Is that so hard nowdays?

    35. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by mk3k · · Score: 1

      Wow...wait till you decide to have kids. If you don't great, but if you do, you'll suddenly understand why you're parents were "so nosy".

    36. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my parents still keep pestering me about where I am and I _still_ don't tell them. Just goes to show parents never learn, ever.

      Yeah, parents are such assholes. It's like they care, or some shit.

    37. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by swillden · · Score: 1

      And the simple answer is that you're obviously sticking your nose in other people's (your son in this case) business.

      LOL.

      I'd love to hear your perspective on this when you have teenage children. If it doesn't change, I'd give your kids a 50/50 chance of having really screwed up their lives by the time they reach adulthood. Maybe you'll get lucky and have kids whose judgment matures before their bodies do, but then again maybe you won't. With your attitude, your kids better hope that you get lucky.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    38. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by The+Wild+Norseman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And the simple answer is that you're obviously sticking your nose in other people's (your son in this case) business.

      Yes, it is a simple answer. It's my moral, legal, and ethical obligation to take care of my children; they have no privacy except what I provide them in the interests of teaching them and correcting any mistakes they might make. I take great pains to demonstrate privacy to my kids with the knowledge that I may take it away at any time if caught in a lie and just yesterday, I had to tell my boys that I lost a lot of respect for them and quite a bit of trust when I caught a "little white lie."

      Seriously, if my parents weren't so nosy they'd probably know a lot more about what I do day to day.

      Oops. I'm sorry, I made the above comment with the presumption that I was responding to a mature adult. This laughable statement proves me wrong.

      --
      "A government is a body of people usually -- notably -- ungoverned." -Shepherd Book
    39. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Swizec · · Score: 1

      Oops. I'm sorry, I made the above comment with the presumption that I was responding to a mature adult. This laughable statement proves me wrong.

      I'm a, to put it lightly, heavy twitter user. Just how much do you think I would have kept from my parents if it wasn't out of pure spite of not telling them because they ask too much?

    40. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Swizec · · Score: 1

      Sorry for duplicate reply, but, just why do parents think the "I lost a lot of respect in you and quite a bit of trust" line works? Now maybe I was just special, but whenever my parents tried to pull that shit on me I just laughed about it and did the exact same wrong thing next time, often simply because they would get 'upset' about it. Seriously, there is nothing more amusing in the world than making your parents snap at ya. It's funny, they're so powerless to do anything they just end up shouting and making themselves feel strong.

    41. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Why would people under the age of 17 have to have little locational privacy? Personally when I was 13-ish I simply stopped telling my parents where I am, usually through either flat out lying or through giving nonspecific information,

      If they accepted non-specific info then they allowed you that privacy as a privilege for you out of their own free choice, which is different from you having a right to that privacy.

      As for flat out lying, that's misbehavior, and prone to result in the grounding response when eventually discovered by parents either by asking around, or by covert tracking (covertly following you, or sending someone to covertly follow you and report on your whereabouts to the parents).

      You see, what happens is that the teenager attempts to assert some control over their destiny (lying or not saying, who cares) and the parents either allow it or not. If they decide not to allow it and the teen doesn't back down, then you have trouble. You really can't control a teenager if he won't be controlled and at worst, you just might alienate them completely - it really depends on what the teen is doing more than them not telling you; by the time you've got a teenager, discipline doesn't work unless the teen allows it, so it's in the interests of the parents to not push too hard.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    42. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      I see your point, but if there's a true correlation I think it's much more vague, and to a large degree comes down to personalities as much as upbringing.

      Not really. Correlations are a statistical thing, and it doesn't matter why things correlate if you just want to know that they do. By and large, europe has less problems with teen drinking, and it can be argued that it's because alcohol isn't a forbidden thing. You could also point to fewer teen drivers, but I doubt that's the major cause. What's important here is whether gradual introduction of alcohol leads to better drinking behavior: logically, it makes sense, and I'm sure there are studies on the subject. I just can't be arsed right now.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    43. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They never checked the basement?

    44. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Of course you can control a teenager... they require transportation to get anywhere; transportation you don't have to provide. They require things like phones, computers, or internet connections you provide to be able to communicate with their friends, a nice warm cozy bed with TV, you don't have to provide them access to any of these things.

      The teenager cannot enter into a contract on their own, they cannot buy a car, they cannot even buy a cell phone on their own, or get a credit card or bank account. If you allowed them to, you as guardian have control over those assets, and you can shut them all down.

      Teenagers also require things like food, clothing, and shelter, and at least until the age of 16, they won't really be able to get a job anywhere to be able to acquire any of those things without help.

      There won't even be a credit rating, which means basically zero chance of renting an apartment (without a huge deposit or someone to co-sign)

      Just to get a driver's license, they require legal documents, such as birth certificate, which are locked in parents' bank locker, the child cannot get on their own, until the age of 16. And even then.. in most states parents can remove that privilege until 18.

      Basically, "leaving" and going away isn't an option for the average teenager. As long as they are a captive audience, highly persuasive means means exist to control them to a great extent, even if they do not wish to be so controlled.

      Parents can (and do) exert much more extreme control over their teenage children way beyond knowing where they are.

      Often parents also demand they don't go to certain places (restraint of where children can go); or demand that children return by a certain time (curfew).

      And various methods are at parents' disposal to verify they do what they're supposed to do, and don't lie. I think the wristwatch is just a new toy.

      Coercive overprotective parents exist, and have been able to do what they want to do without the toy, it really doesn't change matters at all.

      It's not like the advent of GPS-embedded on devices like cell phones is new. Parents have been using such cell phones to track their kids for a couple years at least.

    45. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Naw, i'd send them to slashdot.org. They'd stay up all night reading and posting comments, and forget all about their loneliness.

      Also, it's pretty hard to sneak out of the house, when there's a burglar alarm armed, cameras covering all the exits, the yard + street, and they're in a 2nd floor room, overlooking the back yard, w/ motion-sensors in the backyard that trigger lights and alarms...

      Moreso, if the door out their bedroom is physically locked.

      Ok, maybe that's a little extreme... but you get the idea.. if you're serious about it, you can make sneaking out pretty darn hard.

    46. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      The teenager cannot enter into a contract on their own, they cannot buy a car, they cannot even buy a cell phone on their own, or get a credit card or bank account. If you allowed them to, you as guardian have control over those assets, and you can shut them all down.

      Not true - most people won't contract with a teenager because they can walk away without repercussions. If you insist on controlling a teen as completely as you describe, they can either emancipate themselves and all this stuff you mentioned goes poof or simply wait you out, then leave, never to return. Much better to build a relationship of trust with someone who will very shortly not be beholden to you.

      There won't even be a credit rating, which means basically zero chance of renting an apartment (without a huge deposit or someone to co-sign)

      Or they can rent a room from someone.

      As long as they are a captive audience, highly persuasive means means exist to control them to a great extent, even if they do not wish to be so controlled.

      They will remember this and if you piss them off enough, they simply won't talk to you after they're financially stable.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    47. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by mysidia · · Score: 1

      17 year olds are not really the target for these devices. I would consider it extremely brazen and overprotective to try and track a 17 yr old.

      If you feel she can't be left to wander at 17, you or she has a serious problem, that needs to be solved, but cannot be solved just by tracking her for a year... on her 18th birthday, at most a year, she reaches the age of majority with all legal rights and responsibilities of any adult, and you can no longer be tracking her or compel her to do things, except if she makes a decision that she'll allow it, as an adult, she can change her mind at any time, also.

      That is, unless you're planning on starting a guardianship action and claiming she has an incapacity, with extraordinary and overwhelming evidence of a mental problem, necessitating a guardian to be appointed, that is...

    48. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Personally I wouldn't use this for teenagers because at that age, they have matured enough that they deserve a little privacy

      Exactly - if you put the wristwatch on a teenage boy, all they'll find is that he's spending most of his time in the bathroom rapidly jumping back and forth about 4" at a time.

      if you read the article, (or skimmed the summary) you'd know the GPS is only accurate to 10 feet.

      So for all you know, it will be repeatedly showing your boy in the girls room, or the girl in the boys room.

      (which might be normal I guess)

      --
      Be seeing you...
    49. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by martas · · Score: 1

      exactly. they say that their aim is to "give children their freedom and parents peace of mind", but it would be more appropriate to say "illusion of freedom", and a teenager is already intelligent enough to understand what having a GPS device on you at all times does to limit your privacy and hence freedom, while an up to 10 year old kid would probably not give a crap, even if they understand what the device is for.

      the only problem I foresee is if the watch doesn't look "cool" enough...

    50. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Children who aren't sociopaths actually feel bad when they make others feel bad, not get their chuckles from it.

    51. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by The+Wild+Norseman · · Score: 1

      I'm a, to put it lightly, heavy twitter user. Just how much do you think I would have kept from my parents if it wasn't out of pure spite of not telling them because they ask too much?

      Because there's a world of difference between trying to look cool to your friends and making plans and so on and your parents (perhaps poorly in your case) trying to teach responsibility.

      --
      "A government is a body of people usually -- notably -- ungoverned." -Shepherd Book
    52. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by The+Wild+Norseman · · Score: 1

      Sorry for duplicate reply, but, just why do parents think the "I lost a lot of respect in you and quite a bit of trust" line works? Now maybe I was just special, but whenever my parents tried to pull that shit on me I just laughed about it and did the exact same wrong thing next time, often simply because they would get 'upset' about it. Seriously, there is nothing more amusing in the world than making your parents snap at ya. It's funny, they're so powerless to do anything they just end up shouting and making themselves feel strong.

      I can't speak for others; in my case, I reinforce the idea that trust and respect are far more valuable in life than anything else. They get punished too, of course, my kids. It's not just one or ther other. And it sounds like by the time you were old enough to laugh at your parents when the tried to pull that shit on you, it was already too late. I guess if you think that your behavior is not dysfunctional, then more power to you.

      --
      "A government is a body of people usually -- notably -- ungoverned." -Shepherd Book
    53. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Swizec · · Score: 1

      There isn't really, why wouldn't I want to brag in front of my parents? If I deem a behaviour brag worthy then parents obviously aren't excluded from that since they're just people too.

    54. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by Swizec · · Score: 1

      Oh I understand that trust and whatnot are very important, don't worry, parents taught me that well enough. Like if you don't display yourself as trustworthy then people won't trust you and it will be much more difficult to get them to do stuff for you ... just an example.

      Perhaps I just learned at too young an age that trust can be gamed and manipulated and that even if people momentarily lose their trust in you it's relatively easy to regain that trust at will. And if you don't want htem losing trust you simply make certain you aren't caught doing whatever it was you did.

    55. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      "However, nowadays, when I'm 21-ish my parents still keep pestering me about where I am and I _still_ don't tell them. Just goes to show parents never learn, ever."

      Just wait till you have kids. You'll do the same things your parents did.

    56. Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older by The+Wild+Norseman · · Score: 1

      Okay, that's cool. If I misunderstood then I apologize.

      --
      "A government is a body of people usually -- notably -- ungoverned." -Shepherd Book
  3. ZapEM! by muckracer · · Score: 3, Funny

    1. Extend functionality to provide automatic electroshock to BRAT moving beyond configured away-from-home radius
    2. ?
    3. PROFIT!!!

    1. Re:ZapEM! by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Now it there were any way to combine this with an expletive detector...

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:ZapEM! by mysidia · · Score: 1

      That brat will very quickly find some method around it, such as dousing the device, or wrapping it in tin foil, so it cannot report on their location

    3. Re:ZapEM! by muckracer · · Score: 1

      > That brat will very quickly find some method around it, such as dousing the
      > device, or wrapping it in tin foil, so it cannot report on their location

      Well, that'll be taken care off by the new periodic call-home feature. If no
      connection to home-server can be made, an explosive charge will deploy. "NO
      CARRIER" will get a whole new meaning..mwahahaha!!! >:-)

    4. Re:ZapEM! by maxume · · Score: 1

      Just shoot them in the back of the head before they get a chance to leave the house. Solves all sorts of problems.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    5. Re:ZapEM! by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      *Queue Beethoven's 9th Symphony in the background*

      Thou should learn how to conduct thyself public-wise, oh my brother...

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    6. Re:ZapEM! by The+Cisco+Kid · · Score: 1

      Yes, because if your child is abducted you want to make sure that in addition to whatever fear of the kidnappers they have that they are in pain from electroshock too.

      Spoken like a moron that doesn't have children, and probably shouldn't be allowed to.

    7. Re:ZapEM! by MoralHazard · · Score: 1

      In the immortal words of Jeff Lebowski, "Obviously, you're not a golfer."

      I've seen a lot of Slashdotters mistake humor or irony for a serious post. But you, sir, have distinguished yourself, even amongst that august house.

    8. Re:ZapEM! by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Explosive charge in kid's wristwatch... sounds like something you'd see on the 6-o'clock news...

      Parent sues wristwatch maker; child's injuries due to explosive charge inserted by manufacturer :)

    9. Re:ZapEM! by batquux · · Score: 1

      Then you're likely to end up in an infinite loop... *BZZT* *Expletive* *BZZT* *Expletive* ...

    10. Re:ZapEM! by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 1

      Well, if the kid just prys up the case cover, and puts a drop of water inside, then the device will fail in short order, and the parents send it back for not being waterproof as advertised. When a new one appears in the mail 3 weeks later, rinse and repeat until the parents give up.

      --
      ...
    11. Re:ZapEM! by Odinlake · · Score: 1

      How about one of them nifty collars that explode when you screw up? With cloning and whatever coming along we can just grow children in flocks and let evolution sort out the disobedient! Much more efficient in the long run.

    12. Re:ZapEM! by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Only until you say "Barbra Streisand" and overload the detector. ;-)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    13. Re:ZapEM! by dargaud · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Extend functionality to provide automatic electroshock to BRAT moving beyond configured away-from-home radius

      This has existed for dogs for about a decade...

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
  4. So, Dr Elliott, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    explain to me, what exactly would have happened to Madeleine McCann if she was wearing one of these when abducted ? Either: (a) it would have been forcibly removed - causing an alert, or (b) police would have been able to track her.

    Explain to me again why our society is so safe for children that this device isn't needed ?

    1. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would have been slipped off her wrist and put in a park somewhere or in a bush or something. Or in the back of a passing pickup truck.

      No alarm tripped. Tracking? Sure... but you're chasing ghosts. Your logic is flawed, anon, and screaming THINK OF THE CHILDREN is not going to fool anyone here.

    2. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by carolfromoz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also there is a good chance she would not have been wearing it in bed anyway.

    3. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At best, Madeleine McCann's parents were STUPID enough to leave a three-year-old alone while they went out drinking and dining.

      AT BEST.

      No, that's not the kid's fault, but kids with utter dumbass parents like that aren't going to be saved by a GPS-enabled watch.

    4. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by mysidia · · Score: 1

      The abducter would have used simple methods everyone knows about to block the alert signal from going out while forcibly removing the device.

      Probably involving several layers of aluminum foil wrapped around it, and some bolt cutters.

    5. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by muckracer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > what exactly would have happened to Madeleine McCann if she was wearing one
      > of these when abducted ? Either: (a) it would have been forcibly removed -
      > causing an alert, or (b) police would have been able to track her.

      Or (c) Tracking Police would have found her chopped-off arm, incl. intact bracelet.

    6. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Before or after her parents killed her and dumped her body?

      Oh and unless she slept with her watch on it would have made fuck all difference if she was abducted. Most child abuse comes from within the family, after that the majority comes from trusted family friends and people who are expected to be with the kids, only a small amount comes from strangers, so this will only be marginally more effective at preventing abuse than snake oil and kids would be better off allowed to go out freely (they would be out of reach their family & family friends). It's not that i think this is bad technology, but its very ineffective (and users should be aware of that) and may encourage bad parenting (not letting the kids go out enough).

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    7. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this post touched me

    8. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'll pay you $20 million if we can settle this out of court!

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    9. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It touched my junk liberally.

    10. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

      Because, in the U.S., maybe 120 children are abducted in any given year (out of 35-80 millionish, depending on how you define children). The risk of drowning in a pool is an order of magnitude greater. And paying $240 per child (rough conversion from 150 pound list price) to stave off an infinitesimal risk is stupid. And the watch can be removed without force (look at the picture). And the odds of the watch being removed for a other reasons (sports, catching on a branch, etc.) are high, meaning most of the time the alert is for nothing, but costs time (and sometimes police resources) to respond to for no reason.

      In short, if we "protected" every child in the US, as a nation we'd spend a ten billion+ dollars up front, plus billions more in pointless police responses, and it wouldn't have a significant effect on the safety of any given child. In fact, the more people who use the watch, the less effective it would be, since kidnappers would know to look for and remove it carefully.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    11. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by Vanderhoth · · Score: 1

      I have to partly agree. It's possible that if she was waring some kind of tracking device maybe It would have gone unnoticed and the situation wouldn't have been as bad.

      It's hard to say how this technology could be used, my wife and I have talked about getting GPS tracking implants for our kids when we eventually have children (for when they're young). Things happen you go to the beach, the mall, the movies, fairs, etc... and it's a haven for kidnappers one second where you're paying a vendor or you turn your head to talk to someone and whosh!! kid's gone.

      I could also see this as a bad thing come the teenage years. I caused some trouble when I was younger, but looking back I see it as a necessary evil for my overall development. If I could track my teenagers and I knew where they were, sure I could go collect them because they aren't were they told me they'd be, but what kind of experiences and lessons could I be ruining because I "over sheltered" them? Some parents might take the stance "If I'm responsible for what my kids do, I have a right to invade their privacy.". I'd have to respond "true enough", but 1) just because you know where your kid is doesn't mean they're not causing trouble and 2) if you teach your kids to make good decisions, rather then making the decisions for them, you can be just as confident they're not up to something to get you in trouble.

      There has to be some kind of cut off point, but every person it's different, some mature faster then others, and ultimately it has to be up to the parent to decided until the kid is at least of legal age. I have four siblings, I think my youngest younger brother, 18 now, could have been driving when he was 13-14 because he is mature and responsible, he makes all the right decisions (there would be no need to track him). My oldest younger brother, 22 now, STILL shouldn't be allowed to drive as he's demonstrated time and time again with speeding tickets, getting pulled over for drunk driving and drugs, and wrecking his friends truck (I'm surprised he's not in jail let alone the COPS don't have a tracking bracelet on him).

    12. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

      One clarification: The 120 figure is for abducted by strangers. Many more are abducted by family and to a lesser extent, friends of family. But in the far more frequent abduction case, it can be assumed that the abductor is aware of the watch and will therefore remove it non-forcefully.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    13. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by DrWho520 · · Score: 1

      At the very least there would be some forensic evidence left over. The watch would have been tracked, the arm found and the hounds unleashed. There would be a blood trail easily tracked by a tracking dog to either the girl or the site in which she was loaded into a vehicle. The condo would have been examined for blood indicative of the act. Their vehicles would have been checked in the same manner. The girl would not have been found alive in the case of her arm being removed, but something would have been found. Dismemberment is just too messy.

      --
      The cancel button is your friend. Do not hesitate to use it.
    14. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by muckracer · · Score: 1

      > The girl would not have been found alive in the case of her arm being
      > removed, but something would have been found. Dismemberment is just too
      > messy.

      What a relief...whew!!

    15. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before or after her parents killed her and dumped her body?

      Says an arsehole. There's no evidence that anything like that happened. The police were by all accounts completely incompetant and went down that road for a short time on 'evidence' that was clearly shown to have a completely innocent explanation later. All the real evidence points to abduction.

      I hope you live in the UK and they ruin you with libel damages.

    16. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by RMH101 · · Score: 1

      "And paying $240 per child (rough conversion from 150 pound list price) to stave off an infinitesimal risk is stupid"
      Is it? How about $120? Or $60? or 60c? My point is this is market forces: if parents feel the need to buy this, they will. Some people have higher disposable income than others, some people place more of a premium on peace of mind, some don't mind blowing a couple of hundred dollars on sneakers. I don't care either way, but it's kind of nice there's an option for people that want this kind of technology.

    17. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by Cheesetrap · · Score: 1

      Dismemberment is just too messy.

      You forgot to add the bit at the end, "I am available for children's parties, by the way!"

    18. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "All the real evidence points to abduction."

      By a dingo, I suppose?

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    19. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which would have led them to the scene of the crime days/weeks/months earlier than without it, allowing them to gather valuable evidence and begin an appropriate search much sooner. Unless the perpetrator cut the arm off IN the house, in which case there would have been screaming and the perp would have had to be present at the scene for much longer, as well as prepared with a hacksaw, and would have likely left much more physical evidence as a result.

    20. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by Afty0r · · Score: 1

      explain to me, what exactly would have happened to Madeleine McCann if she was wearing one of these when abducted ?

      She would have been very uncomfortable going to bed that night (just like every other night she was forced to wear a large, uncomfortable watch to bed), been unable to sleep, and her parents would have been unable to irresponsibly leave her alone without any supervision.

      Most likely this would have resulted in her not being kidnapped - but the diseases she got from organisms trapped between her skin and a sweaty watch non-stop for years at a time killed her anyway.

    21. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by pizzach · · Score: 1

      Well, hopefully if they ever become popular, someone creates a correlation between the increased arm chopped-off rate of children and wearing the bracelet. The kids who you most want to watch are most likely to take it off again and again. The only way to get around it is to implant it.

      --
      Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
    22. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Sure that's possible. But it's ignorant to consider it likely.

      Criminals (and also basically every other person) are opportunists. When someone wants to break into a house and they see an alarm sticker, they just go on to the next house. They don't spend a month studying the alarm and the floor plan and figure a way to defeat the alarm.

      In a child abduction where the child has a tracking device, the abductor will get caught 10000 times for every time he decides to chop off the kid's arm. That should be obvious.

      Countermeasures don't have to be perfect to be effective. Often, they don't even have to be real. A good way to end vandalism is to install fake surveillance cameras, for example.

    23. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by tmosley · · Score: 1

      What does "forcibly removed" mean? That it was torn off? More likely they would simply remove it normally.

    24. Re:So, Dr Elliott, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a parent of a 5- and 7-year-old:

      Most of you are fucking stupid and clearly don't have children. Seriously.

      Yes, abductions and the like do not happen very often. Totally agreed, and totally in agreement that it gets overblown in the media quite often.

      However, it only takes one time for it to happen to your child. It would suck to be that one-in-a-million statistic, eh, when you know it is possible to reduce or eliminate those odds entirely, wouldn't it?

      Would I make my kids wear it when they were teenagers? Absolutely not. But there is an age range (between about 4 -> 8-9 years of age, is my guess) where kids DO go running off and DO NOT know the right questions to ask, no matter how much you tell them. (And believe you me, I *tell* them, repeatedly.)

  5. We never needed them before by chetbox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Parents have been perfectly capable of looking after their children without GPS tracking for millennia... IMHO with a little trust and good parenting, these devices are completely unnecessary.

    1. Re:We never needed them before by ZekoMal · · Score: 1

      This is the same era where "kid stealing car" results in people complaining about a video game, though. Parents are ineffective at their job and expect society to help them raise their little brat. When I used to work retail, you'd see no less than three kids wandering alone in the store. One time, there was a little girl wandering around alone ten minutes before the store closed. Parents are irresponsible nowadays, and when something goes wrong they are very quick to blame something or someone else.

    2. Re:We never needed them before by IBBoard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What is it with the large proportion of parents who feel it suddenly is necessary, though? I'm a parent, and he may still be less than 18 months old and so not going very far, but both me and my wife feel that a lot of this stuff (including net nanny monitors) is overkill and is just going to destroy the child's concepts of trust, personal space and self-reliance.

      Instill good values in your child and do your job as a parent and you can't go far wrong. Start to let technology do your job for you (because, shock-horror, the other alternative is putting in effort and teaching stuff to kids) and it'll all go wrong.

    3. Re:We never needed them before by fiordhraoi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Parents have been perfectly capable of looking after their children without GPS tracking for millennia... IMHO with a little trust and good parenting, these devices are completely unnecessary.

      A statistically low percentage of child kidnappings, etc, does not in any way assuage the grief and pain of a parent who happens to be one of the unlucky few. As someone else above stated, this is probably not appropriate for teenagers, but rather is suited for young children. The fact that the human race will continue without your child isn't any kind of comfort to a parent. If they make a value judgment that the peace of mind and possible benefit of purchasing one of these is worth the cost, then so be it.

    4. Re:We never needed them before by dintech · · Score: 1

      I thought tagging was for criminals? Free "I Love Big Brother" t-shirt with every watch. Versions 2 monitors for thought crime...

    5. Re:We never needed them before by zx75 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      We were perfectly capable of using motorized or animal transportation without seat belts for millennia... IMHO with a little care and good control these devices are completely unnecessary.

      It's not that I don't agree with your point, but I don't agree with the argument that you've made. Just because we've gone without something for a long time, and care will mostly mitigate circumstances that would result in an unfavourable result, this does not mean the device is unnecessary or useless.

      Now I don't think I should need such a device with my daughter, but I can easily imagine plausible circumstances in which an urgent matter arises and such a device would be handy to have available if only to give me peace of mind. Because you are not going to be able to watch your children 24hours a day forever... it's part of growing up. And maybe instead of following them to school the first time that they walk "alone", I will make sure my daughter arrives safely by checking my iPhone from my living room.

      --
      This is not a sig.
    6. Re:We never needed them before by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      It's not the kids I wouldn't trust - it's people I entrust them to. It's still years away from me, but I don't think homeschooling is an option.

      Just imagine... what if the babysitter is a complete dumbass? Or the teacher? Or the chaperone on the kid's first out-of-state field trip? If the kid's too young to fend for him/herself, most parents would probably (and should!) welcome any additional way to keep track of their kids.

    7. Re:We never needed them before by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      A statistically larger percentage of child molestation/abduction coming from within the family/trusted friends, surely means this will give the attackers more of an advantage than the defenders.

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    8. Re:We never needed them before by corbettw · · Score: 1

      Were they, though? What were the statistics on children being abducted or just falling down a cliff once upon a time? And are those statistics better today, or could they be further improved with this device? I don't know the answers to any of these questions, but I'm unwilling to dismiss an advancement like this out of hand without knowing them.

      Having said all that, I agree with you that good parenting is the key to having safe and happy children. As a personal anecdote, let me say that my youngest son drowned in my ex-wife's pool when he was only five. If she had been even a little more attentive to him, that little boy would now be eight. But a GPS bracelet would not have helped in that situation, since she was in the house at the time but hadn't even bothered to secure the sliding glass door to the backyard. You can have all the technology in the world, but if someone isn't willing to do the simplest things then needless tragedies will still happen.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    9. Re:We never needed them before by chetbox · · Score: 1

      This may be true, but I don't think it should be up to society to correct the mistakes of incompetent parents.

    10. Re:We never needed them before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I believe it's called stranger fear.

      Thanks to Oprah, Nancy Grace, CSI, Law & Order, etc., people think that the next stranger they meet is going to molest, maim, or kill them. It's often put up that a certain percentage of people are criminals, another figure are hardened criminals, you live within X feet from criminal Y in your neighborhood, there are some percentage (Z!) of criminals in the nearby city, etc.

      This extends then to the precious ones, children.

      It probably has some to do with the higher percentage of people living in cities these days and the mob mentality of the above, that someone somewhere is going to harm you (despite cities having a lower percentage by population crime rate than rural and suburban areas typically, just substantially more geographically dense because of the number of people packed on top of each other).

      It also doesn't help that overt verbal racism (as opposed to cross burning and the such which is another level entirely) has gone to slightly less --instead of people yelling directly at individuals or families, you have your motorcycle gang or tuner buddies conspire to harass, throw trash on someone's yard, gun your engine all hours of the day in front their house, etc.

      Surprisingly, this targets a general area versus a particular individual or family, and people feel less safe. This is similar to "crime watch" areas pretty much being a sign of "police don't care to come here so the neighbors have to watch and then call and hope the police show up at all, to hell with timely that would be godsend".

      Remember, next time you're at a park, there's a good chance a criminal is watching you.

    11. Re:We never needed them before by aclarke · · Score: 1
      You're right, of course. While we're on this line of reasoning, let's also stop using the following:
      • Modern medical intervention: Ultrasounds, delivery rooms, c-sections, blood transfusions, disinfectants, medicine, thermometers, disinfectants etc.
      • Automobiles
      • Diapers
      • Books
      • Any footwear or clothing technology invented in the last 200 years

      With a little trust and good parenting, ALL of these items are unncessary ... until you need them.

    12. Re:We never needed them before by Leafheart · · Score: 1

      Did anything change around the world in this millennium? Maybe more violence, bigger cities, more cars. The fact that we were able to know where in our farm your kid was 200 years ago, doesn't mean it is the same now.

      --
      --- "When you gotta do something wrong. You gotta do it right. (Fighter)"
    13. Re:We never needed them before by tgd · · Score: 1

      This is America. Parents no longer have any responsibility.

    14. Re:We never needed them before by fiordhraoi · · Score: 1

      Because family and friends, who are able to gain regular access to the child anyway, presumably because they either are the parents or are trusted by the parents, now suddenly need to check a website to find the child? Come on now, at least make sense. Yes, most abductions/abuse happen by those the child knows well. Having a GPS trackable watch doesn't make things appreciably easier for anyone in that category.

    15. Re:We never needed them before by aclarke · · Score: 2, Funny

      I just re-read my comment. I hope we never have to get rid of disinfectants, and certainly not disinfectants either! That would be disastrous, not to mention being a complete disaster.

    16. Re:We never needed them before by coofercat · · Score: 1

      As the world has got more crowded and busier, it's becoming harder to be a good parent when dealing with your kids. I mean, we can't be expected to actually be interested in our own kids can we? How can we possibly do that and answer the all important phone calls we get from our friends, let alone talk to our friends as we walk about. How can I possibly keep track of my five children when I'm having a party? I mean, not only do I have lots of guests around, but I can barely see straight enough to go back to the shop to buy more booze. There's no way I'm going to know every last detail about the little tikes that just seem to get into every little hole, or out of every open door way in the half a second my back is turned!

      The problem really is that kids just don't understand that mummy and daddy are busy people. We don't always have enough time in our days to watch their every move ourselves, so if we need some emotionless, compassionless computer to do it for us, for a relatively small up-front charge, then we think that's perfectly fine - at least until they've grown up a bit and shown that they're trustworthy. Of course, my 15 year old still hasn't reached that point, but then he always was a bit uncontrollable, and never really listened to anything we said. I blame schools for that - they don't instil any discipline these days. The police don't help, all they seem to do is harass my kids. They're good kids really, but of course they don't understand that.

    17. Re:We never needed them before by TheLink · · Score: 1

      This could be useful on farms too. Farms can be dangerous places.

      --
    18. Re:We never needed them before by Gulthek · · Score: 1

      Exactly! Spot on. Bam, said the lady.

      I'm a parent of a 15 month old and paranoid parenting is seriously pervasive. Scratch that, paranoid living.

      "Oh heavens, you're letting your boy play in the grass! There could be bugs and snakes in there!"

      We're in the midst of consequences: a great many people, for all intents and purposes, think that science equals magic. Anything not magically imbued with the protection of science by virtue of being man-made will at best sicken and at worst outright kill.

    19. Re:We never needed them before by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "What is it with the large proportion of parents who feel it suddenly is necessary, though? "

      Because Mommy and Daddy are still taking care of them, in one form or another.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    20. Re:We never needed them before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You havent felt the despair when you are in a shopping or in the beach and your little one escaped your eyesight because he poursued somethin interesting/shiny/beautiful.

      10 seconds looks like a month. I would attach something to him imediately if I have this kind of gadget. When He is old enought to ask for help himself and look for his parents (he is only 2) I will explain to him and he will have the option of using it or not

    21. Re:We never needed them before by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I bet not more violence.

      Freakonomics had a table of murder rates throughout history, it was quite interesting.

      The fact that our OMG sky is falling increases are from historically insanely low, to historically very low I found quite interesting.

      And I am going to guess, but I bet availability of more deadly weapons increases the murder rate to violence rate, though I could be wrong, as it wasn't long ago that one could die from a shaving nick.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    22. Re:We never needed them before by esme · · Score: 1

      I don't think having an 18-month-old prepares you for what it's like to have an older child. An 18-month-old is still very dependent on you, and having them in your sight (or in the sight of a trusted caregiver) at all times is realistic.

      I think devices like this are targeted more at parents with 8-10-year-old children. Depending on your circumstances, they might ride their bikes to and from school. Or walk over to friends' houses to play. They might go to one friend's house and find they can't play, and try another friend a few houses down (or even just wander home the long way around). Or when you're out shopping, they might stop and look at something, or head down a different aisle without telling you. Even if they are only a few yards away, it might take a while to backtrack and find them. Etc. So there will be times when there is uncertainty about exactly where they are. And this can cause a lot of anxiety.

      The healthy response to this anxiety is to create circumstances where they can have a little independence, teach them about what to do if things go wrong or they get lost. Work up to more responsibility and confidence (for both child and parent). That's what I'm doing with my 8-year-old. But I can understand why some people might have a bad experience, or be overwhelmed by anxiety and want something like this.

      -Esme

    23. Re:We never needed them before by IBBoard · · Score: 1

      2 years old? So young toddler (my kid is ~16 months and isn't walking very far on his own yet). That'd be about the point where I'd rely on physical controls (either hand holding or one of those harnesses). Either one gives the child a bit of freedom to walk on their own while still keeping them under your control.

      I only got lost in a shopping centre once that I know of when I was a kid and it wasn't that big a panic - that's why shopping centres tend to have "lost and found children" points. That plus I hadn't even gone out of the shop, just around the corner.

    24. Re:We never needed them before by kgwilliam · · Score: 1

      Parents have been perfectly capable of looking after their children without GPS tracking for millennia... IMHO with a little trust and good parenting, these devices are completely unnecessary.

      This is one of those ridiculous straw-man arguments that comes up every time a new device is introduced for children. Parents have also been perfectly capable of looking after their children for millenia without strollers, car seats, baby monitors, cribs, etc. Based on your argument you appear to believe that we would be just as well off without any of those things.

      You would be far better off debating the merits of this particular device, and not introducing such a weak argument about how we used to get along just fine before the introduction of child safety equipment.

      To get back to this device, why is it such a bad thing? Obviously, as with all things, the parents need to make an educated decision based on their specific circumstances. Granted, not all parents can make an educated decision, but that doesn't necessarily mean that this device is bad. As for the argument that it doesn't allow kids to grow up and learn to take care of themselves, or that it violates their privacy... I would actually argue the opposite. Currently if you are a parent with a young child at a fairground you pretty much have to keep them in your sight the entire time ("Johnny, don't get out of my site." "Johnny, don't go play past that tree." "Johnny, just sit here while I finish eating."). With one of these devices you can be a little more free to let your children play and roam and explore the world (again, obviously the parents have to make an intelligent decision based on their child and situation).

    25. Re:We never needed them before by nomadic · · Score: 1

      This is America. Parents no longer have any responsibility.

      Really? The laws of every state in the US will disagree with you. In fact, parents have more responsibility legally now than they've ever had.

    26. Re:We never needed them before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parents have been perfectly capable of looking after their children without GPS tracking for millennia... IMHO with a little trust and good parenting, these devices are completely unnecessary.

      Mankind also survived just fine without electricity for millenia ... should we get rid of that too?

    27. Re:We never needed them before by Hylandr · · Score: 1

      My parents needed them and if they had then you bet they would have used them.

      When my oldest was born we thought the same way you expressed in this post. She's 12 now, and with school buses, field trips and wanting to go to the stores by herself and trotting off with friends you damn well bet I am going to have one for each child I have. Injected under the skin if I thought it would work. I take every effort to secure the safety of my blond haired blue-eyed gems, and that also means utilizing every resource available to my advantage. You also assume that every nation is safe for young girls or boys.

      "Instilling good values" and "putting in effort" are buzzwords that I used when I was a new parent also. But the reality is we aren't always the only ones providing that instruction. Peers at school or at church, Magazines, TV, and movies are all your child's educators and you have no control over what they decide to adopt as good behaviour. If your serious, the best thing you can do for your family is get rid of the TV. Don't assume friends or even clergy at church to be a positive influence.

      Overprotective? No. Allow your children the time to be children, and save the life lessons for when they may have a better grasp of the concepts involved. Like the value of Virginity. Thats nothing any 12 yr old or 13yr old will grasp, and hey, everyone on TV seems to be have a *lot* of fun doing it. I promise you, if they catch wind it's fun, and they *enjoy* it, you *will not* get them back from it. drugs, sex, or bad rap music. If they feel a desire to fit in then remove them from that group or lose them. You are dealing with a hormonal driven animal with little to zero thought other than self gratification. Appeasing the parent, is also self gratification in the effect that it often results in more lenient restrictions.

      Remember that you are the parent, and they are called a child for a reason.

      Good Luck. - Dan.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    28. Re:We never needed them before by Cheesetrap · · Score: 1

      You're right, of course. While we're on this line of reasoning, let's also stop using the following:

      • Modern medical intervention: Ultrasounds

      Probably give you cancer...

      delivery rooms

      Often disregard centuries of midwifery and basic ideas such as beneficial use of birthing baths and gravity...

      c-sections

      Have been shown to be over-prescribed and the associated dangers minimised so that many mothers do not give informed consent...

      disinfectants

      Irresponsible overuse of which has helped give us superbugs, whereas just training people to wash their hands with soap and water more often would have worked just as well. Oh, and probably cause cancer...

      medicine

      Millions of kids on expensive anti-psychotics for run-of-the-mill running-around-like-a-kid activity, not to mention the trillions of dollars spent on the unregulated, so-called 'herbal' side of big pharma, making expensive pee for hundreds of millions of people every day... Not what I'd call progress, oh, and of course probably cause cancer :P

      thermometers

      Doesn't take a genius with equipment to work out if someone's hot or not. We have heat receptors in our skin... Oh, and if you break them, they can cause cancer...

      disinfectants

      See?? Overuse! :P

      Automobiles

      Should be eliminated. Personal, autonomous (in other words, easily crashable) transport vehicles are illogical in a day and age when we could have a top-notch public transportation system in every city; or it could still use private vehicles but utilize something like compressed air engines (needs electricity but this at least consolidates the fuel issue at the power plant, instead of having a billion separate pollution points you can have just a few thousand, and convert those to non-polluting sources); and between every city maglev can do the job... But I digress..

      Diapers

      Disposable nappies are a huge problem in landfill - we would be hugely better off if people stuck with reusable ones. Also less chance of things like allergic reactions (or cancer!!) from the plastics involved, and much cheaper too.

      Books

      The paper comes from trees and needs to be bleached, the bleach runoff gets into the waterways, and gives you cancer.

      Any footwear or clothing technology invented in the last 200 years

      What, are you kidding? Ruffles are BACK dude! :D

      With a little trust and good parenting, ALL of these items are unncessary ... until you need them.

      Or until you get cancer.

    29. Re:We never needed them before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations on your extensive "18 months" of experience as a parent. I have been a father for 23 years and would be very interested to see how your opinions will change as you mature into this role. You will find that it is necessary to use any social or technological advantage available to ensure the child is making decisions that will not adversely affect their future. My father mined coal then "moved up" to working in an explosives plant. He produced a next generation that includes a corporate vice president, two engineers, and a college admin. My first child just graduated from MIT and I look forward to see what my other two become when they get to college. My family knows about "putting in effort and teaching stuff to kids" and that includes oversight of their actions up to the time they prove themselves to be mature decision makers.
      To say "we never needed them before" to technological help is like saying that cars are bad, we have horses and never needed them before.I wish only the best for you and that beautiful new baby. Good luck and I hope he/she grows up to be the best he/she can be.

    30. Re:We never needed them before by ZekoMal · · Score: 1

      Oh I know, I'm just stating that this particular batch of parents believes it's not their responsibility to raise their kid.

    31. Re:We never needed them before by IBBoard · · Score: 1

      Fair enough that some people may be over anxious, but I still can't see it helping the kid in the long run. That plus even if it starts of as "for the over anxious" then it'll become the norm and be for every child (which is what the company wants anyway). Just look at the way that children can't be "trusted" on the Internet, at least according to all of the media outlets.

      Maybe I was just a strange child for actually paying attention to my parents and understanding that leaving my parents when we were in busy places or not being where I said I'd be when I said I'd be there were bad things, but I don't remember causing any major moments of anxiety. I know I'd have felt smoothered, cocooned and like my privacy was being violated if my parents had basically said "know we know we taught you to only go where we know you're going, but we don't trust that you're going to do that and we're paranoid of the big-bad-evils, so we're going to monitor your every movement as well, just to make sure".

    32. Re:We never needed them before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I cant believe so many are missing the clear utility of this device. The point is not to use it to watch the kid every day or even when they are being a dumb ass and going to where they should not be. Its to find them once they have either been lost or .... KIDNAPPED. I am by no means one of those "think of the children people" this however to me is a legitimate concern. The chances of a kid being kidnapped are small but not statistically crazy. Hell if you are visiting the wrong parts of Mexico adults should probably get something like this.

    33. Re:We never needed them before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parents have been perfectly capable of looking after their children without insurance policies, child safety seats, or even fluoride toothpaste for millennia. I absolutely trust my kids and put lots of effort into teaching them stuff. However, I don't trust strangers with my kids since it's hard to teach strangers not to steal my kids. It is extremely difficult for my 5-year-old and 2-year-old to defend themselves from kidnapping. As soon as they are big enough to ward off an attacker, I will feel much more at ease. I like this device.

    34. Re:We never needed them before by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Parents have been perfectly capable of looking after their children without GPS tracking for millennia

      They did without cars, telephones, indoor plumbing, and electricity, too. This is a good example of where this tech is needed.

    35. Re:We never needed them before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People have also been sharing opinions without the Internet for millennia. Why don't you show us how...

      It's wrong to track "children" due to privacy issues/big brother/futility/etc. But it's always different when it's "my kid".

      I know the difference, and I don't even have a kid.

    36. Re:We never needed them before by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1

      So, what is the value of Virginity? I'm curious.

      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
    37. Re:We never needed them before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my opinion, a harness or a leash is at least as degrading to kids as any GPS watch is going to be. On top of that, they usually just result in the kid getting hurt, or you carrying them the whole time. Any reasonably active 2-year old is going to realize that he can run and get jerked back by the leash. And he'll do it repeatedly.. for hours. Likewise with hand-holding - two year can throw temper tantrums like nobody else, and often accompany that with a strong urge to do things yourself. If you think that you can just hold tight to a toddlers hand and force them to walk with you, look up "nursemaid's elbow". Toddlers are physically strong enough, and mentally strong-willed enough to dislocate their own elbows to resist being dragged where they don't want to go. In my experience, the best you can do with a toddler/preschooler is to keep a very close eye on them, and direct their energies into running back and forth to specific points ahead of you: "Go run to that tree and come back". You never lose sight of them, and they don't get bored enough to wander off or get distracted.

    38. Re:We never needed them before by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Most people aren't terrorists either, so what's the harm in making everyone show their papers, right? I mean, you can't ever be too careful, and if you don't have them, you obviously have something to hide.

      The harm is that you're enabling parents and kids to be irresponsible, parents by not having to think so hard about their kids, and kids by not having to learn responsibility. Yes, a few kids may get hurt. Even my kid. But I wouldn't want to live in a society that isn't able to take care of itself, and that's what we're rapidly going toward.

    39. Re:We never needed them before by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      So, what is the value of Virginity? I'm curious.

      $21.27/oz

    40. Re:We never needed them before by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      If you're visiting any part of Mexico, you should have something like that. Why anyone would choose to vacation there is beyond me. There's lots of other places around the Caribbean and Central America that are much, much safer and don't have all the problems with cartels and human trafficking: Virgin Islands, Dominican Republic, Belize, Turks & Caicos, Bahamas, etc. The people in those places are much friendlier too.

    41. Re:We never needed them before by SlashDev · · Score: 1

      Trust? You mustn't only trust your children, you must trust their environment. I personally don't. Children are easily influenced, regardless of parenting. It's the environment they live in that greatly determines their future. This is why, people move to 'better' neighborhoods.

      --

      TOP DSLR Cameras Reviews of the top DSLRs
    42. Re:We never needed them before by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Do you put your kid in flame retardant suits and crash helmets when you take them somewhere in your car? Because that would do far more to increase their real-world safety than preparing for a kidnapping that has a .00000001% chance of happening.

      And besides, if these devices actually become common, actual nazi-baby-raping kidnappers will just start stripping kids of all clothing and electronics before leaving town.

    43. Re:We never needed them before by zuperduperman · · Score: 1

      I'm a relatively new parent too, and I've actually wondered why these devices aren't more prevalent. I think I saw a version mounted in the child's shoes which makes a bit more sense.

      It's not really because I feel it's necessary for security. It's just simple convenience. I hope to allow my child enormous freedom. I want to be able to say 'bye bye' to them in the morning and let them go out and play around the neighborhood wherever they like and not even need to ask where they're going, and not see or hear from them until they come back hungry at lunch or even dinner time. The one flaw in that plan is they have a terrible sense of time and so having something that allows me to know roughly where they are so I can make sure they're not 10 miles away when we have to leave to go somewhere. We could use a cell phone but I'd have to pester them with calls constantly whereas this is totally non-intrusive, much better for fostering 'self-reliance' and all the other stuff people are harping on about.

      From what I'm able to tell young kids ( 10 years old) don't have much concept of privacy and couldn't care less if they are monitored. They just want freedom to play and do what they want at that age.

    44. Re:We never needed them before by IBBoard · · Score: 1

      Directed energy and keeping an eye on them is the best way, but the harness is still a sensible safety precaution near roads. It's not something to keep them on at all times, and it's only something for when they're old enough to walk but not old enough to start understanding not to run away, (which isn't the age that they'd go for a watch), but it'll keep them safe from physical danger by stopping them running in to its path. That's not degrading, it's physical security.

      The watch, on the other hand, is all about trust and undermining it by saying "we don't trust you so we'll keep a track of you as well". It's useless in most of the scenarios that people have said (things like "your child is in the next isle over because they saw something interesting").

      As for the tantrum, just leave them to it and don't let them think it has an effect. If their efforts come to naught and you just carry on with a calm "can we carry on walking now?" then they'll learn that they don't always get their own way. That's what my mum did with me and I soon learned that tantrums didn't get me anything.

    45. Re:We never needed them before by IBBoard · · Score: 1

      To say "we never needed them before" to technological help is like saying that cars are bad, we have horses and never needed them before.

      Except that cars provide a benefit over horses (speed, long-distance travel, cooperation) with no real cons (except the larger-scale "global warming/emmissions" issue) and no obvious alternative (unless you want to count planes).

      Child tracking devices like this provide one possible benefit (tracking your child's movements to the metre when you don't trust them enough to have them tell you where they're going) with a raft of cons (children feel that mummy and daddy are always watching them, parents don't trust children, children get used to being spied on, etc) with more constructive alternatives (like building trust with your child).

  6. Training by AlterRNow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If I were subjected to this, the first thing I would do would be to figure out how to remove it without setting of the alarm and then tie it to, say, a car exhaust. If only for the challenge!

    On another note, the world may not be more safe or unsafe as it has in the past. The difference is that it has becomes easier to hear about what *does* happen with the internet and such.

    --
    The disappearing pencil trick. Let me show you it.
    1. Re:Training by mysidia · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's simple... take it off several times a day claiming it feels uncomfortable.

      In other words, set off the alarm intentionally, repeatedly.

    2. Re:Training by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Pull the battery. The thing must be transmitting to a local basestation somehow, since GPS is passive (despite the popular press not understanding that basic fact).

      Faraday cages aren't exactly high tech and would defeat this also (if you wanted to abduct a kid a van with wire mesh on the inside would do just nicely).

    3. Re:Training by mysidia · · Score: 1

      I'd have to guess it has a SIM card in it / they have a deal with a cellular carrier to use a nationwide network.

      Otherwise, they could only provide the service in the areas where they've installed base stations.

      Or maybe they expect the schools and local businesses to install base stations for you?

      As far as I know, the watch is too small to contain a useful satellite transmitter. Granted, the signal needed should be minimal...

    4. Re:Training by AlterRNow · · Score: 1

      Actually, that raises a good question.

      GPS is quite a weak signal, and in my experience, rarely works indoors.
      So would this be useless in a mall or other large, high-human-density building?

      --
      The disappearing pencil trick. Let me show you it.
    5. Re:Training by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Faraday cages aren't exactly high tech and would defeat this also (if you wanted to abduct a kid a van with wire mesh on the inside would do just nicely).

      Doesn't a Faraday cage have to be grounded in order to be effective? How would you ground a moving vehicle whose only connection to the earth is rubber tires?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    6. Re:Training by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      How about some metallic duct tape wrapped around the kid's wrist? $4.99 at Home Depot.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    7. Re:Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's explicitly not mentioned in the advertising copy, but the watch has a steel cable running through the strap. It can only be unlocked with the key fob, or through the online service. If the strap is cut, or the watch goes out of bounds, an SMS alert is sent.

      You can imagine the potential for abuse by a domineering parent.

      They also have an adult-sized version for tracking elderly dementia-afflicted patients and parolees.

    8. Re:Training by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 1

      I actually can not wear a wristwatch. It hurts my wrist when I'm typing.

      It's better to set of the alarm (repeatedly) and then claim that it was a malfunction in the device. What are they going to do send you back to jail? Oh wait, you're not a criminal.

      --
      ...
    9. Re:Training by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 1

      An elevator is often a faraday cage too. A kid would probably be fine just hotwiring it by finding the wire that detects if the device is attached, and connecting a bypass wire. It may require taking the thing off once, connecting a small unobtrusive wire bypassing the wristband, taking the 'heat' for removing it, but putting it back on once the parents arrive to look. Then with the thin wire in place behind the face and the band reattached, the watch appears to be in place and functioning, but can now be removed at will. You can take it with you and leave it where you want them to think you are.

      --
      ...
    10. Re:Training by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      On another note, the world may not be more safe or unsafe as it has in the past.

      It's FAR safer in just about every respect. On the highway there were no seat belts, air bags, few disk brakes and no ABS. In the hospital there were no cat scans, MRIs, or monitoring equipment. Ether was used as anesthesia (far more dangerous than the more modern drugs). You didn't have a cell phone in your pocket to call 911 in an emergency with -- if you weren't at home you had to find a pay phone. Air quality was horrible. There are a whole lot more ways than I've listed that the world is a safer place (at least the western world).

      OTOH I can't think of a single thing that would make the world more dangerous today than it was in my youth.

    11. Re:Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, that will be fixed soon, similar to how databases of people's DNA were only to be used for terrorists. Then felons, then relatives of felons, then anyone who is arrested... now almost anythihg can result in DNA being taken and put on file.

    12. Re:Training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrap it in aluminum foil.

    13. Re:Training by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Send in back under warranty, and bust the kid's ass on the 3rd watch when they figure out it wasn't malfunctioning after all.

      Well, that's the worst thing that could happen, and it would be up to the parents to do it.

      Somehow, I don't think most people are cruel enough to force a child to wear an accessory the child doesn't want to wear, esp. if the child claims it's uncomfortable or it hurts.

    14. Re:Training by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 1

      Send in back under warranty, and bust the kid's ass on the 3rd watch when they figure out it wasn't malfunctioning after all.

      Or they could determine that the company makes a piece of crap. Still, someone that would do this is likely to be such a prick that their kids have likely lost all respect for them and will tend to tell them to pound sand sooner or later. They are at the brink of losing all control since the more one tightens their fingers the more star systems slip through one's fingers.

      --
      ...
    15. Re:Training by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

      You don't need a ground. Go to the wikipedia article for "Faraday Cage" it has a great animation of how this works.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
  7. Interesting names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The Telegraph reports that a new wristwatch called num8

    Hopefully it teaches all of those eight year olds to be numb when it comes to privacy rights. (by the way, I'm not a big fan of the "minors do not have rights or freedoms" ideology. And also this is definitely a slippery slope.)

    'Losing your child, if only for a brief moment, leads to a state of panic and makes parents feel powerless.

    Thank goodness that constant surveillance would have no detrimental effect on a child.

    The overriding aim of num8 is to give children their freedom and parents peace of mind,'

    Isn't there some saying about trading one thing for another, and not deserving either?

    1. Re:Interesting names by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      (by the way, I'm not a big fan of the "minors do not have rights or freedoms" ideology. And also this is definitely a slippery slope.)

      Sorry, but 6-yr olds do NOT have freedoms or rights. They are not mature enough to handle them. Now if you put one of these on your 17-yr old, you have issues, but I don't think that this is what this thing was intended for.

      Thank goodness that constant surveillance would have no detrimental effect on a child.

      When I was 6, I don't think I would have cared.

      Isn't there some saying about trading one thing for another, and not deserving either?

      Sorry, genius, but granting freedom to a 3-yr old is not going to increase their security. Actually, it's quite the opposite. I would say that those who are stupid enough to allow any unmonitored freedom outside the back yard to a child under 5 is a moron. That said, even with this monitoring device, I still would not let a child have unfettered access to the outside world. I'm a parent and I have a hard time taking a shower or a dump when I'm watching my daughter by myself. I won't let her out of my sight without setting the alarm system.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    2. Re:Interesting names by pipatron · · Score: 1

      I have a hard time taking a shower or a dump when I'm watching my daughter by myself.

      And if you do watch your daughter while taking a shower or a dump, you'll probably go to jail when she tells her teacher about it.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
  8. Mixed emotions ... by KindMind · · Score: 1

    I'm of mixed emotions on this one. As a parent (and grandparent), I like it, especially for small children. But as a privacy advocate, I feel appalled at yet another privacy invasion. Not to mention, if you can track your child, so can a pedophile (Think Of The Children!). I think the best use for this might be in a limited way, like in crowded places like parks, in case you get separated from your small child. That has happened to me, and that's scary enough.

    --
    Politicians complicate life - logic is sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.
    1. Re:Mixed emotions ... by sgbett · · Score: 1

      That's exactly how I feel. I have had lengthy debates with the childless about the pros of a such a device, whilst at being fully aware of the cons.

      It seems to be though that unless you have a child you can't understand the strength of the emotional response that losing a child elicits - even if just for a second.

      It's that response that will ensure, rightly or wrongly, that the device will sell.

      Whilst it's great to advocate privacy, I think that the privacy you grant your child should be proportianate to the increased freedom and responsibilty that you are afforded as you grow older. Ther is no hard and fast answer, and it is a decision each parent makes.

      Me, I'd go for it for the pre-teen years (rough guide). Until they are old enough to really start to understand and want privacy I don't see why privacy should be thrust upon them.

      What's the privacy brigade think about Baby Monitors?

      --
      Invaders must die
    2. Re:Mixed emotions ... by corbettw · · Score: 1

      An easier solution for that scenario is a tag that beeps if the child exits a predetermined distance from another device. I believe those have been around for several years now.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    3. Re:Mixed emotions ... by KindMind · · Score: 1

      I don't think that's the answer, for two reasons: Being in a noisy place where the beep isn't heard, and it still doesn't answer the question "where".

      --
      Politicians complicate life - logic is sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.
    4. Re:Mixed emotions ... by Thiez · · Score: 1

      Why the hell would a pedophile want to track your child?

    5. Re:Mixed emotions ... by KindMind · · Score: 1

      I meant it semi-humorously. My point was, once the tracking is there, anyone can possibly do this, for whatever reason. The pedophile example is far fetched, to be sure, but I could see one tracking a child to know when the best opportunity is. For a better example, what about disputed child custody cases, where the other parent is looking for an opportunity to take the child and run? Or what about a stalker? Know where the child is, know where the parent is. All of these examples may never happen, but to blindly use a technology like this without thinking about the possible implications is not a good idea.

      --
      Politicians complicate life - logic is sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.
    6. Re:Mixed emotions ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have had lengthy debates with the childless

      ChildFREE. -less implies "something whose absence is unwanted/is a problem".

    7. Re:Mixed emotions ... by corbettw · · Score: 1

      If you're in a noisy place where you can't hear the beep you probably shouldn't let your kid out of sight. Because you also won't hear him/her yelling "Let go! I don't want to go in the van!"

      Most tools have a direction locator, too. See: http://www.familysafemedia.com/child_locator_finder.html

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    8. Re:Mixed emotions ... by KindMind · · Score: 1

      True enough. But speaking from experience, kids can be sneaky, especially if they want to do something you told them they can't. BTW, I looked at your link, and from a "find the child" perspective, the GPS based one is better, because with the linked device, all you know is direction, not how far.

      --
      Politicians complicate life - logic is sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.
    9. Re:Mixed emotions ... by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

      Because they're a PEDOPHILE. That's kind of like asking "why would a murderer want to kill"

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    10. Re:Mixed emotions ... by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      No, that's kind of asking "why would a murderer want to kill you?" – an entirely valid question, particularly if you've taken precautionary steps to make yourself a difficult target.

      So... why would a pedophile want to track your child? Your child isn't the only child on the planet, isn't the cutest child on the planet, and really isn't that special to anyone but you. Plus, he/she's wearing a GPS tracking device.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  9. Electronic child leashes by Zebedeu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's funny, I was having a discussion with my mother about how I thought child leashes were stupid and too invasive on the child's freedom.

    My mother told me she used to think like that too, until the day she lost one of her children (either me or my brother, don't remember) in a busy place. When that happened she realized that maybe the leashes are stupid, but at least you'll never lose your child in one moment of distraction. Thankfully, she never went though with it :-)

    I think a GPS bracelet is a nice compromise between having peace of mind and being too imposing on your child's ability to move and sense of independence. At least when they really are children -- for teenagers it's a different story, IMHO.

    1. Re:Electronic child leashes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Err...kids don't HAVE freedom. Not intrinsically, at least. You may GIVE them freedom, but YOU'RE the parent, and losing a child on your watch while "respecting their freedom" is an empty win. As the parent of 3 kids under 10, I understand the usefulness of a leash and the heartache it can help forestall.

    2. Re:Electronic child leashes by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I could not agree more. Children are unable to protect themselves and it is physically impossible to stuff enough knowledge into them to make them "safe" while they are still young enough to need protection. The law makes you responsible for both their well-being and their actions and to not keep track of where they are is irresponsible. As long as you are not required to put a state-reporting bracelet on your children, and this remains a matter of choice for parents, then I see it as a useful and valid option.

      Of course, the problems come when parents use the device as an electronic leash ala prison. It's no substitute for actual parenting. I don't think it's a win for society when kids who won't obey their parents are preserved beyond their common sense. But being a parent unfortunately does not imply much parenting.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Electronic child leashes by Zebedeu · · Score: 1

      It's not about respecting their freedom, but about not having them 1) depend too much on you to keep them safe, and 2) not restricting their freedom too much.

      What happens when the leash comes off? Won't they seek the freedom they never had? If it happens, they won't be prepared to fend off by themselves.

      Again, this is all uninformed opinion. I'm not a parent and I don't pretend to tell people who are how to raise their little terrorists. I just think that the GPS bracelet gives you basically the same peace of mind without imposing too much on the child's development.

    4. Re:Electronic child leashes by aclarke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why is a leash too invasive on a child's freedom? I don't use one on my toddler but I wouldn't hesitate to do so in certain situations. If a kid is happier running along on the ground in a crowded or dangerous situation, isn't refusing to let them to this and carrying them or putting them in a stroller MORE "invasive on their freedom" than letting them run around within certain parameters?

      It's a kid. There's a reason children need their parents. They need protection, and boundaries. If I lived in a busy city, and had a kid that always wanted to run around, I'd probably sometimes have them on a leash and let them run around more than they'd be able to if they were squirming around in their stroller.

    5. Re:Electronic child leashes by auLucifer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I find that the leash would be more invasive as you're treating your child like a pet, not a fellow human. A stroller just seems more civilised even if they both give the same restrictions. Except a stroller is handy for carrying everything you need with your child, provides shade as well as giving your child a chance to rest when they get exhausted. Everyone hates that tired, noisy toddler

      However if you've raised you child to stick near you, never let go of your hand, etc then the 'electric leash' is for those worst case scenarios when they are abducted or drift off somewhere at the beach (yes, bad parenting but it happens to the best, most cautios parents)

      --
      If I was witty I'd put something funny here but, as it stands, I am not and have just wasted seconds of your life
    6. Re:Electronic child leashes by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "My mother told me she used to think like that too, until the day she lost one of her children (either me or my brother, don't remember) in a busy place. When that happened she realized that maybe the leashes are stupid, but at least you'll never lose your child in one moment of distraction. Thankfully, she never went though with it :-)"

      A leash teaches a toddler that someone else will provide a restraint on their impulses. How can they learn impulse control if someone else it literally holding their leash.

      Oh, that's right - they're not learning it.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    7. Re:Electronic child leashes by Zebedeu · · Score: 1

      Why is a leash too invasive on a child's freedom?

      Because he doesn't have freedom to explore, and the actor of that restriction is artificial. If you don't want your child to run around in a busy setting, you could pick him up, hold his hand, or follow him closely.

      I don't use one on my toddler but I wouldn't hesitate to do so in certain situations.

      As I said in another comment: I'm not a parent, and I'm not going to tell you how to raise your child. I do know that my parents didn't use that stuff on my or my brother while growing up on one of the most crowded cities in the world. Neither did my friend's parents, and somehow we all survived.

      In the end, for me it's also a problem of the way it looks. I may not be a parent, but I'm a dog owner, and to me seeing a child on a leash just looks wrong.

    8. Re:Electronic child leashes by aclarke · · Score: 1

      My argument is that phrases like "treading your child like a pet", or "a stroller just seems more civilized" stem from a culturally biased point of view.

      It's not hard to imagine a culture where people don't take their pets anywhere, and certainly never put them on a leash. Perhaps pets are kept at home. In a situation like this, putting your child on a leash would not be treating them like a pet.

      We do many other things similarly to our pets and children. For instance, we may put both of them in the back yard to play for a few minutes to get some energy out of them. Is this "treating our child like a pet"?

      I'm just saying that there is nothing innately wrong with putting a child on a leash. It's our cultural understanding of what this means to us that makes us upset or want to avoid it. In and of itself, as one tool amongst many, it is no more or less civilzed than forcing a child to hold your hand when they would rather run off, or keeping them in a stroller when they would rather be walking.

      For the record, I pretty much always have a stroller or backpack available in which to put my child. When she's tired, she generally sits in the backpack or the stroller. The leash comment was more for the times when she would rather walk but it is not entirely safe to do so. In such a case I could imagine having her hold my hand as she does now, but having the leash as an emergency backup in case we lose contact in a dangerous situation.

    9. Re:Electronic child leashes by auLucifer · · Score: 1

      That's true. If we lived in a culture where a leash was treated as normal use then it wouldn't be so shocking. Until that day, and the day where kids will not be 'scarred' by having been on a leash, the electric leash might have to suffice

      Your reply was definitely very well put. I usually make the effort to be open minded in everything so I'll definitely try to have different views instead of going for the 'children are not animals' reaction

      --
      If I was witty I'd put something funny here but, as it stands, I am not and have just wasted seconds of your life
    10. Re:Electronic child leashes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We used a leash on my first child - combine sidewalks fairly close to the road with a very focused (and fast) toddler who suddenly develops an overwhelming need to see that particular bug over there, and the options were either hold her hand all the time, or put her on a leash and give her some freedom, knowing that when (not if) she lunged into traffic, we could yank her back before she got squished.

      Hrmm...interesting corollary...perhaps something like this could allow kids more freedom in some situations. "Can I walk downtown by myself?" "If you take your watch."

      Not that it will be used like that in most cases.

      But anyways, don't be so hard on the kid-leashes, they are great when used appropriately.

    11. Re:Electronic child leashes by JimFive · · Score: 1

      those worst case scenarios when they are abducted or drift off somewhere at the beach (yes, bad parenting but it happens to the best, most cautios parents)

      This sentiment has been expressed several times, but I'm picking on this one.

      If a child gets abducted it isn't the parents' fault. You don't blame the rape victim. Don't blame the parents (barring etreme negligence). Allowing yourself to take your eyes off of your child is NOT bad parenting. It is, in fact, good parenting to give your child some freedom. Sometimes that backfires, and sometimes that results in a horrific tragedy, but that tragedy is not the parents' fault.

      All accidents are preventable in hindsight, the reality is that none of them were prevented.

      --
      JimFive

      --
      Please stop using the word theory when you mean hypothesis.
    12. Re:Electronic child leashes by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

      "either hold her hand all the time"
      Oh god, how horrible. God forbid you hold your child's hand, that must be absolutely terrible for you. I mean, you had a child it's just rude for people to expect for you to hold their hand.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    13. Re:Electronic child leashes by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Because he doesn't have freedom to explore, and the actor of that restriction is artificial. If you don't want your child to run around in a busy setting, you could pick him up, hold his hand, or follow him closely.

      How is the leash substantially different from holding hands? It seems to me that it's like holding hands with a longer arm.

      I do know that my parents didn't use that stuff on my or my brother while growing up on one of the most crowded cities in the world. Neither did my friend's parents, and somehow we all survived.

      And my parents grew up in houses with lead based paints. That doesn't mean it's safe. It means that it's unsafe, but didn't affect them. Your anecdote does nothing to speak to the statistical safety, just that it isn't necessary for survival, and no one has ever claimed it was.

  10. For younger kids, what's the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh here we go! It's not tagging like you do serial offenders under house arrest FFS, it's simply asking them to be "tagged" while they out and about on their own. Obviously you wouldn't try to get your 14 year old to fall for it, but I can't see a problem with this for say 6-9 year olds, when they first start going out on their own with their friends. Yes, I grew up in the middle of nowhere, I was out playing in the streets until it got dark. I would always have to come home in time, I was always forced to tell my parents where I was going and who I was going with, I was always forced to take a few coins for the phone box ( which I usually spent in the local sweet shop 5 mins after being given the coins! ), I swear if my parents had access to something like this they would have made me wear it. I only got home late once and my old man went straight to my computer and cut the plug off, told me that I could have it back in 14 days time, if I behaved myself. I learned the value of timekeeping that first week!

    A case of balance, you need to be a little paranoid about their welfare but not so overly paranoid they can't do anything for themselves. So long as you tell them what the watch does and why they need to wear it, what's the harm for those first few years.

    1. Re:For younger kids, what's the problem? by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

      You were raised well without these fancy GPS tracking devices and it worked out just fine therefore children now should all wear them? I'm sorry, I don't follow your post.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
  11. battery lifetime by Atreide · · Score: 1

    when the watch battery is dead
    do you replace the watch ?
    or do you replace the kid ?

    you probably would rather replace parents

    --
    The world belongs to those who get up early. - I'm far from being the king of Earth then :-(
    1. Re:battery lifetime by twoshortplanks · · Score: 1

      You charge the watch after 100 hours according to the FAQ

      --
      -- Sorry, I can't think of anything funny to say here.
  12. So? by RMH101 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    'Is the world really that unsafe that parents need to track their children electronically? I don't think so,'
    So what's to lose? Say you have a 6 year old kid: is it really going to harm them to wear one of these? Sure, chances are very very high that this'll never be needed, but so what? It's kind of like Pascal's wager, isn't it?

    The bit that irritates me most about this is the retailer's website "Loc8r", "Where R U" etc. I'd be more worried about the effects of this on their spelling than their general well being.

    1. Re:So? by IBBoard · · Score: 1

      It might not harm them directly (except for taunts from other children about how they're still being watched by their parents, any possible effects of having a GPS transmitter strapped to a wrist, and the degredation of their self-belief, self-reliance and understanding of personal space) but it'll harm the parent's bank balance.

      £150 for a watch for a kid (not known to be the most careful of individuals with items of worth), plus a monthly contract?!?

    2. Re:So? by ZekoMal · · Score: 1

      So what's to lose?

      Kids always feel their privacy is being invaded. For small children, yes the watch is a great idea. However, the families that would purchase such a watch to begin with will want to monitor their child all the way to 18. Meanwhile, the irresponsible parents that do frequently lose their kids in crowded areas won't bother buying such a watch. A lot of pre-teens and teenagers will not be so grateful when their parents start monitoring if they go to a party or not, or if they skip school. Yes, it's for their own good, but being social outcasted by your parents overbearing on you just leads to life being hell.

      Whenever someone touts a child tracker, I immediately think of its' real purpose: tracking teenagers.

    3. Re:So? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      We live in a world where there are 8 year olds with iphones.

      A £150 watch is nothing..

    4. Re:So? by IBBoard · · Score: 1

      We also live in a world where the parents are still on five year old Nokia 3510s with Pay As You Go sim-cards that get topped up every six months or so ;) Some might have iPhones, but others won't be getting mobile phones for a long time to come, and even then they'll be cheap ones.

    5. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what's to lose? Say you have a 6 year old kid: is it really going to harm them to wear one of these?

      It will erode the trust children should feel towards their parents. It will further make the parents paranoid control freaks. It teaches children that total surveillance and control of others is ok.

      The simplest question is: how would you feel if somebody would track you with such a device?

    6. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh,I forgot:
      Instead of teaching children how to successfully cope with the world, these parents will just assume everything is fine as long as the alarm doesn't go off. No need to teach children anything.

      If you have to rely on your child being able to master being alone, you HAVE to teach it. If you keep it under surveillance, you don't have to and most likely won't. No need to tell your child what to do if it gets lost because you always know where it is. I pity that child when it gets older.

    7. Re:So? by c-reus · · Score: 1

      Do you have a cell phone? If so, then you could be tracked already.

    8. Re:So? by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      It's kind of like Pascal's wager, isn't it?

      What, you mean a flawed argument?

      You should hope, for your argument's sake, that it isn't like Pascal's Wager at all!

  13. calc.exe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    design it to look like a calculator and kids won't want it off their wrist! And they'll know the exact cost of each gummy life savor in the 89c pack. hipsters

  14. Tag chip by Chris_Mir · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One step closer to the inevitable, mandatory tag chip for everyone. And future people will not have problems with it. Things like this watch will make children get used to these sort of things.

    1. Re:Tag chip by sgbett · · Score: 1

      At least they won't lose the chip....

      *ducks*

      --
      Invaders must die
    2. Re:Tag chip by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      It will be that the only people who have these bracelets will be Criminals and Children....

      When it is normal for children to be treated the same as criminals, how do we punish young criminals when the freedoms we are tanking away from them, they never had in the first place ....

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
  15. Big Brother starts with you! by agnosticanarch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hey, we should use devices like this to get children used to the idea of being watched constantly. . .

    Then, when they are adults, they won't mind Big Brother watching every little thing they do. It's for their safety, after all!

    ~AA

    --
    I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.
    1. Re:Big Brother starts with you! by Warhawke · · Score: 1

      "In Soviet America, watch watch you!"

    2. Re:Big Brother starts with you! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Hey, we should use devices like this to get children used to the idea of being watched constantly.

      If you don't watch your three year old constantly, you are NOT a good parent. My parents kept an eye on me, I kept an eye on my kids, yet neither I or my kids ever got used to the idea of "not minding" government surveilance. If my parents had been watching a little more closely when I was seven, I wouldn't have fallen off the swingset and broken both of my arms.

    3. Re:Big Brother starts with you! by Clandestine_Blaze · · Score: 1

      Hey, we should use devices like this to get children used to the idea of being watched constantly. . .

      Then, when they are adults, they won't mind Big Brother watching every little thing they do. It's for their safety, after all!

      ~AA

      I agree and wish I had mod points. Once we get an entire generation of children used to the idea that electronic monitoring "is good for us", then the same principle will be forced onto the adults. The best way to make something acceptable in society is to have the children grow up with it. I'd rather not go down that route.

    4. Re:Big Brother starts with you! by JimFive · · Score: 1

      If you don't watch your three year old constantly, you are NOT a good parent

      This is crap. While a three year old does need near continuous monitoring, it doesn't need absolute constant montoring. If you can't leave your 3 year old in the back yard long enough for you to grab the ball out of the garage then you have other problems.

      If my parents had been watching a little more closely when I was seven, I wouldn't have fallen off the swingset and broken both of my arms.

      Sure you would have, they just would have seen it happen.
      --
      JimFive

      --
      Please stop using the word theory when you mean hypothesis.
    5. Re:Big Brother starts with you! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      No, they would have stopped my sister from swinging on it trying to get me to fall, especially when I begged her to stop.

  16. please... by the_fat_kid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    oh, for fsk sake. have you people lost your damn minds?
    "lets get our children used to electronic monitoring early"
    We have a device like that here allready, we use it for work release from jail.
    How about we raise children that we trust out of our sight?
    If you need to track your children like criminals, then I feel sorry for you.
    sort of.

    --
    -- Sig under construction...
    1. Re:please... by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      oh, for fsk sake. have you people lost your damn minds? "lets get our children used to electronic monitoring early"

      Long term this is a real concern. If this took off in 40 years time people might not feel safe unless they are tracked electronically, or at least associate being tracked with being safe. It would be quite easy for a government to address their concerns...

    2. Re:please... by loutr · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't use it to monitor my (future) child's activies, but to be able to locate him in case something happens to him. I know, here on /. we like to make fun of the "think of the children" mentality, but I know that if my child was kidnapped or had an accident, I would be hitting my head against a wall everyday for not making him wear this kind of device.

    3. Re:please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It depends upon the age and the rationale.

      My child was a "wanderer" and a "puzzle solver" -- as in, from about the age of 3 to 5, we had a tough time getting him to stay in the house when we wanted him to, and if he got out he would start wandering the neighborhood exploring. Child-proof locks, you say? Bah. Those lasted a couple of days. He watched how we disengaged it, and when we weren't looking for a few minutes (I think we were doing laundry in the basement), he dragged a chair up to the door, unlocked it same as he saw us doing it, and then went out. Yeah, yeah, we were irresponsible parents. But this was the same kid that could pry off those "child proof" electrical socket plugs that are supposed to keep them from sticking things in there. We learned to watch him constantly, but he was a sneaky, quick, and smart little critter who was very persistent. And we had to sleep sometime!

      I figure he has a future in burglary or breaking encryption systems.

    4. Re:please... by thisnamestoolong · · Score: 1

      I can certainly agree with this sentiment for a child that is too young to know the difference and should be supervised all the time anyway, (3-5, maybe up to 7 if your child is not the sharpest knife in the drawer), but once they get old enough to understand privacy the GPS tracker needs to go permanently. A degree of freedom is CRUCIAL in proper socialization and in psychological development. Yes, your children will be in slightly more danger, but that is ok. It is by this reasoning that the police cannot randomly search anybody and everybody's house -- surely they could prevent a great deal of crime, but we would quickly develop social psychosis due to our lack of freedom. The same thing can be said for raising a child. It will be the hardest thing in the world for you to do, but you need to cut them loose a little bit if you want them to grow up to be normal, functioning members of society.

      --
      To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    5. Re:please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can only imagine that most people posting here aren't parents.

      It's not about tracking your children, it's not about not trusting your children, it's not even about real statistics vs. media inflated. I think most educated and balanced parents know the actual likelihood of something happening.

      That doesn't stop the gripping fear that something *could* happen. Sure it's not likely, but it is possible. I would imagine if you asked parents who find themselves in a situation with an abducted or missing child whether they would have forked over $150 for a device that could have found their child missing child they would emphatically answer "YES!".

      Best case scenario you would never even have to use the device, worst case scenario it's there if you need it.

      In a day and age when Google can pinpoint your location down to a couple meters just by allowing IP geolocation I think the fear of "big brother" is completely ridiculous. This tech is here now and you don't even need to wear a stupid watch. There is a huge difference between a removable device sanctioned by parents and some tracking your every move.

    6. Re:please... by FriendlyPrimate · · Score: 1

      Oh for fsk sake....you OBVIOUSLY do not have a 3 year old who has a tendency to run away from you in stores, and occasionally likes to play 'hiding' games. Several times, I've looked away for no more than 5 seconds and have had my daughter disappear on me. It's the scariest thing that can happen to you. And thinking to yourself "she PROBABLY wasn't just snatched by some pervert" isn't much comfort.

      That doesn't mean I'm going to be tagging her at 17 years of age. But IMHO, something like this would be a useful tool for toddlers and small children. There's a difference between trusting her and trusting the world.

    7. Re:please... by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Did you have a yard or anything? Any way you could give him more freedom to explore in larger boundaries than the house? It sounds like he was just bored with everything inside.

    8. Re:please... by the_fat_kid · · Score: 1

      I have had two of them. They are grown now, but once they were 3 years old and crafty.
      I also made it past the age of 3 with out the help of Global Positioning Satellites.
      So, if your baby slips away and hides at the market, you are going to whip-out your iPhone and track them? Best of luck.
      And if you think that a pedo grabbed them, then what? Maybe a state wide amber alert and car to car search?
      "Oh, here she is, in the pet food aisle...my bad, sorry."
      Your 3 year old wears a watch? All the time? With out wrecking it? Really?
      They are not talking about a pair of size 2 shoes, TFA calls it a watch. Do you know many children who wear one? perhaps a pocket-watch with a picture of a train on it?
      This IS NOT about keeping an eye on your baby. It's about knowing where your kids are when you are not around.
      That, my FriendlyPrimate, is called, "surveillance"
      All that I'm trying to say is that when you resort to surveillance with you kids, you might be on the wrong path.

      --
      -- Sig under construction...
    9. Re:please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *whoosh*

  17. What TFA? by koterica · · Score: 1

    The summary was so interesting that I clicked the link and actually read TFA. Unfortunately, the summary included basically the whole article, save for some useless details about the interface, and a tidbit about 'Safe Zones'.

  18. Deeply troubling by Kupfernigk · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Forget the children for one moment. Consider the parental paranoia. We know that, fueled by irresponsible journalists, parents are being given quite wrong ideas about the frequency of abduction, number of pedophiles, and the general danger of the environment. This will not fix parental paranoia. Ten feet is the difference between sidewalk and roadway. Things like this merely feed it, inviting the "they wouldn't make these things if they weren't necessary" argument.

    Meanwhile I see mothers using phones (illegally, here) while driving their kids to school and weaving across the road. That's not a "perceived" danger. They let their kids get fat. Also not a perceived danger. They don't teach them the dangers of alcohol, which will kill far more people prematurely than all the world's pedophiles and kidnappers.

    We really do need to get across the idea that something can be technically feasible and yet undesirable, because a significant number of people do not get it. And in thirty years time the world is going to be run by people still metaphorically tied to mommy's apron, infantilised by never being given any freedom or responsibility. It's not a nice thought.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:Deeply troubling by MozzleyOne · · Score: 1

      Maybe instead of having to use one of those ridiculous child leashes, they could now be replaced by a watch? When you take your kid to a crowded festival, you could enjoy the whole day rather than spending it panicking for 2 hours when your kid follows some other parent by mistake? I'm sure I can imagine other non-ridiculous benefits of this

      --
      Ayjay on Fedang
    2. Re:Deeply troubling by cptdondo · · Score: 1

      +1. Children meet our expectations. If I expect that my children will lie to me, run away, and generally be disobedient little shits, then guess what - that's what they will be.

      And if I expect my kids to be so helpless, so clueless, and so incapable of making decisions that mommy or daddy have to ride in to rescue every time the kid decides to cross the road, guess what - that's exactly what they'll be.

      And putting a tracking bracelet on them sets up exactly that expectation. What scares me is the level of parental paranoia, the controlling mindset that goes with this.

      "My kid is so untrustworthy that I must monitor him at all times."

      or

      "My kid is so helpless that I have to know exactly where he is at all times so I can go rescue him."

      Neither one of those mindsets will result in responsible adults. Heck, my kids are unruly bastards sometimes - but overall they're responsible, they don't lie, and they make decisions.

    3. Re:Deeply troubling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They let their kids get fat. Also not a perceived danger.

      Actually that's perceived risk management. Fat kids are less attractive, and harder to abduct.

  19. Cell phone built-in? by thetroll123 · · Score: 1

    What a crap article. GPS is a one-way technology. What does this thing actually DO? Is there a GSM transceiver in there too? A SIM card?

    1. Re:Cell phone built-in? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      Newspapers have had this wierd idea that GPS transmits back to the satellite for years. The unuquity of Satnav devices has not dented this belief.

      I guess it's just a GSM phone + SIM card without any of the talk/data bits.

    2. Re:Cell phone built-in? by Protoslo · · Score: 1
      From the manufacturer's (singularly uninformative) website:

      In addition, we have implemented our own proprietary Cell ID technology which provides a swift approximate location of your child. This is then refined using GPS to achieve an accuracy of 3 metres. This action can be driven via your mobile phone using the texting facility. The benefit of using dual locating technology is that the child can still be located in instances where normal GPS technology may not be sufficient

      I don't see how they could possibly transmit the location without incorporating a phone; that is confirmed by this blurb, since they would need a GSM antenna to use Cell ID. Trend Research claims that the location is actually accessed by text-messaging a query to the phone number of the child's device--so it is at least capable of sending and receiving text messages. The unit's triggers are also programmed with scripting commands sent in text messages. But why buy a num8 instead of a phone? According to the manufacturer:

      And unlike similar locator products, num8 has been cleverly concealed in a child's digital watch that is securely fastened to your child and cannot be removed or deactivated without your knowledge. No other child locator in the world can match this.

      "As far as the child is concerned it's a digital watch," said Lok8u CEO Steve Salmon in a Guardian report. "For the parent it's a child-locating product."

      Consider that in conjunction with:

      How long does each charge last? Approximately 2-3 days

      I'm sure that little Timmy will be much less suspicious if mommy takes his (unreasonably cumbersome and feature-barren) watch every night and plugs it into a charger than if she surreptitiously tracks him via a trojaned cellphone. Perhaps mobilewhack knows the true reason?

      To help parents in properly monitoring the whereabouts of their kids, a new device called the Num8 (pronounced as "new mate") has been unveiled by Lok8u. This new device takes the place of the standard mobile phones which have been discouraged for use by kids due to health reasons.

      Uh oh! I hope little Timmy doesn't doesn't rest his head on his watch hand (admittedly, this device would be txing at full power for a tiny fraction of the time required for a voice call, but I'm sure that wouldn't deter someone who makes buying decisions based on the perceived health risks of microwave RF)...

    3. Re:Cell phone built-in? by thetroll123 · · Score: 1

      >Num8 (pronounced as "new mate") Well, you've cleared up the pronunciation question, anyway - that was my other big WTF about this nonsense!

  20. hm by mestar · · Score: 1

    "overriding aim of num8 is to give children their freedom"

    this does not pass the chuckle test.

    or in other words, bwahahahahaa.

  21. False Sense of Security? by gurutc · · Score: 1

    There are many personal locator devices available. The factors that make them either useful or useless are 1) The accuracy and ability to get a position fix of their GPS receiver, and 2) The ability of the device to communicate the position information to the central monitoring system used to track the device. The cost of this device, several hundred US dollars, puts it in the range of low-end personal locator devices like the SPOT personal locator, which has a low-sensitivity GPS chipset and which uses Satellites to relay the position information. Low-end personal locators have very short battery life and generally provide hit-and-miss location tracking. I don't know how this kids-device communicates, but it seems to me that it can't have very good GPS-sensitivity, battery-life, or communications-power. I'd love to have one of these on my toddler when we go to the State Fair, or other crowded outdoor events, but I'd like to see an extensive test and review of any device like this before I add it to the tools I use to protect my child.

    --
    Moderation in All Things... Especially Moderation - gurutc
  22. Uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cue pedophiles acquiring signal hacking skills so they can track underage targets in 3...2...

    1. Re:Uh oh by Thiez · · Score: 1

      Yes, because children are so terribly difficult to find. No pedophile would ever be able to find a playground or a school without GPS technology. That makes perfect sense.

    2. Re:Uh oh by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Side note: Now that everyone knows what these devices look like, I'm thinking I'll start a business selling fake ones. They LOOK like the GPS tracking thingamajiggies, but in reality they are simple watches with some extra empty space.

      Then, in the one in a million chance that a stranger pedophile decides to grab a kid off the playground, the pedophile will see the watch on your kid's wrist and pick another target.

      After all, the last thing a pedo wants to do is deal with another layer of security. Even if he manages to block it or take it off, there'll still be a record of the most likely place the abduction took place, and a faster response time until someone notices that the kid is missing and initiates Amber Alert. If you know your kid is at the playground and you get an alarm that the device stopped reporting, chances are you'll be at the playground in a few minutes, have determined your child is missing, and have Amber Alert active within another 1/2 hour. Compare that to only noticing the kid was missing when he/she fails to show up for a meal on time.

      Pedo sees one of these gizmos, or (important bit) something that LOOKS like one, he's almost surely going to pick an easier target without Kid-LoJack installed.

      Heck, the market on fake security cameras is good... This is pretty much the same thing.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
  23. How is the alert and position sent? by twoshortplanks · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's not clear from the website how this info is transmitted. I'm curious if anyone actually knows... If it's talking up to the GPS then you could remove the watch anywhere there's no line of sight to a GPS satellite. Likewise, you could do the same anywhere there's no cell signal where the watch is...

    --
    -- Sorry, I can't think of anything funny to say here.
    1. Re:How is the alert and position sent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      consumer devices listen to gps but never talk to it. they could talk to gsm, though.

  24. Another Case... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't forget what happens when the techonology becomes exploited by the bad guys. Than you have predators and kidnappers knowing where your child is within 10ft. Bad Idea

    1. Re:Another Case... by Thiez · · Score: 1

      Not this crap again. Please tell me why a predator/kidnapper would want to know where your child is? A kidnapper would only have to know the location of your kid once, and from that point on he knows your child is in his basement, no tracker needed! The predator is probably your friend/family and he/she can just ask you where your kid is and you'll tell them because you trust them. In fact you'll probably ask them to look after your kid :p

      This ridiculous fear of a stranger wearing a long dark coat kidnapping and raping your child is... ridiculous.

  25. satellite positioning system concealed inside? by gblackwo · · Score: 1

    Really, how did they fit it all in there?

  26. Not always paranoia by pvera · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As a parent of an autistic child with escape artist tendencies, I would love to have this kind of watch. That is, assuming that my kid will wear it for more than 5 minutes in a row without trying to cut it off.

    My kid is 10 and incredibly fast. He doesn't understand the concepts of safety and fear, and is constantly figuring out ways to break our locks to go out wandering alone (he's even done it at school, which was actually a bit funny because he took off running in front of the principal, so for the first few minutes there was a gaggle of huffing and puffing teachers and secretaries chasing through an apartment complex until the cops arrived). A watch like this, combined with some kind of alarm could help us keep him alive and unharmed until he is 18.

    --
    Pedro
    ----
    The Insomniac Coder
    1. Re:Not always paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this was exactly my take on the product when reading it. I too am in a similar situation, my son is not such a Houdini, but has a poor understanding of keeping himself safe.

      I would be very happy to be able to pin down his whereabouts when he wanders off!

      I would not dream of using it on his sister, who does not have the same requirements!

    2. Re:Not always paranoia by TheLink · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      > A watch like this, combined with some kind of alarm could help us keep him alive and unharmed until he is 18.

      I'm not sure how it would keep him unharmed, since you and others obviously have difficulty even catching up with him.

      But it may help you find him when he is no longer moving for whatever reason.

      --
    3. Re:Not always paranoia by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 1

      I'm also the parent of an autistic child and I can relate. Our son has also managed to sneak out of the house in the wee hours of the night (without triggering the home alarm) and is a master of defeating any lock/fastener. We've also had the bolting issue at school and at public places. Finding a way to keep it attached seems like the real challenge.

      Something along the lines of a medic alert tag with this functionality that I could semi-permanently attach to something like his shoe (and with a longer recharge cycle) would be more useful for me.

    4. Re:Not always paranoia by Virak · · Score: 0, Troll

      Not always, but the "paranoid retard" market is certainly what they're aiming for; "people who have a legitimate use for something like this" is an insignificant speck by comparison. Don't kid yourself into thinking they're making this out of compassion for the few people it would actually help. They're just in it to make a lot of quick and easy money by playing into the ridiculous delusions of the masses.

    5. Re:Not always paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with you pedro. I too am a parent of an autistic child. She is non-verbal and could not tell people where she lives.

    6. Re:Not always paranoia by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "As a parent of an autistic child with escape artist tendencies, I would love to have this kind of watch. That is, assuming that my kid will wear it for more than 5 minutes in a row without trying to cut it off."

      But you (and the others posting with similar children) are the special cases. Your child has something wrong with his biology, and the more technology to deal with it, the better. But in order for this thing to make money, it needs to be targeted at a wider audience and made cheap enough for the mass market. It sounds like it would be useful to you, but I wouldn't rely on it's durability, etc.

      On the bright side, your story has made me rethink my policy of yelling "Run, kid! Run!" when I see a giggling shild making a break for freedom.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    7. Re:Not always paranoia by macaddict · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Same here. My son has pulled the disappearing act on us a couple times. Both times we got extremely lucky, and both times were "look away for five minutes because he seemed to be busy doing something and then he was gone". He's getting better now that he's getting older about asking if he can go somewhere, but we still can't completely trust him not to wander off. Since we like to travel, we spend a lot of time in new (and often remote) areas. And since he's almost a teenager, it would be nice to be able to let him explore on his own (within a boundary) without us having to hover over him.

    8. Re:Not always paranoia by TBoon · · Score: 1

      Something along the lines of a medic alert tag with this functionality that I could semi-permanently attach to something like his shoe (and with a longer recharge cycle) would be more useful for me.

      What about building the device into the shoes themselves, and harvest the energy of him running? That way the device gets power when it is actually needed, and he might not even suspect his shoes are transmitting...

    9. Re:Not always paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Low tech approach.... leg chain with a 50-kg ball. Should be enough to slow that kid down enough to make him EASY to catch!

    10. Re:Not always paranoia by techvet · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Our 3-yr old son Andrew has Down syndrome. He has gone out of the house several times before we realized it. His godmother has a 7-yr nephew who was once found a mile from his house by the police. Would I use it for my son's older brothers and sisters? Nope. However, it's something I have thought about for Andrew. I imagine Alzheimer's caretakers would be interested as well.

    11. Re:Not always paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then what?

    12. Re:Not always paranoia by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      A watch like this, combined with some kind of alarm could help us keep him alive and unharmed until he is 18.

      Then what? No, seriously. It seems like a watch like this would only delay teaching things like don't run off. What happens when he turns 18?

      I really don't mean to offend, but seriously - wouldn't this hurt you and him in the long run?

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    13. Re:Not always paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it may help you find him when he is no longer moving for whatever reason.

      Man...you must be a riot at parties...

    14. Re:Not always paranoia by TheLink · · Score: 1

      > Man...you must be a riot at parties...

      And funerals too.

      --
    15. Re:Not always paranoia by Psmylie · · Score: 1

      "That is, assuming that my kid will wear it for more than 5 minutes in a row without trying to cut it off."

      I don't have much experience with autistic children, but wouldn't the key to this being to convince him somehow that he wants to leave it on, like say it's a really cool watch, it looks good on him, etc. without ever alluding to the tracking capabilities of the device? It would depend a lot on his functionality, of course, but if he functions highly enough to actually take a liking to the device, then the problem would be more getting it off of him rather then having him leave it on.

      I could be wrong, of course. As I said, I have little experience with autistic children.

      --

      psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo

    16. Re:Not always paranoia by FriendlyPrimate · · Score: 1

      Uh huh.....you don't have a kid do you? The same logic could be applied to parents who lock away chemicals behind child-proof cabinets. How else are they going to learn not to drink Drano unless they do it and end up in the Emergency Room? Sorry...but learning not to run off comes with age. 2 and 3 year old's simply cannot comprehend that they're not supposed to run off, and they usually cannot be taught so at that age.

    17. Re:Not always paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "keep him alive and unharmed until he is 18."

      And then what.

    18. Re:Not always paranoia by pvera · · Score: 1

      I had all of our 30+yr old windows replaced with brand new, energy efficient windows. Since they were doing this for all units in our condo complex they asked if there was anything else special we wanted to get done at the same time. I asked if it was possible to get window locks that require a key.

      Sure, they said.

      I ordered two per window.

      What did he do? He figured out how to defeat the Charley bar lock in the sliding patio door. In a fit of rage I took a couple of screws and drilled them into the sliding door base, so it is permanently closed.

      Fast forward a month or two: he figured out how to disassemble the keyed locks in the windows, we caught him at 2AM, thunderstorms and all. He had the window already open, we only caught him because he couldn't pick which shoes to wear. I drove even more screws, this time into the window frames.

      --
      Pedro
      ----
      The Insomniac Coder
    19. Re:Not always paranoia by pvera · · Score: 1

      When he is 18 I may be forced by law to seek guardianship. I am responsible to keep that child alive until he is 18, maybe 21 if Virginia state law is weird about it. If I have to be his guardian, I will have to worry about this until he is older enough to understand that cars do run over people.

      --
      Pedro
      ----
      The Insomniac Coder
    20. Re:Not always paranoia by pvera · · Score: 1

      The struggle is to know he is out. He is a master of sneaking. One day I was sitting at my desk, and I could see into the living room. He figured out the field of vision, moved right beyond that, then calmly broke the Charlie bar.

      If I had some kind of perimeter alarm, I would have known he was getting out of the house. Instead he ran about 1/8th of a mile, into a busy 4-lane, where my wife AND her mother were driving back home from the supermarket.

      Yes, his own mother saw him run into the street. In her mind she almost ran him over. The worst part of the episode is that I was completely awake and was not even absorbed with what I was doing. I was simply sitting at my desk.

      --
      Pedro
      ----
      The Insomniac Coder
    21. Re:Not always paranoia by pvera · · Score: 1

      This is not a troll. While we parents with real needs are delighted to see this kind of product, we are a tiny market. The bulk of the interest for this kind of product is going to be overbearing control freak parents.

      Hell, had the technology existed my own mother would had chipped the way they do now with pets.

      --
      Pedro
      ----
      The Insomniac Coder
    22. Re:Not always paranoia by pvera · · Score: 1

      Mine talks like a parrot, but he won't have a conversation with you unless it is to get something that he wants (when you think about it, most kids are like this). If you take out the autistic meltdowns and the scripted language issues, he is your typical smartass tween that thinks that the world revolves around him.

      --
      Pedro
      ----
      The Insomniac Coder
  27. hey mom, dad ... by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    Hey mom, dad. Uncle Jack isn't so creepy after all. He's given me this lovely watch for my birthday....

  28. tinfoil gloves by dgcom · · Score: 1

    Time to start selling tinfoil gloves in kid's sizes!

  29. In two minds by GrahamCox · · Score: 1

    Every logical bone in my body (head?) is telling me this is ridiculous, paranoid, a step too far, goes against everything I've ever thought, etc. However, as a newish parent (my only daughter is now 3 and a half) there is an emotion creeping in that sees the benefit of this.

    I expect logic and principles will win out - for now. I'm sure one reason for the growing number of paranoid parent is the declining birth rate - you really do view your one child as so precious that your principles are easily modified (or discarded altogether, to be truthful), and the technology is becoming available and more affordable, so there are going to be fewer reasons like cost to stand in the way. When trackers are $10 in K-Mart, who is NOT going to have one? I'd like to think I wouldn't on principle but what if nonces start targeting those without? You see how it starts?

  30. Fear mongering by aepervius · · Score: 1

    The chance of your kid being kidnapped is next to NIL. It has far more chance to be hit by a car, to fall to his death, and other rare incident. Children which disappear (in the US) have two reasons : they get away on their own will, or they are in custodial dispute. Kids getting kidnapped by a stranger are extremely rare (a few hundred per year ? As opposed to many 10's of thousand of children "disappearing" I wish I had saved the FBI statistic web page), and removing forcefully the watch and dropping it somewhere in a hole would not stop them. Actually this would not stop them killing and abusing the child, which as far as I can tell happens relatively quickly from the few incident I remember of. It might help catch the bad guy quicker behind bar that is it. As for abuse, children abuse, as far as I can tell it is not a random stranger you should fear. It is the father, the mother, the uncle / tante, the brother/sister, the cousins and the direct neighbors.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:Fear mongering by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      The chance of your kid being kidnapped is next to NIL.

      True, but the chances that you'll lose him in a mall or a fair or camping is far from nil.

  31. Useless as a kick stand on a bass boat. by kurt555gs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Almost all child abuse is from family members. Wearing a GPS watch won't help to stop the step dad from hurting the kid. Abuse or abduction by strangers is so rare that it is hardly worth mentioning. All this does is extract money from parents and lets them pretend the danger is somewhere that it isn't.
     

    --
    * Carthago Delenda Est *
    1. Re:Useless as a kick stand on a bass boat. by sorak · · Score: 1

      Almost all child abuse is from family members.

      So you're suggesting we give them cloaking devices?

    2. Re:Useless as a kick stand on a bass boat. by kungfugleek · · Score: 1

      It's not just abduction, though. Young kids get curious, get lost in their own thoughts, and can wonder away surprisingly quickly, in just 5-10 seconds, if the parent is distracted. Some kids, (very young ones), despite their parent's warnings and disciplinary actions, decide all of a sudden to play "hide and seek" in the clothing department -- *and not tell you*. The little runts can practically disappear underneath those clothing racks or crawl underneath the dressing room doors. It's amazing the places they can squeeze themselves into and it can take a parent a very frantic minute or two to find them. It doesn't sound like a long time, but for a parent, that's terror. Just knowing that the kid is still somewhere in the clearance section can help calm everybody down.

    3. Re:Useless as a kick stand on a bass boat. by D+Ninja · · Score: 1

      Just knowing that the kid is still somewhere in the clearance section can help calm everybody down.

      And how would this help with that? It's a GPS watch. GPS requires connection to satellites which are outside. This would not work indoors.

    4. Re:Useless as a kick stand on a bass boat. by Avalain · · Score: 1

      I remember being at the zoo a few months ago and seeing a desperate mother go running by searching for her child. Thankfully the kid had been found by another parent and they were quickly reunited. However, I'm sure if you asked that mother now she would not think that this GPS watch is completely useless.

  32. hey look child abusers can now google their prey! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    did i miss read the watch idea?

  33. "feeling powerless"? by timmarhy · · Score: 1

    wake up, you ARE powerless. your child is an entity independant of you, you can and will find trouble. learning through experience is far too lacking these days...

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
  34. Parental paranoia justified for disabled by sawx · · Score: 1

    My severely disabled child is now 8 years old, finally mobile, and very social. I see this type of product as an absolute necessity. I'm glad it is being developed for "typical" children so the price is not astronomical.

  35. So many things wrong with this... by shrtcircuit · · Score: 1

    Where to begin...

    1. Constant track of your child's whereabouts, being sent to a corporate entity. Talk about the ultimate database of marketing data, and you know that'll be up for grabs.
    2. ANY security flaws in their system open it up for a myriad of privacy violations. Not to mention, as someone else pointed out, it's an instant "find me a victim" site for a kidnapper/pedophile if they can access the information.
    3. If you're like most parents, this is for that rare time the kid ISN'T with you for some reason. The rest of the time, it's really a way to track the parents to within 10 feet on Google Maps. You think that won't be profiled, purchased, and tied to something else?
    4. Yeah hey, let's get our future criminals-to-be used to the idea of ankle bracelets. This is no different, you just don't get hunted by cops if you take it off (though the whole idea of it is so you can be hunted by cops easily).
    5. Hey Parents - Try being a parent! It's an amazing concept that doesn't require electronic leashes, and actually teaches your kids things that will be useful in life beyond "nobody else trusts you, so you shouldn't trust anyone either".

    If my kid one day gives me a reason to drop the e-Leash hammer, then so be it, but I'd like to think I will be a better parent in the meantime that it may not be necessary, rather than one of those dopes that watches their kid getting hauled off to jail wondering where it all went wrong.

    1. Re:So many things wrong with this... by natehoy · · Score: 1

      With respect, you just un-did your entire post with your last paragraph: "If my kid one day gives me a reason to drop the e-Leash hammer, then so be it, but I'd like to think I will be a better parent..."

      So, you can imagine circumstances where a device like this would come in handy. Shouldn't you be glad it's out there in case your kid "gives you a reason to drop the e-Leash hammer", as you put it?

      There are two reasons why a tool like this could be useful, and you've cited one of them.

      The other is for "helicopter parental unit" (aka the Hovering Parent) to be able to allow their child some perceived and experienced independence. Copter Mom or Copter Dad might be watching the child, but the child has some of that vitally-important "alone time" so they can engage in free play. They don't have to check back with Copter Unit every 3 seconds to make sure their play is "Helicopter Approved (tm)" before they can move the next rung up the ladder. They can just play, like kids should.

      Most copter parents are that way because of an irrational fear of having their kids kidnapped by strangers. Yes, it's statistically insignificant, but society is kept at a high fear level right now and you *are not* going to win a rational argument to eliminate an irrational fear. So you add a useless safeguard to counter the irrational fear, and the parent can then act rationally again.

      Ideal solution? Hell, no! But it is a solution...

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    2. Re:So many things wrong with this... by Thiez · · Score: 1

      > 1. Constant track of your child's whereabouts, being sent to a corporate entity. Talk about the ultimate database of marketing data, and you know that'll be up for grabs.

      I doubt they'll keep the data that long, once it's over a few days old it gets pretty useless. Having said that I couldn't find anything about this on their website.

      > 2. ANY security flaws in their system open it up for a myriad of privacy violations. Not to mention, as someone else pointed out, it's an instant "find me a victim" site for a kidnapper/pedophile if they can access the information.

      Your kid getting kidnapped/abused by a stranger is _extremely_ rare. The people who are most likely to abuse your kid are usually those you didn't suspect and would have told where your kid was had they asked.

  36. One problem, and a (preexisting) solution by pla · · Score: 1

    Problem: Kids don't wear watches. Don't wear them, don'y have them, don't want them, don't need them.

    Solution: All cellphones include GPS functionality built-in. Kids do want cellphones, and a good number already have them. And, many cell carriers even have services that allow parents to locate children on their plans.


    / must not rant about idiot helicopter parents, must not rant about idiot helicopter parents, must not rant about idiot helicopter parents...

  37. He'll be alive and well but you... by milosoftware · · Score: 1

    ... will have run out of money. That "montly subscription" is sure as hell gonna wring every last buck out of yout wallet once they got you hooked.

    --
    Musicians don't die. They just decompose.
    1. Re:He'll be alive and well but you... by LoverOfJoy · · Score: 1

      How long before Obama's health care program covers it?

    2. Re:He'll be alive and well but you... by macaddict · · Score: 3, Informative

      ... will have run out of money. That "montly subscription" is sure as hell gonna wring every last buck out of yout wallet once they got you hooked.

      Try reading the website next time:

      Emergency use (1 alert/month) - £5 ($8).
      Standard use (60 alerts/month) - £10 ($16)
      Advanced use (90 alerts/month) - £13 ($21)
      Unlimited use (unlimited alerts/month) - £20 ($32)

      $32 is less than what a family spends at a restaurant. Go out to eat one less time per month, have plenty of money for the top-level subscription. And yeah, it's very much worth it if you can give your autistic kid a little more freedom and yourself a back-up system to keeping an eye on them.

    3. Re:He'll be alive and well but you... by pvera · · Score: 1

      After so many years living in constant terror of the kid bolting out and running under a car, I don't give a shit how much it costs.

      --
      Pedro
      ----
      The Insomniac Coder
  38. So, how does...? by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

    How exactly does tracking someone everywhere they go "increase their freedom"?

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:So, how does...? by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Freedom and privacy are two distinct things.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    2. Re:So, how does...? by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      When someone knows where you are and that severely restricts your ability to go certain places, that's affecting your freedom.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    3. Re:So, how does...? by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Freedom is the ability to go anywhere you want. Privacy is the ability to go those places without your parents knowing.

      The logic goes that "you're grounded, so you can't work on your research paper at the library unless you wear your GPS watch" gives a child more freedom than "you can't go to the library, you're grounded".

      (No, I don't think teens should be tracked all the time. Perhaps it would be handy to be able to find a five-year-old who's strayed at a carnival, but this tech isn't really terribly useful or needed in most cases IMHO. The amount of privacy that children should have is a completely separate issue, and it varies from situation to situation; age and responsibility are also large factors of course.)

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    4. Re:So, how does...? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      They can go down the street to the playground where formerly mom was too scared to let them go by themselves and they couldn't go unless she was with them. These aren't meant to be worn by adults (although putting them on an adult with alzheimer's might not be a bad idea).

  39. Moron's with PHD film at 11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dr Michele Elliott is a classic case of this. I believe in knowning where my child is but making her responsible for her decisions. You can only control kids so long before they have to stretch and try. At the same time we have to guide and show them so they are ready to make those correct decisions. Today's world has a large number of child predators and our crimmanl system is almost usless at this point for stopping them. I will protect whats mine to the fullest extent of my life. If more parents took responsiblity for there, and there childrens, actions this world wouldn't have half the problems it does. Instead we have the tv babysitter, the Video Game babysitter and the, its not my problem you should have done X aka the BLAME someone else babysitter.

  40. Then and now by erroneus · · Score: 1

    I used to walk to school and walk home by myself when I was like 6 or 7. Now, a child of that age isn't allowed to leave the school building unless a parent or someone else "on the list" appears to pick them up.

    I don't know if the number of child abductions and other such things have gone up. I know that attention to those incidents is certainly increased. I just have to wonder if there are really significant differences between now and then or if we are just becoming increasingly paranoid without good reason.

    And if there are truly increases in crimes against children, I would have to ask why. What is it about our society that is breeding this sort of thing with higher frequency? Is it Disney's fault for dressing little girls up in slutty outfits to make billions of dollars? Is it parents who put makeup on the faces of 5 year old girls to win beauty contests? Is it the lack of discipline that was in fashion some 20 to 30 years ago a contributing factor? I really don't know and would certainly be interested to know.

    But why would GPS tracking devices on children be good? Is parental participation in the lives of the children really so difficult? Does it have to be made "too easy" because the parents can't pull themselves away from their video games? (I know some people like that and it's a sticking point with me) Being a parent is a full-time lifestyle choice. It means changing EVERYTHING about everything in your life. It means giving up a lot of time and other things and finding new joys with them. If people cannot do that, that's fine... just don't have kids. (I know, saying so is worthless... the smarter people already consider these things and then don't have kids... the less smart people keep having kids breeding a population of really stupid people.)

    Or perhaps this is driven by something else? We do seem to have a "gotta know it now" sort of mentality these days. We turn to the internet for nearly everything these days including grocery shopping. Marketing this technology "for the children" could just be someone's idea of exploiting the worries of a few parents. Frankly, if I had some of these devices, I'd sooner put one in my luggage when I travel or on my car to track my mileage. But I don't think I would put them on children. If they are young enough to worry about, then they are young enough for me to BE THERE. And if they are teenagers, then I only have to say "nothing good can come of this." Can you imagine how much worse life would be if your teenage years were tracked by GPS?! Many of us complain all day long about "big brother" and here we are becoming big brother.

  41. Good luck wit that by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

    Teenagers will make monitoring this Big Brother-like network a nightmare when they inevitably all decide to collectively ditch the tracker watches before going out to party on a friday night.

    1. Re:Good luck wit that by Dudeman_Jones · · Score: 1

      Teenagers are also probably smart enough to know that a little bit of copper screening could render it completely useless too.

    2. Re:Good luck wit that by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

      Teenagers are also probably smart enough to know that a little bit of copper screening could render it completely useless too.

      Or better yet - hang it up on their cat's collar before letting it outside for its daily walk around the neighbourhood!

    3. Re:Good luck wit that by blueZ3 · · Score: 1

      I can see all the cool kids paying 'the geek' $50 each to wear a bevy of these and wander around the mall while they all head over to Cheryl Cheerleaders house for a pool party.

      --
      Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
    4. Re:Good luck wit that by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

      Make it 100$ and he spends the weekend at the public library. Not a bad deal for a weekend spent drinking and having sex.

  42. Way over engineered by merky1 · · Score: 1

    Considering most situations where a parent would use this (park / mall / large crowds), does it really need "satellite" tracking abilities? I would imagine just a standard beacon transmitter and receiver would be enough. Most of the scenarios I can imagine would be where the child was within 1 mile of the parent, if not less.

    Also, I'd have to imagine that if someone is depraved enough to "kidnap" a kid, they know to cut off the watch and backpack / etc.

    --
    --WooooHoooo--
  43. Off Topic Iraq by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

    I've always wondered why reporters/contractors in Iraq & Afghanistan don't get stuff like this (preferably sub-dermal). Is it easy to detect/block/ineffective or simply too much for oil companies/news organizations to spend ~$400 on a statistically significant number of their employees?

    --
    IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    1. Re:Off Topic Iraq by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 1

      Well sub-dermal won't work. These things need to be recharged regularly and they are quite big at the moment. Plus, there are obvious privacy issues.

      At one point we had around 150,000 troops in Iraq. 150,000 x $400 = $60 million. And that's the initial outlay and doesn't include the month-to-month cost. So it would be quite expensive, although not prohibitively so, from a cost of war prospective.

      These watches, like all GPS's are easily blocked by being inside or under heavy foliage.

      And thy transmit back to the parent usually by cell service, so you would need a working phone infrastructure.

      The worst of course, would be if the enemy could tap into the signal and find the exact current location of US troops.

      I'm not saying it couldn't be done. I'm just saying the technology is definitely not there yet.

    2. Re:Off Topic Iraq by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      At one point we had around 150,000 troops in Iraq. 150,000 x $400 = $60 million. And that's the initial outlay and doesn't include the month-to-month cost. So it would be quite expensive, although not prohibitively so, from a cost of war prospective.

      I don't suggest it for troops, AFAIK they rarely get taken hostage, I meant for the journalists, etc that the troops have to keep finding.

      And thy transmit back to the parent usually by cell service, so you would need a working phone infrastructure.

      Is that a limitation of all GPS locater services or just these watches.

      The worst of course, would be if the enemy could tap into the signal and find the exact current location of US troops.

      I don't suggest using it for troops, but under any system I would suggest only phoning home randomly and infrequently, while this would still be unacceptable for troops, I don't think giving away a journalists position a few times a day is too bad (especially as with proper encryption, you would have to be close enough to detect the actual transmition to locate them anyway)

      I suppose your big 4 are still valid
      1) It doesn't work from inside buildings, especially basements
      2) It needs to be recharged regularly
      3) They may be to big (although if it can fit in a watch it can fit in fatty tissues)
      4) They may require phone signal (although there may be alternatives)

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
  44. Looks flimsy by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 1

    It might send out a warning if the band is separated from the watch body, but looking at the band, the clasp is just about as flimsy as can be.

    1. Re:Looks flimsy by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      All it would take (and is probably how it works) is to have the strap be conductive, and have the places where the stap connects to the device conductive but electrically separated from each other, making the strap itself a switch. If the circut is broken, it sends an alarm.

      That would be easy enough for a teenager to defeat, but not a six year old, and I don't think these are aimed at teenagers.

    2. Re:Looks flimsy by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      That is indeed exactly how it works.

      However, a clever design would use a strap with a slight known resistance, and be designed to alarm if the resistance of the loop changed. Then, either cutting the strap or attempting to bypass it (so as to cut the strap without breaking the circuit) would set off the alarm.

      I have no idea if it is designed so cleverly, but the geek in me hopes so.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  45. GPS satellites only transmit by Peter+Simpson · · Score: 1

    You can't "talk up" to a GPS satellite.

    Well, you can, but it would ignore you.

    The "satellite positioning system" or "satellite tracking system" is just a GPS receiver and (a guess here) and a cell phone (or some part of one)

  46. Dick Cheney would love this by cryfreedomlove · · Score: 1

    He would place this device on his child without the kid knowing about it. If the kid went somewhere unauthorized then Dick would torture the kid until the truth of the activities was revealed. Let's do everything it takes to keep our kids safe.

  47. An alternate view by aclarke · · Score: 1

    Some kids would be happy to have a watch like this. Some kids like technology. They'd think it was cool. There's no reason to necessarily hide from you kid what the watch does. It's a tool to help you be a better parent, not a tool to help you "spy" on your kids (unless that's what you buy it for).

    My daughter's much to young to use something like this, but I suppose when she is older I MIGHT consider it. I'd talk to her about it first though, and only get it if she was on board. It's much too expensive an item for her to toss in the bushes because she doesn't like it.

  48. A better tool for abusers? by jwunderl · · Score: 1

    While some children do wander away, the real fear that this device appears to cater to is stranger abduction. The problem is that stranger abduction is rare. Abuse by family members or close family friends is much more common, and often does not involve the child being abducted or going missing. This technology would seem to be tailor made to enable abusers to track and control the children that they are already controlling and manipulating.

    --
    Thanx,
    John

    When the going gets weird, The weird turn pro.
    - Hunter S. Thompson
  49. It's age, and perceived vs actual security by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1

    If your child is young enough to need a leash, well and good. But consider. A child leash is a two-way thing. You know the child is there, the child knows you are there. It is more invasive than a GPS, but also far more secure. And the parent has to pay attention to the child instead of just letting them wander off. My argument is that GPS tracking of children creates a false sense of security (like mothers thinking their kid is "safe" in the car while they drive like idiots"). A child leash doesn't. The high-tech solution is not actually as good as the low-tech one.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  50. GPS - so won't work indoors by petes_PoV · · Score: 1
    All you will get is a trace leading to the Mall, or whever your kids go to hang out. After that, you'll get nothing until they venture outside again.

    Plus, since this must have a way to be removed with using force, I think we can guarantee that the kids will very quickly come up with ways to subvert the locks and take these off if they don't want to wear them.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:GPS - so won't work indoors by citizenr · · Score: 1

      its a cellphone without mic/speaker. IT can be tracked by Cell ID where GPS signal is not available.

      --
      Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
  51. Benign uses of similar technology by davidwr · · Score: 1

    *Tracking pets or hunting dogs.
    *Tracking parolees and probationers.
    *Tracking the mentally infirm.
    *Tracking very young school children on a field trip, as an add-on, not replacement for, adult supervision.
    *Tracking people who camp in the wilderness.
    *Tracking young children who are in unfamiliar areas.

    Of course, for anyone who can use a cell phone, the broadcasting should be turned off or maybe broadcast only once an hour unless the person shows signs of distress such as loss of blood pressure, not moving for a certain period of time without being in "I'm taking a nap" mode, etc.; the device is removed for more than a preset period of time; or the user hits a call-for-help button.

    Oh, and it should be cheaper than the cost of meal at a good restaurant.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  52. Wrong demographic. by Orbijx · · Score: 1

    I'd rather put this watch on an Alzheimer's patient, who is likely to wander off to dog knows where and no-one can find him.

    Especially so if the patient is in Verizon country.

    --
    One of these days, I am going to flip out. When I flip out, I'll be back in five minutes.
  53. Articles about GPS ironically beg the question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GPS -- a name for a constellation of satellites -- is losing it's meaning as reporters routinely misunderstand what it is.

    The Telegraph reports that a new wristwatch called num8 has a GPS tracking device and satellite positioning system concealed inside...

    GPS is the satellite positioning system 'concealed' inside. GPS doesn't track anything. It's a receiver. Any tracking is done by devices interfaced with the GPS receiver.

  54. whine whine whine think of the children by jtrainor · · Score: 1

    Do you know how many children are kidnapped in the US?

    About 240.

    Buying one of these stupid things isn't going to make your kid any safer, but it will teach him that you're an overprotective control freak.

  55. Maybe the /. title should have been. . . by JSBiff · · Score: 1

    "Children's Watch Allows Perverts To Track Your Kids"

    I'm sure the watch's makers will swear up and down it's impossible for anyone but the parent to track the kid. But, ultimately, there is at least the possibility any technology could be subverted. In this case, I'd be worried that some pervert would be able to find a way to track some kids, watch for patterns in their movements, and figure out the best time/place to snatch kids.

  56. Good tech. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happens when i turn on a GPS Jammer? You've got detailed instructions on the internet how to build one with a good range + you can always buy online from shady places.

    Not to say it might not work, but I'm guessing the GPS Signal from a Car Navigator and a mobile phone are the same. I'm assuming automatically this watch won't be able to bypass a Jammer

    1. Re:Good tech. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're going to that extent to stalk kids in dark places, I don't think a stupid little GPS watch is going to save them or stop you, there are bigger issues at stake if that's how far you would go to get "kids in your car"!

      No disrespect meant, just expanding your point to the next logical step!

  57. this is either too much or not enough by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

    1 how safe is the tracking website aka could it be hacked into a "shopping site"
    2 realtime tracking has way to many concerns
    3 how do they ensure the bracelet is actually on the kid?? (does the strap lock?? is there a pulse detector??)

    If there is a legit reason to have this kind of tracking why do an easily visible watch?? why not hide the tracker on the kid somewhere (or maybe have multiple trackers)?

    --
    Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
  58. Re:It's age, and perceived vs actual security by Zebedeu · · Score: 1

    Depends. I see the GPS not as an active child control device, but as a backup in case you get distracted and the child wanders off.

    If you're a bad parent, no amount of technology will save your child.

  59. plug for my all time favorite /. sig by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "If you spend all your time childproofing the world you won't have any time to worldproof your child."

    I saw that in a sig awhile ago. Don't remember from who. It's a great one though.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    1. Re:plug for my all time favorite /. sig by Sandbags · · Score: 1

      I'm not concerned with my kid getting raped or abducted (well, i am, but the chance is so rediculously remote, that worrying over it, and spending money to prevent it is honestly not worth it). What I AM worried about is being a good parent. I want my kids to see things, go places, have a life. However, there's only so much freedom you can give before they take more... Let them out, and they'll go places you don't want them to be (sneaking in underage into night clubs, wandering dangerous parts of town, hanging out a some kids house whose known to be "unsafe" for teenage girls to be around.

      When you know your kid is supposed to be at someone's house, it;s easy enough to call and confirm (if you have been given the right numebr). When they're elsewhere about town, without a specific desitination, its near impossible to know what they're doing. A Watch with GPS lets me unobtrusevley have a constanbt reminder for my kid (and her friends), that they're alowed to do pretty much whatever they want, but certain things, and certain places are off limits, and with a GPS, doing those things are MUCH harder to accomplish, and I'll likely find out sooner or later I've been deceived.

      I trust my kids only so much as I know what lies i told to my own parents. i was a much better kid than my sister, and rarely broke rules, but I DID break rules when i was fairly certain there were no concequences. An ordinary GPS, or even a cell phone with GPS, can easily be left places. Smart kids even forward the calls from their cell phpone to a friend's un-tracked device and leave their tracked cellphone somewhere to fool the system. A watch with an anti-removal device (or notification system) solves that issue. She can go where she wants, see new things, roam the city, but there are certain places she might try to go that she knowns I would not approve of, and that watch will keep her from going there.

      --
      There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
    2. Re:plug for my all time favorite /. sig by Reziac · · Score: 1

      It also tells her that you do not TRUST her, AT ALL, unless the eye of god is following her (in the form of the watch).

      Trust has to run both ways, or it is just coercion.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  60. Depends on your definition of 'the world' by mschirmer · · Score: 1

    'Is the world really that unsafe that parents need to track their children electronically? I don't think so,'

    That really depends on your definition of the world and where you live in it. I'm sure there are a few families in some not-so-well-off countries that would love to have this device on their children, and at that point I wouldn't call it paranoia, more of an everyday security concern I would think.

    1. Re:Depends on your definition of 'the world' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like what? let's take a pretty dangerous metropolis, let's say Mexico City.

      The child will be abducted, the watch will be stripped and sold at Tepito (probably the biggest informal market in the country) in less than a couple hours, with the cell chip removed and changed to respond to another number.

      Yes, that's my definition of "the world", abductors here will just learn how to deal with the devices, in record time, if you implement it intracutaneous chip, next thing you'll find will be your son/daughter half eviscerated because of the chip.

    2. Re:Depends on your definition of 'the world' by mschirmer · · Score: 1

      You have a valid point and I don't disagree. The abduction is lucrative enough without the need to entice amateur abductors to enter into a secondary body parts market. I was more pointing out the fact that Dr Michele Elliott is a little mistaken to think that "the world" is an ultra safe place. Although I don't think this wrist watch thing is going to help at all, his comment is a little naive.

  61. I think penny covered by nimbius · · Score: 1
    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  62. Moronic by omb · · Score: 1

    Children NEED privacy, If they can't get it one way they will get it another. If you think you are being a good parent by watching your kid every moment and not giving them privacy round the house you are an idiot, and if you think you need GPS tracking you are paranoid and it will do you no good.

    Trusting your kids, and having them trust and respect you is where you want to be and no high tech bling will get you that.

  63. Free Range Kids by hansamurai · · Score: 1

    I recently started reading this great blog by a woman who's very anti-"think of the children". Great stuff and I'm sure she'd get especially upset about something like this.

    http://freerangekids.wordpress.com/

    1. Re:Free Range Kids by natehoy · · Score: 1

      I don't know. This might enable some people to feel comfortable HAVING free-range kids (or, as we called them when we were growing up, "kids", because helicopter parents were the oddity back then and not the norm).

      I'm sure someone who is already comfortable having free-range kids would look at this with horror, but this could be a useful crutch for some to get comfortable with the idea of making their kids free-range. It depends on the circumstances - if you already trust your kid to go out and do their thing, then you're already happy with it and you'll see this as a threat. However, if you are a free-range advocate trying to make HeliMom (who already had their child grow up in the comforting glow of a baby monitor power light or a night-vision camera in their room) comfortable with the idea of trying out free-range, then this could be a really valuable "baby step" tool.

      WHATEVER IT TAKES to get the kids separated from their parents and engaging in independent free play is, by definition, a good thing for so-called "free range" parenting as a movement.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    2. Re:Free Range Kids by NiteShaed · · Score: 1

      get dirty, get cuts and scrapes and bruises, find themselves in difficult situations, get filthy and yes, even get lost. They're even supposed to lose at games, and join competitions where everyone doesn't get a trophy.

      Just out of curiosity, how does this tracker stop them from any of these things?

      As for the tracker thing: Little Billy is out playing, and is supposed to "be home by dark" Let's assume he doesn't show up "by dark":
      With tracker - His mom or dad would wait a reasonable amount of time, check his location, and go tell him he's late and get his ass home.
      Without tracker: His mom our dad wait's a reasonable amount of time, then walks around the neighborhood looking for him, then gets in the car and drives around for a while, before getting a phone-call from the other parent saying "Yep, he just got home, he was playing video games at Johnny's house and didn't know it was already dark".

      Difference? Mom and dad don't have to waste half their evening looking for little Billy, and nobody's bloodpressure spikes into the red. Other than that, there's no real difference between outcomes.

      Where is the problem in this?

      --
      Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
    3. Re:Free Range Kids by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

      Just out of curiosity, how does this tracker stop them from any of these things?

      You're right, it doesn't. The problem with this whole discussion is people run it off the rails and get bogged down in side-issues and absolutism.

      Some people are overprotective of their kids. This fact has led many to backlash against this, so they instantly think anything like this is mollycoddling. It's not.

      Bad

      Not letting your kids play at the park
      Keeping your kids indoors all the time for fear of "the swine flu"
      Going into a panic and putting your kid behind you every time a stranger approaches

      Not Bad

      Keeping track of where your kid is
      Keeping your kid home from a party where someone is known to have had the flu 2 days ago
      etc..

  64. Great stalking device. by GrantRobertson · · Score: 1

    Who wants to bet the the primary use of this device will be for stalking. All someone has to do is stash it in or under someone's car and they can be stalked from home via Google.

    1. Re:Great stalking device. by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 1

      Who wants to bet the the primary use of this device will be for stalking. All someone has to do is stash it in or under someone's car and they can be stalked from home via Google.

      That's a great idea! Thanks!

      --
      My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
  65. Oh yea. Just what the world needs now. by Dudeman_Jones · · Score: 1

    Commercially available small form GPS tracking systems available to the common person. Oh yea. I mean, there is NO way that this tech could be used by stalkers to follow someone, or my organized crime to track things. Jeeze, sometimes people will accept any idiot idea if could in some random remote possibility help children. Here's a good reason why this should burn in hell. Small child in a warzone slips it onto a military convoy as it passes through the town doing whatever good press PR work that unit is on for the day. Totally freaking awesome.

  66. Pascal's wager by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1

    Bad example. Most theologians would agree that Pascal was quite wrong about that. By Pascal's argument, as well as being a Catholic you should also be a Muslim and a Protestant, and possibly a member of several interesting other religions to be on the safe side. In the same way, the moment we get into that argument on child safety, you should escalate your security means to the limit of your income. Because the chances are very high that your kid won't die of E coli poisoning, be eaten by a grue, break his neck falling off a bicycle, drown in the bath but he might. If you are prepared to pay several hundred dollars to combat one (actually very unlikely) threat, how much are you prepared to pay for all the others?

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  67. Monitoring the kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I monitor the kids I like to keep the level of secrecy high. So it is injected GPS devices all the way! They may grow up with nightmares of alien visits but they will be safe. The way I look at it is that I am preparing them for a future where big brother is always watching.... now only if I could have a device to read their minds (prepare them for the thought police).

  68. 2012 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We'll all be forced to wear one, possibly even injected in our bodies.

  69. nanny century by Tom · · Score: 1

    The makers of the watch claim it gives peace of mind to parents

    Yeah, because that's the most important thing in bringing up children, right?

    It's called trust, parents. One evil detail about trust is that knowing is the opposite of trust. By replacing trust with knowledge, you're removing it. So if you don't trust your kids, you have to check on their every move. If you don't trust the people, you have to have surveilance everywhere. It really is the same mindset that's driving both of these developments of society.

    And yes, this includes the kidnapping scenario. What, exactly, do you gain by a real-time alert that your kid has been kidnapped? It's not like it would prevent it.

    Now the numbers. Yes, you read stuff like this:

    Every 40 seconds in the United States, a child is reported missing or abducted.

    (source)

    Note the words "is reported missing". If you dig into the numbers a little deeper, you find that:

    152,265 [of 876,213] of the persons reported missing in 2000 were categorized as either endangered or involuntary.

    (source)

    That's 17% of the reported cases where something serious is actually going on. But that's just the surface. Actual crime statistics show a better picture:

    In 1999, only 115 children were abducted by strangers with the intent to keep, kill or hold them for ransom.

    (source)

    Now that's a very different figure (almost the same year, though). It does exclude sexual abuse, which accounts for a fair share and is certainly almost as frightening to a parent than a murder. However:

    "Family kidnapping" accounts for nearly 50% of all child kidnappings.

    (same source)

    Now we're getting somewhere. Look, in the "reported missing" as well as in the "involuntary" cases above, one very common case is fully included, as if it were equal to a kidnap-rape-and-kill case: That of one parent in a divorce taking the child without the other parent's knowledge or consent. Yepp, legally that's a kidnapping.

    So if you throw enough stuff together under the same label, you can get big enough numbers to frighten parents senseless with. Which you can then use to sell them stuff, pass new laws or whatever it is that was your original intend.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  70. More than a step by russotto · · Score: 1

    Critics of the watch say tagging children is a step too far in paranoia about child safety.

    No. Child leashes were a step too far. This is about 100 miles down the road of paranoia and accelerating fast.

    1. Re:More than a step by q-the-impaler · · Score: 1

      Oh please, child leashes are a God send for toddlers. My kid loves the freedom he gets with his. Of course when the day comes that he actually responds to his name or a firm, "No" will be the day he's too old for it.

      --
      Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform
    2. Re:More than a step by russotto · · Score: 1

      Oh please, child leashes are a God send for toddlers. My kid loves the freedom he gets with his.

      It's good of you to be teaching your kids the modern classics (like _1984_) so young.

    3. Re:More than a step by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

      Oooh, dramatic! I think you should come up with some hip viral video showing hordes of parents daring to keep their toddlers close to them via leashes as some sort of industrial child-rearing process much akin to the canning of milk in a large factory. That would be totally hip dude!

      A toddler understands the concept of freedom about as well as a bird understands the concept of X-ray lithography. Furthermore, you seem to be obsessed around the idea of leashes as having some special meaning. Why not wax dramatic about the perils of cribs (it's a cage you monsters!)?

      Sorry, that really is just very very silly.

  71. Another implementation by Imagix · · Score: 1

    You know what else you can do with this? Instead of a wristwatch, how about an anklet? Oh yeah, they already have them. Used for people under house arrest....

  72. Forget the kids, by crimbil · · Score: 1

    I want one for my dog. Darn thing got loose and was missing for a week. I was wishing for one of these gadgets the whole time.

    1. Re:Forget the kids, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Animals are not "things". A godamn table is a thing.

  73. Mod parent up! by MancunianMaskMan · · Score: 1

    I was just going to post this but A/C got there first. Don't know why the obnoxious McCann parents didn't get done for negligence.

  74. Anyone here a parent? by InsertCleverUsername · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Jeez... I was going to mod this one, but as a parent, I've just got to weigh in. Those of you acting like it's some police state conspiracy to track my four-year old, really have no idea what you're talking about. It doesn't change my attitude about keeping an eye on him, it's not invasive or dehumanizing, and the kid doesn't care --the kid probably doesn't even understand. He'd think it was cool to have his own watch.

    I lost track of the little guy at a theme park about a year ago when he ran off while I was --ahem-- indisposed in the restroom. We found him 10 minutes later, but it took weeks to get back in my wife's good graces. He's typically obedient, but these things happen --and no, training him in karate, giving him a copy of the Fountainhead, or some other moronic suggestion wouldn't have helped. As he becomes more capable of self-governance and demonstrates responsibility, we will give him increasing autonomy.

    --
    Ask me about my sig!
  75. Free Range Kids by Hittman · · Score: 1

    Kids are supposed to get dirty, get cuts and scrapes and bruises, find themselves in difficult situations, get filthy and yes, even get lost. They're even supposed to lose at games, and join competitions where everyone doesn't get a trophy. Learning how to handle small pains and failures results in a happy, healthy adult who is much better equipped to handle the bigger pains and failures that come from Real Life.

    Parents are hard-wired to protect their kids from any harm, no matter how minor. Parents who don't learn to fight that urge raise helpless self-centered adults. Obviously, we need to protect our kids from real dangers and big hurts when we can, and it can be difficult to find the correct middle point. This isn't a correct middle point - this is for paranoid helicopter parents. It is a fine tool for those who want to raise dependent wussies or seriously deranged trouble makers.

    Kids who are given the freedom to get hurt and get in trouble usually don't in any big way. Those who are watched every minute have much more incentive to get into much more trouble when they finally figure out how to get away from their overbearing parents.

    Although my kids are grown now (and since they were allowed to get hurt and get in trouble they very seldom did) I really like the attitude of this site: http://freerangekids.wordpress.com/

  76. peace of mind ? by viralMeme · · Score: 1

    "a new wristwatch called num8 has a GPS tracking device .. concealed inside so parents .. The overriding aim of num8 is to give children their freedom and parents peace of mind"

    What's the point. How is the possession of a GPS wristwatch going to protect their kids from muggers, abductors etc. How about they spend some 'quality time' with their own kids, instead of allowing an electronic device to substitute for a baby sitter.

    alternative headline: company exploits parental concern to sell product

    1. Re:peace of mind ? by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 1

      What's the point. How is the possession of a GPS wristwatch going to protect their kids from muggers, abductors etc. How about they spend some 'quality time' with their own kids, instead of allowing an electronic device to substitute for a baby sitter.

      It allows me to know where my kid is, so I know that when he's selling crack to schoolkids he's on school grounds, rather than some dark alley. Remember, location == safety!

      alternative headline: company exploits parental concern to sell product

      The same headline would have to be re-used on a regular basis, I'm afraid.:\

  77. Easy: by DriftingDutchman · · Score: 1

    1) Walk into a "legal" indoors area. 2) Wrap tinfoil around watch. 3) Parents: ???

    1. Re:Easy: by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but who wants to show up to a party wearing a tinfoil bracelet? Come on...

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  78. Two thumbs down for this. by e-scetic · · Score: 1

    Here's my take on this. I had an unusual upbringing. My parents were one of those laissez faire types who essentially let me do whatever I wanted as a kid. I could come and go as I pleased, go to bed whenever I wanted, go wherever I wanted, etc.

    And gosh, did I ever go places I shouldn't have, and get into trouble, and found myself in danger all the time, including a run in with a pedophile.

    But I learned to think my way out of trouble, to be self-sufficient, to problem-solve and, more importantly, not to rely on anyone but myself.

    When I see kids these days I'm not sure they're exposed to enough danger to make them think rather than freak out or panic when it happens. And I see this watch as having the potential to give them a false sense of security. I think it actually helps to know people don't know where you are and can't find you if you're in danger, that you'll be a little more cautious knowing this. Don't depend on momma to get you out of trouble.

    1. Re:Two thumbs down for this. by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 1

      When I see kids these days I'm not sure they're exposed to enough danger to make them think rather than freak out or panic when it happens.

      Worst one I ever saw was a girl who, even as a teenager, would run towards the nearest person whenever she panicked.

      Guess what happened when she saw a flasher one night while alone.

  79. Damaging to the Psyche by shambalagoon · · Score: 1

    This is a terrible idea. Someone wearing this will feel that they are owned, that they are property, that they are watched and not trusted. Parents who would use this have a problem, either in that they watch the news too much and believe the world is a very dangerous place, or that they have an adversarial and overly controlling relationship with their kid, at which point you give up all pretense of having a good relationship and enter into a nasty tug-of-war that will last until the kid is 18 and flees the parents forever.

    My parents would have used this on me. My mom believed the world was a dangerous place, with evil lurking around every corner. Both my parents had trust issues even though I was an ideal student, never got in trouble, and was always trustworthy and dependable. And if they had shackled me with something like this, my eventual rebellion would have been a thousand times worse.

    1. Re:Damaging to the Psyche by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a terrible idea. Someone wearing this will feel that they are owned, that they are property, that they are watched and not trusted

      How is giving someone a true picture of the world a terrible idea?

  80. Scary to 'misplace' a kid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My 4.5 year old son wandered off and got lost at the beach this summer while rock hunting. We found him in less than five minutes (kids are rather predictable and I deduced his rock hunting path, bewilderment, place of realization that he was lost, and where he went from there - to the water).The time between the moment where I went from glibly holding my 1 year old to realizing the boy was absent to the moment I found him is time I don't care to repeat nor remember. But when I found him, two people had realized he was lost and were taking him to the lifeguard tower. The world isn't as full of child thieves as one is led to believe.

  81. Probably just a coincidence... my employer by KaimaraZatar · · Score: 1

    Probably just a coincidence... This morning HR announced all new hires will be receiving a watch during orientation session instead of the traditional t-shirt.

  82. It's not that the world is unsafe... by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    It's that most poeple restrict the world available to the child because parts of it are unsafe. Something like this (and future steps which will involve more than just location, like vitals) allow children -- really any person -- to go to places and to do things whose ordinary risks usually involve extraodinary consequences, but now would have much more reasonable consequences.

    For example, I bought a new car, an MX-5, and going out for random drives is awesome. I like finding dark creepy roads at night, and exploring. I live in a very safe, huge, city of more than 7 million people. I'm not worried about being attacked in my car at night -- it's just not likely. But if I were to blow a tire, I have a real problem. The answer to "where are you ,we'll send a tow truck" would be "I have on idea. I can see stars, and I'm something like 10 minutes from a residential neighbourhood". Obviously if I should have some kind of medical issue, the same response would be available to the 9-1-1 operator.

    Now, I'm an adult, and can say that the risk of my getting stuck somewhere is worth taking. I can say that if I have to sit there for ten hours, that's not so bad. I can say that I'll drive carefully to minimize any serious medical injury. And I can take the gamble and presume that I won't have a sudden stroke for no reason.

    But I'd never allow children under my care to take those risks. Purely because if something goes wrong, it goes really wrong. But if I (the guardian) could know where they are, and their heart-rate, that alone would be a awy for me to save them from just about any calamity. The new rule colud be "anywhere within a 60 minute driving radius".

    That's pretty freeing. Not only for the child, who would otherwise be caged to a much smaller part of the city, but also to me, who would otherwise be caged near the child.

    Of course, for my device to alert me when my child's heart-rate is dangerously low/high, the movie theatres would have to stop jamming wireless signals.

  83. Faraday Cage by omb · · Score: 1

    No, it dosnt need grounding, I hope your kid listens at school more than the paranoid parents did.

  84. Feed the Paranioa! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chances that someone will discover how to track these devices from the comfort of their own home are probably higher than that of your child being abducted - that is until they do figure out how to track them and then they might actually be putting your child at increased risk.

  85. I may be modded into oblivion for saying this... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    ... but I really don't think that children really ought to expect *ANY* right to privacy from their parents, who are, I am inclined to point out, supposed to be responsible for them until they reach an age where they can assume full legal responsibility for themselves.

    "Is the world really that unsafe that parents need to track their children electronically?" Elliot asks. If something that is a genuinely justifiable concern is sufficient to qualify as need, then I would be inclined to answer yes. Even if the answer is no, the concern is no less justified and I don't exactly see an abundance of workable alternatives that would accomplish the same desired result, which is simply peace of mind for the parents.

  86. If only for a brief moment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Excuse me. Can I borrow your iTouch for a second? I think my kid's hiding in one of the circular clothing racks, but I don't know which one and my phone can't run Google Maps.

  87. Doubtful this will work by TechnologyResource · · Score: 1

    To date, no company has been about to develop a good watch with GPS tracking capabilities. A company called Wherefy tried it and failed. There are too many challenges with battery life and size.

  88. Karate != Bad Ass by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

    It would be nice to think karate gave people magical powers that made them tougher but it doesn't, they will probably get beat up more often because they think they are billy badass and can fight there way out of any situtation. Learning dance steps (katas) and breaking boards will not make children less susceptible to Chester the child molester who outweighs the child by 150lbs. Teaching your child not to trust creepy looking guys with mustaches and vans would be more effective, also keeping an eye on children would do wonders.

    --
    Knowledge = Power
    P= W/t
    t=Money
    Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
  89. Spy Kids Dreams Come True by Rauq · · Score: 1

    Has nobody else realized the possibilities this device enables? I've always wanted to find out where my ex-girlfriend goes after school!

  90. This is very good...with iPhone by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    This would complement with iPhone very well, seeing as I phone now allows you to browse directly Google maps...so if you were to get another app..this would be as easy as look on your phone to see where you are, and where the child is...and be able to track i real time.

  91. I sure needed one of these during my dream by mrs+clear+plastic · · Score: 1

    It's very interesting that this article appears in Slashdot today.

    Just last night, I had a wierd dream where I was lost in a strange city late at night.

    I was on a business trip; I was at this strange building that was like a mize with staircases with no railing and endless dark hallways.

    I emerged from the building into a part of the city that was very different then when I entered te building.

    As I looked around me, the streets kept changing.

    One of these devices would have helped me very much during this dream?

    Where can I get one?

    --
    Cleara
  92. What about battery life by vehicle+tracking · · Score: 1

    The original article fails to mention anything about battery life. If it's running on a watch battery, they will be lucky to get 2 hours, and that's without transmitting signals. GPS needs to have messages called, "Keep alive" messages. Keep alive messages don't report position, they just keep the connection open to ensure the device will work when you do track it. Keep alive messages are generally set for 30-90 seconds apart, and they do draw on your battery.

  93. Re:hey look child abusers can now google their pre by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While "children with GPS tracking devices" may be easy to find, supposing you could hack the signals, they probably wouldn't be the preferred target group if you were a pedophile.

  94. Stupid by leromarinvit · · Score: 1

    GPS doesn't work inside buildings. Guess where your child is going to be most of the time?

    --
    Proud member of the Ferengi Socialist Party.
    1. Re:Stupid by natehoy · · Score: 1

      If you buy into this technology, you'd at least know what building they entered, and when. That could be useful if your kid lost signal in the local brothel instead of the library where you thought they were going. You don't necessarily need to know WHERE in the brothel they are, you just know that unless they are probably not studying geometry. Well, OK, they probably are, but it's not the kind of curves that will allow them to pass their next math test. :)

      Seriously, a device like this will give you:

      1. When the signal was lost.
      2. Where the signal was lost.
      3. An immediate alert that the signal was lost.

      If you're HeliMom, you'll be watching the screen anyway and tracking their location. So if that location shifts suddenly from the local playground to a spot on the road next to the playground, then signal is lost a few seconds later, you can pretty much call the cops and scream "Amber Alert" right then unless you know someone is supposed to be picking HeliKid up. Even if the device is forcibly removed and left behind, you shave hours off the notification time and can narrow the search perimeter.

      And if you are using this because you want to keep tabs on an older kid, and kid is somewhere they are not supposed to be, chances are you'll be able to figure out something based on last-known-location.

      And, yes, I recognize that the kid who wants to go to the brothel instead of the library would simply:

      1. Go to library.
      2. Wrap arm in tinfoil then put long-sleeved shirt over arm.
      3. Go to brothel.
      4. Profit! (for brothel)
      5. Re-wrap arm in tinfoil
      6. Return to library.

      Even so, losing GPS signal doesn't mean a complete loss of location data. I'm sure this uploads data on the cellular network, so if GPS is lost the device can still fall back on the nearest cell tower to report a really rough location, so if it gets even the weakest of cell signals it can report location within a few miles. Even if junior wrapped their arm, there's still a chance of getting a cell signal at some point placing them clearly away from the library (and in the case of a kidnapping you might at least get a rough idea of where they are going, narrowing the search parameters further).

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
  95. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Over 300 comments and nobody has an answer for how they are transmitting, and only 2 others have even asked.
    I find it sad that even on slashdot people are more interested in endless arguing and abductions than they are about *how stuff works*.

    If anybody has an answer as to the transmitting system, or more information, please post.

  96. Top 10 reasons this is silly by bussdriver · · Score: 3, Insightful

    1) MOST the problem people for children are FRIENDS AND FAMILY! This fact can not be stated enough. Obviously, tracking does little good.

    2) The majority strangers are good people and will help / watch out for kids; well, not in lawsuit crazy countries or ones were the culture of fear makes everybody a threat; even the child who needs your help or supervision. Parents today seem over protective, possibly because they are so much more negligent than previous generations? (its not their fault they are this way)

    3) Teenagers will not wear such a watch, outsmart it etc. Teens get themselves into trouble; much of it not requiring tracking-- knowing where they are being foolish is not that useful. Its primary use here would be kidnapping into the sex trade which is much higher in some areas and at certain ages and genders. This is still quite a low percentage even in relative bad areas.

    4) Young "adults" would be better suited to a cell phone. Lots of ideas possible here. Ideally, something that was set it off with you yelling help... Your phone tracks you ALREADY to a general area if not precisely by this point-- no gps required. Eventually most children will have a cell phone too.

    5) Drug sex offenders to kill their sex drive. Similar to drugging the mental cases as we do now (both are mental problems.) This would possibly even help with the #1 cause of the problems. Makes more sense to have the sick people pay to treat themselves than everybody else pay to see where their kid was before / during victimization.

    6) How about we put the tracking devices ON THE OFFENDERS instead of all the kids? (which wouldn't help with biggest group-- friends and family.) This is a lot like house arrest bracelets.
    Seriously, somebody who preys on unknown kids/teens has a mental problem not a criminal problem-- punishment doesn't work; they only learn how not to get caught next time or go after safer targets (friends/family) or kill the victims. It requires life-long treatment, not temporary punishment. Its just as foolish as punishing gay people for being gay and thinking it will fix the situation. Legalized prostitution would also cut down the numbers- hey its a fact - prohibitions never work.

    7) Bad Behavior / Drugs: Knowing where the child is will not help a whole lot; most the drug users I've known did it around friends, at home, or even at school.

    8) Parents: Do you want to have data that could be used to prosecute your child?? In the USA, we prosecute children for stupid shit and are quite foolish about punishing them (in some areas even corrupt about it... http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/519/150)

    9) Clever hacker types (who could be kids) will combine with the power of the internet to provide less talented people easy ways to hack the watches so they don't work as planned

    10) What about bad coverage areas? GPS doesn't work in all places and sending the data back is even more troublesome. Should a parent call 911 because the child disappears near some kids basement? Would wrapping foil over it cause it to do the same thing?

    1. Re:Top 10 reasons this is silly by Grishnakh · · Score: 0, Troll

      5) Drug sex offenders to kill their sex drive. Similar to drugging the mental cases as we do now (both are mental problems.) This would possibly even help with the #1 cause of the problems. Makes more sense to have the sick people pay to treat themselves than everybody else pay to see where their kid was before / during victimization.

      The only way I can think of to do this effectively is to chemically castrate these men. Sounds great to me, but that can't be done because the liberals and ACLU will all be up in arms over their "civil rights". Child molesters have basically a 100% recidivism rate, but apparently the liberals are more worried about their rights than their victims'.

    2. Re:Top 10 reasons this is silly by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

      Child molesters have basically a 100% recidivism rate

      If you don't know the actual facts of an issue (*hint* the above quote is factually incorrect), your opinions on "solutions", especially when they involve maiming people, should absolutely be ignored.

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    3. Re:Top 10 reasons this is silly by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with maiming people who have committed a horrible crime? We already torture them by sticking them in horrible prisons, and no one seems to mind that. Castration isn't "maiming". Aren't your pets neutered? Castration removes the desire for these people to do the things they do.

      And yes, child molesters do have an extremely high recidivism rate. Unless you care to cite some sources, I think you're full of it.

    4. Re:Top 10 reasons this is silly by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

      Why is it that the people spouting the most ridiculous "facts" are always the ones that demand proof their fantasies aren't true? Especially given the obvious fact that you have in no way researched your own claims... Seriously, 5 seconds on Google - http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/rsorp94pr.htm The relevant bit, an estimated 3.3% of child molesters did so again within a 3 year period of being released from jail. A very very long way from your "basically 100% recidivism rate".

      If you want to argue the merits of chemical castration compared to other forms of punishment, or even the semantics of referring to it as maiming, fine. But you didn't start with that; you started with a completely bullshit statistic made-up to support your argument. It severely weakens your position and makes your ranting against the ACLU and liberals sound like paranoid delusions on par with your delusional statistics.

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    5. Re:Top 10 reasons this is silly by Grishnakh · · Score: 0, Troll

      As this link states, the recidivism rate is MUCH higher (30-40% over 20 years), and that only accounts for offenses that are detected. Phillip Garrido abducted and held Jaycee Duggard for almost 20 years before being caught, so he wouldn't even count in your bullshit statistic of a mere 5 years. So the actual rates are likely much higher than what I've stated here, since most sex crimes are never reported. As stated in my link: "When an offender is caught and has a thorough evaluation with a polygraph backup, he will reveal dozens, sometimes hundreds of offenses he was never apprehended for."

      There's nothing delusional about blaming the ACLU and liberals for protecting these worthless humans, because they're the ones who do. And again, what's the problem with castration? You still haven't answered that. We all (at least the responsible ones among us) do this to our pets, and no one seems to have an issue with that. What's the problem with doing it to humans who have committed a horrible crime? How's it worse than rotting in prison and being beaten and gang-raped every day?

    6. Re:Top 10 reasons this is silly by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      5: which sex offenders are we drugging? There are about 600k SOs in the country right now, and maybe a thousand that are actually predators.

      6: Where to you get off tagging someone like cattle after they've served their sentence? We don't do this to murderers or thieves, nor to the people who took the country to the cleaners last year.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    7. Re:Top 10 reasons this is silly by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

      A) I prefer Bureau of Justice statistics over an organization calling itself The Leadership Council. One which apparently finds value in polygraphs.

      B)ONE example of an outlier in no way implies that actual rates are likely much higher.

      C) Please provide me with any credible evidence that "most sex crimes are never reported". I have to admit, I don't see any possible way to prove/disprove that claim. Seems like a bullshit made-up "fact" you want to use to support your hand waving.

      D) Even if I accepted every thing you presented here as 100% factual, you are still only up 40% recidivism, which is still a long ways from your original 100% claim.

      Like I said, you actually do have a few solid arguments for chemical castration of repeat (or maybe first time? Not sure what you're saying) offenders. But I make it a point not to debate people that make shit up to support their arguments (obviously, other than to attack their "facts"). Although, you do at least have the opportunity to sound more credible next time, now that you have found a link and know the appropriate statistics to throw around to utilize that link.

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    8. Re:Top 10 reasons this is silly by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Child molesters have basically a 100% recidivism rate, but apparently the liberals are more worried about their rights than their victims'.

      I've heard that, but I've never seen anything that shows a person convicted of child molestation is more likely to be convicted for a second offense than those that commit other crimes repeating theirs. It sounds more like lies made up to vilify a group that doesn't need any more vilification (not because they don't deserve it, but because they are vilified so much there's little one can do to make them more villainous, so we don't need to make up stuff to try). At best, there is a claim that they get better at it, but no explanation of how someone would get better at that, while the robber gets worse...

  97. Too late for me, but perfect for others. by shallow+monkey · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, this product is about 12 years too late for me to take advantage of it. We looked high and low for such a product back in 1997 after my son continually wandered away from home. At that time, there were just a few products becoming available for Alzheimer's patients, but nothing in the children's market. We even contacted a few research organizations that were producing collars for tracking wildlife. Their products would have worked but they couldn't market them for use with humans.

    If you have an autistic son or daughter who wanders, you will RUN to get this for the peace of mind it can provide. My son was able to outwit, evade, and overcome all the household locking devices we could generate (aside from a keyed deadbolt that would have been problematic in case of a fire.)

    Seriously, this device will give some parents peace of mind.

    NOTE: My son was always found, without harm, but only after a great deal of effort at times, including the bulk of the police force in Fort Collins at one point in time. Today he's a fairly well-adjusted sophomore in high school.

  98. A sly teen would... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    simply attach the watch to the nearest delivery-type vehicle, and wait for the distressed and hilarious call from his or her overbearing parent. What a joke this product is! A sad joke.

  99. it's an arms race by oneTheory · · Score: 1

    You really think once these become widely available it won't be the first thing a kidnapper does to remove the watch (correctly, not to trigger an alarm), then toss it into the back of a pickup truck going the opposite way?

    Tech won't save you from the world. Measures and countermeasures it's an arms race that provides faux safety and warm fuzzies and lots of money to corporations that lie to you. Educating our kids to think for themselves, be street smart, problem solving, and tenacious is better, IMO.

    1. Re:it's an arms race by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

      You're taking a pointless view on reality. A concealed weapon probably won't help you if someone decides they want to walk up and shoot you for no apparent reason. Wearing your seatbelt on a plane probably won't help you if you crash.

      So what. It _might_ help you. If wearing this provides a 10% better chance of finding a missing kid, it could be worth it. Having a gun on your person could in a few limited cases save your life.

    2. Re:it's an arms race by Jhon · · Score: 1

      Do I really think a someone can break a hammer so I can't drive nails anymore? Yes. Does it prevent me from buying/using a hammer of the off chance it might be broken?

      Like you said, it's an arms race. But you are dead wrong if you think you can educate a 7 or 10 year old how to fight off a would-be kidnapper. The best you can do is give them metaphorical hammers (tools) they can use to give them a better chance of not becoming a victim -- "hammers" which a kidnapper may know how to neutralize.

      This watch is just another "tool". To dismiss it's utility because a tech-savvy pedophile might have read up on how to defeat the GPS watch Firmware Version 2.929 is just silly and short sighted to me.

  100. Re:Single steel cable = easy to remove by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's it, just a single steel wire? If so, then it should be trivial to bypass it before cutting the band off. It's not like we are talking about some fancy collapsable circuit here.

  101. A kidnapper's dream. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When someone hacks the system and gets real-time information on all children wearing these watches...

    It's a kidnapper's dream!

  102. century city "without a tracer" predicted this by irw · · Score: 1

    Century City was a lawyer drama set in the future which tried to look at future legal situations (think cloning, meddling with embryos to produce the "perfect" child, etc). Only eight episodes were produced in 2004 and four were never aired (including the one I'm thinking of; though they are (were) obtainable via p2p). One episode (Without a Tracer dealt with a possible result of this sort of device.

    Basically, every child has a tracer (linked to video/audio surveillance no less). The episode revolves around a teenage girl who was fed up with being watched by her parents and removed her tracer, at which point the parents panicked because she'd apparently vanished. IIRC she hired a lawyer to get a ruling to "allow" her NOT to wear the tracer.

    Their point was that this sort of device, whilst well-meaning, can become intrusive. I think (and the drama hints) that the tendency will be to rely on devices, further abdicating parental responsibility. Furthermore, I wonder if anyone's considered whether this would make the wearer EASIER to target, should the ID for their device become available, e.g. to someone wishing to kidnap a child for extortion.

  103. Controlling your kids IS good parenting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for younger kids parents should know where they are at all times.

    1. Re:Controlling your kids IS good parenting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? So that they know where it stepped in front of a bus? Knowing where a child is means nothing if you aren't there to protect it. It's the same after-the-fact "security" that surveillance cameras provide. In fact it's less, because it doesn't identify the threat, not even in retrospect.

  104. for daughters and wives! by Xtifr · · Score: 1

    This is a little more blatant (and scary), but fundamentally similar. The problem (or, I should say, one of the many problems) with this sort of technology is that it can quickly go from "protect the kids" to "stalk the spouse" (as my link should make clear). Or worse: I suspect this could become quite popular among the pimp population, just to name an obvious example. (Of course, the pimps might need a non-panty version--like this new watch.) In fact, at the risk of Godwinning the discussion, I'll point out that this is ever so much more effective than yellow Star-of-David armbands!

    But obviously all that's ok as long as we remember that we have to "think of the children"! Any amount of potential evil can be justified as long as you shout that mantra over and over.

    (On the other hand, I suspect that trying to put a technology like this back in the bottle is probably futile, but it might not be a bad idea to start thinking about how we're going to deal with some of the more unpleasant consequences, rather than pretending that it's all hunky-dory because the label says "think of the children".)

  105. Ok, bad idea by tecnico.hitos · · Score: 1

    It will either make the children somewhat paranoid, which is not so bad, or unconcerned about privacy, which is very bad.

    If we continue as judgemental as we are, we may end up having a generation in which people will be monitored and face punishment for every petty misdeed, they might even be punished for unconformism and for "predictions" based on social and mental profiles (OMG! Terrorists!!!).Won't somebody actually think of the children?

    ...I guess I should put my tinfoil hat now.

    --
    The good, the evil and the vacuum tubes.
  106. use this for pets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if this were a little less pricey i'd put one around my dog, who's still a bit of a flight hazard a year after being rescued...

  107. benefit of the watch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The watch has a benefit for kids which many of you seem to have overlooked.

    Younger children are often restricted in their activities, not because of the child's irresponsibility, but rather because the proposed activity would create a window of time in which something bad could happen to the child without the parent knowing for an extended period.

    A young child wearing the watch can therefore be allowed more freedom than otherwise. Far more than "checking up" on the child, it provides assurance that if the child isn't where s/he's supposed to be at the given time, it will answer where the child is. A child that's a block away and heading towards the appointed destination is merely tardy. A child that is exiting town at 60 MPH is probably in trouble.

    For older children and teenagers, a cell phone serves the same purpose.

    "I don't need to watch where you are all the time when I can find you when I need to."

  108. C'mon, nerds! by Jeremi · · Score: 1

    A company comes out with a $150 (and destined to become cheaper) mass-market GPS tracking device that connects to Google Maps, and all you care about is debating parenting styles? Who is going to hack this thing for proper nerd purposes?

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  109. Warning on watch by SlashDev · · Score: 1

    "Remove while spanking the monkey, your parents WILL find out"

    --

    TOP DSLR Cameras Reviews of the top DSLRs
  110. How to kidnap a child by professorguy · · Score: 1

    To remove these without detection:

    1. Place child's entire forearm into a bucket of water.
    2. Forcibly remove watch underwater. Leave in bucket.
    3. Sell kid to family with better tracking capability.


    Simple enough?

  111. Simple explanation by professorguy · · Score: 1

    Develop internal control and be a good person for life.
    Have external control forced upon you, and you will never grow to be a good person.

    1. Re:Simple explanation by Sandbags · · Score: 1

      The watch is an internal control. It does not prevent them from going places, it simply permits me to identify when I've been lied to about where they're going, which provides a means for accountability and traditional punishments (might be groundings, might be guilt, many different methods apply). The "watchful eye" trains them into thinking before they do things, which is an internal control. I'm not saying they can't go to parties and have fun, just only parties i know are supervised on some level, or clubs I am reasonably sure are safe, and relatively drug free.

      You can let them have a life, and still be accountavble for their actions. I can't follow them places, i can't allways be sure of where they are. This is a somple device that provides a parent some accountability validation, while also doubling as a saftey system.

      --
      There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
    2. Re:Simple explanation by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      The watch is a crutch, for you.

      The "watchful eye" trains them into thinking before they do things, which is an internal control.

      It also means they'll think about responsibility in terms of "grounding" and "guilt" instead of how actions affect them as individuals. Which is kind important for when they turn 18 and you no longer own them.

    3. Re:Simple explanation by Sandbags · · Score: 1

      The crutch does not prevent education, teaching them to think, it simply makes it less likely they'll FAIL to think.

      Look at this in terms less than absolutes, because it's not black and white.

      How does being grounded not effect them as individuals.

      Again, I AM NOT SAYING THEY CAN"T HAVE A LIFE, I'm just saying they need BOUNDARIES AND RULES aside from the CONSEQUENCES OF LIFE that are FAR more often permanently scaring, and completely avoidable.

      Also, this is a TEMPORARY control. You don't put them on a bike without training wheels until they prove they can ride without falling down at least on a regular basis. You take the control away when it's time to TRUST them, not when you;re certain beyond a shadow of a doubt... This is the balance to parenting. Give them slack, but you have to reign it in or they'll circle the globe with line...

      Life without limits is very short.

      --
      There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
    4. Re:Simple explanation by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      The crutch does not prevent education, teaching them to think, it simply makes it less likely they'll FAIL to think.

      And that sort of thinking will serve them well as far as staying in your good graces until they turn 18. After they turn 18, not so much.

      Again, I AM NOT SAYING THEY CAN"T HAVE A LIFE, I'm just saying they need BOUNDARIES AND RULES aside from the CONSEQUENCES OF LIFE that are FAR more often permanently scaring, and completely avoidable.

      All of which were possible long before it was possible to strap people with GPS navigation. Another question for you: do you put your kids in crash helmets and flame retardant suits before taking them anywhere in a car? Because that would do FAR more to increase their real-world safety than lowjacking them.

    5. Re:Simple explanation by Sandbags · · Score: 1

      Again, stated several times, device is not for their general saftey.

      Yes there are ways of validating their activity, primarily the use of a phone... unfortunately, I can't have access to a phone, nor have the phone number of their supposed location, on me at all times.

      When i screwed around as a kid, it was when I was pretty certain the parents could not follow up on me. GPS allows me to follow up LATER. It also prevents me from having to carry a long list of phone numbers of other parents, pester those parents on occasion, and share my information with those parents as well.

      Yea, it's possible to not use a GPS, but its more problematic, easier to circumvent, and far less convienient.

      and, for the last time, its a TEMPORARY measure, until TRUST is not only earned, but confirmed.

      --
      There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
    6. Re:Simple explanation by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Again, stated several times, device is not for their general saftey.

      So it's not about safety, it's about grilling your kids until they make some statement that you can bust them for. Did you work for Ken Starr?

      and, for the last time, its a TEMPORARY measure, until TRUST is not only earned, but confirmed.

      Trust is a two-way street. If you want to teach your kids about trust, no doubt you'll purchase the deluxe option so they can check up on your location 50 times a day. Maybe you can order it with the next size crash helmet and flame retardant suit, and then find some way to de-program them so they don't turn into chronic snoops.

    7. Re:Simple explanation by Sandbags · · Score: 1

      Boy, you're really a dumb fuck aren't you!

      You think everything is so black and white. Just because they're being monitored, you;re assuming there's not an exchange of trust?

      You also CLEARLY have paid no attention to my comments about insisting that the monitoring device ALERTS the child when their being monitored! This IS the 2 way trust foundation!!! If I pinged them 50 times a day, i'd soon end up with a rebellion, not an adjusted child with a 2 way trust.

      By maintaining a trust relationship, and the child understanding that's a validated system, they'll stay out of more trouble, trouble that's actually likely to cause them real harm. This still does NOT prevent them from being raped, hurt by a boyfriend, hit by a car, taken advantage of, cheated on, or a million other life lessons they can learn.

      The tool is to create open communication between parent and child. "where are you going soon becomes "I'm headed to..." and the child continually keeps you in the loop, and boundries can be communicated, and over time lessened, and trust is gained.

      You expect to what, give your 16 year old who has never been out of the house unsupervised keys to a car and license to do whatever they want? No cross cheking? They've lived in a cage all their lives, 16 years, under your waking control, and you;re just going to throw the doors wide and let them run??? Have you SEEn the statistics on catholic school children?

      kids need to be EASED into new situations and new responsibility. They do not instantly adapt as mature adults do, and need boundaries. Peel back layers of controll to earn their trust, use the tool so they earn yours. Simple.

      Have some common sense asshole.

      Yes, some people will abuse this tool. Those kids will refuse to accept it, or simply rebel and get in trouble anyway.

      --
      There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
    8. Re:Simple explanation by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Boy, you're really a dumb fuck aren't you!

      Is that how you teach your kids to respond when they lose arguments?

      Just because they're being monitored, you;re assuming there's not an exchange of trust?

      Not if they aren't monitoring you at the same time. Obviously.

      You also CLEARLY have paid no attention to my comments about insisting that the monitoring device ALERTS the child when their being monitored!

      Uh huh. So if you're making an important phone call, and one of your kids picks up the other phone in your house to listen in, you're not going to be upset, because you know it's happening?

      This IS the 2 way trust foundation!!!

      On what planet is one-sided snooping "2 way"?

      The tool is to create open communication between parent and child. "where are you going soon becomes "I'm headed to..." and the child continually keeps you in the loop, and boundries can be communicated, and over time lessened, and trust is gained.

      A little device was invented over a hundred years ago that does that without lowjacking your kid: the telephone.

      You expect to what, give your 16 year old who has never been out of the house unsupervised keys to a car and license to do whatever they want?

      And the fact that they are a new driver wouldn't have anything to do with that, now would it?

      Have some common sense asshole.

      What a role model you are. I hope you don't homeschool. Look, it's quite simple:

      1. Will you wear the same device so your kids can check on you: yes or no.
      2. Do you dress your kids in flame retardant suits and crash helmets when you drive them anywhere: yes or no.

      If you say no to the first question: practice what you preach. You'll no more build up trust by one-way snooping than you can encourage your children to learn manners at the dinner table while ordering them to pass you the potatoes while demanding that they say "please" and "thank you".

      If you say no to the second question: your sense of proportion is seriously broken.

  112. Soo American by omb · · Score: 1

    "Yes, it's statistically insignificant, but society is kept at a high fear level right now and you *are not* going to win a rational argument to eliminate an irrational fear."

    I feel genuinely sorry for you, a country that recognizes hopeless irrational fear, and does not know what to do about it.

    (1) Get a real education, and one that includes basic statistics and logic,

    (2) Set an anti-corruption investigation of the ENTIRE legislature, put the crooks and thieves in jail,

    (3) Shut down the Cable News channels, and radio-talk shows by limiting them to 4 X 1 hour broadcasts per day 9am, 3pm, 9pm & 3am so they dont have to try to invent so much garbage.

    Stop pandering to lobbiests, minorities and idiots who just want air time.

  113. Great idea... get them used to... by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    ... constant tracking. After all, the next logical step is to pass a simple, yet harmless law that requires everyone wear one of these for life. After all, it would be for our own good somehow.

  114. Technology isn't a panacea by Dysphoric1 · · Score: 1

    I hate to state the obvious, but there is no such thing as a secure device. If you can track little Johnny with GPS, then I can hack into the system and track Johnny as well.

    No longer will I have to suspiciously sit near the playground in a dirty van scoping out Johnny's cute little derriere with my binoculars waiting for the perfect opportunity to nab him. I'll be miles away on someone's open wireless network tracking his every movement. I'll know every aspect of his daily patterns; the route he walks to school, what houses he frequents and at what times, all without ever risking capture until the very moment I grab him.

    And if I'm a violent criminal, I might just take him by force right from your house. The house whose layout I know perfectly from all the pictures you've posted on your Facebook/MySpace page. The house I know doesn't have any guns in it, because you blabbed on and on about how anti-gun you are there as well. I also know YOU from your pictures, and you obviously couldn't fight your way out of a paper bag.

    Oh, and BTW? I downloaded the schematics for that watch off of usenet. It really isn't too hard to defeat. I'll get a chuckle when the police find it on the stray cat I released as a diversion.

    Then won't you feel like a complete idiot when the very thing you used to protect him is what costs him his life...

    Is this an unrealistic scenario? Perhaps. But no less realistic than the idea that something similar will happen if you don't GPS your child.

    1. Re:Technology isn't a panacea by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Why would you go to all that trouble when there are hundreds of kids not wearing GPS tracking devices to choose from? Is little Johnny just that cute?

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  115. parenting FAIL by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    When my oldest was born we thought the same way you expressed in this post. She's 12 now, and with school buses, field trips and wanting to go to the stores by herself and trotting off with friends you damn well bet I am going to have one for each child I have. Injected under the skin if I thought it would work. I take every effort to secure the safety of my blond haired blue-eyed gems, and that also means utilizing every resource available to my advantage. You also assume that every nation is safe for young girls or boys.

    Do you also put crash helmets and flame retardant suits on your kids whenever you take them somewhere by car? Methinks not, but that would do far more to enhance their real-world safety than being a helicopter parent.

    Overprotective? No.

    Massively over-protective. You're the sort of parent who's 18 year old kid goes off to her first year of college, and drinks herself to death because 1) you've been working on a baaaaacklaaaaaash for 18 years and 2) she has no self-reliance because you've had one hand on her shoulder her entire life.

  116. Missing the point by CubicleView · · Score: 1

    There's no sport in it if you can track them with GPS.

  117. Canada? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2, Funny

    is there a service provider in the middle of Outback, Nowhere in Australia, or in Canada, or even some areas of the United States?

    I am curious as to why it is "the outback, Australia" and "areas of the US" but apparently all of Canada? We have a large variety of service providers up here: elk, bison, deer and moose. On advantage of our providers is that they can actually drag the child back with them - I'd like to see any of your fancy US providers do that. We even have a new cutting edge, high speed Canada goose network that has just enough capacity to carry iPhone traffic. So please remember that just because we all live in igloos doesn't mean that don't have access the latest tech.

    1. Re:Canada? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      ROFLMAO

      I could point out that Canada is actually "Outback, America". But, to be honest, I really meant to type "Northwest Territory or Yukon" but got lost. Maybe I forgot how to spell it, I dunno.

      I suppose you watched Wild America? I really am just LMAO. That Mama Moose was trying hard to help that youngest kid, wasn't she?

      Thanks for the laugh!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    2. Re:Canada? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      I suppose you watched Wild America?

      No but we do get to watch Wild Canada through the hole in our igloo wall. It's on 24 hours a day up here, it can be a bit boring in winter, especially when we get a lot of snowy interference with the signal.

    3. Re:Canada? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Aww, man - don't know how serious you are, but really. I'm not a movie watcher, and I almost never recommend a movie. Get Wild America and watch it. Short summary: 3 dopey teenage boys about 1955 living in Fort Smith Arkansas manage to con Mom and Dad into letting them go explore nature. They catch a lot of America's vanishing nature on film, they very nearly manage to get killed a couple times, and it's funnier than hell in several places. It's not your typical idiot Hollywood production. Hope you enjoy it! Wait til the middle of winter though. I'd hate to hear that the heat from the VCR and television caused your igloo to melt down. ;^)

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  118. I'd love to see a museum do a show by msimm · · Score: 1

    Demonstrating the history of child control devices to put things like this watch into a more accurate, historic perspective. The leash comes to mind, but I'd be willing to bet there's been a wealth of such devices for as long as there have been worried parents.

    --
    Quack, quack.
  119. My world is not your world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "'Is the world really that unsafe that parents need to track their children electronically?
    I don't think so,' says Dr Michele Elliott, director of children's charity Kidscape"

    Dr. Michele Elliot needs to do a bit of traveling and get to know some world before proclaiming that.

    I for one would love to have one for my little girl.

  120. GPS Doesn't work indoors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fact that GPS is useless indoors makes this watch completely useless if the child is in a building. Which is 99% of the time nowadays

  121. No substitute for common sense by Zerbey · · Score: 1

    There's actually several of these kind of devices on the market, I've seen different watches, cell phones and even a backpack. They have their place, I have 3 kids all under the age of 10 and kids that age can get lost very easily if you don't keep a close eye on them. I've put serious consideration into buying some kind of GPS tracker for my kids.

    It's important to realise, however that a kid is going to get abducted even if they are wearing some wizzbang locater device if they're not first taught how to defend themselves. There's no substitute for teaching your kids the most important lesson of all: Stay away from strangers! I've taught my kids some very important things, that all parents should teach them:

    - Don't approach strangers
    - If one approaches you, run
    - If the worst happens and someone grabs you, make a huge fuss - kick and scream, do what ever you can to draw attention.

    Right now, I'm investing my $250 not into a GPS device but into taking my kids to self defense classes. Much apart from the fact it's great exercise and teaches them discipline and respect, it may save their lives one day. Plus, they're having a lot of fun doing it :)