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."

Comments

Kid won't know what to do when an adult

[Anonymous Coward]

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!.

Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

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.

Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult

[Shakrai]

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.

Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult

[dlsmith]

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.

We never needed them before

[chetbox]

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.

Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Useless as a kick stand on a bass boat.

[kurt555gs]

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.