Slashdot Mirror
A Colorado Group Wants To Ban Smartphones For Kids (apnews.com)
An anonymous reader quotes the AP:
Colorado officials have cleared the language of a proposed ballot measure that would establish the nation's first legal limits on buying smartphones for children. Backers of the move to forbid the sale of smartphones to children younger than 13 would now need about 300,000 voter signatures for the proposal to make the 2018 ballot. The ban would require cellphone retailers to ask customers about the age of the primary user of a smartphone and submit monthly reports to the Colorado Department of Revenue on adhering to the requirement. Retailers who sell a phone for use by a youngster could be fined $500, after a warning.
A Denver-area dad is leading the campaign -- a board certified anesthesiologist who says children change when they get a cellphone. "They go from being outgoing, energetic, interested in the world and happy, to reclusive. They want to spend all their time in their room. They lose interest in outside activities."
A Denver-area dad is leading the campaign -- a board certified anesthesiologist who says children change when they get a cellphone. "They go from being outgoing, energetic, interested in the world and happy, to reclusive. They want to spend all their time in their room. They lose interest in outside activities."
sounds like the guy who came up with this should grow some balls and put his foot down and say no to his kids instead of relying on the government to make a law so he can have an excuse
Is there any actual evidence that phones are bad for kids?
My kids got phones when they were 8. We can find them if they get lost, it makes it easy to coordinate pickups. It gives us more freedom to let them go and do what they want, since they can call if they get in situation they can't handle. In fact, we don't let them leave home without their phones. I don't see the downside. I don't think I need an anesthesiologist to tell me how to raise my kids.
Was a Low-Tech Parent (Sept. 10, 2014) https://www.nytimes.com/2014/0...
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Perhaps kids still are outgoing, energetic, and interested in the world. Just through the portal of their phone, through which they can learn about literally anything and come into contact with billions of people around the planet. As opposed to just being able to learn about things around them and meet only people nearby.
...this presumably highly intelligent anesthesiologist discovered "teenagers".
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Just what we need, more of the government telling us how to raise our kids. I personally haven't given my kids smartphones until they were 15. But I can certainly see circumstances other people might have in giving their kids smartphones and everyone's circumstances are different. Just because it may be a bad idea in general, doesn't mean it's a bad for everyone. Keep the decision making in the hands of those who know the kids and their circumstances best.
Looking for a computer support specialist for your small business? Check out
You ever see a kid with books, they spend their time reading instead of playing outside and socializing. We should ban children from reading so we can have better adjusted children.
I have no plans to give my daughter, or any future children of mine, a smartphone. Ever*. I already limit iPad time (it's mine, not hers), because I want her to remain interested in other things. But, I don't need any government, or even other parents, telling me how to raise my children.
* my position is that when she can afford it, she can buy it. She's not banned from having one; she's just not going to get it from me.
The thinking is that technology interferes with creativity and young minds learn best through movement, hands-on tasks, and human-to-human interaction. Take for instance Waldorf schools. Students at these schools are gaining math, patterning, and problem-solving skills by knitting socks. They aren’t exposed to fractions through a computer program. Instead they learn about halves and quarters by cutting up food. Sounds a bit like summer camp? Well, yes, but parents in Los Altos and at over 150 similar schools across the country say the Waldorf method works and they’re sending their kids to top colleges, from Oberlin to Berkeley. That's my five-and-one-half-cents!
..but I think smartphones aren't all that great anyway. When some people get so wrapped up in whatever they're looking at on their smartphone that they literally bump into you walking down the street (or into a stationary object, or walk out into traffic, etc), then you have to wonder if they're being misused. Then there's the complete lack of security; any given smartphone, regardless of manufacturer, could be infected with malware, and the owner of the phone might never know about it, even if they never went to any risky URLs, never opened a suspicious email, and never clicked a dubious link. Then there's the fact that your smartphone might have malware baked right into the firmware from the factory. Meanwhile you're paying a premium every month just to have it connected to your wireless companys' network. Think about it: we live in a world where there are people right now who'd rather text each other than talk, even if they're in the same room. Does that seem right? It's easy for someone to say "well, it's a communication tool, I use it to stay in touch with people, and I can research things on the internet, and I can pull up a map to find where I need to go", but when people have their eyes glued to it practically every waking moment? Despite being told not to people are using their smartphones in theatres, and despite hefty fines and risk of being killed in an accident, people are constantly screwing around with their phones while they're driving. Doesn't it really sound like this 'useful' communications tool is being heavily abused to the point where it's more of a nuisance than it is a tool? Let's not even get started on the stories about people who have had thousands (and TENS of thousands) of dollars charged to them because their kids bought things in games or online on their phones..
I don't have a smartphone. I can't justify the expense of the hardware or the monthly connectivity cost, and I especially can't justify carrying around something so incapable of being secured properly against intrusion and against malware infection. Nor do I care to carry around an electronic leash that allows anyone with access to know precisely where I am and perhaps even listen in on what I'm doing or turn on the camera and see what I'm doing. The so-called 'benefits' of the connectivity and processing capabilities are just not anywhere near sufficient to mitigate all the expense and all the problems and deficiencies associated with it. Now we find that perhaps the technology itself, because of how it's misused, overused, and abused, is potentially destructive to kids. Really makes me wonder what it is we've allowed to be done to us.
I guess 13 year olds magically have money and cars now to go to the store and buy smart phones. Oh wait, they don't. If you can't tell them no, then you tell them hell no. You're not their friend, you're their parent. Now regarding the burner phone slipping into a Bill idea mentioned, that's an actual possibility when retailers have to ask who you're buying the phone for. They make you show a drivers license for phones that have no contracts like Straighttalk, and that eliminates the point of the phone for some people. Your name is now associated with the device. Though, this may encourage more "dumb" phones in the market which will ironically be a much better burner phone.
It's an approachable idea that I would have no problem with individual parents implementing for their children.
I don't even mind if indviduals try to convince other individuals it's the right thing to do.
LEGISLATION should be based on fucking SCIENCE, not opinions. Get your fucking hands off the people's rights unless you can prove you're right.
IIRC they beefed up the requirements for a constitutional amendment last year, and I'd be surprised if that gets enough signatures to get on the ballot, much less get approved by the voters. This sort of busybody legislation traditionally doesn't go anywhere and this story wouldn't be news until it at least ends up on the ballot, except that it's clickbaity enough to get a lot of clicks.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Of course there is plenty of evidence. The same evidence that proved that having computers in their bedrooms was destroying their future. Like all the crap we get fed it is always based on a few anecdotal cases that we are expected to believe are automatically the rule in every case.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
Is there any actual evidence that phones are bad for kids?
They aren't trying to ban cellular telephones for kids, they are trying to ban smartphones for kids. The important difference here is that one is a telephonic communications device and one is a small computer. The reason this matters is because it's the applications that engineered to maximize user interaction using neuroscience. This can lead to very real addictions regardless of age in a similar fashion to gambling addiction. Are there adults that are addicted to their smartphones? Most definitely.
I'm not arguing in favor of the ban, I'm just answering your question.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Read the post again. That the kids there turn out great does not establish causality. You must account for confounding factors (a proper controlled study).
"They go from being outgoing, energetic, interested in the world and happy, to reclusive. They want to spend all their time in their room. They lose interest in outside activities."
Of course there's evidence of this, it just changes every couple of years. Previous candidates: Heavy metal, Dungeons and Dragons, [...] stamp collecting, trading cards, [...] Morris Dancing, [...] cave painting [...] banging rocks together. I've left out a few hundred of them just to save space.
'Those darned teenagers! Spending hour after hour on the phone!
What happens to human interaction when a virtual conversation with a bot is determined to be better than any real one?
What happens to companionship and procreation when machines and virtual realities can pleasure us better than a human alternative, and without the risk of dying prematurely from a world running rampant with STDs?
What happens to human employment and education when automation and AI become good enough to destroy it?
What happens to critical thinking and educating humans when the concept of employment and monetary reward is no longer viable?
As you dismiss these concepts, are you certain this technology is still "waaaay far away", or merely a couple of decades? 20 years ago you were still using a modem to dial
up to the internet. Compare that to what you can do today, from a wireless smartphone.
The next iterations of "advancement" are quite a bit different, and is not something we are readily prepared for, so perhaps you can stop clutching your pearls now. Ancient analogies likely won't apply.
Are there adults that are addicted to their smartphones? Most definitely.
There are a whole lot more adults that are simply addicted to avoidant behavior. If it wasn't smartphones it would be TV. Before TV it would've been a book.
For times immemorial, extroverts have looked at introverts and decided since introverts would rather spend a large amount of time not socializing there must be something wrong with them.
No, introverts just don't want to spend time socializing. That's it. That's all. Take our phones, take our computers, we still don't want to sit around in a group of 20 people singing Kumbaya.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Of course there's evidence of this, it just changes every couple of years. Previous candidates: Heavy metal, Dungeons and Dragons, [...] stamp collecting, trading cards, [...] Morris Dancing, [...] cave painting [...] banging rocks together. I've left out a few hundred of them just to save space.
I was the victim of Morris Dancing addiction. My basement was filled with Hurdy Gurdys and thrift shop flower Garlands. I sold my body on the streets to buy an accordion I abandoned and rejected family and friends. I was on a downward spiral that would only end with my demise. Damn those Morrisites and their fancy geegaws and velocipedes.
Then I bought a smartphone, and kicked my addiction on facebook. Type yes if you agree.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Geez, I couldn't keep up with my jacket for more than 2-3 weeks when I was 8yrs old....much less a $$$$$ small electronic device.
I guess I can see the "pro" side of it..easier contact with kids...as that we don't have pay phone everywhere like we used to.
But I dunno...I don't think I'd buy my kids smartphones that young. Actually I think I'd have them work and earn money to buy most of the phone and "help" them a bit...but likely only when they were a teen, maybe 16yrs?
I'm not sure the obsession parents seem to have today....are the chances of a child kidnapping THAT much greater than it was when I was a kid, or are people more paranoid?
I mean, when I was a kid 12yrs old or so, I'd take off on my skateboard in the mornings in the summer...and might not come home till dinner time...I'd be out running around skating with friends, maybe building a ramp (with plywood stolen from new houses being built, no one got in trouble)...or running out in woods....maybe at the neighborhood swimming pool....but I wasn't in 24/7 phone touch with parents. When I was younger than 12yrs, I was pretty much the same way, but my folks would want me to try to call from a friend's house to check in every 2-3 hours...but that was for very young.
The more I think about it, I"m really GLAD we didn't have cell phones where parents could track us 24/7.....glad there wasn't a fscking camera everywhere, and social media.
I'd not have had the fun I did....and the mischief we got into...didn't lead us to getting into trouble, or going on records, or being scrutinized by everyone in the world.
We had fun, learned from mistakes, and I'm still friends with many of those same guys, and we now have tons of fun stories when we get together.
Man..the more I think about some of our exploits back then...if done today, would have had homeland security looking for us...*SIGH*
I actually feel sorry for the kids of today a bit....with all the electronics, they don't seem to learn as early (if at all) how to really talk to each other and socialize in meat space as well. They don't seem to be as active.....having friends in their neighborhoods, with "kill the man with the ball" games breaking out, etc. and doing other fun outdoor activies.
I don't think maybe I'd buy my young kids smart phones, maybe not buy phones at all....I'd want to allow them to be kids like I was, to learn what it is to be trusted and trustworthy, and to face consequences when they did wrong and go caught.
Hell, I'm not sure I'd let them on social media till they were much older....you can't be bullied on social media, if you're not on it....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
An introvert doesn't askew all contact with humanity, they just chose to spend more time alone. I would never want to lose all contact with all people forever; but, if I prefer to go for a hike alone, or read a book alone, or be on my phone alone, or go kayaking in a safe location alone, that shouldn't be looked on as an abnormality.
A lot of extroverts feel like introverts are broken because they don't want to be surrounded by other people all the time. That's not true. There is "me" time and there is "with other people time". Introverts just prefer more "me" time.
No one wants to be truly alone. (or almost no one).
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
I checked the website of the Waldorf schools in my (US) state. Preschool is $17K/yr, K-8 is $23K/yr, 9-12 is $29K/yr. There is some "tuition help" listed, but only up to 50% off for those who qualify. These schools are in some of the most affluent areas of my state, with real estate prices regularly flirting with $1M+ for pretty "normal" houses. They also have some of the best public schools in the state. So yeah, at least in my area, anyone who attends Waldorf school is going to be self-selected as someone who can not only afford to live in the most expensive towns but above that has enough income to spend ~$25K (or n*$25k/yr if there are siblings) to send their kids to school. I'm willing to bet these kids would be "successful" no matter what, since their family has access to wealth and resources that aren't available to quite literally the other 99% of society.