« profile & posts archive

This author has written 108 posts for Larvatus Prodeo.

Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

21 responses to “The Global Village still has idiots”

  1. Ronson Dalby

    A slight digression on the cancelling of Google email accounts:

    http://www.zdnet.com/blog/violetblue/google-plus-deleting-accounts-en-masse-no-clear-answers/567?tag=mantle_skin;content

    Now that could be a real pain if you’ve had your email address for years.

  2. AndrewB

    So many different things in the post, I am not entirely sure what the point being made is.

    But one observation is you can’t do this:

    “We teach children to participate in the world by slowly letting them be a part of it. We begin by bringing them with us to our parties, then we let them attend their friends’ parties – we stay with them sometimes, leave them with other parents at other times. Slowly they reach the stage where they have their own parties and parents must simply trust that they’ve taught them well enough. “

    Without the ability to control their social media experience, or more correctly, observe it, it’s impossible to do.

    The way to teach a child is to , show them how to do something, let them try, and correct/guide them when they get it wrong. In order to this you need to be able to observe their actions, and with social media or email you either have access to their communications or you don’t.

    The problem I have with discussion of this issue is that no one seems to distinguish between children or adolescents. Basically the amount of supervision a young person requires will, obviously, differ with their age. You wouldn’t force your 16 year old to hold your hand when you cross the road. Well I wouldn’t. And yet I see blog posts which say this policy aimed at children is unfair to adolescents, and I go yes, yes it is, because children aren’t adolescents.

  3. James Wakefield

    Cyber bullying is the best thing ever! Finally the school bullies are leaving a well documented log of every incident of what they are doing to people. Back when I was at school the jerks would get away with everything. While the targeted, who eventually fight the bullies, would get expelled and everyone would seem to lie to protect the popular group. It seems that all the anti-internet stuff is more about protecting bullies, and to stop those that are feeling isolated from connecting with their peers around the world.

  4. AndrewB

    Oh I agree about the continuum of evolution.

    “Getting access to your child’s Facebook account by controlling their computers and devices is not the same as getting legal access through third parties to access an account”

    And this is where the argument breaks. Children probably shouldn’t have facebook accounts for a start it’s a violation of the TOS. Secondly I don’t actually trust facebook. So we enter this point where were arguing against against something for children based on how we should treat adolescents, ie it’s stupid. You need to distinguish age because it’s relevant to the discussion. So when I say “children” I mean kids under 13 and most likely talking about 7-10 year olds.

    Also you can’t get “access” to their account by controlling their physical devices( well you can but it’s a pain in the arse). The only way to get access to their account is for face book to give it to you or your child to. And the only way that facebook is going to do that is if you force them by law, which is precisely why they don’t offer their services to children under 13.

    What people are really saying is “why can’t I monitor my child’s online behaviour digitally.”

    It’s not a clear cut issue and is based on issues surrounding a minor’s right to privacy either digital or otherwise. It’s also worth pointing out that by and large the parent is responsible for the actions of the child.

  5. uniqerhys

    “barbarism, unleashing the worst elements of human nature, with no restraints”

    They used to say the same thing about newspapers when they first started. Moral panics – unchanged since the days of Gutenberg – and always with the goal of keeping the marginalised in their place.

  6. Chris

    Pretty obviously giving parents the legal right to access children’s social media accounts is unlikely to work in practice. But I think engineers who work at facebook/google etc should think about how they can provide those sorts of services for parents. Eg allow one user to give total read only access to another user.

    Can think of it as L-plates for various internet services for children (or those who are very inexperienced). For example, I’ve setup an email account for my niece in a way such that her parents get a copy of every email that she receives. She knows this happens so its not really spying. And eventually when she gets experienced enough the copying mechanism will be removed.

  7. billie

    Surely Facebook and Google+ know by the traffic if an account is used by school kids or adults. The National Security Agency uses software to scan phone calls and emails in an effort to pinpoint terrorists and I bet the research behind that software can also identify schoolkids.

    It’s lack of commercial will that permits school kids to run amok on electronic social networks

  8. sg

    and there I was thinking that war was “barbarism, unleashing the worst elements of human nature, with no restraints.” Or, at least, rugby league. I was looking the wrong way all the time… so here’s to more war, and less facebook. Miranda Devine gets her priorities right as ever.

  9. Chris

    Surely Facebook and Google+ know by the traffic if an account is used by school kids or adults. The National Security Agency uses software to scan phone calls and emails in an effort to pinpoint terrorists and I bet the research behind that software can also identify schoolkids.

    You’re kidding right? Maybe they could do some 3l1t3 sp34k detection 🙂

  10. John D

    @2: Children enter a world where they have a private life that is known by others but not their parents very early in life. For example, any normal child will interact with other children when they go to school. In many cases some of this interaction may involve dark things like bullying and being bullied as well as more desirable activities. I am not sure that the net has changed it all that much.
    As parents the important things are to discuss the morality of what the child does on the net and life in general. We can also talk to children about how they can handle bullying and other difficulties as well as providing support when things get really bad.

  11. paul walter

    Control freakery almost direct from the red state heartlands of the US, via the fundy pentecostals and opus dei types.
    Is there no aspect of life so small that they are not compelled to microscopically seek colonisation of it and from the inside, the very soul, out.
    I say again, this morlock urge toward control; really a bit weird, sinister unnerving. Nauseating.

  12. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    “[B]arbarism, unleashing the worst elements of human nature, with no restraints” – so she wasn’t talking about News Corp hacking scandal?

  13. Mercurius

    @11 John D is right to see continuity where others see change.

    The other continuity that parental monitoring of social media would bring is domineering, controlling and even abusive parents invading every corner of their child’s life. That used to happen before the Interwebs too!

  14. moz

    I thought parents already had legal access to their child’s social media accounts? Isn’t that what “in loco parentis” means?

    Unless things have changed since I was a wee nipper it’s still the case that until the little munchkin is 18 it doesn’t own property, can’t enter into a contract (in most cases) and so on. Which is sodding annoying if your parents decide to sell the car you bought because they need money, to give one example that happened to a friend of mine. But also means that if you are willing to wheel out the lawyers I think you’d be able to get access to just about anything. Or lose access to your child, depending.

  15. Jacques Chester

    Also you can’t get “access” to their account by controlling their physical devices( well you can but it’s a pain in the arse).

    Go to your kid’s computer. Load facebook.com. They are probably already logged in.

    Still worried? Do what my parents did: take the modem away.

  16. Jacques Chester

    The main problem is that the main user for a “parental login” facility would be perves. It’d be pretty trivial for Johnny McWindowlessvan to pose as a parent.

  17. paul walter

    ” Deindividuation”, a deliciously explained concept belonging to the same family of ideas as “othering”, a stock in trade for people like Bolt and Devine and many politicians.
    A thread with unpleasant implications, offered in a typically understated way.

  18. dave

    Anna

    Television, email, sms, social media, whatever, it’s all the real world now.

    Would you care to expand on this idea? Sure, they are objectively real but I think there remains a distinction between things that embody symbolic representations and existent reality. Is virtual sex the same as real sex?