Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by brudgers | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

brudgers

[Random parenting advice from the internet]

My child is grown but grew up during the iPhone era.

Anyway, I had a policy.

It lasted until middle school.

Then we had a conversation.

And worked things out together.

That's my recommendation because in the long run, conversation and negotiation are the only tools you really have.

Good luck.

----

Appendix:

1. FOSS is your value. Your child is not you. If your child thinks FOSS is cool, it's cool. If they think it is lame, you are being lame.

2. Parental controls are only as good as someone else's parents. Your child can look at naked people on someone else's phone.

3. Around middle school, your child's peers begin to have massive importance. It is not that you cease to be important. But you are going to have to share influence. Even if you try to forbid such sharing.

4. It is better if parents grow as their children grow. Growing is on you because you are the adult.

View on HN

To add to that:

1. Technology and screen time aren't the problems; it's the lack of passion and interests that is the root problem. Cultivate passion in your child and expose them to new things. You'll immediately notice a positive change in how they use their screen time to pursue these interests. When they watch gaming videos or unboxing on youtube they do that because that's their current passion.

2. Your control over your children diminishes over time. Build trust early on and allow them to make mistakes; these are invaluable teaching tools. It's better to teach them good habits concerning technology while you still have influence, rather than later when your control is limited.

3. There are real costs associated with not allowing your child largely unrestricted access to technology. These costs include social drawbacks, a significantly reduced ability for them to explore their passions independently, and long-term tension between the child and the parents due to a lack of trust.

Our minds need times of boredom to be creative. Especially children who learn at fast pace. I have seen it multiple times that children without immediate stimulation start solving problems.

> Technology and screen time aren't the problems; it's the lack of passion and interests that is the root problem.

Hard disagree. Many passions and interests take time to develop, and a big way they (used to, at least) develop naturally is through boredom. I remember well when I was a kid in the 80s who would get bored with my friends in the summer, and so we'd go and build forts or explore (illegally I guess) houses that were still under construction. A lot has been written about "the death of boredom" because smartphones are always there to give you that little dopamine fix to keep boredom at bay.

I agree with the general thrust of your post (technology is pretty unavoidable, and I've never seen a case where parents have been successful "hiding their kids from the real world" past a certain age), but I do think technology has had a severe negative impact on the mental development of youths since the advent of the smartphone, similar to how modern diets have had a severe negative impact to the development of their bodies.

Boredom is useless if kids don't have interests and avenues to pursue them. Nearly every child who attends school experiences hours of forced boredom every day, but that doesn't necessarily yield positive results. While I understand your point about smartphones serving as a constant "dopamine fix," I believe that educating kids on responsible tech use is the solution, not artificial limits that don't address the core issues. In addition, boredom is neither the only nor the most effective avenue for discovering one's passion. A more proactive approach involves exposing your children to a wide variety of activities and interests while instilling the right mindset in them.

I'm not advocating for unrestricted technology use; rather, I'm pushing for a more nuanced approach. I acknowledge that technology, when misused, can have negative impacts, much like poor dietary habits can have physical repercussions. However, the focus should be on the quality of engagement over simply counting screen time. Guide your children towards finding their passions and setting corresponding goals. This will foster intrinsic motivation, helping them utilize their time more effectively—whether you are present or not.

The problem, I think, is that in our generation many of us had at least some freedom to leave home and roam and socialize when we were bored. Nowadays bored children don't have the same escape valves as we had.

This is not an argument defending screen time, just recognizing that it is a difficult problem with no easy solutions.

It’s on us to allow our kids to free roam and stop being subject to social pressure that leaving them be is bad or risky.

I totally agree with that. Easier said than done, though, if you live somewhere where this is not the norm and you may get scolded by the authorities (luckily not my case).

> Technology and screen time aren't the problems; it's the lack of passion and interests that is the root problem.

Could not disagree more.

“No dad, I don’t want to go fishing together. I need complete this raid in Clash of Clans.

Not screentime but on a similar thread. My daughter was born in '96 so screentime wasn't an issue when she was young. My story is about alcohol. When my daughter was about 12, I decided to stop drinking. Not that I was a big drinker or anything - I probably had one or two beers a week. But I decided to demonstrate that social drinking - or any drinking - was something that people can choose to abstain from without any downsides. I started to drink beer again some time when she was in high school.

My daughter did get a feature-phone in middle school and then a smartphone in high school. I never set any limits - but I was fortunate to have a child who managed her time exceptionally well. I wonder how much of that came from her not having smartphone exposure when young.

I do feel for parents today.

As someone born in '87, I have no idea what you mean by "screentime wasn't an issue". I think it's more the case that it wasn't an issue for your daughter. I had plenty of fights with my parents about the amount of time I wanted to spend on my computer.

Agreed, I was born in the 90s and I spent 90% of my time glued to my pc, tv, psp, gameboy, nokia...

I was born around when you were and screen time never came up, the more time I spent on my computer the better, honestly.

I had many problems, but generic “screen time” was never one of them.

I guess technically true, since the only screens we had back then were the computer and TV, and I didn't give a damn about the latter.

I was born a few years earlier. My mom limited my internet time to 1 hour per day -- which had more to do with keeping us under our allotted ISP hours without getting overages than it did modifying my behavior.

But in hindsight I'm extremely thankful for the limitation. A computer stops being a social channel when it's offline so the hours I spent offline were pretty crucial for me to learn a variety of things - from learning how to code to creating art.

It also really did force me to go outside and learn about the world that way.

I had really meant preteen smartphone screentime. Smartphones didn't exist when she was a preteen so it wasn't an issue. Also, smartphone screentime is in general much higher thank computer screentime.

I'm with you on quitting alcohol for the kids.

Even though you may not have had that much, health benefits are definitely there.

Especially for any older parent to young kids, taking steps to optimise your own longevity is pretty much acting responsibly the way I see it.

I did it nearly three years ago primarily for longevity reasons, but the role modelling aspect is starting to dawn on me. My 13 year old son has at least one parent (I'm divorced) who doesn't need alcohol to survive various settings - I think he'll have a much more conscious approach to it.

One of my biggest fears is him getting into a car with a drunk kid driving. Have already started to talk to him about it, even though he's likely years away from it being a possible thing.

> And worked things out together.

So much this. Kids are living, breathing, thinking human beings. They are immature yes. But that doesn't remove the value of their opinions or their agency. And it's not to say you give them everything they want, but that you find common ground and aren't seen as dictating things without reason. If you can explain your point of view in terms they understand, compliance is far more likely.

For the most part, my kids have unlimited access to electronics and the internet. Yeah, sometimes they watch stupid TikTok videos or silly toy reviews on Youtube. Other times they are learning how to code or learning how to knit or how to make slime from common household materials, etc. Last week I baked bread with my daughter because she found a recipe on TikTok she wanted to try out. They sometimes watch content I don't like or agree with, but often that's resolved just by talking about why I don't think it's good content or sending a good message. I've talked to both of my daughters about why I don't like SSSniperWolf content as an example. Usually this works out fine, but none of the things they watch are so egregious I feel like I need to cut them off. And who am I to judge the occasional mindless entertainment when I've always done the same and I can readily see it's a small portion of the content they are consuming?

When I hear folks talking about zero access and no smart devices until X years, I have to ask myself where the trust and relationship exists between these parents and their children. I just can't imagine not having enough of a relationship with my kids to not have a good understanding of what they are up to online and how they are perceiving it. I can't imagine not being able to trust the values that I've instilled in my children and having to cut them off from the world to hide that neglect. Further, I feel these sort of blanket bans put kids into a position where they feel they need to hide what they do from their parents online which is the absolute opposite of what they should be thinking.

That said, we do have restrictions. No electronics during dinner or shared entertainment sort of things. People scrolling social media during movie time is a pet peeve of mine. The electronic devices are not an escape from small talk during boring family dinners or the slow part of the show we're watching.

How do you know your children are not hiding the parts of their online activity they think you would disagree more strongly with? Genuinely curious.

The same way you know that what anyone is telling you is true and not something they just made up that you'd agree more strongly with. As in, the trust is there until such a time as it has been violated and you have to revisit your priors to reconcile your new world view. My sample size is limited to three, so I cannot claim to be an authority on this. But of those three, one has graduated and the other two are well on their way to do more than that and I've had no reason to suspect they are harboring some secret desires based on things they learned on the internet that they have been patiently waiting for years to put into action. Honestly if they can deceive me for years while watching meaningless TikTok videos that are supposed to corrupt their mind, they are clearly way more prepared for existence in a capitalist society than I ever was.

I will just say that it was widely reported that Steve Jobs didn’t let his kids use iPhones and iPads :)

I’d also be willing to put money on the fact that I spend way more time with my children than someone like Bill Gates or Steve Jobs did with their children. I’ve worked from home for the last 10 years. I’ve been to every concert and sporting event. I’ve been to every teacher conference. If you don’t actually have a relationship with your children I’d see why you’d need to resort to more draconian policies to impart your will.

I.e. you assume they are transparent until proven otherwise? Fair enough, but not exactly the same as knowing they're transparent!

I'm not judging, to be clear. I think that's a healthy policy. I was just curious since humans are great liars and bad lie detectors.

It's the same as I view the relationship with my wife. I'm not going to assume she's cheating and force her to install spy software so I can monitor all of her activity just to make sure. Of course this doesn't guarantee that she will never cheat, but if you presuppose the outcome it'll be far more likely to end up that way I believe.

I've also experienced that this extension of trust is reciprocated. One time my son was hanging out with some of his friends after high school. He's not one to make friends easily and this was one of the few times he went out on an "adventure" like this. They did typical teenage boy hooligan stuff. He was comfortable enough to tell me about what they had gotten up to so we were able to have a discussion around it and I explained the likely outcomes of continuing down that sort of path. At some point that "harmless fun" can become a lot less harmless and have real consequences. I didn't have to ground him or ban him from seeing those kids again. He took the lesson and ran with it. I'd never want my son to feel like he has to hide something like that from me, and I feel if you're going too authoritarian you corrode the trust that let's them be honest with you. When my kids are in trouble, I want them to think of me as a possible solution and not someone they have to hide it from instead.

Again, I won't claim to be any sort of expert on this. I parent like anyone else. As best we can with the tools we're given. My sample size is small with 9, 11 (10 & 12 this month!), and and 18 year old. But I know for a fact I would never have told my parents about any shenanigans I got up to and I'm having conversations with my kids that I couldn't have imagined having with my parents. We never had that sort of relationship.

I feel like this is the kind of advice that fits perfect when everything is going swimmingly but becomes much more complicated when other negative influencing factors come in to play.

When they are blind to something that you can plainly see is a net-negative for their life it seems like it would be much harder to not intervene.

I'm not speaking as someone who has lived this but I have observed a close family member who very much has the relationships and parenting style you're describing and I've watched this parent go through incredibly challenging situation after situation as her kids have grown into teenagehood (covid really did a number on kids coming of age). It's not that her kids are bad either, a tad naive perhaps, but genuinely good kids.

> I feel like this is the kind of advice that fits perfect when everything is going swimmingly but becomes much more complicated when other negative influencing factors come in to play.

How is this different from literally any other social interaction in your life? I extend folks the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise as a general rule. The same policy applied to my children has had fantastic results for the past 18 years. Should distrust and suspicion be the default? No thanks, I’d rather like to have a meaningful relationship with them continue long after they become self sufficient.

> How is this different from literally any other social interaction in your life?

I already explained this in the original comment?

While I agree that your child is not you and FOSS doesn't need to be your child's value, it needs to be said that

FOSS is the software author's value. It correlates with the author's intentions, their incentive and the software's shape and influence on the user – your child. It's a way to delineate content you want your child to see and that which you don't (and thus we circle back to the idea that you imposing a policy ultimately means imposing your values anyway).

I'm still a ways off from needing this specific advice (child is 2 ½), but i feel like the that is exactly how i wish i had been treated as a kid. Not what i wanted back then, which was obviously to just do everything i wanted to do, but what, looking back, i believe would've been great. Thank you.

> Then we had a conversation.

> And worked things out together.

You make it sound so simple. What if your kid simply doesn't listen? They are smart, so they know that if they keep nagging, they will eventually get what they want.

i don't think gp necessarily meant that everything always worked out well and that there never were disagreements. I might be very wrong but what i took away from it was that no matter how much of a plan / how strong a policy you make, you're going to need to make some compromises unless you want to become the sort of parents we had (generalizing greatly).

> Your child is not you. If your child thinks FOSS is cool, it's cool. If they think it is lame, you are being lame.

Yup, don't turn them into a pariah due to the color of chat bubbles (not having iPhone-colored bubbles was recently a major social problem for American teenagers). The color of a bubble might seem stupid to someone dealing with the issues of the adult world, but social issues is basically/hopefully the extent of problems that kids face.

That being said, parents have been successfully imparting values to their children for millennia. If you believe that using FOSS is important (I happen to agree) then you should have no issues convincing your child the same. Maybe they'll end up using Linux on their laptop, while prioritizing the color of chat bubbles on their phones. You can only give them the tools and knowledge to make the right choices, you can't make choices for them.

I don't know if I would say it's a "major social problem", more like a mild negative. Some teenagers primarily use Snapchat, Instagram, or Facebook Messenger. And outside of the US Whatsapp is very common. All these get around the chat bubble color issue.

I couldn't find anything on this online. Why would you need to change the theme of a chat application as a kid in the United States?

Sorry if I am missing something painfully obvious here.

On iPhones iMessages are blue, but text messages (from non-ios devices) are green and lack some of the features of iMessages, so being green is looked down upon

Have a read: https://archive.ph/RJ7bl it is an article of the wall street journal from last year that explains this pretty well

This cannot be upvoted enough - thanks for posting it!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com