Not sure why this hasn't triggered a discussion, I thought a lot of readers include parents of young(er) children?
I totally lost my teen to TikTok and deeply regret succumbing to their (and my wife's) pressure to give them an iPhone at 14 (they're 16 now). It's like hours upon hours of mindless scrolling, with occasional gaming sprinkled in.
My youngest is 10 and has a dependency on school iPad (school was giving up iPads during COVID when they were teaching remotely). We have to monitor their usage closely and unfortunately angry outbursts (ie when it's time to stop) are a regular occurrence.
The 10yo does have a lot of extra-curricular activities so having a cellphone would be a big help (to know where they are and give them an option to contact us if anything happens). But there's just no way I'm giving them a smartphone anytime soon.
I think there's sooo many parents in my position and do hope that some of these devices might be able to help.
> The 10yo does have a lot of extra-curricular activities so having a cellphone would be a big help (to know where they are and give them an option to contact us if anything happens). But there's just no way I'm giving them a smartphone anytime soon.
One option you might consider is a cellular Apple Watch.
> I totally lost my teen to TikTok and deeply regret succumbing to their (and my wife's) pressure to give them an iPhone at 14 (they're 16 now). It's like hours upon hours of mindless scrolling, with occasional gaming sprinkled in.
We are struggling with this as well. Gave our son a phone for his 12th birthday (after putting it off for a couple of years) but with the agreement of no social media apps. We locked down the phone so he can't install any apps. However, YouTube doesn't require an app, so he can still do hours of mindless scrolling of YouTube shorts.
He has a chat group with his friends (Messenger) that works well, and does some gaming (Genshin Impact and similar), which is fine. But the mindless scrolling is what's most detrimental.
Apple has "Screen Time" controls but they're either useless or broken as they somehow reset on their own (anyone else have this problem)?
I have network controls on the wifi so it's blocked after a certain time, but haven't found a good way of controlling the time on specific apps or websites.
He keeps pushing for a TT account and we're adamant that he can have one. But it's relentless because "everyone has one".
Block the shit already then. Block it at the router, get rid of that fruit phone and get something you can have more control over - i.e. a rooted AOSP-derived Android distribution with a few extra tools installed - if you child absolutely has to have a 'smart' phone. If not and he - or most likely she given the TT addiction - absolutely needs a phone there are plenty of 'dumb' phones available to fit those needs. Yes yes yes, I know all about the supposed ostracisation caused by teens not having a phone but if the alternative is to give up your child to the CCP and the tech moguls I'd choose the former and send her/him to a different school.
Here's what I´d do if a 'smart' phone is a requirement:
- ditch the fruit phone, get a device which is supported by LineageOS.
- root it. Install Timelimit [1]. Install the required server somewhere under your control. Make sure Timelimit is configured as 'device administrator' so it can not be removed or circumvented. Install it on your phone as well and maybe on your wife's - if she can be trusted not to give in too easily when your child wants to have more time than you allotted. If she is a pushover in this respect you'll have to take the lead and suffer the consequences of having your child and your wife see you as the big bad wolf but so be it.
- No google account on that phone, no play store. Install F-Droid and Aurora Store. Install AFWall (firewall) and configure it to only allow those apps which really need to have network access. Put a password on AFWall so the firewall can only be edited by those who know it - and make sure your daughter/son does not get to know it.
- She/he can now only run those apps which you allow him or her to run. You can remotely add and remove apps which can be run, add or remove time for those apps/categories/... (the thing can be configured just how you want it, from a single 'phone can be used for X minutes' to a hierarchy of categories each with their own rules on when, how long and how long in a single stretch after which follows a forced break apps in those categories can be used.
- Timelimit is not a remote control tool, you can not see what your child is doing with the device. I don't like spying on my children so I intentionally do not run such tools but they do exist. I'd advice against using them unless you suspect foul play (grooming etc) because I consider these to be a breach of trust.
The combination of Timelimit and the firewall give good control over which apps can be used and when/in what way they are used. As long as there is a browser on the device it can be used to reach undesired services like Tiktok so that is something to keep in mind: limit generic browser access.
Best would be to simply not give the child a 'smart' phone. Second best is something like this, a device which you can configure to reduce the incentives for those 'hours of mindless scrolling' - don't allow such apps and put forced breaks on browsers, e.g. 5 minutes of access, 15 minutes forced break. If the child needs to have longer access for some reason let her explain why and grant it piecemeal.
This is what I do for my 14yo daughter who also 'had to have a phone' according to my wife. There are no social media apps on the thing, she has access to our own XMPP server through Conversations, she can make photos, play music, do some browsing (with forced breaks) and has a total of 30 minutes of screen time per day for non-essential purposes. She has more time for reading books or playing music and actual phone time is unlimited as is the time for e.g. the public transport app which she needs to get to school.
Root out the plague of Tiktok et al, root and branch. You're the parent, you have the power to act, use it. On my network it is blocked at both the DNS as well as the IP layer - first using ipsets with iptables, now using nftables sets.
Devices can help but only if the parents are willing to use their parental authority - a dirty word according to many 'enlightened experts' whose 'expertise' is partly responsible for the mess we're in now - so use it. Ditch the fruit phone because it does not allow you the control you need. Don´t use a stock Android because it does not allow it either. Don't put a Google account on the phone, it is not necessary.
Will your daughter like it? No, not initially, not if she was used to having unlimited access. She might try to find ways to get around the limits so you'll have to check your network for unknown devices since she might borrow a friend's old phone to get her fix. If you find her doing this you of course take away that phone but you should not get angry with her. Limit her phone time for a bit so she knows she did wrong but keep it at that. Encourage her to do things with all the time she now has since she is no longer doom-scrolling, find other things to do - hobbies etc, these used to be common but seem to be rare nowadays. Eventually she'll get used to not being controlled by her phone and she'll probably end up liking the freedom this gives but to get there you'll have to bite through that sour apple.
I managed to keep my children (14 and 20) away from 'social' networks so I probably had and have an easier task than what awaits you but I think the effort it worth it. No good comes from having your children mind-controlled by the nefarious actors behind 'social' media. I hope you give them the good example by not using these 'services' either?
I don’t doubt that this is a good approach for some families, but as someone coming from a childhood that had a high degree of sheltering/control I would recommend that anybody looking to do something similar do so with great care.
Depending on execution there’s a significant risk of the child developing a deep-rooted parental resentment that may never dissipate, risk of them going wild the second they’re no longer subject to house rules, and risk of them not being able to handle the things they’ve been barred from in adulthood due to lack of experience. The tighter the parents’ grip the more these risks grow.
I have yet to become a parent so the only experience I can draw from is that of my childhood, but I believe what I would do if I were raising a family would be to put some limits in place, but also spend time discussing why the limits exist with my children and break down exactly how things like social media hijack your brain in effort to inoculate them against it. Every kid is different of course, but many are much more bright than they’re given credit for and can show surprising ability to self-regulate when they understand the reasoning behind rules. Mandate without supporting logic on the other hand is likely to inspire rebellion.
I’d expect social acceptance and access to tiktok/ig to go hand in hand. Was the same with access to tv programs and video games when growing up in the early 90s.
Just like in the 80's/90's this is not the case. I did not have access to those TV programs and only got a C64 (and with that, access to games) in the latter year of high school and had problems whatsoever with 'social acceptance' be dint of being among peers with similar attitudes. I formed a band with some friends, we played music, did 'boy stuff' (nick the car and drive it through the fields, make fires, blow things up, shoot air rifles, made a pulse jet engine, etc.) and got along just fine. The same is true now, my 14yo daughter gets along fine with some - but not all, just like I didn't back then - of her class mates, has some hobbies (drawing, singing, now in a 'pop choir') and has a lot of time compared to those who're glued to their phones 24/7. When she needs or wants more time she sends me a message through that XMPP server (right under the stairs here at the farm) and I usually grant it if it seems reasonable where 'reasonable' can mean 'waiting for a delayed train so I want to browse the web a bit', not just 'serious' things. She sometimes talks about friends who have unlimited access to phones but tends to put that in terms of unbelief and wonder, "how can her parents allow her to do that, it doesn't make sense, don't they know what she's doing all that time?" so she's either the world's best actor or she does not feel she's under 'a high degree of sheltering/control'.
She is 14 years old. Who ever though it a good idea to allow every lunatic out there on the Weird Wide Web to introduce her to his personal fetish?
FWIW, I didn’t realize how controlled the environment I was raised within was until I’d left home, which makes perfect sense as I had no point of comparison until then. Similar to your daughter I had friends whose environments were much less controlled, but they weren’t able to serve the same role as the personal experience I wound up spending a significant chunk of my 20s playing catch up on.
That’s not to advocate for unfiltered internet access or anything, just presenting my experience as a data point and food for thought.
> That’s not to advocate for unfiltered internet access or anything, just presenting my experience as a data point and food for thought.
This 'food for thought' stands to mental health as McDonalds stands to physical health. You're trying to make the case that limiting teenager access to controlled substances is 'creating a controlled environment of which the person only will become aware when he leaves home'. This is, to put it bluntly, abject nonsense. My 14yo daughter - the 20yo does her own things by now but has managed to evade being caught by the machine, most likely in no small part thanks to her upbringing - knows perfectly well that her access to these 'services' are being limited, she knows why, she knows what the 'services' have to offer having seen her friends and others around her drown in them. She is in no way living in some bubble which she'll only recognise and escape once she leaves home.
Stop apologising for inaction in the face of the 'social' disease, this is like that well-known cartoon of the dog sitting in a burning room while he says 'this is all fine' or something along those lines. Things are not all fine and it is up to parents like us to find a way though the quagmire of lures and incentives because our children are too young and inexperienced to decide for themselves whether these are good ideas. We don't allow children to use drugs like alcohol either before they've reached an appropriate age, we don't feed them porn (although it is quite unlikely for them to have missed than the 'net is full of it so they're probably already exposed), we don't put them behind the wheel of a large automobile (to paraphrase the Talking Heads) and now we don't allow them to feed their developing brains to the machine. This is just another part of parenting the denial or refusal of which is just as bad as the denial or refusal to keep your children from the aforementioned hazards. A time will come when they are free to choose whether they want to partake of this madness but that time is not when they're 14 years old.
Sorry, it wasn’t my intent to argue for inaction, but rather that children will eventually come in contact with these things at some point or another. Depending on what they decide to do it might even be a requirement. Personally, I feel that it’s better if that happens while the structure, support, and guardrails provided by parents are still in place rather than shortly after they’ve left the nest and have numerous other things to figure out too. Maybe it doesn’t happen at 14, but instead at 16 or 17, and in highly controlled doses with “less bad” services, and comes with the context of discussions of the pitfalls of such services.
I respect other opinions but it’s difficult to see myself taking a zero-exposure policy as a parent for the simple reason that such policies have made for stumbling blocks and thorns in my side that I’ve been dealing with for the better part of my adult life.
Right there, in the first paragraph I say Yes yes yes, I know all about the supposed ostracisation caused by teens not having a phone but if the alternative is to give up your child to the CCP and the tech moguls I'd choose the former and send her/him to a different school.
So yes, it is discussed and no, this is not a good reason to feed your children to the machine and yes, they're better off outside of that world. Yes, it takes effort. Yes, it is worth it. Stop making excuses for being passive in the face of this onslaught of brainwashing madness coming from these devices. Be honest and recognise that you'd put a halt to this development if you were there some decades ago and knew what it would lead to. Not to mobile computing, that has many positive aspects but to the 'social' networks which wreaked havoc on personal relations - a FB or IG or TT 'follower' is not a 'friend' and a 'like' is worth the electrons used to convey it, i.e. nothing at all - and attention spans. These devices can be great for communications with people with whom you already have a personal relationship but they're terrible in giving the idea that the whole world and his dog need to be catered to to gain social cred. Also, the idea that the shit posting crowd who gets off on pissing on everything posted by some hapless girl who thought she looked nice in that dress. Also on the mobbing magnifier these things are for the local bullies, weaklings who need to up their own self esteem by pushing down others.
> - ditch the fruit phone, get a device which is supported by LineageOS.
Alternatively, you could use the parental controls built into that "fruit phone" to do all your recommended blocking without the hassle of setting up your own server, rooting a phone or giving 3rd party software administrative control over your kid's phone. Screen Time limits can be used to set limits (or hard blocks) on both applications and their associated websites. You can limit access to sets of apps to specific times of day, you can prevent the installation of new applications, or require remote approval of new applications. There's a number of other options in there too, and nothing you described seems to my recollection like you can't do with the built in tools.
Here's why to ditch the 'fruit phone' from the 'fruit factory': no functional firewall on those devices, anything Apple is free to do whatever it wants according to the whims of Cupertino, not nearly the level of fine-grained control you can achieve with the mentioned setup, horribly expensive, subject to forced upgrades due to planned obsolescence, you need to totally buy in to their 'ecosystem', sleazy tricks like on-device content monitoring to 'protect the children', limited free software availability, etc.
There are more reasons related to the freedom AOSP-derived Android distributions give for those who want to have more control over what the devices can be used for and which network resources they can connect to. It comes down to the difference between having a Linux-based device with near full access (with the exception of the radio firmware) and a factory-sealed no-serviceable-parts-inside device.
The point about control has some validity, but support lifetimes on iPhones/iPads are generally among the longest in the industry, at least if going by how long you continue to get full security updates.
There’s a good chance that various Android devices (though not all) will continue to get LineageOS updates for longer, but that’s caveated by things like baseband ceasing to be updated and becoming permanently vulnerable. Depending on the manufacturer this can happen in as short of a period of time as ~3 years.
Support lifetimes on AOSP-derived distributions outpace those from all commercial vendors - and it is that iteration of Android which I use, not vendor distributions. I don't user commercial operating systems on my computers and and happy to skip them on my mobile devices as well.
Baseband vulnerabilities are not the thing to worry over, the closed-source radio firmware blob is a leaky bucket by design which allows the TLA's of the world to use these devices for monitoring purposes and no update from ${vendor} is going to change that. If you don't want to be subjected to this you can not use devices which connect to 2/3/4/5G networks no matter how virtuous the vendor claims to be.
You can use Apple Configurator [1] to go beyond ScreenTime offers, including limiting which Wi-Fi networks can be connected to, restricting access to apps and the App Store. You can even remote wipe an iPhone remotely if necessary.
I was going to say that. Apple can do all that was mentioned, and I'm hardly against Apple, but they do give strong parental controls.
Drives me crazy to give a 1000$ phone to a child that don't need it
No, it just moved eastwards and gained a few extra stars. Compare the Chinese iteration of TT (Douyin) with the international version. Chinese children are time limited to 40 minutes per day and get presented 'science experiments you can do at home, museum exhibits, patriotism videos and educational videos' according to a 'tech expert' interviewed on the subject [1] while western girls get told they may be boys and vice-versa if they happen to feel some unease with their growing bodies during puberty. They get inundated in 'influencer' content trying to peddle them the latest make-up trends, the latest fashion fads and more such consumerist drivel. From the interview with the 'expert': “There’s a survey of pre-teens in the U.S. and China asking, ‘what is the most aspirational career that you want to have?’ and in the U.S., the No. 1 was a social media influencer, and in China, the No. 1 was astronaut,” Harris said. “You allow those two societies to play out for a few generations and I can tell you what your world is going to look like.”
Of course I did not only mention the CCP as a nefarious actor in the 'social' landscape, did you miss that? I pointed out the (decidedly home-grown) tech moguls as being just as guilty and while they may have tried to virtue signal with the 'progressives' when they were in power they're certainly not part of the 'red scare´ unless they're like Lenin's 'capitalists who will sell the Soviets the rope they will use to hang them'. I don't think they are, they're just fixated on growing their power and influence in pursuit of the almighty ${currency_unit}.
> Of course I did not only mention the CCP as a nefarious actor in the 'social' landscape, did you miss that?
No, of course not, and it feels like quite unfriendly rhetoric to suggest that I could have done just because I responded to a particular aspect of your position.
But now that we've dropped the pretense I can comfortably say that your opening paragraph comes across as insane; paranoid and in denial of science and composed in a way that strikes as if you just tried to shoe-horn in as many of your pet concerns as possible.
Could you explain what about my opening paragraph comes across as 'insane' and 'paranoid'? Are there inaccuracies which cause concern for you and if so could you point them out? As far as I see there are no such problems but if you can point them out I may change my mind. If you can not, well, in that case I can only conclude that this ad-hominem attack is the result of you not being able to debate the facts and as such feel like you have to resort to 'comfortably' defaming the character of the debater.
Problems are there to be solved, not kvetched about. Responsibilities are there to be carried, not abandoned or pushed towards others. Also, comments are there to be commented upon, not "WOOT-lol'd".
> Bark places calls to law enforcement when it receives an alert about a kid threatening to harm themselves or others, he told me, but those alerts are reviewed by a human first. “We’re not swatting kids,” he said.
So any messages your kid sends to their friends could get routed to some random employee at this third-party service? Yikes.
I have a very skeptical worldview, and whenever I see any of these companies that offer to "protect your kids" by managing and monitoring their data, I always just assume they are gathering data to sell to advertisers.
And sure maybe they don't go into business with that mentality, but when the company inevitably goes under, the first thing they're going to do is sell off the data to the highest bidder.
And a couple of the apps are from companies from Utah, so putting them on your kids phones is basically outsourcing their online information flow to the Mormon Church.
I'd say the parents should moderate it... but I've seen how busy work and everything else leaves modern parents.
Society really needs to adjust to leave time for people to be humans, to correctly raise and guide the next generation into quality adults. We're really going to regret it when we end up in that cyberpunk dystopia ruled by corporations.
Or maybe people are just overeacting. In the 1950s there was a movement that claimed that comic books were evil and rotting kids' minds. When I was growing up in the 1970s and 1980s it was TV. Then it was video games. Now it's social media, Kids like to do things that (at least to parents) look like wasting time. But if the parents look back to their own childhoods, they weren't using their time that productively either.
It’s easy to suggest that this is the same scaremongering around media and new technologies occurred in the past, but I think that’s a mistake. The Internet, web forums, social media, etc. are different because of how people interact with them and because many of them use algorithms and dark patterns to manipulate and drive further engagement.
To make matters worse, malicious actors have demonstrably used them to manipulate public opinion and distribute propaganda. Studies around illusory truth have shown that familiarity can overcome rationality and critical thinking. IOW, no matter how much you know something to be a lie, if you hear it often enough, you’ll begin to believe it.
That’s all to say I think it’s important to be wary of how technology influences your life and consider how to cultivate balance in life that includes time away from devices to contemplate as well as to escape the machine.
Dungeons and Dragons was different, because it encouraged the confusion of fantasy with reality. But in the case of algorithm-driven social media feeds the difference is different, I take it?
The scale is bigger, I think that's the key thing. I can vaguely imagine an alternate history where D&D is as popular as TikTok, and then Russia and China are publishing their own Monster Manuals full of propaganda, and laws start to appear limiting it to over 18s due to the potential for brain rot as proven by studies.
I tried to source who said this, presumably in the 80s, but struggled. The phrase "rumors regarding players having difficulty separating fantasy from reality" appears on Wikipedia, in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dragons#Moral_pan... but the sources aren't good (the page from theGamer is unrelated, maybe spam). https://web.archive.org/web/20200626110749/http://www.ptgptb... has a good history of the topic, but without mention of the fantasy/reality claim. The panic made it out to be a satanic cult that induces suicide and murder. This psychiatrist was involved: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Radecki ... however, I can't find the claim about the blurring of fantasy and reality, so maybe nobody made it, although it's kind of the theme of Mazes and Monsters.
What. Even larping is not confusing. Are you claiming that actors in the film/ play actually are confused and they think they REALLY ARE the characters they play?
No, but actors don't decide what their characters do.
Also I don't claim larping is "confusing" to any extent, just that it would be relatively more confusing than DnD for people with a bad grasp on reality.
Maybe it's not worse, maybe it's just as bad, who knows?
I'd try to get my kids away from TV or comics just as hard as I tried to get my kids away from their phone.
There are of course real and worthwhile culture artifacts on any media, TikTok included, but we are talking about addiction here.
Our generation would have been so much better off without tv addiction!
(Comics? Yes, they have been well known vectors of propaganda for one, and favor in general an idiotically simple manichean worldview, and therefore an adult explaining to a kid why they are potentially harmful was also in order, no?)
As a professional scientist, I think it is important for people to understand that nearly any viewpoint can point to "peer reviewed" research supporting it. That isn't enough. You need to consider the size of the study, where it is published (there are thousands of journals and many of the lesser known ones have little or no serious peer review even if they claim to have it), and whether there are other studies contradicting it.
I tend to share your optimism, but it also seems smartphones have some very different qualities from previous tech. Yes, the sounds and images, but mostly a new kind of socially remote yet nearly instantaneous communication style.
I know I am an outlier case, but I am unable to function in society (or even individually) with an unrestricted smartphone. I'll literally not eat, not drink water, not sleep, miss all my classes, final exams, I'll miss the plane I booked a month earlier. I am 20yo, not a child either, but I have AuDHD. For years now I've implemented (often custom) solutions that allow me to use WhatsApp and $BANK_APP on a smartphone without having access to any sort of infinitely scrollable content. I'm living a fine life today - a moderately successful college student. Give me an unrestricted smartphone and you wouldn't be able to recognize my face after 3 days. In a week I'll likely be sick due to decreased immunity because of poor sleep, lack of nutrition & hydration and lack of self-care.
I don't think I'm alone in this, I've certainly seen similar anecdotes over the years. People who literally can't live with access to unrestricted smartphones - we exist. I'm glad to see these sort of "Alternative Device" movements - it surely is my longstanding dream to build a company that produces just that, a smart device you can't abuse, a bicycle for the mind with support wheels. Not everybody is healthy enough to ride a normal bicycle - people with disabilities will fall over and injure themselves if you put them on one, or worse, if you force them to use one.
I understand the self-control aspect - I'm trying to build it with various approaches. I hope I'll get it figured out before my 30s. It's something so many healthy neurotypical people take for granted, yet there is a minority who just can't.
I have not gotten a smartphone in part because I know how much even laptop access distracts me, to the point where I'll go places which have no wifi, like a park, just to get work done.
I felt less alone after finding "Swapping 5G for 3G: Motivations, Experiences, and
Implications of Contemporary Dumbphone Adoption" at https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3637402 last year as it told me there were others who felt similarly.
> Another group of participants (the second ideological grouping) saw dumbphones as a tool for defending their attention spans from smartphones. These participants described smartphones as “a hungry monster” for attention (U3-27) and an “itch in your pocket” (U5-28). Switching to a dumbphone was described by U6-41 as releasing an anchor that had been tightened around their waist. Reflecting on their time as smartphone users, these participants reported feeling that they had been missing out on meaningful activities – e.g., personal connections, shared moments with loved ones, and reading books. Instead, they engaged in activities like doomscrolling or, “the action of compulsively scrolling through social media or news feeds which relate to bad news.” Experiencing distraction was annoying for many participants, but for others it took a physical and mental toll. Having two children diagnosed with Autism spectrum disorders, U6-41 empathizes with the endless capabilities, settings, and launchers of the smartphone as not only “overwhelming” but “terrifying”.
Jaron Lanier had a bit that there’s a subset of the population who can’t handle social media, it totally warps their minds. There’s some famous examples, but I’ve seen in with friends.
I can’t quite relate because even a minute on TikTok makes me want to vomit. But I really dislike the idea that it’s the user’s fault for not having discipline or having some unspecified psychological quirk; the application is working on them exactly the way it was designed to.
Over the years of not using social media because I can't handle it, I arrived at the definitive conclusion that any form of social media (including HN) modifies a person's worldview, life goals, personality and behavior to significant degrees. I came to call this "ungrounding", it's in effect a detachment from how they would think and act if they were exposed to only the real world and not the artificial world that doesn't even exist.
Little people remember anymore, but a decade ago people used to remark how the personality and manner of behavior of somebody they know changed when they got their first smartphone.
This effect doesn't skip anybody, can be caused by plain old cable TV and very little use (about 30 mins./day) is enough. When I completely cut artificial content years ago, it took about 3 months for me to feel the veil lifted from my eyes and able to see the real world as-is and not through the lens of the content I consumed. It was a profound feeling when I first realized what happened to me, and it left me thinking and pitying all others I knew who are trapped with thought patterns unmatching their reality - most otherwise good, hardworking people.
They didn't realize the lenses being put on (because it happened so slowly) and now they don't know the world isn't quite the way they see it is. No matter whether they see it as rose-colored or black-and-white, with an optimistic hue or a pessimistic blue, because of the fake, narrow representations they get exposed to regularly.
It's almost like a mind virus, and you know what? It's immediately recognizable to me, the glossy eyes when they start to talk about X thing and Y event and Z news that all are actually totally irrelevant for them if they'd stop to think about it, yet they for some mysterious reason they put a high importance on them and talk about it as if it's life and death. I believe anybody who drops artificial content and re-grounds with reality will be able to readily see how captive the minds of their very loved ones are.
Note: No AI was used in this comment, it's late at night and I'm in a particularly productive mood.
I've heard of people losing interest in all of that infinitely scrollable shit once they start taking GLP-1 drugs for weight loss. Makes sense, seems to dampen the dopamine system a bit.
Indeed my problem is just that. IMHO ADHD should be renamed to Dopamine Dysregulation Disorder. In my experience it's a total analogue to diabetes if you swap glucose with dopamine.
Greed as the only engine of human enterprise turns out to have negative social effects over and over again.
it's not that tv or social media must inherently be evil, but when the motivations for building platforms is mind control and market share, and the entity is a collection of contracts designed to allow exploitation of all and sundry concerned we should probably stop and say, hey Adam, your invisible hand is choking me.
society should own some things, including rail networks, data networks, and large media intended for mass societal conversations.
Can't we have a law saying that all devices should be general purpose computing devices, owned by the owner? Then any device can be turned into an "alternative" device, whatever you think that means.
This isn't what I expected from this article, this seems to me less about "alternative devices", and more about devices that are aiming specifically to keep kids safe, which deserves a focus in and of itself.
But also, most of these devices are just implementing software, the device isn't the important part.
There is truly some interesting work happening in device world atm, and I think it is a combination of the desire for a change of behaviors from our phones, as well as new possibilities of what devices can do.
I work in the neurotech/sleeptech space, and we're one of a few companies that are building consumer level EEG devices. The others are trying to sell, "fall asleep faster" tech (with limited scientific backing), we're focused on enhancing the restorative function of sleep (https://affectablesleep.com). Neurotech in general is really interesting right now with a few other use cases around measuring focus and specifically re-training focus (https://www.neurodelabs.com/), depression treatment (https://www.flowneuroscience.com/), and many more.
I also find the augmented reality glasses space really interesting.
To me, these are "Alternative Devices", the article really just points out "different phones".
Part of the reason, I believe, we are seeing these new devices, along with the need, is that it is getting less expensive to develop and prototype small scale devices.
When I started programming, the LAMP stack was new, and people we raving about how easy it was to get started, then came RoR, then node, and with each new change in language, from download to working code got easier and easier.
Hardware is still challenging, but I suspect we may be at the LAMP stack level, and over the next decade, it will also become easier.
To be honest, I think the Alternate Devices in a form of a _new smartphone_ miss the point. All current Android smartphones could be dumbified to the same level with the matter of installing appropriate software, no need to buy anything special (and usually rather expensive). I see only an attempt to earn profit in such devices.
What I would like to see is a feature phones with the essential functions of a smartphone: proper messengers, proper maps and navigation, but many different form factors and 1+ week of a battery life. This is all possible with the current-generation 4G chips, which have sufficient performance (1GHz ARM core of Unisoc T107/T117/T127 for example).
If you're just tired of checking the phone when the notification comes in to understand whether it is important or not, you're looking for so-called 'calm technology device' — just buy a wristband like Xiaomi Band and it will send the notifications to your wrist, you won't need to touch the smartphone, which is especially helpful on the street or in a crowded place.
https://archive.is/HqOOG
Not sure why this hasn't triggered a discussion, I thought a lot of readers include parents of young(er) children?
I totally lost my teen to TikTok and deeply regret succumbing to their (and my wife's) pressure to give them an iPhone at 14 (they're 16 now). It's like hours upon hours of mindless scrolling, with occasional gaming sprinkled in.
My youngest is 10 and has a dependency on school iPad (school was giving up iPads during COVID when they were teaching remotely). We have to monitor their usage closely and unfortunately angry outbursts (ie when it's time to stop) are a regular occurrence.
The 10yo does have a lot of extra-curricular activities so having a cellphone would be a big help (to know where they are and give them an option to contact us if anything happens). But there's just no way I'm giving them a smartphone anytime soon.
I think there's sooo many parents in my position and do hope that some of these devices might be able to help.
> The 10yo does have a lot of extra-curricular activities so having a cellphone would be a big help (to know where they are and give them an option to contact us if anything happens). But there's just no way I'm giving them a smartphone anytime soon.
One option you might consider is a cellular Apple Watch.
> I totally lost my teen to TikTok and deeply regret succumbing to their (and my wife's) pressure to give them an iPhone at 14 (they're 16 now). It's like hours upon hours of mindless scrolling, with occasional gaming sprinkled in.
We are struggling with this as well. Gave our son a phone for his 12th birthday (after putting it off for a couple of years) but with the agreement of no social media apps. We locked down the phone so he can't install any apps. However, YouTube doesn't require an app, so he can still do hours of mindless scrolling of YouTube shorts.
He has a chat group with his friends (Messenger) that works well, and does some gaming (Genshin Impact and similar), which is fine. But the mindless scrolling is what's most detrimental.
Apple has "Screen Time" controls but they're either useless or broken as they somehow reset on their own (anyone else have this problem)?
I have network controls on the wifi so it's blocked after a certain time, but haven't found a good way of controlling the time on specific apps or websites.
He keeps pushing for a TT account and we're adamant that he can have one. But it's relentless because "everyone has one".
i cant imagine the effort it takes a parent to drag their kids out of tiktok and into playing video games
> so having a cellphone would be a big help (to know where they are and give them an option to contact us if anything happens)
our 9 year old has a simple Apple Watch for this purpose ($10/mo for a line); works great and no chance of it getting left somewhere like a phone
If it wasn’t TikTok it’d be something else. I was on /b/ for a while until I grew out of it.
Block the shit already then. Block it at the router, get rid of that fruit phone and get something you can have more control over - i.e. a rooted AOSP-derived Android distribution with a few extra tools installed - if you child absolutely has to have a 'smart' phone. If not and he - or most likely she given the TT addiction - absolutely needs a phone there are plenty of 'dumb' phones available to fit those needs. Yes yes yes, I know all about the supposed ostracisation caused by teens not having a phone but if the alternative is to give up your child to the CCP and the tech moguls I'd choose the former and send her/him to a different school.
Here's what I´d do if a 'smart' phone is a requirement:
- ditch the fruit phone, get a device which is supported by LineageOS.
- root it. Install Timelimit [1]. Install the required server somewhere under your control. Make sure Timelimit is configured as 'device administrator' so it can not be removed or circumvented. Install it on your phone as well and maybe on your wife's - if she can be trusted not to give in too easily when your child wants to have more time than you allotted. If she is a pushover in this respect you'll have to take the lead and suffer the consequences of having your child and your wife see you as the big bad wolf but so be it.
- No google account on that phone, no play store. Install F-Droid and Aurora Store. Install AFWall (firewall) and configure it to only allow those apps which really need to have network access. Put a password on AFWall so the firewall can only be edited by those who know it - and make sure your daughter/son does not get to know it.
- She/he can now only run those apps which you allow him or her to run. You can remotely add and remove apps which can be run, add or remove time for those apps/categories/... (the thing can be configured just how you want it, from a single 'phone can be used for X minutes' to a hierarchy of categories each with their own rules on when, how long and how long in a single stretch after which follows a forced break apps in those categories can be used.
- Timelimit is not a remote control tool, you can not see what your child is doing with the device. I don't like spying on my children so I intentionally do not run such tools but they do exist. I'd advice against using them unless you suspect foul play (grooming etc) because I consider these to be a breach of trust.
The combination of Timelimit and the firewall give good control over which apps can be used and when/in what way they are used. As long as there is a browser on the device it can be used to reach undesired services like Tiktok so that is something to keep in mind: limit generic browser access.
Best would be to simply not give the child a 'smart' phone. Second best is something like this, a device which you can configure to reduce the incentives for those 'hours of mindless scrolling' - don't allow such apps and put forced breaks on browsers, e.g. 5 minutes of access, 15 minutes forced break. If the child needs to have longer access for some reason let her explain why and grant it piecemeal.
This is what I do for my 14yo daughter who also 'had to have a phone' according to my wife. There are no social media apps on the thing, she has access to our own XMPP server through Conversations, she can make photos, play music, do some browsing (with forced breaks) and has a total of 30 minutes of screen time per day for non-essential purposes. She has more time for reading books or playing music and actual phone time is unlimited as is the time for e.g. the public transport app which she needs to get to school.
Root out the plague of Tiktok et al, root and branch. You're the parent, you have the power to act, use it. On my network it is blocked at both the DNS as well as the IP layer - first using ipsets with iptables, now using nftables sets.
Devices can help but only if the parents are willing to use their parental authority - a dirty word according to many 'enlightened experts' whose 'expertise' is partly responsible for the mess we're in now - so use it. Ditch the fruit phone because it does not allow you the control you need. Don´t use a stock Android because it does not allow it either. Don't put a Google account on the phone, it is not necessary.
Will your daughter like it? No, not initially, not if she was used to having unlimited access. She might try to find ways to get around the limits so you'll have to check your network for unknown devices since she might borrow a friend's old phone to get her fix. If you find her doing this you of course take away that phone but you should not get angry with her. Limit her phone time for a bit so she knows she did wrong but keep it at that. Encourage her to do things with all the time she now has since she is no longer doom-scrolling, find other things to do - hobbies etc, these used to be common but seem to be rare nowadays. Eventually she'll get used to not being controlled by her phone and she'll probably end up liking the freedom this gives but to get there you'll have to bite through that sour apple.
I managed to keep my children (14 and 20) away from 'social' networks so I probably had and have an easier task than what awaits you but I think the effort it worth it. No good comes from having your children mind-controlled by the nefarious actors behind 'social' media. I hope you give them the good example by not using these 'services' either?
[1] https://f-droid.org/en/packages/io.timelimit.android.aosp.di...
I don’t doubt that this is a good approach for some families, but as someone coming from a childhood that had a high degree of sheltering/control I would recommend that anybody looking to do something similar do so with great care.
Depending on execution there’s a significant risk of the child developing a deep-rooted parental resentment that may never dissipate, risk of them going wild the second they’re no longer subject to house rules, and risk of them not being able to handle the things they’ve been barred from in adulthood due to lack of experience. The tighter the parents’ grip the more these risks grow.
I have yet to become a parent so the only experience I can draw from is that of my childhood, but I believe what I would do if I were raising a family would be to put some limits in place, but also spend time discussing why the limits exist with my children and break down exactly how things like social media hijack your brain in effort to inoculate them against it. Every kid is different of course, but many are much more bright than they’re given credit for and can show surprising ability to self-regulate when they understand the reasoning behind rules. Mandate without supporting logic on the other hand is likely to inspire rebellion.
Well buy them beer and conveniently leave for weekends to compensate for the router censorship or something.
Much of the resentment comes from parents sabotaging social status among friends and class mates I think.
I’d expect social acceptance and access to tiktok/ig to go hand in hand. Was the same with access to tv programs and video games when growing up in the early 90s.
Just like in the 80's/90's this is not the case. I did not have access to those TV programs and only got a C64 (and with that, access to games) in the latter year of high school and had problems whatsoever with 'social acceptance' be dint of being among peers with similar attitudes. I formed a band with some friends, we played music, did 'boy stuff' (nick the car and drive it through the fields, make fires, blow things up, shoot air rifles, made a pulse jet engine, etc.) and got along just fine. The same is true now, my 14yo daughter gets along fine with some - but not all, just like I didn't back then - of her class mates, has some hobbies (drawing, singing, now in a 'pop choir') and has a lot of time compared to those who're glued to their phones 24/7. When she needs or wants more time she sends me a message through that XMPP server (right under the stairs here at the farm) and I usually grant it if it seems reasonable where 'reasonable' can mean 'waiting for a delayed train so I want to browse the web a bit', not just 'serious' things. She sometimes talks about friends who have unlimited access to phones but tends to put that in terms of unbelief and wonder, "how can her parents allow her to do that, it doesn't make sense, don't they know what she's doing all that time?" so she's either the world's best actor or she does not feel she's under 'a high degree of sheltering/control'.
She is 14 years old. Who ever though it a good idea to allow every lunatic out there on the Weird Wide Web to introduce her to his personal fetish?
FWIW, I didn’t realize how controlled the environment I was raised within was until I’d left home, which makes perfect sense as I had no point of comparison until then. Similar to your daughter I had friends whose environments were much less controlled, but they weren’t able to serve the same role as the personal experience I wound up spending a significant chunk of my 20s playing catch up on.
That’s not to advocate for unfiltered internet access or anything, just presenting my experience as a data point and food for thought.
> That’s not to advocate for unfiltered internet access or anything, just presenting my experience as a data point and food for thought.
This 'food for thought' stands to mental health as McDonalds stands to physical health. You're trying to make the case that limiting teenager access to controlled substances is 'creating a controlled environment of which the person only will become aware when he leaves home'. This is, to put it bluntly, abject nonsense. My 14yo daughter - the 20yo does her own things by now but has managed to evade being caught by the machine, most likely in no small part thanks to her upbringing - knows perfectly well that her access to these 'services' are being limited, she knows why, she knows what the 'services' have to offer having seen her friends and others around her drown in them. She is in no way living in some bubble which she'll only recognise and escape once she leaves home.
Stop apologising for inaction in the face of the 'social' disease, this is like that well-known cartoon of the dog sitting in a burning room while he says 'this is all fine' or something along those lines. Things are not all fine and it is up to parents like us to find a way though the quagmire of lures and incentives because our children are too young and inexperienced to decide for themselves whether these are good ideas. We don't allow children to use drugs like alcohol either before they've reached an appropriate age, we don't feed them porn (although it is quite unlikely for them to have missed than the 'net is full of it so they're probably already exposed), we don't put them behind the wheel of a large automobile (to paraphrase the Talking Heads) and now we don't allow them to feed their developing brains to the machine. This is just another part of parenting the denial or refusal of which is just as bad as the denial or refusal to keep your children from the aforementioned hazards. A time will come when they are free to choose whether they want to partake of this madness but that time is not when they're 14 years old.
Sorry, it wasn’t my intent to argue for inaction, but rather that children will eventually come in contact with these things at some point or another. Depending on what they decide to do it might even be a requirement. Personally, I feel that it’s better if that happens while the structure, support, and guardrails provided by parents are still in place rather than shortly after they’ve left the nest and have numerous other things to figure out too. Maybe it doesn’t happen at 14, but instead at 16 or 17, and in highly controlled doses with “less bad” services, and comes with the context of discussions of the pitfalls of such services.
I respect other opinions but it’s difficult to see myself taking a zero-exposure policy as a parent for the simple reason that such policies have made for stumbling blocks and thorns in my side that I’ve been dealing with for the better part of my adult life.
Not even discussed was the social isolation this would cause. Friend groups communicate via tiktok.
Right there, in the first paragraph I say Yes yes yes, I know all about the supposed ostracisation caused by teens not having a phone but if the alternative is to give up your child to the CCP and the tech moguls I'd choose the former and send her/him to a different school.
So yes, it is discussed and no, this is not a good reason to feed your children to the machine and yes, they're better off outside of that world. Yes, it takes effort. Yes, it is worth it. Stop making excuses for being passive in the face of this onslaught of brainwashing madness coming from these devices. Be honest and recognise that you'd put a halt to this development if you were there some decades ago and knew what it would lead to. Not to mobile computing, that has many positive aspects but to the 'social' networks which wreaked havoc on personal relations - a FB or IG or TT 'follower' is not a 'friend' and a 'like' is worth the electrons used to convey it, i.e. nothing at all - and attention spans. These devices can be great for communications with people with whom you already have a personal relationship but they're terrible in giving the idea that the whole world and his dog need to be catered to to gain social cred. Also, the idea that the shit posting crowd who gets off on pissing on everything posted by some hapless girl who thought she looked nice in that dress. Also on the mobbing magnifier these things are for the local bullies, weaklings who need to up their own self esteem by pushing down others.
> - ditch the fruit phone, get a device which is supported by LineageOS.
Alternatively, you could use the parental controls built into that "fruit phone" to do all your recommended blocking without the hassle of setting up your own server, rooting a phone or giving 3rd party software administrative control over your kid's phone. Screen Time limits can be used to set limits (or hard blocks) on both applications and their associated websites. You can limit access to sets of apps to specific times of day, you can prevent the installation of new applications, or require remote approval of new applications. There's a number of other options in there too, and nothing you described seems to my recollection like you can't do with the built in tools.
Here's why to ditch the 'fruit phone' from the 'fruit factory': no functional firewall on those devices, anything Apple is free to do whatever it wants according to the whims of Cupertino, not nearly the level of fine-grained control you can achieve with the mentioned setup, horribly expensive, subject to forced upgrades due to planned obsolescence, you need to totally buy in to their 'ecosystem', sleazy tricks like on-device content monitoring to 'protect the children', limited free software availability, etc.
There are more reasons related to the freedom AOSP-derived Android distributions give for those who want to have more control over what the devices can be used for and which network resources they can connect to. It comes down to the difference between having a Linux-based device with near full access (with the exception of the radio firmware) and a factory-sealed no-serviceable-parts-inside device.
The point about control has some validity, but support lifetimes on iPhones/iPads are generally among the longest in the industry, at least if going by how long you continue to get full security updates.
There’s a good chance that various Android devices (though not all) will continue to get LineageOS updates for longer, but that’s caveated by things like baseband ceasing to be updated and becoming permanently vulnerable. Depending on the manufacturer this can happen in as short of a period of time as ~3 years.
Support lifetimes on AOSP-derived distributions outpace those from all commercial vendors - and it is that iteration of Android which I use, not vendor distributions. I don't user commercial operating systems on my computers and and happy to skip them on my mobile devices as well.
Baseband vulnerabilities are not the thing to worry over, the closed-source radio firmware blob is a leaky bucket by design which allows the TLA's of the world to use these devices for monitoring purposes and no update from ${vendor} is going to change that. If you don't want to be subjected to this you can not use devices which connect to 2/3/4/5G networks no matter how virtuous the vendor claims to be.
You can use Apple Configurator [1] to go beyond ScreenTime offers, including limiting which Wi-Fi networks can be connected to, restricting access to apps and the App Store. You can even remote wipe an iPhone remotely if necessary.
Works on iPads, Macs and Apple TVs too.
[1]: https://support.apple.com/guide/apple-configurator-mac/intro...
I was going to say that. Apple can do all that was mentioned, and I'm hardly against Apple, but they do give strong parental controls. Drives me crazy to give a 1000$ phone to a child that don't need it
Screen Time limits don't work for us -- they are repeatedly reset on their own. I have not found a solution to that.
I have this happen on both of my kids' devices (phone for the older one, iPad for the younger one). It's a huge source of frustration.
> give up your child to the CCP
I thought the red scare was over.
No, it just moved eastwards and gained a few extra stars. Compare the Chinese iteration of TT (Douyin) with the international version. Chinese children are time limited to 40 minutes per day and get presented 'science experiments you can do at home, museum exhibits, patriotism videos and educational videos' according to a 'tech expert' interviewed on the subject [1] while western girls get told they may be boys and vice-versa if they happen to feel some unease with their growing bodies during puberty. They get inundated in 'influencer' content trying to peddle them the latest make-up trends, the latest fashion fads and more such consumerist drivel. From the interview with the 'expert': “There’s a survey of pre-teens in the U.S. and China asking, ‘what is the most aspirational career that you want to have?’ and in the U.S., the No. 1 was a social media influencer, and in China, the No. 1 was astronaut,” Harris said. “You allow those two societies to play out for a few generations and I can tell you what your world is going to look like.”
Of course I did not only mention the CCP as a nefarious actor in the 'social' landscape, did you miss that? I pointed out the (decidedly home-grown) tech moguls as being just as guilty and while they may have tried to virtue signal with the 'progressives' when they were in power they're certainly not part of the 'red scare´ unless they're like Lenin's 'capitalists who will sell the Soviets the rope they will use to hang them'. I don't think they are, they're just fixated on growing their power and influence in pursuit of the almighty ${currency_unit}.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0j0xzuh-6rY
> Of course I did not only mention the CCP as a nefarious actor in the 'social' landscape, did you miss that?
No, of course not, and it feels like quite unfriendly rhetoric to suggest that I could have done just because I responded to a particular aspect of your position.
But now that we've dropped the pretense I can comfortably say that your opening paragraph comes across as insane; paranoid and in denial of science and composed in a way that strikes as if you just tried to shoe-horn in as many of your pet concerns as possible.
Could you explain what about my opening paragraph comes across as 'insane' and 'paranoid'? Are there inaccuracies which cause concern for you and if so could you point them out? As far as I see there are no such problems but if you can point them out I may change my mind. If you can not, well, in that case I can only conclude that this ad-hominem attack is the result of you not being able to debate the facts and as such feel like you have to resort to 'comfortably' defaming the character of the debater.
tl:dr; “why don’t you just”
Problems are there to be solved, not kvetched about. Responsibilities are there to be carried, not abandoned or pushed towards others. Also, comments are there to be commented upon, not "WOOT-lol'd".
[dead]
[dead]
> Bark places calls to law enforcement when it receives an alert about a kid threatening to harm themselves or others, he told me, but those alerts are reviewed by a human first. “We’re not swatting kids,” he said.
So any messages your kid sends to their friends could get routed to some random employee at this third-party service? Yikes.
I have a very skeptical worldview, and whenever I see any of these companies that offer to "protect your kids" by managing and monitoring their data, I always just assume they are gathering data to sell to advertisers.
And sure maybe they don't go into business with that mentality, but when the company inevitably goes under, the first thing they're going to do is sell off the data to the highest bidder.
Worse yet, I guarantee that some of the detection is done by feeding the kids' messages to cloud LLMs. Thanks, no thanks
And a couple of the apps are from companies from Utah, so putting them on your kids phones is basically outsourcing their online information flow to the Mormon Church.
if you gave your kid a device this is not an issue already. you are skeptical here but not when you allowed a child a device…?
I'd say the parents should moderate it... but I've seen how busy work and everything else leaves modern parents.
Society really needs to adjust to leave time for people to be humans, to correctly raise and guide the next generation into quality adults. We're really going to regret it when we end up in that cyberpunk dystopia ruled by corporations.
Or maybe people are just overeacting. In the 1950s there was a movement that claimed that comic books were evil and rotting kids' minds. When I was growing up in the 1970s and 1980s it was TV. Then it was video games. Now it's social media, Kids like to do things that (at least to parents) look like wasting time. But if the parents look back to their own childhoods, they weren't using their time that productively either.
It’s easy to suggest that this is the same scaremongering around media and new technologies occurred in the past, but I think that’s a mistake. The Internet, web forums, social media, etc. are different because of how people interact with them and because many of them use algorithms and dark patterns to manipulate and drive further engagement.
To make matters worse, malicious actors have demonstrably used them to manipulate public opinion and distribute propaganda. Studies around illusory truth have shown that familiarity can overcome rationality and critical thinking. IOW, no matter how much you know something to be a lie, if you hear it often enough, you’ll begin to believe it.
That’s all to say I think it’s important to be wary of how technology influences your life and consider how to cultivate balance in life that includes time away from devices to contemplate as well as to escape the machine.
Dungeons and Dragons was different, because it encouraged the confusion of fantasy with reality. But in the case of algorithm-driven social media feeds the difference is different, I take it?
The scale is bigger, I think that's the key thing. I can vaguely imagine an alternate history where D&D is as popular as TikTok, and then Russia and China are publishing their own Monster Manuals full of propaganda, and laws start to appear limiting it to over 18s due to the potential for brain rot as proven by studies.
> Dungeons and Dragons was different, because it encouraged the confusion of fantasy with reality
What. DnD isn't larping. Or what do you mean.
I tried to source who said this, presumably in the 80s, but struggled. The phrase "rumors regarding players having difficulty separating fantasy from reality" appears on Wikipedia, in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dragons#Moral_pan... but the sources aren't good (the page from theGamer is unrelated, maybe spam). https://web.archive.org/web/20200626110749/http://www.ptgptb... has a good history of the topic, but without mention of the fantasy/reality claim. The panic made it out to be a satanic cult that induces suicide and murder. This psychiatrist was involved: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Radecki ... however, I can't find the claim about the blurring of fantasy and reality, so maybe nobody made it, although it's kind of the theme of Mazes and Monsters.
I mean, you are supposed to play the character and pretend to be it. But most people don't even role play that much.
I have a really hard time seeing that what is fundamentally a dice rolling game would induce psychosis etc.
What. Even larping is not confusing. Are you claiming that actors in the film/ play actually are confused and they think they REALLY ARE the characters they play?
No, but actors don't decide what their characters do.
Also I don't claim larping is "confusing" to any extent, just that it would be relatively more confusing than DnD for people with a bad grasp on reality.
Maybe it's not worse, maybe it's just as bad, who knows?
I'd try to get my kids away from TV or comics just as hard as I tried to get my kids away from their phone.
There are of course real and worthwhile culture artifacts on any media, TikTok included, but we are talking about addiction here.
Our generation would have been so much better off without tv addiction!
(Comics? Yes, they have been well known vectors of propaganda for one, and favor in general an idiotically simple manichean worldview, and therefore an adult explaining to a kid why they are potentially harmful was also in order, no?)
I’m 75% sure there are peer reviewed studies that show social media use among teens is objectively harmful to them
As a professional scientist, I think it is important for people to understand that nearly any viewpoint can point to "peer reviewed" research supporting it. That isn't enough. You need to consider the size of the study, where it is published (there are thousands of journals and many of the lesser known ones have little or no serious peer review even if they claim to have it), and whether there are other studies contradicting it.
All of those things have been rotting kids minds for decades.
Look around. Rotted minds are common.
I tend to share your optimism, but it also seems smartphones have some very different qualities from previous tech. Yes, the sounds and images, but mostly a new kind of socially remote yet nearly instantaneous communication style.
And a surprising amount of sexting.
Getting to this: https://xkcd.com/1414/
I know I am an outlier case, but I am unable to function in society (or even individually) with an unrestricted smartphone. I'll literally not eat, not drink water, not sleep, miss all my classes, final exams, I'll miss the plane I booked a month earlier. I am 20yo, not a child either, but I have AuDHD. For years now I've implemented (often custom) solutions that allow me to use WhatsApp and $BANK_APP on a smartphone without having access to any sort of infinitely scrollable content. I'm living a fine life today - a moderately successful college student. Give me an unrestricted smartphone and you wouldn't be able to recognize my face after 3 days. In a week I'll likely be sick due to decreased immunity because of poor sleep, lack of nutrition & hydration and lack of self-care.
I don't think I'm alone in this, I've certainly seen similar anecdotes over the years. People who literally can't live with access to unrestricted smartphones - we exist. I'm glad to see these sort of "Alternative Device" movements - it surely is my longstanding dream to build a company that produces just that, a smart device you can't abuse, a bicycle for the mind with support wheels. Not everybody is healthy enough to ride a normal bicycle - people with disabilities will fall over and injure themselves if you put them on one, or worse, if you force them to use one.
I understand the self-control aspect - I'm trying to build it with various approaches. I hope I'll get it figured out before my 30s. It's something so many healthy neurotypical people take for granted, yet there is a minority who just can't.
I have not gotten a smartphone in part because I know how much even laptop access distracts me, to the point where I'll go places which have no wifi, like a park, just to get work done.
I felt less alone after finding "Swapping 5G for 3G: Motivations, Experiences, and Implications of Contemporary Dumbphone Adoption" at https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3637402 last year as it told me there were others who felt similarly.
> Another group of participants (the second ideological grouping) saw dumbphones as a tool for defending their attention spans from smartphones. These participants described smartphones as “a hungry monster” for attention (U3-27) and an “itch in your pocket” (U5-28). Switching to a dumbphone was described by U6-41 as releasing an anchor that had been tightened around their waist. Reflecting on their time as smartphone users, these participants reported feeling that they had been missing out on meaningful activities – e.g., personal connections, shared moments with loved ones, and reading books. Instead, they engaged in activities like doomscrolling or, “the action of compulsively scrolling through social media or news feeds which relate to bad news.” Experiencing distraction was annoying for many participants, but for others it took a physical and mental toll. Having two children diagnosed with Autism spectrum disorders, U6-41 empathizes with the endless capabilities, settings, and launchers of the smartphone as not only “overwhelming” but “terrifying”.
I know a small community that avoids smartphones, and you can indeed feel the clear-mindedness energy emanate when you go to their place.
Reading the paper you linked, thanks.
Jaron Lanier had a bit that there’s a subset of the population who can’t handle social media, it totally warps their minds. There’s some famous examples, but I’ve seen in with friends.
I can’t quite relate because even a minute on TikTok makes me want to vomit. But I really dislike the idea that it’s the user’s fault for not having discipline or having some unspecified psychological quirk; the application is working on them exactly the way it was designed to.
Over the years of not using social media because I can't handle it, I arrived at the definitive conclusion that any form of social media (including HN) modifies a person's worldview, life goals, personality and behavior to significant degrees. I came to call this "ungrounding", it's in effect a detachment from how they would think and act if they were exposed to only the real world and not the artificial world that doesn't even exist.
Little people remember anymore, but a decade ago people used to remark how the personality and manner of behavior of somebody they know changed when they got their first smartphone.
This effect doesn't skip anybody, can be caused by plain old cable TV and very little use (about 30 mins./day) is enough. When I completely cut artificial content years ago, it took about 3 months for me to feel the veil lifted from my eyes and able to see the real world as-is and not through the lens of the content I consumed. It was a profound feeling when I first realized what happened to me, and it left me thinking and pitying all others I knew who are trapped with thought patterns unmatching their reality - most otherwise good, hardworking people.
They didn't realize the lenses being put on (because it happened so slowly) and now they don't know the world isn't quite the way they see it is. No matter whether they see it as rose-colored or black-and-white, with an optimistic hue or a pessimistic blue, because of the fake, narrow representations they get exposed to regularly.
It's almost like a mind virus, and you know what? It's immediately recognizable to me, the glossy eyes when they start to talk about X thing and Y event and Z news that all are actually totally irrelevant for them if they'd stop to think about it, yet they for some mysterious reason they put a high importance on them and talk about it as if it's life and death. I believe anybody who drops artificial content and re-grounds with reality will be able to readily see how captive the minds of their very loved ones are.
Note: No AI was used in this comment, it's late at night and I'm in a particularly productive mood.
I've heard of people losing interest in all of that infinitely scrollable shit once they start taking GLP-1 drugs for weight loss. Makes sense, seems to dampen the dopamine system a bit.
Indeed my problem is just that. IMHO ADHD should be renamed to Dopamine Dysregulation Disorder. In my experience it's a total analogue to diabetes if you swap glucose with dopamine.
Greed as the only engine of human enterprise turns out to have negative social effects over and over again.
it's not that tv or social media must inherently be evil, but when the motivations for building platforms is mind control and market share, and the entity is a collection of contracts designed to allow exploitation of all and sundry concerned we should probably stop and say, hey Adam, your invisible hand is choking me.
society should own some things, including rail networks, data networks, and large media intended for mass societal conversations.
Can't we have a law saying that all devices should be general purpose computing devices, owned by the owner? Then any device can be turned into an "alternative" device, whatever you think that means.
This isn't what I expected from this article, this seems to me less about "alternative devices", and more about devices that are aiming specifically to keep kids safe, which deserves a focus in and of itself.
But also, most of these devices are just implementing software, the device isn't the important part.
There is truly some interesting work happening in device world atm, and I think it is a combination of the desire for a change of behaviors from our phones, as well as new possibilities of what devices can do.
I work in the neurotech/sleeptech space, and we're one of a few companies that are building consumer level EEG devices. The others are trying to sell, "fall asleep faster" tech (with limited scientific backing), we're focused on enhancing the restorative function of sleep (https://affectablesleep.com). Neurotech in general is really interesting right now with a few other use cases around measuring focus and specifically re-training focus (https://www.neurodelabs.com/), depression treatment (https://www.flowneuroscience.com/), and many more.
I also find the augmented reality glasses space really interesting.
To me, these are "Alternative Devices", the article really just points out "different phones".
Part of the reason, I believe, we are seeing these new devices, along with the need, is that it is getting less expensive to develop and prototype small scale devices.
When I started programming, the LAMP stack was new, and people we raving about how easy it was to get started, then came RoR, then node, and with each new change in language, from download to working code got easier and easier.
Hardware is still challenging, but I suspect we may be at the LAMP stack level, and over the next decade, it will also become easier.
To be honest, I think the Alternate Devices in a form of a _new smartphone_ miss the point. All current Android smartphones could be dumbified to the same level with the matter of installing appropriate software, no need to buy anything special (and usually rather expensive). I see only an attempt to earn profit in such devices.
What I would like to see is a feature phones with the essential functions of a smartphone: proper messengers, proper maps and navigation, but many different form factors and 1+ week of a battery life. This is all possible with the current-generation 4G chips, which have sufficient performance (1GHz ARM core of Unisoc T107/T117/T127 for example).
If you're just tired of checking the phone when the notification comes in to understand whether it is important or not, you're looking for so-called 'calm technology device' — just buy a wristband like Xiaomi Band and it will send the notifications to your wrist, you won't need to touch the smartphone, which is especially helpful on the street or in a crowded place.
one thing I like about the LightPhone is that it uses an e-paper screen so the battery lasts 2 weeks.
This is so dumb.
If kids are to be given a device, it needs to be a dumb Nokia brick or similar with no cameras or apps. Texting and calling. That's it.
They can't send nudes if they don't have access to a camera. They can't get dick pics if the phone can't show them.
Put the phones away before dinner to charge overnight. Give them back in the morning after breakfast before they go to school.