[HN Gopher] Dad takes down town's internet by mistake to get his...
___________________________________________________________________
Dad takes down town's internet by mistake to get his kids offline
Author : FridayoLeary
Score : 195 points
Date : 2022-02-18 15:23 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bleepingcomputer.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bleepingcomputer.com)
| irrational wrote:
| One of the best things we invested in is a Circle device. All
| kid's devices have the Circle VPN. Through it we can turn off
| their Internet access at certain times, give them a time limit on
| certain applications or websites, easily monitor what they are
| doing from our own phones, etc.
| [deleted]
| YaBomm wrote:
| bitwize wrote:
| Wow, a dad really did cut the internet down:
| https://youtu.be/ricmZy9VZMM
| 14 wrote:
| midnight until 3am is a weird time imo. Midnight is way to late
| for a child to be up I started cutting my kids off at 9pm but at
| the router as I won't pay for them to have a cell service and was
| experiencing the same issue with my oldest kid. Is there a way
| you can do the same thing for cellular signals? I guess my
| solution would be to just take the phone at 9pm. Also I would
| punish my kid for repeatedly ignore my rules.
| AndroidKitKat wrote:
| I know you're being downvoted, but when I was young, my parents
| were able to turn off mobile data between set hours through our
| carrier (Verizon Wireless). It might have required paid
| parental controls, but I don't think so.
|
| They claimed it was to make sure the phones didn't chew through
| our small datacaps at night in case things went down, but it
| had the effect you were looking for.
| nelsondev wrote:
| Just curious, when you tried explaining to your child the
| importance of sleep and negative health impacts of late night
| social media, what was the reaction?
|
| I'm curious what led to wifi being turned off rather than kid
| personally convinced to do it.
| acuozzo wrote:
| Not OP, but my parents tried that back in 1997 when I was
| nine.
|
| My solution? I'd fake being asleep, wait for them to go to
| bed, and then sneak over to the computer room and turn it on.
|
| I did this nearly every night for a long, long time.
| progman32 wrote:
| I knew full well as a kid that poor sleep was bad. Between a
| night owl body and school schedules lacking any compassion or
| space for significant self development, I felt the trade-off
| was worth it. Kids are smart, and I've found them responsive
| when engaged with respect from an early age.
| dav_Oz wrote:
| If I were go to such great lengths and finally resort to order a
| multi-frequency signal jammer isn't the next follow-up question:
| Is it powerful enough? Or could it disrupt like ... I don't know
| ... 911 calls in the vicinity? No experimenting? Really
| desperate, I guess.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| I mean, yes; part of the reason that these jammers are illegal
| is that it'll happily wipe out all service, including 911, in
| the affected area.
| txsoftwaredev wrote:
| What happened to just hiding the power cord or keyboard :) That's
| what worked for my parents when I was growing up. But we also
| only had one "family" computer as the internet and PCs were
| expensive.
| jdkjs wrote:
| "By mistake"? This was absolutely criminal. And since this is a
| very small town (<1000), knowing the kind of people who live in
| small towns, I could very well believe this is a case of "fuck
| everybody else"
| fatcat500 wrote:
| right, because people who live in small towns are known for
| their knowledge of electromagnetism
| dsign wrote:
| There is conflicting information about how bad is the Internet
| for kids[^1], but assuming we find out it is bad, and kids must
| be disconnected at any cost or (put something terrible here),
| then it could be a good business idea to create "parental
| suburbs" in the middle of nowhere (say, mountainous region
| scarcely populated with very bad weather) with no Internet
| access. Because only family with kids would ever like to live
| there, the kids themselves would get plenty of kids in the
| neighborhood to play with. And goats and border collies. Beats
| Meta.
|
| [^1] I for one think that more physical activity would be good
| (and that can be achieved with VR, but that's not neither there
| nor here), and that girls and boys tend to like more the athletic
| type of the opposite/same sex (/sighs)
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| > but assuming we find out it is bad, and kids must be
| disconnected at any cost
|
| Maybe, but that's a _really_ big precondition.
| progman32 wrote:
| I could see this working only in very narrow cases. Closing
| doors to kids seems higher risk to their future than risks
| posed by some parts of the internet. If it's not the internet
| addiction machine it's gambling. If it's not gambling it's
| drugs. If it isn't drugs it's any of a wide variety of self
| destructive behavior. Towns where these things don't exist are
| fantasy.
|
| Imagine coming of age in such a place and trying to find
| meaningful work without any net skills. I'd imagine it's a huge
| disadvantage. For example, consistent net access from an early
| age (and respectful parents that mostly recognized my autonomy)
| gave me such a huge boost in my self confidence and career. It
| made me more self reliant, too.
| [deleted]
| Overtonwindow wrote:
| I'm not saying he was right, but I understand.
| exhilaration wrote:
| My favorite jammer story is the truck driver who wanted to jam
| his employer's GPS tracker. Except he regularly drove by Newark
| Airport in New Jersey and was blocking GPS signals used by the
| air traffic control system. Story from 2013:
| https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/truck-driver-has-...
| dbrueck wrote:
| Parenting is hard, but if you ever find yourself in a situation
| where you are doing weird stuff because your kids completely
| disregard family rules, just stop. There are more fundamental
| issues that need to be addressed first, and your kids will almost
| certainly get around whatever you're trying to do anyway.
| recursive wrote:
| > There are more fundamental issues that need to be addressed
| first
|
| I mean maybe so, but if I knew what they were, I'd already be
| doing them. This advice doesn't seem like it could help anyone.
| ouid wrote:
| If you are actually in this position, then you should
| understand that the advice is not to fix the other issues,
| but to _stop_ doing what you are currently doing, not because
| it 's not working, although that is a very good reason to
| stop expending the energy, but because it's making the
| situation worse.
| recursive wrote:
| I'm not _really_ in this position, but the advice sounds
| way too general and blunt for it to be generally useful.
| quacked wrote:
| I think it is too blunt; the sort-of truth around the
| matter is that the "stuff you have to stop doing" is
| often entirely out of reach for most parents.
|
| In many families, the adults are both working full- or
| overtime jobs, the children are at school or in school-
| adjacent activities (commuting, extracurriculars,
| homework, etc.) for 9+ hours per day, and 90% of parent-
| child interactions are rule-reinforcement (Did you do
| your homework? Did you put your shoes away? Haven't you
| already used your screens for an hour?)
|
| Actual concrete advice, which is "have one parent leave
| the workforce so they have more time to parent, reject
| destructive social norms at the family level, and move
| away from bad social environments" is not only
| financially impossible for most, but for those that it
| _is_ possible for may find that they still can 't reach
| their children, because their children have already
| adopted a "reject-parent" identity and will continue to
| prefer online-and-friends over offline-and-family.
|
| The most useful advice that I think that any parent can
| take is to learn about what the world is _really_ like to
| a kid or teenager, not what it appears to be [1]. It is
| very difficult to do this, because you have to enter a
| mindset where a child is not a subsidiary of their
| parents, but rather a totally foreign and separate
| entity, capable of the same depths of rage, cruelty,
| laziness, vindictiveness, passion, joy, etc. [2] No Gen-X
| parent I know models their kids like this; they reserve
| the true spectrum of emotion for themselves and their age
| cohort, and treat their children as less-able to think
| and feel.
|
| [1] = (http://www.paulgraham.com/addiction.html#:~:text=T
| he%20world....)
|
| [2] = As a example, I often hear parents discuss with
| amazement the shenanigans that their kids (even up to and
| around pre-teen) will pull when video games are
| restricted: full-body tantrums, claims of hatred,
| physical violence, etc. From the parents' perspective,
| their child is being completely unreasonable and upset
| over inconsequential things, but the parent is assigning
| their _own_ assessment of consequence to the video games,
| and not accepting their child 's version. To the child,
| these games often represent the only hours in their life
| when they feel excited, proud, and free; to deprive them
| of this gives them the short-term chemical emotions that
| an adult might feel if their house burned down.
| bnralt wrote:
| > From the parents' perspective, their child is being
| completely unreasonable and upset over inconsequential
| things, but the parent is assigning their own assessment
| of consequence to the video games, and not accepting
| their child's version. To the child, these games often
| represent the only hours in their life when they feel
| excited, proud, and free; to deprive them of this gives
| them the short-term chemical emotions that an adult might
| feel if their house burned down.
|
| True, but I'm sure a heroin addict would say the same
| thing about being deprived of heroin. At a certain point
| it's a parent's duty to limit destructive addictions. And
| these social media networks and games are made to be
| extremely addictive, companies spend billions of dollars
| on this goal.
|
| Part of the problem is, like you've said, most kids are
| going to be spending a lot of their time not with their
| parents, but with other kids. You can tell them what you
| want at home, but then you're sending them off to a
| school full of addicts, almost all of whom are exerting
| an immense social pressure on your kid to partake.
| sidewndr46 wrote:
| What is with the nonstop comparison of video games to
| hard drugs? There is no basis for comparing an activity
| of a person to the administration of chemicals that
| directly affect the physical and mental state of someone.
|
| Under this train of thought, the following activities
| could be considered "addictions" for me
|
| 1. Getting up in the morning
|
| 2. Making breakfast
|
| 3. Going to work
|
| 4. Spending time with friends
|
| 5. Walking around the neighborhood
|
| 6. Going to the park
|
| 7. Riding my bicycle
|
| 8. Working on my house
|
| 9. Lifting weights
|
| I could list many more things, but I think I have made my
| point. You tell me I can't do any of those things and I'm
| going to be very upset. The only difference is that as an
| adult I realize there are other things I can seek out as
| alternative activities. I also fundamentally _more_
| activities than most children. Take away all of what I
| just listed and I am going to be exceptionally irate. Is
| there any individual in society which we expect to
| tolerate a removal of almost all of the activities in
| their life which they selected? Even prisoners get access
| to a library to prepare their own legal defense or
| educate themselves as they see fit.
|
| Children have nearly zero autonomy in the US nowadays,
| the opportunity to participate in an interactive world
| (even a single player city building game for example) is
| one of the limited times they have a high level of
| autonomy. Suggesting that those activities are equivalent
| to hard drug addiction is facetious.
| quacked wrote:
| Have you ever done hard drugs?
|
| Edit: This is being downvoted; if someone wanted to
| disagree, they could respond and say "yes, I have both
| done hard drugs and played superstimulating video games
| as a nine-year-old, and there's no comparison".
|
| I _have_ done both, and I think the comparison is valid.
| quacked wrote:
| > At a certain point it's a parent's duty to limit
| destructive addictions. And these social media networks
| and games are made to be extremely addictive, companies
| spend billions of dollars on this goal.
|
| Yes, I agree. I actually typed out a bit about my own
| experience with playing Gameboy at 10 and comparing it to
| drinking and partying at 21, but I didn't end up
| appending it to my comment.
|
| It's one of those things that parents don't get--modern
| stuff (video games, social media) is like heroin for
| kids. You can't just give them "an hour of heroin time"
| per week and then expect them to think about anything
| else for the periods of time you suspend them from it.
|
| When I was younger, I could think about playing Donkey
| Kong Country for literal days at a time. I'd imagine
| levels in my head, draw pictures, stare at old video game
| ads, hum the music to myself, and once I made a cardboard
| Gameboy and pretended to play it to scratch the itch. My
| life was measured as blocks of time in between playing
| DKC. My parents didn't get how single-minded I was and
| thought that by "restricting it" they could redirect my
| attention to other, more wholesome things. Impossible. I
| am so thankful I didn't have unlimited internet access or
| Fortnite when I was younger.
| nonbirithm wrote:
| I'm thinking there should be a new term for these kind of
| addictions to activities that remained socially
| acceptable for decades despite globalization and
| increased media scrutiny. Saying that you "watch videos"
| or "play video games" can now have drastically different
| implications based on the unstated degree of the
| activity. And some degrees of these activities have been
| gradually distorted beyond recognition from their
| counterparts in the 80's and 90's when nobody asked the
| question of how much was enough. Actual hard drugs were
| never going to gain mainstream acceptance because they're
| addictive and destructive by their physical nature. In
| contrast, a "game you can't put down" can be interpreted
| as a piece of critical acclaim for an indie developer or
| a dire alarm for the guardians of the consumers.
|
| It is a sobering thought to hypothesize that, due to
| incentives beyond our control, the most earnest and hard-
| working creative minds inadvertently feed the addictions
| of millions of people. Whenever I look at the view counts
| of a successful creator, I have to wonder what percentage
| of the people behind those views specifically asked to be
| shown the content.
|
| Having been subjected to strict time limits on
| electronics when I was growing up, they didn't do much
| except to make me a more bitter person. As an adult I now
| spend the majority of my time on a computer. I don't
| consider myself addicted to personal computers
| specifically, but that is what's most sinister about
| addictions such as these - it's a socially acceptable
| drug that still changes some peoples' lives for the
| better, and is in some cases necessary to participate in
| modern society. That acts as a mental wedge to excuse the
| addictive parts that aren't yet held to the same standard
| to other addictions on a whole - "watching videos" or
| "playing video games".
|
| I have to wonder if it's something intrinsic to human
| nature that leads people down pathways such as these.
| Many kinds of media feed on our curiosity, which we're
| taught is an important virtue growing up. And I think
| curiosity tends to motivate us to find better and more
| effective ways at succeeding, such as developing and
| shipping a game that receives critical acclaim and breaks
| sales records. But soon we might have to start judging
| ourselves on metrics besides how successful we are, if
| success is based on how well our thoughts can capture the
| hearts and minds and attention spans of the world
| population.
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| This. We are above average US earnings for the region and
| we do not feel comfortable leaving current dual income
| setup. It is ridiculous, because on paper, we should be
| able to.
|
| The simple reality is that we will need to make some
| adjustments to make it happen though, because we both see
| it as a desirable outcome.
|
| I have yet to deal with real child issues ( and I know I
| was a terror to my parents ), but having time is a pre-
| requisite to not slap a simple 'solution' on the problem.
| quacked wrote:
| I am sorry to hear that but I am also not surprised.
| Time, money, and support from other friends/family are
| _essential_ for avoiding serious internal family strife,
| and those are the three resources that are stripped from
| by any go-getter in a wealthy country merely by the act
| of moving up in the world.
| dbrueck wrote:
| Just to break it down a bit more (and with this
| particular article we are speculating some since there
| aren't a lot of details, but the situation in the article
| sure looks similar to what parents deal with a lot):
|
| 1) With anything, it's good to take a step back and ask
| yourself if you're addressing a symptom or a problem.
| Again, don't have a lot of details, but this sure looks
| like the dad was addressing a symptom. This doesn't solve
| anything (and the problem will manifest again 10
| different ways later), it almost certainly does more harm
| to the relationship, and it leads to everyone feeling
| terrible.
|
| 2) It's easy to /think/ you'd tackle the problem if you
| knew what it was, but that's often not true at all. This
| probably applies to all relationships, but as a parent at
| least it's often much easier to fixate on a symptom. If I
| suspect my kid is lying to me often, it's realllly easy
| to go down the rabbit hole of trying to come up with ways
| to catch them and then to punish them, and it's far
| harder to focus on healing/strengthening the
| relationship, getting to the bottom of why the kid feels
| the need to lie, confronting the flaws in my parenting
| style etc. :)
| dbrueck wrote:
| Yes, thank you for saying it more clearly than I did.
| turtlebits wrote:
| Set expectations, boundaries and define responsible use
| beforehand.
|
| Teach self-control.
|
| Talk to your kids and have discussions instead of resorting
| to passive aggressive style parenting.
| zamalek wrote:
| > This advice doesn't seem like it could help anyone.
|
| I did sneaky shit to get around my parents' rules when I was
| a kid, most people here probably did. To some degree kids
| need to learn how to push boundaries, for everything else
| device related there's MDM[1].
|
| There are MDM solutions that are specifically for parenting.
|
| [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_device_management
| josephcsible wrote:
| If it's possible for a parent to set up MDM in a way that a
| child can't remove, then what's stopping a domestic abuser
| from setting up MDM in a way the victim can't remove?
| scythe wrote:
| The police. If you're an adult and someone messed with
| your phone, you have [or should have] a case under CFAA
| or some similar law. It's basically a blinking neon sign
| that says "abusive partner".
|
| A simplified comparison: if it's possible for a parent to
| take away a kid's phone, what prevents a domestic abuser
| from taking away their victim's phone?
| josephcsible wrote:
| > The police. If you're an adult and someone messed with
| your phone, you have [or should have] a case under CFAA
| or some similar law. It's basically a blinking neon sign
| that says "abusive partner".
|
| If "just go to the police" were an option for all
| domestic abuse victims, I'd expect that there'd already
| be plenty of other blinking neon signs they could point
| to.
|
| > A simplified comparison: if it's possible for a parent
| to take away a kid's phone, what prevents a domestic
| abuser from taking away their victim's phone?
|
| The difference is that the phone doesn't sprout legs and
| run away from the victim, or otherwise assist the abuser
| in taking it away.
| scythe wrote:
| >If "just go to the police" were an option for all
| domestic abuse victims, I'd expect that there'd already
| be plenty of other blinking neon signs they could point
| to.
|
| Not really. Proving domestic abuse is _not_ easy. It 's
| mostly "he said, she said" until somebody ends up in the
| ER. That's why restraining orders are so common, because
| the evidence available won't lead to a conviction, but
| the legal system still wants to provide some kind of
| protection to victims, even though the protection
| afforded by a restraining order isn't that reliable. A
| big limitation for victims in going to the police is that
| if there isn't evidence to convict, the system does not
| effectively protect them from retaliation.
|
| Now, on the other hand, if you can produce a device with
| some software illegally installed on it, you've got
| physical evidence that can be presented in front of a
| jury leading to a felony conviction. It's easily more
| reliable than most evidence used to prove abuse, which
| tends to be testimonial.
|
| A remarkably high proportion of abusers walk away _even
| when the police have been involved_ , cf Brian Laundrie
| and Gabby Petito. So no, there are not plenty of blinking
| neon signs. There are almost never blinking neon signs.
|
| >The difference is that the phone doesn't sprout legs and
| run away from the victim, or otherwise assist the abuser
| in taking it away.
|
| This is trivial and irrelevant.
| SteveNuts wrote:
| Nothing is stopping that from happening and there are
| many many apps that give you very granular control and
| reporting on phones, sometimes in very sneaky ways.
| joezydeco wrote:
| Apple came out and said MDM was not a suitable way to do
| parental device control and could pose a security risk,
| which killed apps like OurPact.
|
| https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-is-nixing-iphone-
| pare...
|
| Was it meant to promote ScreenTime? Perhaps. But ScreenTime
| is another iOS feature that was highly touted at first and
| then became a neglected unusable mess in the years since.
|
| Honestly, I don't blame the guy for setting up a signal
| jammer because the whole cat-and-mouse game you play with
| teens is fucking exhausting.
| yonaguska wrote:
| My parents simply chose to not have internet. We used an
| old WRT router to boost the neighbors wifi, cracked it,
| and then had free internet. They had no idea.
| cwmoreiras wrote:
| I would be proud of my kid if they did that. I would
| ground them, but proudly.
| ngngngng wrote:
| My dad would take the modem with him to work, and when he
| was at home using the internet he would turn it on, wait
| for it to boot, load a web page, and then turn it back
| off until he needed to load another webpage. That was the
| only way he actually stopped me from getting to the
| internet, but it was a too much effort and he didn't keep
| it up for long.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Statute of Limitations, but...
|
| A "friend's" parents chose to go without a phone. My
| "friend" realizing how simple the old phone systems were
| rewired the second line of "his" parents' house to the
| line of a neighbor from a near by junction between
| houses. "He" would have to quietly pick up the phone to
| see if the line was free, and quietly hang up if not to
| try later. It worked well for a period of time until "he"
| forgot to unplug the phone before leaving. "His" parents
| were quite surprised when the phone in "his" room started
| ringing.
| bityard wrote:
| Oh man. I too have a "friend" with a similar story.
| Except my friend was connected to a pay phone line at a
| nearby store and managed to route the line all the way
| into his bedroom via existing unused pairs along the way.
| All so that he could dial into long-distance BBSes.
| (Because there were none locally.)
|
| Eventually the phone company caught on and probably
| _could_ have charged my friend with theft of services or
| something, but instead just disconnected the rogue line
| and put a lock on the payphone interface box and placed a
| large "property of the telco" sticker on it. Probably
| dodged a significant bullet there, in retrospect.
| mmsimanga wrote:
| Speaking of pushing boundaries. Parents in the generation
| had to get a physical box with a padlock in which the phone
| was placed. You could still pick up the handle to answer a
| call but you couldn't reach the dial. Some figured out how
| to tap dial but I never did.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Well, it's meant to be broad-based. Like if your friend
| called you, saying "Can I borrow your fire extinguisher; my
| Internet isn't working", you can say "Whatever you're doing,
| it's likely to be wrong" and you're most likely correct! Of
| course, since that is a two-way channel you would ask for
| clarification after.
|
| That second part is unavailable here.
| bachmeier wrote:
| My thoughts exactly. It's as helpful as telling people to not
| be poor. I've known parents doing all kinds of things to
| prevent their drug-addicted kids from getting drugs. Yes,
| there are fundamental issues, and yes, it would be nice to
| resolve them, but in the meantime you do what it takes to
| stop your kids from getting their hands on drugs.
| prpl wrote:
| What is "weird stuff"?
|
| I have actually set up two different ssid's and the kids only
| connect to one, but I haven't enabled time limits on theirs
| (yet). I need to, because the 13 year old doesn't understand
| not to use devices which don't have easy parental controls
| (switch) at night.
|
| Previously I also edited /etc/hosts to localhost youtube, which
| was most effective (but not available on iOS/switch.
|
| The big cause of the problem? Fortnite. I would love to just
| kill Fortnite but it would also mean disconnection from part of
| his social network (which he is experiencing currently)
|
| So anyway, as a parent, you are up against a social network and
| an addicting game company - the odds are stacked against you.
| causi wrote:
| The Switch has pretty robust parental controls; you can even
| control it remotely from a smartphone.
| AvocadoPanic wrote:
| I force all devices on my network to use my local ADGuard
| DNS. Maintaining host files is too much administrative
| effort.
| teawrecks wrote:
| If _any_ device has coherent parental controls it 's the
| Switch.
| prpl wrote:
| I know I need to download the app, but I have been
| procrastinating and I _just_ figured out ScreenTime
| reliably (annoyingly it doesn't share properly with his
| Macbook either, and it's buggy a bit there too)
| lostlogin wrote:
| You don't need any help by the sounds of it, but her is some
| unsolicited advise anyway.
|
| A Pihole gives a nice GUI to what you are doing, and has some
| nice config options.
| 123pie123 wrote:
| PiHole is just DNSmasq (unless it has newer features?)
|
| my teenage kids have figured how to get around that
| lostlogin wrote:
| I think I like them!
|
| Wonder if you can channel their abilities somewhere.
| hannob wrote:
| > What is "weird stuff"?
|
| Doing something that is clearly illegal to stop your kids
| from accessing the Internet certainly is. Bonus points if it
| is also heavily enforced and easily traceable. All of that is
| true for using a signal jammer.
| passivate wrote:
| >There are more fundamental issues that need to be addressed
| first, and your kids will almost certainly get around whatever
| you're trying to do anyway.
|
| I'd bet most parents intuitively know this, the problem is
| nothing they have tried has worked. How have you solved this
| problem?
| dbrueck wrote:
| At the risk of oversimplifying: if you have a problem with
| something but the kid does not see it as a problem at all,
| and it doesn't give them much pause that you consider it to
| be a problem, then that's a problem. :) Any rules you try to
| enforce will be circumvented, ignored, or hurt your
| relationship.
|
| That doesn't mean you get rid of the rules - you still need
| to be the parent - but you need to put at least equal focus
| on coming to a shared understanding of why it's a problem, or
| building a relationship where they can have some faith that
| you might be able to see a danger where they don't, or seeing
| the wisdom in at least temporarily agreeing to some rules
| that they don't totally "get" yet.
| passivate wrote:
| You're defining end-states and goals, e.g. - 'focus on
| coming to a shared understanding of why it's a problem' and
| 'building a relationship where they can have some faith
| that you might be able to see a danger where they don't',
| etc.
|
| While that is great, I think the problem parents have is
| with the steps/process to get there. What works for one
| child won't work for the other, etc. Like I said, the
| problem isn't that parents don't know these things, the
| problem is stuff they're trying isn't working.
| dbrueck wrote:
| Hmm... maybe. Since we're generalizing, I'll throw
| another generalization on the pile. :) Most parents are
| slow to react to these problems but, once they do react,
| they want fast results and so they are tempted to reach
| for actions that are unhelpful or even counterproductive.
|
| When parents approach it with a mindset of realistic
| expectations (especially around timeframes), I think most
| of them can in fact figure out things that work (where
| 'work' means 'lead to improvement over time'). There are
| always some kids who simply don't respond, but speaking
| generally, I believe most do.
| tomhallett wrote:
| Are there any books that anyone recommends?
|
| We do our best to limit screen time, but you can tell it's all
| they think about sometimes. When we say "You can play nintendo
| switch when your friends come over", their brains kick-in like
| limitless -- "i need to charge the controllers now, so they
| don't run out of battery. 2 need the usb cables while 1 needs
| more AA batteries". In comparison to when I recommend doing
| something creative, I have to push through "if you want to
| draw, the paper is on your desk"....
| yurishimo wrote:
| I did this sometimes as a kid. 28 now. I think they'll grow
| out of it. Alternatively, you could try to encourage better
| habits around charging after they're done playing.
|
| Which creative medium they use I don't think I care as much
| about. The reality is that screens aren't going away. If they
| want to draw on an iPad, I'd allow it.
| djaychela wrote:
| How old are your kids?
| dbrueck wrote:
| 4 kids, 18-26 years old.
| djaychela wrote:
| Then you've done a better job than me! I was expecting you
| to say 5 or something. I've totally failed with my four
| step kids (15-23). Three have been involved in all sorts or
| shenanigans (all of which have involved the police, social
| workers and huge amounts of distress). We have good
| communication, an open, tolerant family culture where we
| talk about issues, and still three of the four have gone
| off the rails in truly "You must be making this story up"
| ways. I've tried to model appropriate behaviour (I'm not
| manacled to my phone, and I've been way ahead of the curve
| on phone use and social media's effect, but I've not
| stopped them from doing it as 'everyone is on there', and
| they think I'm an old man who doesn't know what he's
| talking about). I dread every phone call I get from my
| partner when they're not 'scheduled' as it's nearly always
| another disaster.
|
| What I'm saying is that I could easily be the guy in this
| story, because short of a blackout, I've got kids on VPNs
| who are looking at extreme content (because everyone they
| know does, apparently), thinking QAnon is real, etc., and
| whose capacity for disrupting everyone around them without
| a moment's thought of anyone but themselves knows no
| bounds. Pandora's box is open, and I have no idea how to
| close it. On dark evenings when we've had another gut-
| wrenching round of horror stories, I'd probably buy one if
| I knew where to get one.
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| It's probably not your fault. My dad couldn't control me.
| I never got into trouble with the police, but I could
| easily imagine a version of myself that felt compelled to
| do so. And then my dad (and I) would've been in real
| trouble.
|
| Don't let it bug you. People are how they are, more often
| than not. And your kiddos will probably relax in a decade
| or so when their testosterone levels start to drop.
| dbrueck wrote:
| > I've totally failed with my four step kids (15-23)
|
| I don't know you or your kids, but I can almost guarantee
| that this is not true at all, so please don't tell
| yourself that. You don't take credit for their good
| traits and accomplishments, right? :)
|
| There are way too many variables involved, the largest
| being that they are each independent people. You have no
| idea how they would have turned out had you not been in
| their life - for all you know, things would have been
| much worse and your involvement was one of the things
| that made the difference. And their stories aren't
| finished yet... people figure things out at different
| times; they may yet turn out just fine and look back with
| gratitude to a stepdad who didn't write them off even
| though they gave him every reason to.
| abyssin wrote:
| I agree with you, but I'm curious if you could offer some
| specific measures to assess what these fundamental issues are.
| dbrueck wrote:
| A good starting place for assessing is on communication-
| related things like: do we regularly just talk with our kid?
| How does that go? Are we able to talk about anything it depth
| or is it just superficial "how was school today" stuff? How
| much of our interactions are tense or even contentious?
|
| If communication is in a decent state, then another thing to
| look at is the rules for the kids, like: have we really given
| our kid a chance to weigh in on things or do we just dictate?
| As a parent you do sometimes just have to put your foot down,
| but there's a world of difference between shutting down
| pushback with "I'm the parent and that's the way it is" and a
| collaborative attitude and an open conversation with real
| listening and sharing of viewpoints/concerns and, where
| appropriate, some compromising. Are our rules based on solid
| principles or just things we pulled out of the air?
|
| The article mentioned that the kids were addicted to social
| media. If it's an actual addiction, then that probably needs
| to be addressed with professional help. If it's more a
| compulsion/habit, then good communication is again key. Does
| the kid agree it's excessive but isn't sure how to reign it
| in? Or does the kid genuinely think it's just fine? Gotta
| figure that out first, but in either case, jamming the signal
| to their phones doesn't really address the problem.
| thesuitonym wrote:
| I'm not saying this is bad advice, but I don't feel like
| you're really thinking about the issue. If the child is
| spending all day on his phone, how do you think trying
| ``communication'' is going to go?
|
| If you don't take the phone away, the child won't interact
| at all, beyond the superficial, ``school was fine.'' If you
| do take the phone away, do you really believe interactions
| won't be tense or contentious?
| dbrueck wrote:
| Haha, I'm definitely thinking of the issue; I've raised
| several kids and this is stuff we dealt with all the
| time. It's not easy and as a parent you screw up a ton
| because you're usually figuring it out as you go and
| making lots of mistakes along the way. :)
|
| These sorts of issues aren't things you address in a
| moment. Yeah, if you suddenly take a phone away, you kid
| will likely blow up. But the problem wasn't created in a
| moment, either. Things got to a bad place over time so
| it's unsurprising that improving them takes time.
| Further, in the heat of the moment everyone (including
| the parents) are less even-keeled, so most progress
| happens when tempers are cool.
|
| One thing we did for awhile was, as a family, we came up
| with the rule that from 5-7pm (IIRC) each night there
| were no devices/screens and we had to be around each
| other during that time. (We settled on that after a
| family discussion and some back and forth negotiating,
| but eventually everyone committed to it.) We did it for
| /months/ before I felt like it really paid off, but
| eventually every one of the kids recognized that we were
| stronger as a family and that they actually enjoyed the
| screen breaks. And one side effect of it was that we all
| started talking to each other a lot more, but again, it
| was a slow process. What works varies by family and
| changes over time as the family changes, but the
| meaningful changes seem to always take a lot of time.
| idontwantthis wrote:
| I thought kids could set their own boundaries with tech (like I
| did), but I no longer believe that's possible. The internet is
| like a drug and sometimes you need to take drastic measures to
| keep your kids safe from it.
|
| I got my kid on all Apple devices and set screen time to
| completely block him out outside of school hours, when
| unfortunately he is required to have his computer all day. He's
| never been as respectful, attentive, or creative as he is now,
| and after an angry adjustment period, I only regret not doing
| this sooner.
| adonovan wrote:
| > I thought kids could set their own boundaries with tech
| (like I did), but I no longer believe that's possible. The
| internet is like a drug
|
| Hell, I can barely control my own urges to look up some
| interesting fact whenever a thought pops into my head---and
| for years I was the guy everyone mocked for never looking at
| his phone.
| jwineinger wrote:
| I'm the same. I distinctly remember being annoyed at my
| brother and father when they got early-gen iPhones because
| they kept pulling them out and burying their faces in them.
| And now, I'm sure I'm much worse than they were then.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| I do the same. No phones after 8 pm. They are pretty free
| range before that. Better not catch them doing anything on
| their laptops other than homework after that. Everything goes
| on the kitchen table/counters after homework is over. I might
| relent a bit as they get older but tweens and younger seem to
| have zero self control with electronics. I let them free
| range with whatever on Saturday (i think everyone needs a
| safety valve day), but Sunday it's back to business as usual.
| Firewalls are great at limiting this stuff.
| fartcannon wrote:
| Apple devices? So what, they can learn to become good
| consumers?
|
| Get them on Linux or a BSD and explain their purpose and
| value.
| dbrueck wrote:
| My two cents: kids can not do this on their own, and the
| comparison to drugs is apt. I think as parents the goal is to
| teach the kid the risks and the importance of limits, and
| then help them over time learn to manage it on their own
| (i.e. as they mature and show they're able to do so).
|
| Working backwards, at some point they are going to be on
| their own, and if up until that point they are entirely
| leaning on the fences set up by the parents, and/or don't
| understand the 'why' behind those fences, they will fail
| badly.
| bnralt wrote:
| > Working backwards, at some point they are going to be on
| their own, and if up until that point they are entirely
| leaning on the fences set up by the parents, and/or don't
| understand the 'why' behind those fences, they will fail
| badly.
|
| I've seen situations where the opposite happens. People who
| aren't exposed to something when they're kids, and then
| have almost no interest in it when they're on their own as
| adults. Whereas people who are exposed to it develop an
| interest and addiction that lasts through adulthood.
| shankr wrote:
| I had something similar when I first came across PC,
| internet and online gaming. Growing up I didn't have any
| access to these things and I came across them during
| university, and I kind of got addicted to them and my
| grades suffered badly. It did help me later in life to
| adjust my habit around any online gaming. I don't do it
| at all but sometimes I would install some games, play for
| few days, and then uninstall them.
| brnt wrote:
| > The internet is like a drug
|
| I mean, that's what Big Tech pays many here for, isn't it?
| grp000 wrote:
| He might be hiding it, or playing along hoping to get access
| back later. Regardless, one thing I learned growing up with
| incredibly strict parents is that it doesn't teach you self-
| governance. Once he starts living independently, this could
| come back to bite him. There's also a level of animosity to
| your parents when they don't trust you that pervades the
| relationship. Add to that, a level of social isolation since
| almost every remote interaction is done on an app nowadays, I
| really question that decision to completely block him out.
| idontwantthis wrote:
| I let him back in when he asks for it.
|
| About self-governance, honestly I don't know. I know that
| what kids are dealing with online is crack compared to the
| coffee I grew up with. I don't know if anyone can have a
| healthy relationship with Roblox, Tiktok, and Youtube.
|
| I also know that now he finishes his school work, is
| learning guitar entirely on his own, and talks to us about
| school and his friends. Before he would stare at the
| computer until dinner and go back to it after unless we
| forced him to do something else.
| jamst174 wrote:
| I completely sympathize with this. I had to kick the ipad
| off the network an hour ago so I could get the 6 yo to
| stop playing roblox and go somewhere with me. This was
| after asking numerous times over the course of 5 minutes
| and while trying to get results without yelling as often.
|
| Anyone judging and trying to lecture on how doing actions
| like this is actually counter productive - well, chances
| are you don't have kids or you yell a lot.
| flycaliguy wrote:
| Congratulations, those are huge wins. My oldest is 4 so
| I'm just starting to test the waters with a system and
| more concrete time blocks.
| bcrosby95 wrote:
| I'm curious how old your kid is?
|
| It took a lot to convince my wife to enable the time
| limit on our Amazon Fire tablets. They get 1 hour of
| videos and apps, but unlimited book time.
| idontwantthis wrote:
| He's 13.
| bityard wrote:
| > There's also a level of animosity to your parents when
| they don't trust you that pervades the relationship.
|
| The counter-balance for that is plenty of love, support,
| and one-on-one time. Building trust, essentially. With
| that, the kids will understand the reasons for the rules.
|
| > I really question that decision to completely block him
| out.
|
| I have two children. One child has always successfully-self
| moderated her screen time and we have never had to step in
| and correct anything. Zero worries about her.
|
| The other child is the exact opposite. He is not that young
| anymore but still has no self-moderation. He has his own
| computer on which he can do an unlimited number of things
| but if given the choice, he will spend literally ALL of his
| time on it not even playing video games, but watching
| YouTube videos of other people playing video games.
|
| Even if we tell him, "here's your computer, you can do
| ANYTHING except watch YouTube gaming videos," he still ends
| up watching YouTube gaming videos when he thinks we aren't
| looking. When he gets caught, we take the computer, tablet,
| or phone away, and remind him what the rules were. He gets
| angry and throws an enormous temper tantrum. Rinse and
| repeat, for years on end. He doesn't seem to be learning
| any lesson here so the only option we are left with is
| banning him from Internet-connected devices most of the
| time.
|
| It's a real bummer to me because free access to computers
| (as a kid) and the Internet (as a teen) are the only things
| that turned me into a half-capable human being. I'm worried
| he won't have that chance due to his inability to self-
| moderate his screen time, combined with the fact that the
| Internet is now more of a shopping mall than a library.
| kakoni wrote:
| Oh man, my oldest seems to be exactly like your son.
| Nowdays its even difficult for him to do homework/read
| for exams because to urge(fomo?) to watch
| tiktok/youtube/play whatever free-to-play is so huge.
| Aperocky wrote:
| > completely block him out outside of school hours
|
| > He's never been as respectful, attentive, or creative.
|
| I hope the latter statement is true and is not just
| satisfaction from completely controlling your childrens life.
| Because blocking all electronic _after_ school is certainly
| the harshest thing I 've ever heard of.
| idontwantthis wrote:
| I completely agree with you, and it took me years to come
| to terms with the necessity of it. There is so much more
| positive emotion in my home after making this change.
|
| In fact, I exert less control than I used to because now I
| trust him to be taking care of himself. He gets his work
| done, he learns new things on his own, and he takes more
| responsibility for his own health and well being.
| tombert wrote:
| How much of this is just timing though? Anecdata, but my
| parents took my computer away a bunch of times and
| restricted me from watching TV on weekdays, and I still
| got terrible grades in middle and high school (though I
| almost always did well on tests, just didn't like doing
| homework).
|
| My grades didn't get measurably worse when I got the
| computer back, and my parents stopped taking it away from
| me when they saw that I was teaching myself how to code
| for fun, because I think they realized that is a
| marketable skill, and I think I taught myself to code
| (and my grades started improving) because I simply grew
| up a bit.
|
| Granted, there weren't really "smartphones" throughout
| most of my high school years, and I didn't even have a
| laptop at that point either, so it's possible my
| information is out of date.
| Spivak wrote:
| Yeah, if my parents tried to control that much of my life
| while I was living with them I would be in "basically live
| at a friends house and move out at 18" mode. Because holy
| shit "nigh completely cutting off the social life of a kid
| during their formative years" is brutal. It's gotta be so
| hard for them to maintain friendships, when I was in HS if
| you totaled up my Snap/Discord/IG/Texts/iMessage I probably
| sent 5k messages/mo -- all to IRL friends, and I wasn't
| even that social.
| kobalsky wrote:
| > to completely block him out outside of school hours
|
| they cannot google stuff or check wikipedia when they are at
| home? no internet access at all?
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| That's not what they're doing when they have 24/7 unlimited
| internet, it certainly ain't wikipedia or looking up
| animal/computer facts.
| munk-a wrote:
| You'd be surprised how irrelevant wikipedia and googling
| are to elementary and middle school educations. Due to a
| lack of assumptions about who has devices at home all the
| information you'll need for course work is included in the
| course materials (whether that be a text book or some other
| form of reference).
|
| I think online educators have a lot to offer young
| students, but they help accelerate the process - they don't
| replace it.
| nybble41 wrote:
| > You'd be surprised how irrelevant wikipedia and
| googling are to elementary and middle school educations.
|
| You say that as if the official elementary- and middle-
| school curriculum are the only things worth looking up.
| There is much one can profitably learn from the resources
| which are freely available online beyond the least-
| common-denominator taught by schools.
| munk-a wrote:
| I did purposefully exclude High School from that list
| since that's a good period to start independent research.
| If you have an issue with the curriculum being taught
| that's an issue you should take up with your school board
| - not try and monkey patch by using online learning as a
| solution. Elementary and middle school expectations are
| usually focused on learning the way to learn since that's
| where the brain is at.
| nybble41 wrote:
| I for one am _extremely_ glad that you in particular, and
| others of a similar mindset, had nothing at all to do
| with my pre-high-school education. It is truly
| unfortunate that not everyone else can say the same.
|
| The right time to start "independent research" is
| approximately _from birth_. We should be overjoyed that
| any child is curious and eager to learn. Standing in
| their way by limiting access to educational resources
| based on arbitrary ideas of "age-appropriate materials"
| is absolutely a crime.
| popotamonga wrote:
| I did some sneaky crap to mine, routed all PS4 traffic through
| a linux box that added random 200ms-500ms delay on packets. He
| could play but kept dying because its so fun to play with high
| ping.
| thebean11 wrote:
| That is sneaky, are you afraid of just being direct with your
| own kid?
| popotamonga wrote:
| My dad was very direct with me, i still tried to break all
| the rules, it's ok, helps them learn to deal with
| frustration (the 'kid' is 17)
| thebean11 wrote:
| Aren't you worried that dishonesty like that would hurt
| your relationship with your kid?
| popotamonga wrote:
| Only if i get caught, so i try not to. Would be extremely
| proud if he found out but even though he is in
| tradeschool for computers and networking i dont know wtf
| they teach there he has no clue how nothing works.
| hogepiyo wrote:
| So they get the worst of both worlds because you either
| didn't want to draw a line on them playing or you get some
| weird enjoyment in your kid having a shit time? Weird
| behaviour honestly
| popotamonga wrote:
| I draw a line they do it anyway behind my back.
| moritonal wrote:
| Hey I ain't got kids so only a thought but whilst fun, that
| sounds toxic. Let the kid play to their fullest enjoyment
| then tell them to stop, this seems the worst of both options.
| Mathnerd314 wrote:
| Having grown up in a house with DSL, I can say that this
| works. When YouTube only plays in 240p it's a lot less
| addictive.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| Though then you run the danger of https://xkcd.com/598/
| emsy wrote:
| Some children hit a certain age and then just don't give a
| shit. Can happen to the best parents. Honestly, the only
| thing toxic about it is that it sounds like the the child
| didn't know it had been done to him. Let them know they
| have boundaries. If he gets around it, at least he's
| showing ingenuity.
| moritonal wrote:
| Or at least tell the kid, and have it play normally, but
| increase over time past the allocated hours. They'd likely
| work out which games have the best net-code and would be a
| teaching opportunity about TCP vs UDP xD
| Taylor_OD wrote:
| I don't have kids either but I remember my youth well
| enough to know that this probably would have worked on me
| and my parents just telling me to stop probably wouldnt
| (and hadnt if they made the effort to do this)
| temp0826 wrote:
| Really? This wouldn't have made me want to stop. It only
| would've made me bitter and angry.
| popotamonga wrote:
| You would never know it was on purpose , we blame in on
| the ISP. They just accept it as a fact of life and guess
| what it works, play less, going out with family and
| friends more. I just can never ever get caught or i ruin
| everything so i go to great lenghts not to get caught
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| As a parent you're up against a widespread addiction to
| social platforms that dramatically outpace you with
| psychological tricks, fomo, and advertising. It's
| insurmountable. Your kids will go through phases where they
| won't listen to reason, and will often seek out ways to
| defy it.
|
| In a perfect world I'd agree that parents shouldn't do
| stuff like this, but the world is far from perfect.
| mixedCase wrote:
| This is a rationalization parents do in order to avoid
| the feeling that comes with implicitly (or explicitly)
| being criticized on their parenting.
|
| "This modern world is too complex", "I have no time for
| it", "I can't afford such a luxury", "kids are just going
| to be contrarian". So they come out with easy punishments
| as a "solution".
|
| It isn't an easy task, but it's not an insurmountable one
| to have a chat with a teenager to figure out what kind of
| life they want to lead in the future and work out with
| them * _as a peer*_ what they objectively need to do to
| get there and how they can manage that. Then revise and
| review the plan every year or so. Let them figure out
| what time they can allocate to their hobbies and only
| make suggestions if you disagree.
|
| If your child is a kid, where they can't possibly be
| mature enough to start discussing his adult life, then
| just let them play the freaking game. If you're giving
| them love, they're socializing enough not to feel
| isolated, are getting basic education, not suffering from
| malnutrition, and are not being traumatized by helicopter
| parenting, cults and other similar shit, you're likely
| doing your job fine. Don't ruin it by trying to architect
| the ever-living shit out of someone else's life.
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| You're reducing the point to fit a specific narrative so
| you can counter the entire argument with a shallow
| statement like "helicopter parents bad."
|
| I'm not talking about helicopter parenting, I'm talking
| about combating multi-billion dollar companies with full-
| time psychologists on staff that are making concentrated
| efforts to get children addicted to their platforms,
| sometimes at the cost of their mental health.
|
| "Let them play the freaking game" isn't a counter-point
| to the concept of children losing sleep and failing
| classes because they're up at 3am doom-scrolling
| instagram and falling into depression about the way they
| look. A phenomenon that the company is aware of and has
| done nothing about[1].
|
| Large social media companies are creating social dynamics
| that they barely understand to generate ad revenue, and
| to opt-out of these networks can lead to social isolation
| amongst peers. This isn't a simple matter of having more
| conversations with your kids or instilling specific
| values. The cards are so stacked against parents this is
| akin to telling your kids that all the feedback the world
| gives them (peers, popular media) is wrong. Many adults
| are even ill-equipped to handle this for themselves.
|
| [1]: https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-
| instagram-is-tox...
| popotamonga wrote:
| When i let 'play the freaking game' = play till 5am with
| friends, failed 1 yr school etc etc
| hackerdotmkv wrote:
| > just stop
|
| On one hand (and as a parent) I agree, there are deep-seated
| issues around boundaries and authority... on the other hand if
| my folks had followed that advice I would have never been
| incentivized to learn to hack.
|
| I'm conflicted.
| newjersey wrote:
| I sincerely believe the incentives are out of whack. In the
| US, at least the only way to "win" parenting is to not play.
| We should refuse to have children at all.
|
| My hope is once we see total fertility rate shrink below one,
| we will start to see proper support for parents and children
| with things like paid paternity leave and medicare for all
| enshrined in our laws.
|
| That being said, I absolutely do not condone frequency
| jammers and were this to happen in the US, I'd argue a
| minimum of six months in jail is an appropriate sentence.
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| Unfortunately the most realistic scenario where the
| birthrate drops below 1 comes from extreme economic
| inequality or authoritarianism. The birth rate does indeed
| drop as countries develop more, and as more people get
| educated about birth control, but controlling it beyond
| that is likely not a good thing.
|
| Jail time for frequency jamming seems very extreme (if you
| want to see the failure of jail time to curb behavior, look
| at how many people are in American prisons and how high
| their recidivism rate is).
| NikolaNovak wrote:
| I _think_ I agree with your message, though I see how it
| can be misinterpreted in this context.
|
| As a society, I think US is not doing enough to support
| parenting - paternity leave, work hours, health system, and
| myriad other ways to provide support and help and
| assistance and relief to parents. I'm in Canada, I'm lucky
| and blessed and privileged, my wife is getting _18 months_
| parental leave, and parenting is STILL hard. I cannot
| imagine trying to do it in USA :O
|
| (If your post on the other hand is that you cannot win with
| the kids, you might need to elaborate to make your point
| clearer:)
| barbazoo wrote:
| > That being said, I absolutely do not condone frequency
| jammers and were this to happen in the US, I'd argue a
| minimum of six months in jail is an appropriate sentence.
|
| Compassion much? What's the point of throwing them in jail?
| I can't see anything but a net negative for society. I'm
| having trouble understanding that desire for punishment.
| robertlagrant wrote:
| Try phoning the emergency services on a mobile phone when
| there's a signal jammer running.
| barbazoo wrote:
| And throwing them in jail does what exactly?
|
| How about educating people, how about going after those
| that sell these devices in the first place instead? Sure,
| give them a fine but jesus, don't throw them in jail.
| lostlogin wrote:
| That doesn't answer the parent question. Yes the jammer
| is dangerous and bad. Putting the father in jail doesn't
| fix that or particularly help.
|
| A fine, community service or something like that seems
| more appropriate.
| mr-debil wrote:
| There's no greater motivator than telling somebody they can't
| do something they want to do.
| turtlebits wrote:
| You could have easily gone down the path of lying, cheating
| and stealing. Not to mention issues with authority could
| sabotage your career.
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| In 2008 HN a comment like this would get you laughed at.
| Being submissive to authority? Not a successful startup.
|
| How times change.
| rsync wrote:
| "... if you ever find yourself in a situation where you are
| doing weird stuff because your kids completely disregard family
| rules, just stop ..."
|
| Carseats come to mind immediately as I think of counterexamples
| to this ...
| dagmx wrote:
| When I was in highschool in India, our school had installed
| jammers everywhere to try and prevent the use of cellphones by
| the students.
|
| This was done in part because a sister school had a student sex
| video make the rounds and it had gone viral being shared via
| Bluetooth in schools.
|
| Anyway what they hadn't accounted for was that our school was
| right next to a cellphone tower.
|
| Anyway it was a mess. You'd walk down a hallway and randomly go
| between full and zero bars.
| vbphprubyjsgo wrote:
| hinkley wrote:
| They had more than one jammer, right? I'm guessing when your
| physics teacher tried to warn them about wave superposition
| they said, "shut up, nerd."
|
| I'm sure the kids figured out all the little nooks and crannies
| that had full bars if you held your phone just so.
| jakear wrote:
| Are there any bands in the US that are open for free use? A sort
| of Wild West band. The tech seems very cool to experiment with,
| but I don't want to end up in this guys shoes for trying to
| wirelessly control my coffee pot (for instance...).
| strombofulous wrote:
| Kind of, there are unlicensed radio bands but there are still
| rules about what you can't do on them. 900 MHz, 2.4 GHz and 5.8
| GHz
| josephcsible wrote:
| In particular, you're still not allowed to jam them. You're
| not allowed to jam any frequency, ever.
| jakear wrote:
| Ah, walkie talkie and wifi, of course! :) I suppose a good
| starting point would be to just buy some commercially
| available walkie talkies and see what sorts of modulation is
| possible. Cheers!
| hinkley wrote:
| I'm having one of those false memory experiences. I 'know'
| that the 1.2GHz band was used for earlier WiFi specs and yet
| Wikipedia disagrees.
|
| In fact this is allocated to Ham radio and that has rules
| (poorly enforced due to budget constraints) up the wazoo.
| sprayrang wrote:
| In this guy's online research he never came across a firewall? He
| could easily block the Internet for his kids with a pfsense fw.
| josephcsible wrote:
| The kids were using cellular data, not his Wi-Fi.
| josephcsible wrote:
| "By mistake" seems way too generous. He intentionally deployed an
| illegal signal jammer with complete disregard for the effect it
| would have on other people.
| 1970-01-01 wrote:
| The high power level (33dB) was the mistake.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| If you're referring to the graph in the article, that's not a
| graph of the actual signal jammer, just a stock photo.
| 1970-01-01 wrote:
| Yes, good catch! The time matches the story, however the
| date isn't even close.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| Epoch user name, btw
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| Transmitted power is measured in watts. dB is sometimes used
| to measure received power, but it depends on the location of
| the receiver, what kind of antenna is being used, and so on.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| Using an illegal device was the mistake. A lower power level
| would have taken longer to notice.
| [deleted]
| dwighttk wrote:
| Could he have just turned it down a little bit so that it
| wouldn't cover such a large area? (I know it would still be
| illegal)
| spiderdev wrote:
| In regards to screen time management and as a tech enthusiast dad
| of two kids--I have learned that simple low tech solutions work
| much better than most other more complicated methods. For example
| to limit screen time at night... we have a rule that all of the
| kid's devices need to be charged over night downstairs in the
| kitchen. I have a charging station setup in the kitchen for all
| their devices.
|
| Also during the week devices are only allowed upstairs for
| homework use only.
| kaiby wrote:
| > kid's devices need to be charged over night downstairs in the
| kitchen
|
| How do you prevent them from going downstairs after you've
| fallen asleep?
| behringer wrote:
| You don't. You just teach them self control through
| reinforcement.
| kept3k wrote:
| You're lucky, and must have a typical child.
|
| When my oldest child was 2, he snuck an allen wrench in his
| diaper and disassembled his whole crib. He is atypical with
| aspergers syndrome.
|
| You "just don't know" how difficult it is for some children
| to learn self control through reinforcement.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| jacquesm wrote:
| > When my oldest child was 2, he snuck an allen wrench in
| his diaper and disassembled his whole crib.
|
| I have to tell a colleague/friend about this, his kid is
| quite similar to yours in that respect.
| avgcorrection wrote:
| > I have a charging station setup in the kitchen for all their
| devices.
|
| Isn't that considered a fire hazard? I mean to charge gadgets
| overnight when there are no one close by in case something
| catches fire.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| As long as you have a proper smoke alarm system and maintain
| it, why would it be? I have multiple exits upstairs, all
| bedrooms have a chain ladder, alarms go off all over the
| house.
| alxlu wrote:
| But there are many other battery powered things like UPSes in
| an office, teslas, roombas, or Dyson vacuums that wouldn't
| necessarily make sense to charge in your bedroom but tend to
| stay connected to a charger when not in use.
| gunshai wrote:
| >allowed upstairs for homework use only.
|
| How are you enforcing that one?
| clarle wrote:
| I think as a parent it's also important to set the standard for
| your kids by doing the same thing. If they need to charge their
| phones overnight in the kitchen, then you should do the same
| too.
|
| I think leading by example is a good parenting technique in
| general, kids figure out when their parents are being
| hypocritical pretty fast.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| Kids need to learn that we all have roles to play, not
| everything is egalitarian.
|
| Edit: for the downvoters, you're the problem with the
| education system and parenting, your kids aren't little
| adults, they need some guidance and boundaries to learn a bit
| of self-control.
| chmod600 wrote:
| When a child asks for X, they are not really asking for X.
| They are asking for X, and for you to deal with any
| consequences of that action, regardless of how poorly-
| executed. When you do X you are also dealing with the
| consequences, so it's really no concern of theirs.
|
| Mentioning that a parent gets to do X while they do not is
| just a way for a child to score a point against foolish
| parents in an argument.
|
| You are right to a degree. Clearly a parent can lose
| credibility by being too hypocritical. But you shouldn't feel
| any general obligation to treat children as adults or
| yourself as a child.
| irrational wrote:
| >then you should do the same too.
|
| No. My phone is my alarm system. It is what wakes me up at
| 5:20am every morning to start things going. My wife uses hers
| for white noise.
| danieljacksonno wrote:
| I use my apple watch for this.
|
| That said, you can easily buy a simple analog alarm for a
| few bucks.
| aprinsen wrote:
| This has really got me thinking about the hidden costs of
| having one high tech device that does everything.
|
| Like, I wonder if someone is running ML models on all of
| our sleeping habits based on phone alarms. Would be
| interesting to get some of the telemetry/tracking output
| from the clocks app.
| throw3838 wrote:
| Or just install opensource ROM without this stuff.
| saagarjha wrote:
| Ok, but why shouldn't your kids be able to also use them in
| similar ways?
| brnt wrote:
| You are aware impulse control is something that takes a
| decade or two (or more) to acquire? Most kids simply
| can't use them just in those similar ways.
| amflare wrote:
| Because they are children. They get to have fewer
| responsibilities in return for having fewer freedoms
| while they grow up and gain experience.
| saagarjha wrote:
| I know if I was a child, I would be upset that you get to
| take your phone into your bedroom and use it for useful
| things. I understand that this is OK for some parents,
| but the whole point of the comment above the one I was
| responding to was that children react positively to
| consistent applications of the rules, and the comment was
| basically " _I_ have valid uses for my devices (but this
| is not true for my children) ".
| PathOfEclipse wrote:
| It's not that you have valid uses for your devices. It's
| that you trust yourself with the self-control to not to
| use the devices improperly or in ways that could be self-
| harmful, or, if so, to be able to bear the consequences.
| Adults can also drive, but children can't. There is no
| inconsistency there, either.
|
| Writing as a parent who has had to deal with children
| staying up late at night, way after they should be
| sleeping, and looking up things on devices that I would
| consider inappropriate for both children and adults.
| dijonman2 wrote:
| > It's that you trust yourself with the self-control to
| not to use the devices improperly or in ways that could
| be self-harmful, or, if so, to be able to bear the
| consequences.
|
| This sounds like something an addict would say. Not
| calling you out as an individual but instead highlighting
| the dangers of "I can stop anytime I want".
| moistly wrote:
| Were you upset that your parents got to drink booze and
| you didn't? That they got to watch nighttime (e.g. adult)
| TV? Drive the car? Stay up late? Have sex?
|
| Adults have myriad privileges that children do not. It is
| not unfair.
| onli wrote:
| Of course that's unfair. Always has been.
| moistly wrote:
| Please explain, because IMO that is a ridiculously stupid
| statement: to paraphrase your claim, "of course it's
| unfair that children don't get to fuck/fly airplanes/etc.
| Always has been."
|
| Surely you meant something else.
| codechad wrote:
| nickpeterson wrote:
| I think you're inadvertently propping up another idea,
| that all rules apply equally to children and adults. This
| is obviously not true.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| Because kids lack almost all control when it comes to
| entertainment and talking to friends and their brains
| aren't fully formed. I have a screen time timer set for
| my phone. After 1 hour each day I don't use it for
| anything fun after that hour is up. My kids aren't going
| to be able to handle that with personal discipline.
| Before you ask, yeah I've tried, the only way is to force
| them to surrender their devices at a reasonable time at
| night like 8pm.
| andruby wrote:
| That's easy to fix with a $15 alarm clock.
| watwut wrote:
| O would rather model not wasting money unnecessary
| andruby wrote:
| Is spending $15 on an alarm clock wasting money? That
| thing will probably last a decade or two and outlive a
| couple of phone generations.
|
| You'll get to lead by example and perhaps even improve
| your sleep.
| watwut wrote:
| Yes it is wanting money. Especially since I already own
| multiple device capable to do exact same thing.
|
| I prefer to set example of not buying all the available
| crap. That one is more important all I all.
| ohyoutravel wrote:
| Buying a second thing to unnecessarily duplicate
| functionality seems like a waste, even if the thing by
| itself would otherwise be a solid deal.
| kelnos wrote:
| That depends on whether or not you'd consider "setting an
| example for your kids" in this particular way as
| necessary or not. If you think that's valuable, then this
| isn't an unnecessary duplicate. If not, then sure.
| syntheticnature wrote:
| My alarm clock, purchased as an undergraduate in the 90s,
| has never had any bugs in its alarm or clock
| functionalities, and comes with (red 7-segment LED) digit
| display that's larger than my phone. I do think it was
| more than $15, even back then, but it's lasted a long
| time.
| sophacles wrote:
| Or you know... $1 at a garage sale or goodwill.
| cyberbanjo wrote:
| Goodwill isn't cheap for stuff like that any more
| nomel wrote:
| After I realized I could buy, brand new, many of the
| items I was looking for for a couple dollars more, and
| sometimes a couple dollars less (they left the original
| price tag), I mostly stopped going. I went back in for
| the first time in a couple years and it was just
| ridiculous. I have to assume their real purpose is some
| sort of tax benefit at this point, because none of it
| made sense, besides the clothes.
| khedoros1 wrote:
| About $4 at the thrifts near me, and at one in
| particular, that's likely to be half-price on specific
| days of the week.
| justnotworthit wrote:
| People will misinterpret you, but if something is bad for you
| at any age, then the parent should be taking their own
| advice. "If you can't do it with self-control, then don't do
| it, or find a way to make it work..." applies to everyone,
| regardless of roles. No, you don't have to wear pajamas and
| sleep the same times they do, but you cant tell them how
| healthy it is to get a full night's sleep with the screen
| down if you're (frivously) harming your own sleep.
| alistairSH wrote:
| Yep, the only sure way to keep a kid off a screen is to
| physically remove the screen. My son is grown and out of the
| house, but when he was a kid, he was eventually able to defeat
| just about anything I installed on our PC. With friends younger
| kids, removing iPads and suchlike is much easier than
| maintaining software limits.
| hinkley wrote:
| We keep asking for wireless charging but if we ever actually
| get it then we are going to discover all the ways we made a
| liability into an asset. This being prime amongst them.
|
| I could also see a black market of kids selling each other
| their old phones so that the kid can have a 'prison phone'
| they use at night.
| jagraff wrote:
| Yep - when I was a kid, I had to put all my electronics in
| the kitchen at night, so I bought an old used smartphone
| that my parents didn't know about. Kids are crafty
| alistairSH wrote:
| _I could also see a black market of kids selling each other
| their old phones so that the kid can have a 'prison phone'
| they use at night._
|
| Sneaky little devils. I can totally see it, especially pre-
| teens and older.
| quacked wrote:
| It's quite common among communities that have heavy phone
| restrictions (religious kids that go to public schools,
| etc.) They're as clever as adults are, just more
| monitored.
| hinkley wrote:
| They are also less encumbered by thoughts of
| consequences.
|
| I worked on a contract one time where they were trying to
| alerts for college sports, and I insisted on adding some
| security to the system. The manager reasoned that the
| cost/benefit analysis for someone deciding to hack a
| sport score feed did not add up and so nobody would think
| to try that.
|
| I pointed out that college students have poor risk
| assessment. I pointed out MIT/Stanford. I pointed out it
| was already written. They made me rip it all out. And
| then the customer cancelled the project because 'we' had
| given them exactly the system they already had and why
| should he pay for it again. I just stared at the manager,
| who avoided eye contact. (If I'd been a bigger and braver
| person I would have jumped in here with a counterproposal
| that amounted to restoring all of my changes, but I did
| not think of it)
|
| Which is just as well because there totally would be fake
| messages sent out during the last timeout stating that
| <our team> won by 6 points just for the lulz. Because of
| course they would.
| quacked wrote:
| I've been reading some of your comments elsewhere in the
| thread--I think you're one of the few people commenting
| that has some serious respect for how kids actually think
| and behave. I'm curious for my own sake if you've ever read
| a certain pseudonymous psychiatry blog--you will
| immediately know what I'm talking about if you have, and if
| you haven't I'd like to ask how you learned what you did
| about child behavior and consistent parenting.
| hinkley wrote:
| I have not.
|
| I could say that I have spent a lot of time and energy in
| my life doing root cause analysis, how you can steer
| people away from self-sabotage, how you can empower
| people to help themselves instead of being reliant on you
| for everything, but that's only the book jacket version
| of the real story.
|
| The real story is sadder and I'm still actively dealing
| with the consequences of feeling like I needed to become
| an autodidact at the age of 8 to ever have any success at
| anything. Which necessitated spending a lot of time
| thinking about thinking. Self-teaching morphed into self-
| mentoring, self-doctoring, and self-parenting. Me, me, me
| (what could go wrong?) I watched my parents (from my
| perspective) abandon Discipline almost entirely with my
| kid brother, who has struggled his entire adult life, and
| even at 14 I could see this road ahead of him. I wish I
| had been like some stories where the eldest child takes
| care of the younger ones, but unfortunately he spent most
| of his childhood finding ways to push my buttons and we
| were never close (something my mother has pointed out as
| a mistake that is playing out now between his own kids,
| to which I responded, "Tell him this is why I never
| call.")
|
| That story about my friend's kid reminds me a lot of my
| little brother and as you can imagine by the length of
| that reply, was a little triggering.
| hinkley wrote:
| I wish I'd been wise enough to see this solution on my own, but
| in our case what happened is that charging cables kept
| disappearing, and it came down to the fact that when the kids
| broke a cable, they would throw it away and take another one
| without telling anybody. This same pattern was how I ended up
| having to put stickers on all of my laptop chargers because I
| had posession of 1-2 despite having 3 laptops and bought 2
| extras when I dropped below 3. Shit just walks off.
|
| And the reason the cables broke is that the distance from their
| bed to the nearest outlet was 2m, and they would lay in bed on
| their screens, with the cable stretched to its limits.
|
| Eventually you'd reach crisis mode when we simply couldn't find
| a cable anywhere and someone was trying to call a plumber or
| talk to grandma with a dying phone. Anker charging stations
| came to a partial rescue, The Rules were that the cables in
| that charger should stay there. But kids (and sometimes my
| partner) rationalize 'needing' things and eventually I had to
| zip tie a daisy chain across all of the cables to make it
| easier to ask for a new cable than to try to take one.
|
| It wasn't perfect, but about half of the devices ended up
| living at that charging station, because spare chargers [were]
| still in short supply.
| watwut wrote:
| I bought 3m and longer cables for myself and kids. Best
| purchase ever.
|
| One is 6m, but that one is truly excessive.
| aprinsen wrote:
| Along these lines, I just purchased a low tech solution called
| a KSafe for personal use and I love it.
|
| It's basically a safe with a timer and no override, so you can
| say, lock up for 2 hours, put your (de)vice inside, and push
| the button. The only way to open it early is to break the safe.
|
| As someone who has struggled with impulse control, especially
| around technology, I have used it to great effect. Spent an
| uninterrupted two hours playing guitar and reading physical
| books for the first time in ages.
|
| I use it personally, but I could see it being useful for
| families as well.
| boplicity wrote:
| When I was young (late eighties, early nineties), we had a
| device that controlled power to the TV. You had to type in a
| code to be able to turn it on; each kid in our family had a
| code, and each code had a certain amount of time allowed per
| week. Sounds similar -- but for a different era!
| lilyball wrote:
| I had one of these too! Though parents could override it if
| needed (which was generally done if e.g. we had a friend
| over, so we could play games together without using up all
| our weekly time).
| eh9 wrote:
| My wife and I both have ADHD and we couldn't recommend this
| enough. So far, it's helped us cut down on our weed habit and
| now I'm throwing the Xbox controllers in there because of my
| terrible impulse control.
| josephcsible wrote:
| Is the safe fragile enough that anyone can break it with just
| their bare hands? If not, then what if you need to call 911
| while your phone's in there?
| dangrossman wrote:
| It's plastic. You could throw it on a hard floor, or hit it
| with a hammer, and it would break open. They sell
| replacement bases because people breaking their own safe
| open isn't terribly uncommon, and the locking part is all
| in the lid.
|
| https://www.thekitchensafe.com/
| aprinsen wrote:
| You could break the safe with a hammer or by smashing it on
| the ground, as others have mentioned.
|
| You know though, you are mostly using the safe in your own
| home or office, for increments of 30 minutes to a couple
| hours. For many folks I think the risk is very low.
|
| I guess, I find this emergency access sentiment really
| similar to something my wife's students say when there
| phones are taken away: "what if my parents need to contact
| me in an emergency?"
|
| It's a really sincere worry they have that seems totally
| foreign to me, having grown up in an era when my parents
| often couldn't contact me for hours at a time. Food for
| thought.
| gpvos wrote:
| Have a landline?
| josephcsible wrote:
| A lot of people don't these days.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| I would say a strong majority don't. I don't know anyone
| personally with a land line other than my mother
| irrational wrote:
| > we have a rule that all of the kid's devices need to be
| charged over night downstairs in the kitchen
|
| Tried this, didn't work. The problem is that we go to sleep
| earlier than the kids, so the kids will go get their devices
| after they figure we are probably asleep.
| thenerdhead wrote:
| I'm sure many can relate to having strict parents literally "cut
| the cable" to get us offline when we were younger.
|
| This problem only gets harder as technology progresses. There's
| no way to win this battle given the plentiful options to get
| online nowadays. You can do all sorts of things like block
| websites, traffic, or even delay priority so gaming is
| infuriating to play.
|
| The solution is definitely in parenting styles. The strict
| removal / cold turkey approach doesn't work. Sure you may get
| your kids off temporarily, but your relationship of trust is
| going to be the cost of it. Your kids are going to conceal much
| more from you and encourage deceit which makes your life as a
| parent harder.
|
| I think it's rather important to be open & transparent with your
| kids. To help them be self-driven and understand the consequences
| while giving them the freedom to do so and
| intervening/supervising enough to know if it's detrimental to
| their development.
|
| Prevention is only temporary, kids will find a way around it.
| lowbloodsugar wrote:
| Counterpoint: we were open minded parents who wanted our kids
| to be familiar with technology, and found out years later,
| through therapy, that our 9 year old daughter had found murder
| porn (that they believed was real) and was mainlining that
| every night. Take their phones at night, at a minimum.
| alistairSH wrote:
| _The strict removal / cold turkey approach doesn't work._
|
| Anecdotally, it works fine if implemented up front. If initial
| expectation is "1 hour/day after school between 2pm and 6pm"
| and you stick to it, it works. The problem is letting devices
| usage become a problem in the first place.
|
| And the dynamics do change as the kids age. I'm referring to
| younger kids (preteen and younger).
| jquery wrote:
| >Anecdotally, it works fine if implemented up front.
|
| Parent of a young child, can confirm your anecdote with my
| anecdote. My daughter's screentime has always been strictly
| enforced, so there's nothing to "cut back". She reads a lot
| of books in her free time without complaint.
| hinkley wrote:
| My friends who struggled with this couldn't understand that
| they never made their kid responsible for policing his own
| time. If he went 3 hours instead of 2, he got a talking to
| (if they even noticed) and was back on the next day. For a
| while he was really good at apologizing because it got him
| what he wanted. Any time he didn't do what he was asked to do
| he would just say he was sorry and get away with it. His
| reward for being ignorant of his actions was clear, and his
| punishment was abstract. His parents were exhausting
| themselves trying to stay on top of things, and so twice a
| year they would overreact (no screens for a week!) which also
| blew up on them.
|
| My suggestion was pretty simple IMO: The 2 hours a day is a
| budget, not a rule. If you went 3 hours today, then the
| consequence is that you only have 1 hour left tomorrow. If
| you went 6 hours, then guess what, you get 0 hours today and
| tomorrow. Straight mathematical consequences even a child can
| predict. They tried it for a hot second (even letting him
| bank up time for later, which he found enticing - do a paper
| tonight, play for 3 hours tomorrow!) but couldn't stay on top
| of it.
|
| So this kid also learned that rules are
| flexible/inconsistent, and you can just keep asking for
| exceptions because his parents had no discipline to teach
| him. He ran into some trouble in high school because of this.
| The real world often doesn't care about reasons, they want
| results.
| newaccount74 wrote:
| We tried the budget approach, and for us it just leads to
| endless discussions, especially when we wanted to do
| something that interfered with their screen time (eg. they
| didn't want to go to the pool or visit grandma because then
| they wouldn't have time for minecraft).
|
| I personally think that a bit of leniency works better than
| totally rigid rules.
|
| But it's of course still a constant struggle, because what
| works one week doesn't work the next, as the kids are going
| through different phases all the time.
| hinkley wrote:
| It's always a tradeoff between keeping rules simple
| enough that "you know the rules" can foreshorten a long
| and exhausting exchange, and them trying to language
| lawyer the simple rules. Especially since part of growing
| up is constantly testing boundaries.
|
| This plays out almost as often at work. Most of the time
| it doesn't amount to me seeing the person as a big kid
| playing grownup, but that's happened a few times. At
| least in the work situation I've come to see this as a
| subsection of the Rule of Three, which I call the Rule of
| Two - It's okay that everything is an X except if it's a
| Y. Once 'Z' comes into the picture you need to refactor
| to come up with workable rules again. I am not aware of
| having a similar narrative with children or pets,
| although I seem to be on the cusp on one with children.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| Being consistent is the hardest of the important things for
| parents to do.
|
| Being inconsistent basically turns you into a Skinner box
| for your kids. Or as one parenting coach I knew used to say
| "You don't see people sitting zoned out in front of coke
| machines, just slot machines."
|
| A corollary is to create rules and structure that it is
| _easy_ to do consistently, even when stressed out.
| hinkley wrote:
| Absolutely. She could not figure out why she was tired
| all the time. It's because you try to discuss everything
| with your kids, lady. I got tired just watching it.
|
| Edit:
|
| The other thing is that sometimes you have to punish
| yourself in the short term in order to prevent long term
| problems. On your way to a sequel to your favorite movie,
| with prepurchased tickets, the consequences for doing
| something egregious in the car ride to the theater are
| going to have consequences for you as well. "Dealing with
| it later," detaches cause and effect which even adults
| struggle with.
|
| At the very least, no snacks for them, maybe last pick
| for seats. Even if you usually split your favorite snack
| with the kid. At worst maybe you turn around and go home.
| Because otherwise every car trip for the rest of your
| life is going to be like this, and some day you're going
| to _wish_ $100 was all it cost to solve the problem.
| CharlesW wrote:
| > _The strict removal / cold turkey approach doesn't work._
|
| This is an over-simplification. Briefly losing privileges is
| not an intrinsically-bad thing, and (to your point about being
| open and transparent) will not affect "your relationship of
| trust" if it's a well-communicated consequence that's not a
| surprise, and not done in anger.
| thenerdhead wrote:
| Yep I agree with you. Was mostly referring to overreactions /
| overstepping rather than these open boundaries being broken
| and it being a consequence intrinsically understood by both.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| Not to mention that plenty of us can probably relate to parents
| not understanding what we were doing, making the "cut the
| cable" approach even worse for the relationship.
|
| My family didn't take me seriously regarding self-learning
| anything (especially programming) until someone they seemingly
| trusted more told them the same things I had been telling them
| for years.
|
| It used to be pretty frustrating to be trying to learn
| something and be treated like I was just wasting time on
| gaming. All it did was make me great at doing things under
| their nose and unwilling to discuss anything I did or was
| interested in with them.
|
| So yeah, teaching your kids boundaries while allowing them to
| be self driven is probably ideal.
| Existenceblinks wrote:
| This, I was one of those in 56k era. My dad walked to bathroom
| to piss at 2am and still saw me in front of computer, and boom!
| cut the rj11 wire into 10 pieces. Next day I bought a new wire,
| and this time he didn't cut the wire but put a bug on a modem
| splitter by slightly took off a copper inside a little, it
| looked like it's connected but it's not. I fixed that. Next
| time he just told my mom to deal with me instead .. that is a
| short version of the story.
| hiram112 wrote:
| Haha, back in those days my mother could just pick up a phone
| in another room, and it would disconnect my modem from the
| internet. Maybe that was just an issue in how my own home's
| POTS line was installed, but it would infuriate me so much to
| have to restart that HUUUUGE 30 minute / 10MB download
| (probably of a naughty pic), that I'd eventually just give up
| and read a book or watch TV.
| krallja wrote:
| We got a second phone line once we kids started doing the
| same thing to the parents.
| IYasha wrote:
| Morale: next time also jam gps and services radios so they won't
| get to you ) I mean, who can drive without GPS these days? :)
| stevehawk wrote:
| moral?
| weeblewobble wrote:
| It's a few years out from being an issue for me, but I'm planning
| to rely on Apple's ScreenTime and parental controls to take care
| of this issue for me. My thinking is that having the enforcement
| be automatic and passive will lead to less conflict.
|
| Anyone have any experience with this? Pros and cons?
| softwarebeware wrote:
| If I wanted to take down the internet for my kids, I could just
| block all their IP addresses in my router. Much easier and not
| illegal. (I have not actually done this.)
| bagels wrote:
| Pictured was a mobile phone blocker. Presumably the kids were
| using their phones over cellular network.
| ajuc wrote:
| I have a little similar story :)
|
| My wife had to do something and asked me to disable internet when
| I go to work so she won't waste time. I was in hurry and I just
| switched the "WAN" and "LAN" wires in my router. It worked, I
| went to work.
|
| About 2 hours later my wife called me and said that guys from the
| internet provider came and asked her to fix it because the
| internet broke for everybody in nearby buildings who use that
| provider. My router was assigning local IPs to everybody :)
| cmeacham98 wrote:
| See, this is what I expected the story to be like: instead the
| linked story is just "they were using a jammer".
| RandallBrown wrote:
| Had something similar happen at a company I worked at.
|
| The conference room tables had ethernet ports and cables in
| them. Someone idly plugged both ends in, making a loop. This
| somehow screwed up the network for the building.
| cmeacham98 wrote:
| > This somehow screwed up the network for the building.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switching_loop
| tebruno99 wrote:
| I think I probably would have just cancelled the kids phone
| plans.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| This goes firmly into the criminal stupidity bucket. Mobile
| phones are critical infrastructure at this point, if only for the
| need to communicate with emergency services.
|
| Why didn't he just confiscate their phones?
| rossdavidh wrote:
| It is not clear to me why he didn't just remove the phones for
| part of the day? Getting a jammer seems like more work, actually,
| even if it doesn't get you arrested.
| kerneloftruth wrote:
| This guy used a somewhat similar technique[1]. Yeah, it's wrong
| -- but I can't help but sympathize. And, he gets 20 points alone
| for the 6-pack of "Old Style" that he used to conceal the jammer.
|
| 1. https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/chicago-man-
| arrest...
| opheliate wrote:
| > Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in your
| country.
|
| Wow, seems like the technique is very effective!
| kerneloftruth wrote:
| Ah, the World Narrow Web strikes again. A
| crotchety Chicago man who became notorious among commuters
| for riding the train with a cellphone jammer and a six-pack
| of beer now faces felony charges for using the signal-
| blocking device to get some peace on his way home.
| Dennis Nicholl, 63, faces felony charges of interfering with
| cellphone calls using a signal jamming device on the CTA Red
| Line in Chicago, Illinois. Dennis Nicholl was
| arrested Tuesday for using a cellphone jammer on the metro
| because "he was disturbed by people talking around him," his
| attorney, Charles Lauer, told the Chicago Tribune.
| The 63-year-old financial planner for the University of
| Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System had become well-
| known among commuters on Chicago's Red Line railway who
| noticed their calls would drop around the bulky, antennaed
| device on Nicholl's lap. Some commuters also
| noticed a six-pack of Old Style beer at his feet, as seen in
| photos that circulated online for months. Nicholl
| was finally busted after undercover officers set up a sting
| operation and deployed a plainclothes cop to commute
| alongside him. The inconspicuous cop made a phone
| call and, when it dropped after Nicholl turned on his device,
| he handcuffed him at the next stop. Nicholl
| admitted to police that he "gets annoyed at people talking on
| their cellphones while riding on" Chicago's transit system,
| according to the police report. Cellphone jammers
| violate federal law and can disrupt all phone or radio
| signals in their immediate surroundings, causing calls to
| suddenly drop. People who use or sell them in the U.S. can
| face prison time and significant fines -- up to $16,000 for
| each violation, according to the FCC. The judge
| on Nicholl's case dubbed the cantankerous commuter the
| "cellphone police" and set a hefty $10,000 bail.
| Nicholl's lawyer said the man was harmless and just trying to
| get some peace and quiet on his ride home. "He
| might have been selfish in thinking about himself, but he
| didn't have any malicious intent," Lauer said.
| Nicholl posted bond and left jail Wednesday.
| Shared404 wrote:
| > "He might have been selfish in thinking about himself,
| but he didn't have any malicious intent," Lauer said.
|
| I recognize this is lawyer speak, but what the heck? How is
| "Broke other peoples stuff for own benefit" _not_ malicious
| intent.
| selectodude wrote:
| Jamming cell phones on the red line is a public service.
| bagels wrote:
| Truck driver drives by Newark airport frequently with a GPS
| jammer: https://www.cnet.com/news/truck-driver-has-gps-jammer-
| accide...
| leephillips wrote:
| What makes you think he used the 6-pack to conceal the jammer?
| steelstraw wrote:
| Does China have the right idea with respect to kids and the
| internet? Should we effectively ban kids from social media and
| restrict their usage at the ISP level?
|
| Would like to see the arguments for and against.
| carapace wrote:
| Reading the threads here about parents trying to manage their
| kids' online usage something strikes me. It's a little hard to
| articulate, but I might call it the "assumption of normalcy" in
| regard to media/technology. People assume, to various degrees,
| that current forms of technology and levels of usage are "fine,
| just fine", yet if you think about it for a bit it seems really
| more like a "boiling frog" situation. What I mean is that we
| are engaged in a massive open-air social/psychological
| experiment of sorts, and we're more or less doing it on auto-
| pilot.
|
| From that POV the policy changes that China has introduced seem
| like an attempt to opt-out, which would make Chinese kids into
| a kind of "control group" for our media/internet/phone/game
| mass experiment. The problem is that there are so many
| confounding variables that it seems unlikely that we can learn
| much from it after all. And it's moot anyway since there's no
| political way to enforce similar bans in the West.
|
| FWIW, if I had kids I would ban the Internet, smart phones, and
| even cable TV. I've been on the Internet, there's no way I
| would expose my kids to it, even with ad-blockers. The Internet
| used to be Burning Man, now it's Bangkok. I wouldn't let my
| kids wander around the open Internet any more than around the
| back alleys of Bangkok. I feel for parents that are dealing
| with this.
| frankbreetz wrote:
| As parent, I think China may have the right idea. From my
| perspective, I think kids shouldn't have social media until
| late teens especially stuff like instagram. Go through an
| average 14 year old girls instagram feed and it is easy to see
| how eating disorders are increasing.
|
| The other thing is if every other kid in the class has social
| media, I will allow it because it important to be involved in
| the social aspect of school. So, China has the right idea
| because it is forced to be a social norm of not having social
| media and I think the whole community and individuals will be
| healthier because of it.
|
| They do something with limiting the amount of video games you
| can play, I think they are on to something there.
|
| I never see anything like that happening here in the USA though
| wjmao88 wrote:
| I think any blanket policy that just apply the same rule to
| everybody is just lazy policy. A less lazy approach is provide
| the capability (through e.g. ISP or device manufacturer) to do
| so to parents/guardians and let them make the choice on an
| individual level.
|
| Even for education, its much better to have options for home
| school or special needs school, than it is to just blanketly
| say all children must go to a regular school like every other
| child.
| mmh0000 wrote:
| In the USA, the FCC takes serious action against anyone using a
| frequency jammer[0].
|
| On the FCC's website [1] you can find both fines issued [2] as
| well as details into the investigations they carried out.
|
| [0] https://www.fcc.gov/document/48k-penalty-proposed-against-
| in...
|
| [1] https://www.fcc.gov/general/jammer-enforcement
|
| [2] https://www.fcc.gov/enforcement/orders/1866
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| Radio Amateurs find jammers for fun. They consider it a sport.
| Literally, in some cases:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amateur_radio_direction_findin...
|
| So the FCC doesn't even need to spend any money on finding them
| because the hams will do it for free.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| My dad's a Ham and I used to go to hamfests with him. One
| time someone jammed the talk-in frequency for the hamfest. I
| was never sure if that was more like waving a red flag in
| front of a bull or throwing down a gauntlet, but the talk-in
| quickly switched to a different frequency and the jammer was
| caught.
| [deleted]
| amelius wrote:
| No SDR folks in the list.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-02-18 23:01 UTC)