[HN Gopher] Google releases smart watch for kids
___________________________________________________________________
Google releases smart watch for kids
Author : goeldhru
Score : 69 points
Date : 2024-05-29 18:14 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (store.google.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (store.google.com)
| wmf wrote:
| Smartwatches may be an overlooked answer to the kid phone
| conundrum. Watches have the communication and location tracking
| that parents demand without the distraction of phones.
| nextos wrote:
| Also for adults, it's a much less intrusive technology.
| polairscience wrote:
| I'm not sure I agree with less intrusive. Having a tracker
| attached to your body that can notify you of anything it
| wants is very intrusive. It is, however, seemingly less
| addictive in some capacities. No doom scrolling, etc.
| nextos wrote:
| I think it's much less addictive. And if you only allow
| very urgent notifications, it's almost like a plain watch.
|
| Whereas on a phone, the temptation to open apps to do
| things is always there.
|
| It's almost like comparing an eink device with a regular
| tablet.
| LordDragonfang wrote:
| Considering the number of times I've heard cell phones
| referred to as being "attached at the hip", I think that
| ship has sailed.
|
| Also, almost every smart watch allows you to block
| notifications on top of what you phone already blocks, so
| if you have apps that you want notifications from for when
| your attention is on your phone, but not all the time, you
| can only allow those through. It's not "anything it wants",
| it's anything _you choose_.
| philomath_mn wrote:
| 100%. My kid is not getting a smartphone until he's ~16 but
| we're looking at a restricted smart watch right now
|
| (a flip phone would also be acceptable but a watch is
| physically attached which is ideal for 7 year old).
| ZiiS wrote:
| Not getting a phone you know about!
| philomath_mn wrote:
| A minor is going to get a phone plan w/o a guardian signing
| for it? And use it in my house without me knowing?
|
| There is a lot my kid is going to do under my nose, getting
| a smartphone doesn't seem too likely (esp. if he has
| alternatives like a desktop).
| gnicholas wrote:
| This is absolutely what I worry about for my kids, down
| the line. A boyfriend could easily pass her an inherited
| iPhone with a prepaid SIM card so they could keep in
| touch away from parental prying eyes. Most families
| around here (SV) have old devices lying around, and
| $20/mo for a cellular plan is nothing for many teenagers.
| philomath_mn wrote:
| Fair enough! Something to watch for I suppose.
| LordDragonfang wrote:
| I think you've sort of missed the forest for the trees,
| here. If you've gotten to the point where the kid is
| hiding a phone from you, you're already in an adversarial
| relationship with a young adult who has lost trust in
| your ability to be a reasonable authority figure.
| Someone1234 wrote:
| > A minor is going to get a phone plan w/o a guardian
| signing for it?
|
| In the US at least, it is trivial to get a phone plan
| without being 18 or having an adult sign for it. There is
| no credit check nor identity check.
|
| Just walk into any Walmart and pick up any one of a dozen
| prepaid kits. These plans require you to bring your own
| devices, but you can get a used/unbranded smartphone for
| under $100 and a plan with data for under $10/month.
|
| It has been this way for at least 10-15 years, if
| anything post-pay/credit line plans are quite an outdated
| concept, and mostly used by older generations who are
| overpaying. Plus T-Mobile specifically have had three
| data breaches leaking all of their customer's personal
| information (which they wouldn't even have with a prepaid
| plan).
| philomath_mn wrote:
| The more you know, I guess :+1:
| reaperducer wrote:
| _you can get a used /unbranded smartphone for under $100_
|
| I got one at the bodega on the corner for $20. The owner
| wanted $35, but when I told him I'd pay cash, he took the
| twenty.
|
| It was in packaging from some carrier in Mexico, but
| wasn't SIM locked. No problems for the last year.
| TheNewsIsHere wrote:
| The trick is whether or not he's a true believer in the
| rules you promulgate. If he's not, he may find ways
| around them, and you probably don't want to foster a game
| of cat and mouse with your child lest they end up
| resenting you.
|
| Not YOU, specifically. I'm speaking in general terms, and
| somewhat from experience.
|
| When I was in high school we barely had smartphones. A
| friend of mine had a Windows Mobile 6 device, some kids
| had Blackberry devices. The iPhone had just come out.
| Devices were somewhat less personal back then so my
| experiences may not be practically replicable today, but
| back in the day I would lend my phone to my friends at
| the end of the school day if they had been grounded and
| their phone taken away.
|
| Again, that was _almost_ 20 years ago (dear god), but
| there's something to be said for the unchecked
| determination of a teenager in search of a gadget.
|
| I don't necessarily disagree with your stance, nor am I
| criticizing you. For every watchful parental eye, there's
| always a bit of sleight of hand. It's the way of so many
| of us here, and likely something passed on to the kids of
| many of us here.
| miketery wrote:
| I think the issue at hand is yes you can enforce this at the
| family level. However unless high maturity / self awareness
| the kid will struggle if his peers all have phones.
|
| This needs to be a campaign pushed at the school or even
| county level.
| playingalong wrote:
| Yep. Their class at school has a WhatsApp or similar group
| chat.
| philomath_mn wrote:
| We can fire up WhatApp on desktop or tablet -- the
| constant access is the biggest issue I have with
| smartphones.
| darkhorse222 wrote:
| Yeah there's discussion about this in scientific articles
| I've read, where at a certain point the social circle
| exists on these apps, and by a single individual removing
| themselves they are forced to effectively choose isolation.
|
| I experienced it myself when I deleted instagram. I
| realized that certain friendships that had been thriving on
| that channel didn't flow as well outside it, via texting
| for example.
|
| So I redownloaded and set a screen time limit and I'm
| calling that good enough.
| skydhash wrote:
| > _I realized that certain friendships that had been
| thriving on that channel didn 't flow as well outside it,
| via texting for example._
|
| I think it's a strain to call that friendship.
| Communication channels don't matter in case of
| friendship. I may text, call, email, etc... and it's all
| good. But it being exclusive to a specific platform is
| more a social circle or a club as you said.
| jacobr1 wrote:
| I had this happen when I got rid of facebook years ago. I
| just lost touch with certain groups that were going to
| the movies or out for drinks or whatever. I just wasn't
| aware things were happening. Occasionally I'd get "where
| are you?" texts. No big loss, as I had other much closer
| groups where the communication mechanism matters less and
| varies, but I can imagine it could be isolating for some
| without that.
| michaelt wrote:
| Eh, yes and no.
|
| Let's say I'm in a group of 6 close friends and every
| year we have 20 poker nights, 4 barbecues, and attend 2
| sports events or concerts.
|
| If I decide I don't like poker and I'm not going to
| attend the poker nights - my friends will still welcome
| me to the barbecues and sports events. We'd still be
| friends.
|
| But they're not going to cancel poker night. And if at
| poker night Bob tells the other guys how proud he is his
| daughter Jenny has gotten accepted to the fancy college
| she applied to - nobody's going to summarise that in an
| e-mail to me.
|
| We'll still be friends - but I'll be spending more time
| alone, and the social fabric won't be quite as tightly
| knit.
| philomath_mn wrote:
| Agree, won't be easy -- he already has many peers with
| phones. But we have a lot of rules like that (e.g. no
| unsupervised YouTube use, wear helmets on the bike, etc)
| and he lives an otherwise well-provisioned life -- I think
| we'll work something out.
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| I'm amazed no one is pushing back on this. I respect your
| decision as a parent -- it's your decision -- but not
| letting them have a phone until 16 or privacy in their
| YouTube sounds miserable for them. I would be, but
| everyone is different I suppose.
|
| In contrast, I was watching gore videos by the time I was
| 13. I think I turned out ok.
|
| We'll see if it's survivorship bias, but personally, I
| plan to give our daughter Kess most of the freedom she'll
| want. She'll figure it out. The worst situation would be
| for her to develop feelings for someone and not trust her
| parents with that info. I suspect restricting smartphone
| usage is exactly how to end up in that situation.
| citizenkeen wrote:
| The sooner my kid learns someone is always watching, the
| better.
| wlesieutre wrote:
| Not specifically made for kids, but see "family setup" for the
| Apple Watch also
|
| https://support.apple.com/en-us/109036
| Almondsetat wrote:
| I have seen a couple of videos on youtube about people only
| using an Apple Watch with LTE, but I have found nothing long
| term or about android smart watches. I would really like to
| explore this possibility for myself
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| My watch changed my relationship with my phone very positively,
| so I offered to get my kids watches as a phone alternative. Not
| that they couldn't have phones at all, but they'd leave them at
| home when going on, and not carry them in their pockets around
| the house.
|
| They declined because they think watches are lame and nerdy.
| Only the most unfortunate kids get watches. They still can't
| carry them around the house, but I didn't gain much ground
| overall. I've gradually increased controls on and over the
| phones in my home, but the watch offer has never been taken up.
|
| I think you're right that it could be an overlooked solution,
| but I suspect you need to sneak in before the kids are
| accustomed to a phone.
| sharadov wrote:
| I got an Apple watch for my 11-year-old for precisely this
| reason - he can text, call, and play some games on it.
|
| Subscription to cellular is $10/month.
|
| And it let me set parental controls on it. No way was I getting
| him a phone, it's already way too distracting with the other
| devices he has access to at home.
| tonightstoast wrote:
| Doesn't it need to be paired with a phone thought?
| giantg2 wrote:
| I was honestly coming here to say fuck those exploitive
| assholes at Google. But I see your point. Maybe this could be a
| good in-between.
| FeistySkink wrote:
| The design doesn't look kid-proof at all with the curved front
| glass. And I'm not sure what they're on about when saying "first
| of a kind".
| Invictus0 wrote:
| When I was a kid I wanted a slick James Bond style smartwatch
| that had lasers, tools, and other badass capabilities, not this
| baby-ified fitness tracker.
| CobrastanJorji wrote:
| As soon as you invent the In Live and Let Die watch that
| deflects bullets with magnets or something, I'll buy one for my
| kids as long as you leave out the buzzsaw.
| Terr_ wrote:
| If it had an IR emitter and camera in the right place, one
| could play laser-[watch-]tag, although the classic cheat of
| obstructing the sensor would still exist.
| mc32 wrote:
| I just hope this is not a repeat of the Versa 4 where no third
| party apps were allowed[1] (unlike the prev versions which
| allowed them). That's a head-scratcher. This is the thing that
| gets people to spring for a Garmin.
|
| [1]https://community.fitbit.com/t5/Versa-4/Can-I-install-
| apps-o...
| bradfa wrote:
| There's no mention of software support lifetime. If this is just
| another multi-hundred dollar electronic gadget that's going to be
| useless in 2 years, why would I buy it for my kid?
|
| I can get a refurb Apple Watch SE 2nd gen direct from Apple for
| $209. I'm clearly not going to buy this Google watch because of
| the price.
| wmf wrote:
| If the child doesn't carry a phone you'd need a cellular Apple
| Watch for $250 which is slightly more but probably worth it for
| the software support.
| mhaberl wrote:
| > going to be useless in 2 years, why would I buy it for my kid
|
| Don't worry about it. I will be broken or lost far before those
| 2 years :)
| mkoryak wrote:
| And if that doesn't happen, the battery will be such crap
| that your kid will do nothing but complain about it 24/7.
|
| You will wish it was lost.
| bradfa wrote:
| If it's going to be broken, have a shot battery, or be
| useless in 2 years it doesn't matter which of those
| happens, I am not willing to spend >$200 initially and then
| a monthly fee on it.
|
| If I needed to track my kids' locations, I'd give them each
| an Airtag. $20ish and free tracking. I mind much less if
| they destroy/lose a $20 thing with a replaceable battery.
| makeitdouble wrote:
| 2 years is an eternity in the field of kids tracking devices. I
| sure wish it's supported for longer, but also don't expect to
| use it that much longer if there's a better device 2 years from
| now.
|
| In particular you'll be paying a monthly subscription, so
| you'll still be paying the same price whether you stick to this
| device for 10 years or not.
|
| On the Apple Watch it's a completely different proposition, in
| particular you absolutely need to pair to an active iPhone.
| nalekberov wrote:
| I am amazed by the way decisions are made at Google.
|
| In my imaginations the story was something like that: - How to
| keep next generations hooked into useless technology? - Oh, let's
| make their parents buy smartwatches to their kids, this way we A.
| will track them 24/7, sell other useless stuff too.
| jsnell wrote:
| Fitbit has been making smartwatches for like a decade. They've
| been making models specifically for kids before Google even
| bought them. It's the Fitbit Ace line. Why is continuing that
| product line something you're amazed by?
|
| Like, the only reason you seem amazed is because you've made up
| an outrageous story about how the product came to be. Except
| you admit that you've just made it up and know very well it's
| not true, so presumably that's not driving your amazement.
| nalekberov wrote:
| Didn't know about that, thanks for the addition.
| janice1999 wrote:
| Anyone else who would be uncomfortable opting your child into
| location, behavior and health surveillance by the world's largest
| advertising company?
| zooq_ai wrote:
| No. Because I'm not a loser with irrational paranoia and hatred
| towards corporations undermining my own ability to live a
| happy, productive life
| dang wrote:
| Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and
| flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly.
| It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.
|
| If you wouldn't mind reviewing
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking
| the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be
| grateful.
| wmf wrote:
| Apple Watch exists if that's what you want.
| janice1999 wrote:
| Does Apple have a children's version of their smartwatch? I
| was not aware of that.
| philomath_mn wrote:
| No, but there are several settings you can enable to make
| them more kid-friendly (including app limits and school
| hours)
| bradfa wrote:
| As mentioned by others in this discussion, Apple does have
| a way to limit the functionality of an Apple Watch, as
| outlined: https://support.apple.com/en-us/109036
| jrexilius wrote:
| That isn't really much better, except that Apples ad network
| is smaller than googles perhaps?
| RobotToaster wrote:
| Apple is also an advertising company.
| atonse wrote:
| Apple doesn't see any of your location data when it comes
| to Find My.
|
| It's usually end-to-end encrypted.
| prepend wrote:
| Google makes almost all their income from ads. Apple makes
| almost none.
| standardUser wrote:
| Apple purposefully leverages its closed ecosystem to
| generate social friction amongst kids in order to drive
| hardware sales, making them persona non grata in my book.
| okso wrote:
| Does anyone else feel uneasy about the idea of children having
| to curb their behavior because they know they're being
| constantly monitored by their parents?
|
| This product concerns me not only due to corporate advertising
| surveillance but also parental spying.
| quaintdev wrote:
| And then when they finally break free they don't have any
| feedback mechanism that they had since childhood. This can go
| both ways. They might turn out to be model citizen or your
| worst nightmare.
|
| People raised children for 1000s of years without any
| technology. I bet we can do that too.
| philomath_mn wrote:
| Possibly -- but we're looking at a smartwatch to give our 7
| y.o. _more_ freedom. If he has a way to call home and we
| can check on his location, I'm much more likely to set him
| loose in the neighborhood.
|
| Something for us to think about, though.
| guilhas wrote:
| I don't disagree, but we didn't had a choice and now we
| have. How much guilt is a parent going to have in, the
| unlikely situation, that something unfortunate happens and
| that it could have been prevented by this device?
| exitb wrote:
| I suspect that parents might be more permissive if they have
| access to location and means of communication.
| bitshiftfaced wrote:
| From skimming the page, it looks like it mainly just lets you
| know their location. Were there other more invasive features
| than that? Parents keeping tabs on where their kids are and
| who they're with is associated with positive outcomes like
| reduced drug use risks.
| pavel_lishin wrote:
| Flip that around.
|
| My child has _more_ freedom now, because I can let her walk
| further from home, unsupervised, to see if a friend can play
| - because she can immediately text me and let me know she 's
| staying at the friend's house for the next few hours. She no
| longer has to wait for me to be ready to walk with her.
|
| She can text me if she wants to be picked up from aftercare
| early. Or if she wants to stay later. Or if she wants to make
| plans for afterwards with a friend.
|
| I don't mean to dismiss your concerns, they're valid. But
| this question also varies _hugely_ with age. It would feel
| very odd tracking every step of my child 's life if they were
| 16; it's different if they're 8.
| tamimio wrote:
| Your kids won't appreciate it once they grow up and they found
| out later that their whole childhood been recorded and being
| used to train AI or even worse, a data breach, since they
| didn't have the choice to opt in or out.
| philomath_mn wrote:
| I don't think many kids will be bothered that their data was
| aggregated with thousands of other kids to set the weights in
| some model in the cloud.
| ryukoposting wrote:
| Is it any worse than giving your kid a smartphone?
| aiauthoritydev wrote:
| This is one good product.
| philomath_mn wrote:
| This is about the same price as the Apple Watch SE w/ LTE --
| seems tough for Google to compete with an established, reliable
| alternative at the same price point.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| > Fitbit Ace LTE is designed to protect your child's privacy and
| wellbeing. Parents can see their child's recent activity and goal
| progress, but older data will be automatically deleted from our
| systems. Location data is only shown to parents and is
| automatically deleted after a short time.
|
| > There are no third-party apps or ads shown to kids, and health
| and wellness data will not be used for Google ads.
|
| Sounds better than the regular smart watches.
| rvnx wrote:
| Interesting definition of "protecting your privacy", which
| means: Sending location information remotely to a US-hosted
| centralized server + a third-party (the parents) can track you
| all the time
| rmrfchik wrote:
| In next year: Google EOL watch for kids, closes servers rendering
| watches useless.
| philomath_mn wrote:
| Right -- why would I risk $229 on this when I know the Apple
| Watch will be around for many more years?
| rvnx wrote:
| $229 _plus_ mandatory subscription of $120 per year.
| atonse wrote:
| Does this include the cellular plan? Then it's probably
| fine. But if we'd still have to get an additional cellular
| plan on top of this, then it's silly.
| KMnO4 wrote:
| The $10/mo subscription is the data plan.
| canucker2016 wrote:
| Or $60 if you pay annually instead of monthly - though who
| knows how long that annual discount will last.
|
| [edit] and there's no buying the watch WITHOUT the Fitbit
| Ace Pass data plan, the watch setup REQUIRES a data plan.
|
| from the Compatability section of Tech Specs page:
|
| "Requires Wi-Fi and Fitbit Ace Pass data plan for setup."
|
| [edit2]
|
| though I guess you could buy just one month of the data
| plan, just for setting up the watch.
|
| But the watch's WiFi supports only 2.4GHz.
|
| [edit3]
|
| the annual data plan deal is only good until before Aug 31.
| see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzDpo1t02yA&t=275s
| fma wrote:
| Pretty bold for a company known to EOL their products to
| even offer an annual plan.
| rvnx wrote:
| It's not because they did it with Fitbit, and with a lot of
| Dropcam/Nest products they abandoned that it will happen
| here... right, _Right_ ?
| ClassyJacket wrote:
| Exactly. Anyone in the tech industry who buys this is a fool.
| But I feel sorry for everyone who doesn't keep up with tech
| news to know everything Google releases is dead in the water
| and gets duped by this and the inevitable shutdown.
|
| If this lasts as long as Stadia it will shut down on Thursday
| the 5th of August 2027.
| andrewla wrote:
| We've been happily using the Verizon Gizmo watch for a while now.
| It's a deliberately crippled smart watch. No games, no apps (it
| has a step counter and a stopwatch, but that's about it) -- some
| calling functionality, some messaging functionality, tons of
| oversight (limited contacts, all contacts must be approved by a
| guardian), and location tracking.
|
| It's kind of bad at all of these, but our primary thought is to
| have it be a limited capability device -- similar to a flip phone
| but a wearable.
|
| This looks like it's trying to enter the same market, but with a
| bunch of really really really really stupid shit.
|
| "Meet the eejie. The eejie is the center of the Fitbit Ace LTE.
| The more your kids move, the more goals they hit and the happier
| they make the eejie."
|
| You'd have to be an "eejie"-it to buy into this cutesy bullshit.
| ygjb wrote:
| IDK, showed it to my 12 and 15 year old. It's a bit too "little
| kid" for them, but both of them would have liked it when they
| were younger.
|
| You call it bullshit, but maybe you just aren't the target
| market?
| andrewla wrote:
| Quite possibly I am not the target demographic -- I never
| really got the tomagotchi thing either, so maybe I'm just a
| soulless monster.
|
| My kids have access to other electronic devices, but don't
| yet have a smartphone. The Gizmo is a nice intermediate step.
| They know what real games are like and they want those. As a
| parent I don't want the phone to be a source of distractions.
| Having these sort of half-assed games feels like the worst of
| both worlds; disappointing games that the kids don't like,
| and stupid distracting games that the parents don't want.
| gnicholas wrote:
| I agree that some kids would like this, but in my family we
| wouldn't give our kids smartwatches at that age (6-8?). I
| don't think this will hit with tweens/teens, both because of
| the UI and because Apple Watches will be perceived as more
| prestigious/elite (not endorsing the feeling -- just saying
| that will likely be the impression).
| balls187 wrote:
| $230 device, plus $10/mo, and that is per kid.
|
| At what age does Google think kids are responsible enough to be
| given such a device?
| lostlogin wrote:
| Google's views on this could be quite interesting to hear.
|
| Remember the (long ago) episode when Schmidt suggested that
| kids change their names to avoid connection with online antics
| in the past?
| crims0n wrote:
| $59.98 a year for unlimited connectivity is a pretty good deal.
| My kids are getting to the age where we leave them for things
| like soccer practice or summer camps. Not really interested in
| giving them a phone yet... but want them to be able to keep in
| touch. This seems like a decent compromise.
| robg wrote:
| No sleep or stress with heart rate seems like a missed
| opportunity. The games to help kids move is interesting but if a
| distraction in school more trouble than it's worth.
| tamimio wrote:
| If I have kids, I will never trust them with an evil and
| dangerous company like google, same goes for facebook too, the
| business model been and still exploiting, abusing, and selling
| users' data. An open source alternative, both software and
| hardware would be ideal for kids, in the meantime, being a good
| and dedicated parent is the best strategy, and keep your eyes on
| your kids, tech isn't needed.
| rvnx wrote:
| It's privacy-protecting; their location will be private, only
| you can track them all the time, the apps installed, Google and
| their SREs, the US government if they want to (but they most
| likely need to ask), etc.
| tamimio wrote:
| > the apps installed, Google and their SREs, the US
| government
|
| Overseas contractors, third party apps that are used by said
| contractors, other cloud services and their contractors etc
| etc.
| rvnx wrote:
| mhhh, and the phone operator too
| surfingdino wrote:
| My heart sunk when I saw this on the cookie control panel
| for a popular website "We and our 796 partners..." Oh, do
| f*k off...
| Achtunglskjdf wrote:
| I think we are crossing a boundary.
|
| If our world gets so broken, that parents need this, we should
| start changing our world
| pixxel wrote:
| You're preaching to the wrong crowd. They're salivating in this
| thread to attach a corporate surveillance tracker to their
| kids.
| bmoxb wrote:
| Am I missing something? Is it not just a glorified fitness
| tracker? I can certainly understand privacy concerns but I
| don't get how a smart watch is the signifier of a 'broken'
| world.
| wmf wrote:
| It's also a phone. Parents are demanding the right to say
| last goodbyes to their children during school shootings.
| gnicholas wrote:
| What's the benefit of this over a cheap LTE Apple Watch? I'm not
| an AW fanboy (Pebble/Garmin for me), but I had always anticipated
| getting my kid an LTE AW when the time came.
|
| It doesn't look like the pricing is much different, and for
| families with iPhones it would presumably be simpler to stay in
| the Apple ecosystem. Is there something I'm missing, or is this
| just for Android families?
|
| Regardless, I'm happy to see innovation in the space.
| m3kw9 wrote:
| It's an Android watch rebranded as kids version, add some
| restriction features. Apple has all of that already
| taeric wrote:
| I feel somewhat in a twilight zone. I'm not a fan of this device,
| but I also don't understand the over the top paranoia around it.
| Why do we invent such absurdly terrifying discourse around kids?
|
| If you don't want this for your kids, just don't get it. If you
| are worried about folks knowing where your kids are and what they
| are up to, I have bad news for you about neighborhood gossip.
| makeitdouble wrote:
| > Ace Pass required. Works with most phones running Android 11.0
| or newer or iOS 15 or newer.
|
| This is a bummer. It's still better than being android only or
| iOS only, but this would really have benefited from allowing
| standalone use with management from the web for instance.
| Laremere wrote:
| A noble idea that looks to be mired in bad design.
|
| Once again Google ties a product to a subscription service
| (beyond whatever lte connectivity which would be needed anyways).
| They seem to be always chasing getting that recurring revenue by
| adding unnecessary features. This adds little value, greatly
| increases the maintenance cost for Google, and puts the risk on
| the customer for whether Google will continue thinking it's worth
| it.
|
| Worst of all, "Games". As a lover of games as an artistic medium,
| and a game designer myself, I'm just so tired of gamification
| crap being added to everything else. Flashy graphics and numbers
| going up are the "sugar" to games' "nutrition" of interactive
| experience, mechanical exploration, and emotional expression.
| Rewarding children with external rewards over building internal
| motivation is dubious at best, and incredibly harmful at worst.
| jfkw wrote:
| I was hopeful this would be minimalist, secured contacts version
| of general purpose OS used in more powerful smartwatches. Regular
| phone and message apps, parent-limited contacts, communications
| logged where the parent can review/block it.
|
| We are currently sharing a Verizon Gizmo 3 among multiple
| children. The GizmoHub app is not bad but its mandatory use is
| frustrating. Friends need substantial parental help to start
| communicating with the Gizmo user (account creation with
| Verizon). Forcing all communications through a dedicated and
| clunky app is a non-starter.
|
| Battery life is the other challenge. Kids don't heed advice to
| conserve the less than all day battery life. Later when
| communications for pick-up are most needed, the watch is often
| low on power.
| stanski wrote:
| The communication part is a good idea but games? Would hate to
| watch my kid stare a smart watch to figure out what to do with
| herself.
| wmf wrote:
| The "games" appear to be gamified exercise apps.
| canucker2016 wrote:
| The Fitbit Ace LTE (age 7+) seems to be the step up to the
| FitBit Ace 3 fitness tracker (age 6+),
| https://store.google.com/product/fitbit_ace_3
| gnicholas wrote:
| > _You have control over when they can play on their Fitbit Ace
| LTE. Set downtimes during the day, while still letting them get
| in touch with you if they need to._
|
| This sounds like a great feature. I want my kid to be able to
| reach me in an emergency, but I want there to be zero
| distractions during the school day. Hopefully Apple implements
| this on Apple Watches that use Family Setup.
| atonse wrote:
| There's been "School Mode" on apple watches for years now. It's
| a distraction-free mode.
| gnicholas wrote:
| Cool, good to know. Seems like the discussion forums have
| several requests for preventing the kid from exiting the
| school mode, or only allowing exit in order to send a message
| or call an approved contact. I'll be interested to see how
| the different school modes evolve. It sounds like some
| schools don't allow watches where the kid can exit school
| mode except to make an emergency call, which makes sense. I
| wouldn't want to be a teacher trying to catch kids slipping
| in and out of school mode!
| pie420 wrote:
| Heroin for kids! NOTIFICATIONS NOTIFICATIONS TECH TECH START THEM
| EARLY QUANTIFY EVERYTHING RECORD EVERYTHING CONNECT EVERYTHING
| dmitrygr wrote:
| Requires a $10/mo data plan. So that is 2x of the many $5/mo
| plans you can get for a standalone-setup apple watch SE. Price is
| $70 less than the SE. Ok, so that crosses over in just over a
| year.
|
| But, I know the apple watch will be supported for 7 years or so.
| This is a google product, so I expect it to be EOLed tomorrow. No
| thanks. Fool me 100 times, shame on you, fool me 101 times, shame
| on me, google!
| canucker2016 wrote:
| Under Tech Specs,
| https://store.google.com/us/product/fitbit_ace_lte_specs?hl=...:
|
| "Tap to Pay (NFC)4(Coming soon)"
|
| What? Why would my kid need Tap to Pay? That's just setting the
| user/Google up for a horror story where the watch wearer goes
| overboard on spending for some lame game with in-app payments...
|
| Or are they expecting adults to use this as well?
| jakemoshenko wrote:
| Tap to pay with spend controls sounds ideal for things like
| after school snacks/activities and transit. It could also be an
| easy to way to manage things like allowance digitally?
| ryukoposting wrote:
| Same reason we have debit cards with parental controls.
|
| If I lived in Chicago, I'd put my Ventra card on my kid's smart
| watch.
| joezydeco wrote:
| Some urban transit systems use NFC for fares. Maybe you want
| your kid to have a bus or subway pass without having to carry a
| wallet.
| enragedcacti wrote:
| If you read the the "4" footnote included in your copied
| section...
|
| > Requires compatible payment card and internet access. Payment
| cards for supervised users may require a separate paid
| membership (not included with Fitbit Ace Pass). Payment card
| memberships or parents may restrict purchases of certain
| products or from certain retailers. Supports Tap to Pay only.
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| Ugh, I threw up a little in my mouth just from the headline.
|
| This constant tracking of kids is unnecessary and dangerous.
| Generations of kids survived without their parents needing to
| know their location at all times.
|
| And yes, I totally admit, some kids (very few actually depending
| on the locale) _didn 't_ survive. But we've traded this false
| sense of "safety" for kids that are so risk averse it is
| seriously negatively affecting their development. I highly
| recommend the writings of Jonathan Haidt - he not only has great
| arguments but also has a lot of data to back up his conclusions.
|
| Kids don't need more tech, they need less of it (and FWIW, most
| adults, too).
| wepple wrote:
| > Generations of kids survived without their parents needing to
| know their location at all times.
|
| And cars used to be safe even without seatbelts!
|
| It turns out times change. Before you think I'm disagreeing
| with the entirety of your comment, my own kids are the most
| free-range in-the-dirt kids I know. But it's location-
| dependent. I trust cities and their people far less than wild
| animals.
| NullPrefix wrote:
| >And cars used to be safe even without seatbelts!
|
| Me and a lot of people wear them purely out of fear of being
| robbed by the state
| forgotusername6 wrote:
| I met a guy who didn't wear his seatbelt. He was a delivery
| driver and in a collision at 20mph. His head went through
| the windscreen and it scalped him from the eyes up. He had
| a scar all the way across from ear to ear. He couldn't shut
| his eyes for months. He wears his seatbelt now.
| swatcoder wrote:
| The purpose of cars is to get people from place to place.
| That purpose isn't hampered by wearing a seatbelt. There's
| not even a compromise involved. It's all upside.
|
| The purpose of childhood is _produce future adults_. That
| purpose isn 't fully served when kids get too far removed
| from choices, risks, and consequences. Yes, we _also_ need to
| make sure they stay alive, but survival can 't be the only
| metric parents optimize for or they'll just produce confused
| old kids trying to live adult lives. (`Big`, but for real and
| without a magical fix in act 3.)
| daymanstep wrote:
| > I trust cities and their people far less than wild animals.
|
| Is this based on statistical reasoning?
|
| Would you really rather leave your kid with say, a wild boar,
| than with a person randomly chosen out of a city's
| population?
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| > And cars used to be safe even without seatbelts!
|
| No, they weren't, which is why this is a poor analogy. We
| discovered that seatbelts could save an enormous number of
| lives with minimal impact on individuals, so we mandated
| them.
|
| With child safety it's difficult to get comparable numbers
| (overall crime spiked in the 90s, so it's difficult to say
| whether kids were less safe because they had less tracking or
| just that overall crime was higher then), a big reason
| experts give for the reduction in crime affecting kids is
| they're simply inside a whole lot more.
|
| They'd be even safer if we just put them in a plastic bubble
| I guess.
| enragedcacti wrote:
| For better or for worse the ship has definitely sailed on the
| laissez-faire "be home before sunset" parenting of past
| generations. Assuming that, its probably a net positive if a
| product like this can give a parent who would otherwise be full
| helicopter enough assurance to let their kid have more freedom
| and independence. Especially if its in lieu of a smartphone.
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| > For better or for worse the ship has definitely sailed on
| the laissez-faire "be home before sunset" parenting of past
| generations.
|
| It's only "sailed" because (some) parents demand to know
| where their kid is at all times. While I think it's difficult
| for any individual parent to, say, forbid social media for
| too long lest they ostracize their kid, saying "I won't track
| my kids" is a choice any parent can make.
|
| I just pity the kids of these helicopter parents. The youth
| mental health crisis is no accident.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _the ship has definitely sailed on the laissez-faire "be
| home before sunset" parenting of past generations_
|
| This depends on where you are. In particular, it seems to
| depend on how wealthy your neighbours are.
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| > For better or for worse the ship has definitely sailed on
| the laissez-faire "be home before sunset" parenting of past
| generations.
|
| It was a good [entirety of human history] age. I'll miss it.
| TomJansen wrote:
| I agree with this 1000%. Kids need to be free and explore
| things on their own.
|
| Why are we living in a world where we think that kids do not
| deserve privacy? Or where we think that we cannot trust our
| children?
| reaperducer wrote:
| _Kids don 't need more tech, they need less of it (and FWIW,
| most adults, too)._
|
| There was a "looking back" piece of WGN-TV last week about a
| 10-year-old and a 14-year-old who rode their horses from
| Missouri to New York City to meet Roosevelt. Alone. All they
| had with them was canteens, and a map.
|
| Then they bought a car with the money they raised along the
| way, and drove home to Missouri. Alone.
|
| Today you can't get an adult to sit on a chair for 30 minutes
| without them using a phone, a water bottle, or both as a
| pacifier.
| qwerpy wrote:
| > using a phone, a water bottle, or both as a pacifier
|
| I slowly put my phone down in shame after reading this. But I
| really love this sentence because of how true it is. Why is
| it always a phone and a water bottle?
| Rebuff5007 wrote:
| Having kids solely use a smart watch with some amount of
| connectedness (GPS, phone calls, a game or two) seems healthier
| and considerably "less tech" than a full on smartphone.
| nytesky wrote:
| In principle I agree we don't need to track our kids. But when
| I was I a free range kid in the 80s, there were pay phones at
| every corner, I carried coins and a calling card so could reach
| my parents.
|
| Now they have to interact with an adult somewhere to use their
| personal phone. And the adult has to trust this isn't a ruffian
| looking to swipe his phone for kicks.
|
| But a cell capable watch for $200 is pretty compelling; the
| Apple SE is sync only right, so equivalent apple watch is
| $350+?
| neilv wrote:
| How will this work out with grade school kids' socialization,
| when some kids in a class have the neat smartwatches, but some
| don't?
|
| I remember very much noticing as a young kid that I didn't have
| some things some other kids had. But most of the time that was at
| home, rather than visible every day. And I was also a bit aware
| that some other kids had less than I did. (Parochial school
| uniforms helped.)
| LeoNatan25 wrote:
| > Requires Ace Pass data plan $9.99/mo.
|
| LOL
| alooPotato wrote:
| This reminds me of an idea I've been noodling on for a bit about
| my kids. I want them to be able to take more risks and be more
| independent - but counterintuitively, I think this means putting
| them in a safer environment.
|
| For example, I'd be waaaay more comfortable letting my young kids
| (6yrs old) roam around outside the house if will lived in a safe
| suburb rather than a city. I think the same is true for this type
| of watch, I'd let them do more stuff at a younger age if I knew I
| could always get a hold of them and knew where they were.
| stavros wrote:
| But that's not taking more risks, that's taking the same amount
| of risks, just doing more with it.
| mustang-med wrote:
| My partner is on one of the teams responsible for red tape and
| cost-cutting at Alphabet. After having frequent conversations
| about past failed projects, I'm surprised this project got the
| green light. Personally, I don't see this product taking off. As
| a parent, I think it looks quite lame, and I don't think anyone
| at Google knows how to break into product areas for kids. I've
| seen quite a few headlines concerned about Nvidia being the next
| Cisco, but as someone who has had family at both Cisco and Google
| over the last 30 years, I really think Alphabet is more likely to
| become the next Cisco, where middle-aged engineers go to work for
| 30 hours a week to keep the internet's backbone afloat.
| refulgentis wrote:
| I worked on Android Wear many, many, years ago. 2016ish. This
| segment and use case was quietly huge, massive, in at least
| China, and I bet it still is. (Left google late 23)
|
| I'd love to hear more about this team for cost cutting, it
| really messed things up*: external, or internal?
|
| * You may imagine I am finding some humor in "my SO is on the
| google cost cutting team and I don't get why this team exists,
| why would anyone want a watch for their kid." I am, but I
| understand where you're coming from, and I'm sure your SO
| likely would have learned more about the watch market before
| making similar decisions
| canucker2016 wrote:
| Just based on the UI, I can see the user age range being
| limited to 7-11/12 year olds.
|
| Teens won't want this on their wrist in high school.
| drewg123 wrote:
| Tell her to look at the travel system. At least when I was
| there a decade ago, they gameified it so that we needed to come
| in below the average cost for a flight, otherwise we needed VP
| approval. But if we came in under the average, you could bank
| the savings and use it to upgrade to first class, etc.
|
| This sounds great on paper: incentivizing employees to reduce
| travel costs and rewarding them for it! But in reality, you'd
| have engineers payed substantial fractions of a million dollars
| in total comp wasting hours booking travel, hoping to bank
| savings to use on later upgrades.
| dylan604 wrote:
| > I'm surprised this project got the green light.
|
| To me, it looks just like another example of Googs missing the
| boat and attempting to play catch up in an attempt to stay
| relevant by imitating what someone else does. Maybe that's a
| gross oversimplification, but that's the way it comes across to
| me. This thing clearly chasing Apple's device. Googs+ clearly
| chasing Facebook. Of course, there's their rash attempt at an
| AI. Googs just comes across a company without any focus other
| than AdSense, but desperately want to not remembered as a tech
| company that became an ad company.
| dzonga wrote:
| this is the risk, no matter how useful products are. Google
| just cuts products at a whim. and sends products to the
| graveyard. even the one's that wouldn't cost 1 engineer -
| looking at you - Google Podcasts.
| m3kw9 wrote:
| Google tracking yo kids, your moma, papa, sisters. Build a ad
| profile early, even a family profile, gotta serve them good ads
| tanker_root wrote:
| The 5% of the world that makes most of the decisions has an
| active interest in creating a labor force that will passively and
| diligently maintain order.
|
| The subconscious drive to give young children technology is no
| different in its psychohistorical origins than the Hitler Youth.
| One could ask for what purpose does somebody want to "monitor"
| themselves.
|
| Is it for any great works or for the prolongation of bare life
| through the min-maxing of REM cycles.
| julienreszka wrote:
| > wild things
|
| That formulation is poor taste imo
| srameshc wrote:
| LTE is good, but what is the subscription for? A sturdy LTE watch
| that can call and text would have been great. This product is
| dead on arrival.
| kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
| Gabb wireless and others have had this for ages, for much
| cheaper.
| canucker2016 wrote:
| People who have parents/relatives with cognitive problems might
| want this for tracking purposes.
| mrinterweb wrote:
| $230 is a bit high up-front cost for a kids watch. Compare this
| to something like TickTalk and it seems that TickTalk has more
| features. https://www.myticktalk.com/. The design of the Google
| kids watch does look nicer though. TickTalk is pretty bulky and
| the UI is not great.
| dtx1 wrote:
| Sounds cool, looking forward to it getting killed in 3 weeks.
| nytesky wrote:
| It says GPS location, but does it do mapping? That and calling
| are like the two most valuable features (only 20 contacts, so no
| group chats with his class?)
| ugh123 wrote:
| This is an interesting move by Google. The watch market for kids
| is _huge_ and growing. Look at the major companies sales here.
| Also look at the amount of kid 's smart watches available on
| Amazon and number of reviews (I know, i'm sure some of those are
| fake yada yada).
|
| The detractors here say "let the kids be free" and "no new tech
| for kids", but I wonder if those people have kids today? Parents
| _WANT_ to give their kid 's more outdoor freedom in this f'd up
| world. Tracking products like this _give them more peace of
| mind_.
|
| At $10/month (or $5/mo with annual buy), this is competitive and
| possibly a new recurring revenue stream for Google's consumer
| products group.
| Havoc wrote:
| Does it come in ankle bracelet form factor?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-05-29 23:00 UTC)