PDA

View Full Version : Would you / do you block your children from certain sites?



aysiu
May 15th, 2009, 06:21 PM
I'm not a parent, and I don't plan on ever being one, but I'm curious for those who are parents or those who plan to be parents, what are you doing or what you planning to do about content filtering?

If you are a parent whose kids are already grown up, please pick what you would have done if the internet were around when your kids were young... or what you did do when your kids were young (if they were young not so long ago).

maflynn
May 15th, 2009, 06:24 PM
I'm a parent of twin 3 year olds, and as they get older, I'll be looking to monitor their computer usage, which is not limited to blocking sites and making sure that the computer will be in a public place, i.e., in the living room as opposed to their room.

There's too many creeps and sickos out there and too many things to trip up young ones not to be overly cautious.

Tipped OuT
May 15th, 2009, 06:28 PM
I'm a 15 year old, I if I have a child one day, I will let him/her see whatever they want. What's the point of hiding things from them? The only "bad" thing on the Internet is pornography, which is just filmed actors having "sex".

Sex is completely natural, and one day he/she will have sex too.

Don't get me wrong though, I won't expose my kids to that kind of material at a young age, probably at 15 or 16, and talk to him/her about it, and about sex.

:)

Bölvağur
May 15th, 2009, 06:29 PM
behaviour altering techniques ftw... which would then be seen as self generated filter by the child

Paqman
May 15th, 2009, 07:02 PM
Tbh, I filter myself too. I've had to wean myself off online filth, as it was getting well out of hand.

As for kids, yes, i'll filter their content, but I also won't be letting them surf unsupervised until they're old enough to be safe online. Although how a parent is supposed to monitor their access on mobile devices I have no idea. The networks filter content a little, but I can't imagine that would stop the kids really. All it takes is one of them with some dubious content and Bluetooth and they've all got it. I guess you have to admit that you can't really control this kind of thing much.

Sinkingships7
May 15th, 2009, 07:15 PM
I'm 18 right now. If or when I have kids, I would just teach them programming. Then they'd spend all their time reading articles and Google-ing for help on their latest projects. :p

In all seriousness, it would be horribly hypocritical for me to try to restrict their computer usage. I would, however, use their healthiness as a limit on their time using a computer. As long as they're healthy, they would be able to use the computer as much as they wanted. It's a privilege, but may lead to bad health problems if it is abused.



if (kids == (Ride their bikes with me while I run in the morning) &&
kids == (Eat healthy) &&
kids == (Do their chores) &&
kids == (Aren't brats)){
virtuallyUnlimitedComputerTime = true;
}else{
virtuallyUnlimitedComputerTime = false;
}

LowSky
May 15th, 2009, 07:42 PM
Education is the way to go. No point blocking stuff, just be involved in their lives.

SunnyRabbiera
May 15th, 2009, 07:48 PM
Education is the way to go. No point blocking stuff, just be involved in their lives.

Indeed, granted I make sure that my kids stay away from bad sites but one cannot control everything.

kellemes
May 15th, 2009, 08:20 PM
Not sure how I should deal with this yet, I have a boy of 22 months and he's not online yet.
I see the dangers of internet and I think kids should be protected from the worst of it. Maybe filtering-software can handle some of this, but surely I'll be guiding my kid(s) (second kid coming up) besides using filters.
The same applies to tv by the way, I see a lot of kid-unfriendly crap on tv these days.. This sometimes even includes tv actually made for kids.

sim-value
May 15th, 2009, 08:23 PM
Internet Censoring is Plain stupid

Education & Trust are Way better ...

pricetech
May 15th, 2009, 08:36 PM
Kids are grown so I'm dealing with Grandchildren. The computer they use is in the livingroom where everyone can see. I also use OpenDNS for filtering just in case. The rule at our house has always been if they stumble upon something that we (parents and grandparents both have a say) don't approve of, bring it to our attention and they're off the hook. Grandpa will make sure it's blocked at the router.

Parental supervision is the best first line of defense, with filtering as a backup. (My Opinion)

gabo.cr
May 15th, 2009, 08:49 PM
I will educate and filter the contents.
(They don't have to know that I have filters)

gn2
May 15th, 2009, 08:51 PM
I'm a parent and rely solely on guidance and education.
It's the only way for them to learn how to behave responsibly.

Tristam Green
May 15th, 2009, 08:51 PM
I will easily plan on filtering my child's Internet access; however, education is also key.

The other side of that coin is, though, that with more education comes more knowledge of how to circumvent filtering techniques.

markp1989
May 15th, 2009, 08:53 PM
im 19, and dont plan to have kids, but if i did, it would educate them rather then blocking things.

all blocking things will do will just make the kids more curious, and then they will

a) find a way around the filtering

b) see stuff that you have filtered on another childs computer.

lisati
May 15th, 2009, 09:07 PM
I'm neither a parent nor likely to be one (it hasn't happened yet, but who knows?) but have several nieces, nephews, and cousins (by marriage) of school age.

One of the ideas I've come across on shows like Dr Phil is to have something similar to what pricetech suggests: to have the internet access in a public room in the house, so you can keep an informal watch on what's being accessed.

I'd also be open to talking about why some sites aren't such a good idea, in an age-appropriate manner.

You shouldn't have to be sneaky but you need to remember whose computer it is, who's paying for the internet, and who's the parent. It's up to you to set whatever controls and boundaries you think are appropriate.

Oh, one further option: one of my routers' "parental control" settings includes a feature that lets you redirect selected sites to a different place. This could be used to redirect "suspect" sites to one you can trust, rather than just blocking things outright.

xpod
May 15th, 2009, 10:13 PM
I used to mess about with filtering & white listing stuff for our younger girls during my first year or so but i was/am learning about the computers/internet just the same as them so any messing about between the computers i did/do is only to better understand them rather than to actually limit what the children can or cant do.There`s really no need for any real filtering though.Monitoring for the younger one`s yes but filtering no.Involvement with them & the computers/internet has been the best way it seems.
I can easily see what any of their machines are doing at any particular time if needs be but having one computer in the living room to monitor them really is`nt an option.

We`ve had (only)3+ years now with the computers & internet but we`ve yet to have a problem with the little ones landing/going anywhere they probably shouldn`t have.Even better is that after 32 of those 36 months with Ubuntu & co we`ve not really had any other problems either....:D


If or when I have kids, I would just teach them programming. Then they'd spend all their time reading articles and Google-ing for help on their latest projects.

mmm...good luck with that;)

Old_Grey_Wolf
May 15th, 2009, 10:47 PM
Education and guidance is what I have done. Guidance also includes placing computers in public areas of the house for the children to use. That way you observe what they are doing and know what guidance to provide. Of course they do things when you are not watching.

I remember when I was a child, there were no home computers or Internet; however, my friends and I found magazines that were UM RACY to say the least. I also encountered a choir director at my church and a coach at my school that propositioned me when I was a minor. My parents raised me so that I could respond to those situations. I took the same approach with my children and grandchildren.

Even if you filter the Internet, the children can encounter the same problems in the corporeal world. Therefore, I chose education and guidance.

SuperSonic4
May 15th, 2009, 10:53 PM
I would educate them in the basics and then allow them to learn from their own mistakes. Nobody learns from the mistakes of their parents - one must learn from one's own mistakes.

I would let them have the internet in their bedroom even going as far as giving them a lock (but I'd have a spare key) because I believe in privacy above a lot of things. Even browsing innocently I get all tense when someone is looking over my shoulder.

kelvin spratt
May 15th, 2009, 10:55 PM
If you put restrictions on your children it will only make them more curious better to educate them.

Carl Hamlin
May 15th, 2009, 10:59 PM
I have an 8 year old daughter, and when she's on the internet here at home, I sit next to her. She actually kind of likes it - she asks me how to get information on stuff, and I show her.

She uses my wife's laptop to do her school assignments, and when one of us can't be near her while she's on the computer, we just remove the USB wireless component from the port.

She's occasionally asked me to help her find info on some relatively controversial stuff. She's a smart kid and wants to know what's what. I sit with her, and show her how to get where she wants to go, and she asks questions when she has them.

Ms_Angel_D
May 15th, 2009, 11:03 PM
I'm the mother of three kids 15, 11, and 9. As a parent I've always relied on Honesty and openness with my kids. My Reasoning is that if I Educate them now then they will have the tools necessary to make good decisions as adults. The results so far have been very positive. I now have a 15 year old son who isn't afraid to discuss problems he might be having even confide in me about other things.

Of course I'm no fool either I do monitor my kids on-line behaviour, as well. But as for filters I find them to mostly be more of a hinderence than a help.

markp1989
May 15th, 2009, 11:43 PM
It really annoys me when my dad looks over my shoulder when im using the laptop in the living room. same as if im reading it anoys me if people read over my shoulder.

i complained about my dad looking over my sholder, and he sed well your not doing anything private on there so it doesnt matter, which just anoyed me. its the same thing, just because your phone call isnt somthing private doesnt mean that people can listen in.

i just stick with my original opinion, education is the best defence

subdivision
May 15th, 2009, 11:46 PM
"I'm a parent and rely primarily on guidance and education "

That one. There's really no substitute for keeping an eye on your child, espcially if you're going to let them online.

wersdaluv
May 16th, 2009, 12:55 AM
I'm not a parent but when I already have kids, I intend to rely on the values I teach them. Filtering content would make them think that I don't think they are smart enough to know what's right and wrong. Children are smart enough to find out that they can't access some things because daddy restricts them from doing so.

I'm quite young and I always had unfiltered internet access. I love this because I know that I can see and hear anything I want from the web but I can manage to avoid what I have to.

Tipped OuT
May 16th, 2009, 01:02 AM
"I'm a parent and rely primarily on guidance and education "

That one. There's really no substitute for keeping an eye on your child, espcially if you're going to let them online.

Aww you guys are lame, I'm a kid, and I can tell you that's lame, we get enough of "education" at that building we go to every day people call school. Lame.. :neutral:. And if you think you can hide the real world from your kid, you're dead wrong.

dragos240
May 16th, 2009, 01:21 AM
I'm a student, I plan on not having a child or any type of relationship whatsoever.

gnomeuser
May 16th, 2009, 01:22 AM
I am not currently a parent but I plan to one day become one. I am not so worried about filtering sites, evidence so far proves that children with motivation will get into sites they want regardless. For many children a big "you're not allowed in there" just entices them more. Even if you plan to "protect" them from porn and other things it's impossible to filter every single item out there and accidentally hitting a site with that content is sure to happen.

Instead I think that education and time limiting will be effective. For the first few years I expect to be sitting there with my children, but eventually they will have solo experiences and for those I think it's the right thing to limit the time they get online and the conditions on which they can go online.

neo_1in
May 16th, 2009, 01:27 AM
Good topic. Definitely an important issue. I am not a parent and i did not have a pc till i was 18 so i cannot be authoritative about my views.
Though education sounds very political answer, i guess it is the only practical option. I mean if you do start filtering stuff, at what point do you stop, when the kid is 13 or 16 or what. For all we know there are 10 year olds as responsible as anyone and 40 year olds losing their mind to porn on internet. Guidance is the only way to tread here. If one of these days between acads, extra-curriculars, sports, gf/bf and ubuntuforums someone still ends up being affected by "certain sites", well, thats just unlucky.

Mister LinOx
May 16th, 2009, 01:57 AM
If I ever have children, I will teach them about loop holes and the such, then limit them while they try to find ways to bypass it or get rid of it all together "behind my back". I'll catch them, then teach them more and continue to challenge.

I'd also keep them active, though, as too much computer and programming time isn't the best for a child or teen.

Sinkingships7
May 16th, 2009, 02:22 AM
If I ever have children, I will teach them about loop holes and the such, then limit them while they try to find ways to bypass it or get rid of it all together "behind my back". I'll catch them, then teach them more and continue to challenge.

I'd also keep them active, though, as too much computer and programming time isn't the best for a child or teen.

... Can I go back in time and trade my parents for you?

mohitchawla
May 16th, 2009, 02:23 AM
I'll let them do/see whatever they want as long as they run linux. :cool:

penguindrive
May 16th, 2009, 02:29 AM
I'm not a parent, I'm 15 and am the defacto net admin, so I don't think I will block my own access.:p

BTW: I don't plan to block my kids either(if ever have any, which I doubt I will).

Dngrsone
May 16th, 2009, 02:31 AM
I am a parent of four kids ranging in age, currently, from 9 to 21.

Education is key, but so is monitoring and regulation: I can't always be there to watch the computer because I have to work, sleep, etc. I have a firewall appliance which restricts internet access to certain times of the day so curious minds don't wander into the dark underside of the internet while parents are sleeping.

The firewall also contains content filtering with different levels for each child. It's too easy for inappropriate content to slip through the cracks in Google search or especially YouTube. Education is one thing, but allowing my 9-year-old to learn the mechanics of sex via online video is certainly not in anybody's interest.

Likewise, allowing my 12-year-old daughter to learn new language and terms via YouTube videos is also counter-productive.

Downloads, instant messaging and chat are also blocked or monitored, as appropriate.

If I can't see where they are going on the computer in the living room, I can see where they've been via the firewall logs: they know my rules, and their internet access can and will be restricted even more or downright revoked if they break them.

CharmyBee
May 16th, 2009, 02:37 AM
I'm not a parent nor an admin of a network but if I could I would just for the sake of security. My aggressive greedy little brother catches trojans all the time so much I wonder how he does it. Not on my computer but my mother's, where the finances are done :(

Mister LinOx
May 16th, 2009, 02:38 AM
... Can I go back in time and trade my parents for you?
Yes, you can, but I would probably not be born yet, as I am only 14.

That would be nice to have parents into programming/linux/pcs and the such. Too bad the only person that messes with computers a lot is my grandmother that I live with and she does not know anything in reality, but in her brain she does. I joke about her with my techsmart-like brother and we laugh. That's how I get decent at bypassing things. She sets them on me, so I do things to confuse her. Funny stuff.

She recently forced me to switch computers with her Dell Dimension 4600 with only 30 GB of free space and then formatted my old drives without letting me backup destroying my "perfect" xubuntu set up and had to go buy a new PSU =( Now she claims that she talked to a hardware professional and he said that the reason the other PC needed a new psu and it wouldn't turn on was because more than one os on a computer messes up everything and brings viruses in. Go figure. So, Now I'm stuck with XP until I can purchase an external hard drive.


Sorry for the rant. XD

zakany
May 16th, 2009, 04:28 AM
I'm a parent and I strongly regulate her hours. I don't use content filters, but if I find her going to a site I don't like I block it at the gateway and poof - you can't get to it from any computer in the house.

lisati
May 16th, 2009, 04:35 AM
She recently forced me to switch computers with her Dell Dimension 4600 with only 30 GB of free space and then formatted my old drives without letting me backup destroying my "perfect" xubuntu set up and had to go buy a new PSU =( Now she claims that she talked to a hardware professional and he said that the reason the other PC needed a new psu and it wouldn't turn on was because more than one os on a computer messes up everything and brings viruses in. Go figure.

That kind of misunderstanding can happen when you're more clued up on some things than those in a position to pull the plug. Hope you're able to maintain a good relationship with your Mum while you two sort out an arrangement which both of you can work with.

Mister LinOx
May 16th, 2009, 05:22 AM
That kind of misunderstanding can happen when you're more clued up on some things than those in a position to pull the plug. Hope you're able to maintain a good relationship with your Mum while you two sort out an arrangement which both of you can work with.

Yeah. Grandmother. I hope so too. She just doesn't like linux nor my mothers side of the family, and since my brother is from that side and he got me into linux, she gets mad. I try to look over it though.

On topic though:
I think it would be kind of cool for a parent to set up a "training" program for their kids like I mentioned before. Haha. Be kind of fun to come up with the challenges.

Paqman
May 16th, 2009, 08:16 AM
So for those of you who do use filtering, what solutions do you find practical? Obviously setting up a dedicated firewall machine gives the most flexibility, but at the cost of extra hardware and electricity, which would be a bit of a turnoff for me.

starcannon
May 16th, 2009, 10:02 AM
My kids are given levels of trust; and we do not run a free republic here; indeed, its more of a dictatorship with a Big Brother overtone. I can log in and watch what they are doing online 24/7. I have all the passwords to the various websites and email accounts they use, when they are 18, I will of course change that policy; but, while they are minor children its my business to know their business, in this way I can keep them safe, allow information and ideas to be brought to them in degree's and forms that I think is safe and conducive to creating in them a well adjusted psyche.

GL out there how-ever you choose to do it.

xpod
May 16th, 2009, 10:37 AM
So for those of you who do use filtering, what solutions do you find practical? Obviously setting up a dedicated firewall machine gives the most flexibility, but at the cost of extra hardware and electricity, which would be a bit of a turnoff for me.

OpenDNS has quite a good filtering option but the best options will always depend on the computer situation at home.

WatchingThePain
May 16th, 2009, 10:59 AM
I just think the ease at which kids can bump into a page of hardcore porn on the net these days is completely sickening.
As adults it is of course our duty to use all the filtering software and means we can to protect them.

Paqman
May 16th, 2009, 11:03 AM
OpenDNS has quite a good filtering option but the best options will always depend on the computer situation at home.

We use OpenDNS at work and it seems to be quite flakey. It regularly decides to fail a site for several minutes. From a quick snoop at their website it also looks like it might be a bit of a hassle for a home network that has a dynamic IP. Cheers for the suggestion though!

xpod
May 16th, 2009, 11:11 AM
We use OpenDNS at work and it seems to be quite flakey. It regularly decides to fail a site for several minutes. From a quick snoop at their website it also looks like it might be a bit of a hassle for a home network that has a dynamic IP. Cheers for the suggestion though!

Cant say we`ve ever had any real problems here at home.
There are DDNS solutions for dynamic IP addresses though.
http://www.opendns.com/support/dynamic_ip_tech/

We actually get our own IP address/es via DHCP too but it changes so rarely that i dont even have to bother using any DDNS service.If and when it ever does change i can quickly add the new network.I`ve only ever had to do that when i`ve been changing hardware or forcing an IP change some other way.

EDIT:My main reason for using OpenDNS is that my browsing is just so much snappier,even with our 20Mb line.The pages generally load that bit quicker than they do with my ISP`s DNS servers.

markp1989
May 16th, 2009, 11:47 AM
I got my first computer put in my room with internet access when i was 11, i only had 1 hour of access a day (9pm-10pm) because we still had dialup back then, and only 1 computer could connect, so i would have to be online when my older sister was watching her tv shows.

I never had any content filters of any kind, and i didnt see anything i wasnt sposed to.

i have seen a few post mentioning monitoring MSN and other instant message chats , which i think is out of order, I think that you should monitor WHO they talk to, but not what they talk about , same as you would if you reviewed a phone bill. I feel that looking at what your children talk about with the friends is abit out of order if you ask me, as every one is aloud some privacy.

Then again im 19 and alot of you would still think i was too young to have full internet and probably want to filter mine lol

handy
May 16th, 2009, 01:51 PM
Guidance & education was our way.

Though we are grandparents now with very young grandchildren, so we have that future to enjoy. :)

sgosnell
May 16th, 2009, 02:52 PM
I let my kids do whatever they want. They're adults, and it's too late to do much about what they do.

You're a role model every hour of every day when you're a parent, and you kids will generally do pretty much what you do. If they see that you practice what you preach, they are much more likely to do as you ask. They need to learn to make decisions on their own, so over-supervision can be counterproductive. Parenting is a very difficult and complicated job, and there is no effective user manual, you just have to learn as you go.

fatality_uk
May 16th, 2009, 02:58 PM
Of course I would block them and as soon as we have kids, that will be the case. I use the analogy of the internet being like a town. In any town, there are areas which you wouldn't want your children to visit. In my opinion, it is a parents responsibility to provide their child with a safe environment and part of that duty is preventing them for putting themselves in danger. Just as in the "real" world, there are dangerous areas of the internet.

Dngrsone
May 16th, 2009, 03:19 PM
Since I have a collection of older machines lying around, it was easy for me to set up a firewall appliance using Smoothwall Express. Originally, I was running v. 2.0 on a Pentium II with 512MB on a 4GB drive.

I've recently upgraded to a P4 1GB on a 6.3GB drive. I run the machine headless (that is, without keyboard, mouse, monitor) and the PSU also powers my routers, eliminating a few bricks/wall warts.

I use CLAM AV stateful packet inspection and DansGuardian to filter the content based on IP address (DHCP with fixed addresses for the family member's computers. Guests using DHCP get filtered at the tightest filter restriction). Eventually, I will set up user account filtering, but right now, since each family member has a computer they each like to use, it works out okay with IP filtering.

Someone spoke out against PM/IM monitoring. My view is simple: a nine-year-old has no need to be IMing anybody, so he doesn't have that option. If he asks for it, then I will consider, and he will know that I am monitoring the channels. I have no need to read every message, however, considering the anonymity of the internet, the best way to know who my kids are chatting with is to watch the IP addresses and the content-- if I don't like the words they are using, then that channel will be restricted and that IP blocked.

Luckily, I've not had to go to that extreme, yet. When you find sexual predators in your neighborhood being arrested, you tend to get paranoid.

WatchingThePain
May 16th, 2009, 04:34 PM
I suppose it gets to a point where your kids reach an age when monitoring their email gets imposing.
Email is very worrying because it can contain unsolicited links to anything.
Young kids getting corrupted by the internet should not happen.
Spammers just do not care.
Then there's the stalkers in chatrooms.

lykwydchykyn
May 16th, 2009, 05:59 PM
I have squid/dansguardian set up on my server (which also does file/print/DNS caching/you-name-it), and it works pretty well. I've got four kids and the oldest is seven, so at this point (a) they aren't trying to get to anything objectionable and (b) they don't know how to get around the filtering even if they did. I expect that to change at some point.

But filtering is just one tool, a keep-the-honest-person-honest tool. When my kids run into a blocked site or file, they tell me about it and we talk about why that site was blocked. "Education and Guidance" covers a lot of ground and a lot of different approaches, and to me filtering is actually part of "education and guidance".

There is a lot more than just porn out there that kids their ages don't need to be into.

subdivision
May 16th, 2009, 06:01 PM
Aww you guys are lame, I'm a kid, and I can tell you that's lame, we get enough of "education" at that building we go to every day people call school. Lame.. :neutral:. And if you think you can hide the real world from your kid, you're dead wrong.

So keeping my kid from looking at hard-core porn online is hiding the "real world" from him? It may be lame from your perspective but, no offense, you have not a clue as to what you're talking about.

Come back when you have kids.

alexandari
May 16th, 2009, 06:10 PM
well..I dont know but when I have kids,there will be things that should be shown/explained from me not from the internet...my point is,doesnt matter what,I want my kids to first learn it from me not from the internet...because one of the things will be that I`ll be sure they know the truth,the real thing because on the internet everyone can type/tell anything...

Tipped OuT
May 16th, 2009, 06:10 PM
So keeping my kid from looking at hard-core porn online is hiding the "real world" from him? It may be lame from your perspective but, no offense, you have not a clue as to what you're talking about.

Come back when you have kids.

The real world is full of sex and violence. The internet is only one way to find out about it, there's school, friends, movies etc.

So keeping your kids from it and not talking to them like a father/mother, is just cowardly in my opinion. Sex and violence is apart of this world, if you don't teach them how to handle it, your son and/or daughter will live a miserable life. You don't believe me? I'm living proof, and I promised myself I wouldn't let this happen to any one else, as long as I can prevent it.

Come back when you know how it feels to have bad parents, and feel suicidal every day.

subdivision
May 16th, 2009, 06:14 PM
The real world is full of sex and violence. The internet is only one way to find out about it, there's school, friends, movies etc.

So keeping your kids from it and not talking to them like a father/mother, is just cowardly in my opinion.

Your opinion as a kid doesn't hold much weight when it comes to the "real world", which, by the way, the internet has very little association with. You can call us cowardly all you want but I'm afraid that your critique is pretty baseless until you yourself have some actual experience with the "real world".

If you seriously think that alowing children to look at pornography and violence online is a healthy thing I feel bad for your kids, should you ever have any.

subdivision
May 16th, 2009, 06:17 PM
Sex and violence is apart of this world, if you don't teach them how to handle it, your son and/or daughter will live a miserable life. You don't believe me? I'm living proof, and I promised myself I wouldn't let this happen to any one else, as long as I can prevent it.

Come back when you know how it feels to have bad parents, and feel suicidal every day.

When you're a parent I hope you remember posting this.

I'm not going to argue with you, but as someone who has been alive probably a LOT longer than you and has experienced firsthand some of the terrible things that go on in the "real world", I'm telling you that you have a lot to learn.

Tipped OuT
May 16th, 2009, 06:20 PM
Be a man. That's all I have to say.


TT

subdivision
May 16th, 2009, 06:26 PM
Be a man. That's all I have to say.


TT

I'm going to leave alone the fact that a 15 year old is telling anyone to "be a man".

When I was 21 I had the opportunity to speak with a gentleman in his late 60s that had just got back from a trip to Africa. This guy has seen a lot, done a lot, and has, by most people's measure, been pretty successful in his life.

He told me (I'm paraphrasing), "When I was 18 my father was an idiot. When I turned 21 he seemed a little smarter. At 30 it almost seemed like he was my equal. At my age now, I look back and I realize the man was a genius."

linsux
May 16th, 2009, 06:56 PM
I'm going to leave alone the fact that a 15 year old is telling anyone to "be a man".

When I was 21 I had the opportunity to speak with a gentleman in his late 60s that had just got back from a trip to Africa. This guy has seen a lot, done a lot, and has, by most people's measure, been pretty successful in his life.

He told me (I'm paraphrasing), "When I was 18 my father was an idiot. When I turned 21 he seemed a little smarter. At 30 it almost seemed like he was my equal. At my age now, I look back and I realize the man was a genius."

There's some things only age can teach.

Personally, I'm not a parent. But, I would probably try and teach my children to be smart enough on the internet to not get in trouble. Would I do content filtering? Maybe if they were under the age of 12. But as far as I'm concerned, you were probably looking at hardcore porn when you were 13, it didn't screw you up and you can just let his mother kill him for it.

lykwydchykyn
May 16th, 2009, 06:57 PM
He told me (I'm paraphrasing), "When I was 18 my father was an idiot. When I turned 21 he seemed a little smarter. At 30 it almost seemed like he was my equal. At my age now, I look back and I realize the man was a genius."

Amen to that.

It's a whole different ballgame on the other side.

subdivision
May 16th, 2009, 06:58 PM
Amen to that.

It's a whole different ballgame on the other side.

Ain't that the truth? I've remembered that ever since and now that I am a father it makes more and more sense every day.

subdivision
May 16th, 2009, 07:00 PM
But as far as I'm concerned, you were probably looking at hardcore porn when you were 13, it didn't screw you up and you can just let his mother kill him for it.

And she would too.

At any rate, education is the key, not filtering software.

WatchingThePain
May 16th, 2009, 07:05 PM
I'm in agreement with Subdivision as you might guess.
There is some really disturbing stuff on the Internet, stuff that can not be explained with the birds and bees.

Exposing kids to stuff which most adults would find offensive can only be a bad thing.


Children are impressionable and the danger is that they begin to think that stuff is normal and part of adulthood.
When your parents lock down your pc it is not to deprive you of useful things, it is to protect your mind from bad influences.

What one person deems as ok another might be mortified with.


It's not just porn but online scams, forums about drug taking and things like that.


Education and Filtering.

subdivision
May 16th, 2009, 07:10 PM
I'm in agreement with Subdivision as you might guess.


Scary!

SuperSonic4
May 16th, 2009, 07:13 PM
I'm a parent and I strongly regulate her hours. I don't use content filters, but if I find her going to a site I don't like I block it at the gateway and poof - you can't get to it from any computer in the house.

I hope by saying "a site I don't like" I really hope you mean "a site which is considered unsuitable for children".

Such an attitude is fundamentally counter-productive to education. Education teaches why things happen and how they happen. If you'd like to see close minded bigotry and brainwashing then join a religion.

on topic: I would give rough guidelines and a small education but no filters or monitoring because I believe spying is wrong. I believe any kids I have should learn from their own mistakes - if I saw my (hypothetical) child looking at porn well good for them, it's better than unsafe sex and masturbation is natural

Name change
May 16th, 2009, 07:39 PM
I would rely on education. As I'm not a parent.
But this is a interesting topic none the less.
The question is if you block access to some sites where do you draw the line?
Would you stop at strange fetishes only (Zoophilia, 2 girls one cup,...)
Just porn or would you go even further.
It might be the case that news with wars and torture aren't good for child either.
And why not add all religious content in it for good measure?
And when you keep your child in such a bubble the transition to "real world" could be as traumatic as seeing this at home or worse.
In school your child might be exposed to something like Goa-tse as part of prank, but it would be far more traumatic as it should be...

So yes educating a child is a good thing, but still how?
Does a presentation in safe and controlled environment prevents trauma?
How much do you tell.
Do you just let your child to find it on his/her own?
Do you talk about "birds and bees"...

I would say that the best thing to do is to wait for them to ask.
if that doesn't happen to the time they reach 13-14 then it's time that you educate them.
(I know tl,dr)

SuperSonic4
May 16th, 2009, 08:03 PM
With regards to what Primož Papič said surely it would do more damage to keep kids in the dark about various internet fads for they're likely to be more prevalent at school not unlike football was when I was in school. The sense of isolation and even been sent to Coventry is very damaging and in some cases can lead to mental illness.

off topic: yay for kdemod :D

xpod
May 16th, 2009, 08:05 PM
Regardless of any filtering & monitoring i know one thing for sure.More parents need to take a more active role in their childrens computer/internet usage.
Too many parents dont have a clue what their young children are doing online.Too many dont/hardly use the computers themselves so have no clue whatsoever about keeping either the children or the computers safe online.
Theres a lot of bullying & stuff goes on over MSN and the like so although imsniff is possibly a bit much chat logs can come in very handy,especially for other children`s parents.
It`s old hat now but i myself only ever sat down at that first computer of ours because of the sheer dread i had at my own kids starting to use the computers & internet.



if I saw my (hypothetical) child looking at porn well good for them, it's better than unsafe sex and masturbation is natural

That all depends on the age of the child surely?
I`m sure if i walked in on my 16Yr old lad spanking his monkey i`d apologize and leave(choking back the laughter) but if i walked in on my 4,8 or even 11Yr old girls ...well....lets not even go there eh.

subdivision
May 16th, 2009, 08:06 PM
With regards to what Primož Papič said surely it would do more damage to keep kids in the dark about various internet fads for they're likely to be more prevalent at school not unlike football was when I was in school. The sense of isolation and even been sent to Coventry is very damaging and in some cases can lead to mental illness.

off topic: yay for kdemod :D

Please find me a credible source that thinks letting your 10 year old view 2 girls 1 cup is a good idea.

Letting your kids see lolcats is one thing, exposing them to goatse is quite another.

aysiu
May 16th, 2009, 08:29 PM
Just to throw a little wrench in the debate here, this whole back and forth about porn and inappropriate materials seems to be based on the assumption the kids are actively seeking said material.

That may not be the case. Maybe the kid is just looking for some cheat code on a game she's playing and then all of a sudden a pop-up comes up with some explicit non-traditional sex act.

I'm definitely a proponent of guidance and education, but even I would think some kind of filtering would make sense so that your kids aren't accidentally stumbling on certain objectionable material.

subdivision
May 16th, 2009, 08:36 PM
Just to throw a little wrench in the debate here, this whole back and forth about porn and inappropriate materials seems to be based on the assumption the kids are actively seeking said material.

That may not be the case. Maybe the kid is just looking for some cheat code on a game she's playing and then all of a sudden a pop-up comes up with some explicit non-traditional sex act.


Regardless of whether they're actively looking for this stuff or they accidentaly happen upon it, my point is that supervision and education is the key.

markp1989
May 16th, 2009, 09:12 PM
i have always found them filters anoying , i remember when i was at school , i was looking for cheats , for the game "james bond agent under fire" the link that i found was "http://someurl/jamesBONDAGEntunderfire" i capitalised that, because that is what the filter picked up on, and blocked the page, even thou it was a perfectly innocent game cheat page.

SLEEPER_V
May 16th, 2009, 09:25 PM
First I think its funny that alot of nonparents and kids are answering.

Second, I will use a mixture of filtering, g & e, and keylogging software. I dont think the real threat on the internets is pron, or naughty sites. The threat is predators, hence the logging software. I really dont want my son(who is not even 2 yet) to fall prey to some sick s.o.b. that is able to dupe him. I want my son to grow up feeling that the world is good rather than imbed in him the notion that everyone is out to get him and he should constantly be paranoid on the internets. If wanting him to hold onto his innocence until the last moment possible is wrong on my part then so be it.

swoll1980
May 16th, 2009, 09:25 PM
I use the good, old fashioned, guidance technique. If someone want to get past a filter, it isn't very difficult.

SLEEPER_V
May 16th, 2009, 09:29 PM
also, the point of a filter isnt necessarily to stop someone from getting to a site, it is to make getting to that site more trouble than its worth. Locking your door at night wont stop someone from breaking in, it just might make it more trouble than its worth.

swoll1980
May 16th, 2009, 09:31 PM
I won't expose my kids to that kind of material at a young age, probably at 15 or 16, and talk to him/her about it, and about sex.

:)

You would go to prison, and be registered as a sex offender. Might want to rethink that.

subdivision
May 16th, 2009, 09:36 PM
You would go to prison, and be registered as a sex offender. Might want to rethink that.

This is true. I believe that showing an underage child that sort of material is considered sexual abuse (at least it is here in the US).



First I think its funny that alot of nonparents and kids are answering.

I've attempted to reign in my responses with that in mind. :)

markp1989
May 16th, 2009, 10:43 PM
This is true. I believe that showing an underage child that sort of material is considered sexual abuse (at least it is here in the US).




I've attempted to reign in my responses with that in mind. :)

here , the legal age for that kind of stuff is 16, i dont know what the rules are about children seeing that kind of stuff are. admiringly,

I haven't got children of my own, but i am not considered a child myself.

WatchingThePain
May 17th, 2009, 12:45 AM
Also If a kid stumbles across something dodgy who knows what might happen to the parents.
They could get a huge phone bill or maybe get arrested.
Warez sites are notorious.

In defense of the youth..I am afraid to say that in some households the children might be more trustworthy and responsible on the internet than the parents!.

Zom-b
May 17th, 2009, 12:49 AM
I am a parent, my children are too young to use computers yet, but when they do I dont' plan on blocking anything with software, it's easy enough for me to monitor what they are doing and see if they are going on anything I don't think they should be on, and if I did have sites blocked, I would hope they would be smart enough and resouceful enough to get around it, XP I know I was

Dngrsone
May 17th, 2009, 04:40 AM
A lot of would-be parents here seem to think that they will be able to monitor their children's activities and whereabouts all the time. Guess what-- it ain't like that. You teens, especially, know how easy it is to avoid mom and dad when doing something illicit. Filtering and monitoring help close the gap (as well as the timed access limiters).

I make it damn difficult to bypass my filtering and security, and if one of my kids manages to get through it, then more power to 'em: they've earned what they get to see, at least until I plug the hole and make the next challenge.

If they expose their younger siblings to it, though-- they are in for a world of hurt.

Fortunately for me, none of my children (the 21-yr-old who longer lives here doesn't count any more) are looking for that kind of stuff and aren't even remotely adept enough to get past my current filtering.

Someone said something along the lines that children need not be sheltered at all (at least, that's how I read it). I must disagree. It's like saying that one need not monitor a child watching broadcast television because the FCC regulates it so much (never mind the alcohol, feminine hygiene products and, yes, even condom ads nowadays). Because kids have to learn, so when they decide that cliff-diving at age seven seems like a cool thing to do (thank you, ABC Sports), who cares if they start eyeballing bridges? I almost lost a brother that way.

Yes, there is such a thing as too sheltered, and we parents (those of us that care, anyway) walk a long and crooked line trying to keep to the middle-ground in that regard. We all make mistakes, but I'd rather err on the side of sheltering and being able to explain things to an older child than having an emotionally scarred youngster requiring years of therapy (or worse).

Dragonbite
May 17th, 2009, 05:36 AM
I've got a CPU running IPCop between the modem and the wireless router so that all of the internet traffic is filtered at this point.

This is handy. One time my son asked his younger sister if she wanted to see "fairies.com". Luckily his spelling isn't as good as he thinks it it, so I let him find out, but what about "next time"? That time I wasn't far away, just in the other room, and it's a small house (not many secrets). So far they haven't gotten the "you've been blocked" message, but eventually I am sure they will.

Setting it up this way is good in that whether connected via wire or wireless, using the host OS or a LiveCD, it's filtered. Not just for them, but what if in years to come, their friends bring their laptops or iPod and try surfing?

Likewise, education is important because there will come a time when he's at a friends house, and online. My protections here will do no good then.

handy
May 17th, 2009, 09:28 AM
The trickier the fence the more motivated the ladder builder.

Name change
May 17th, 2009, 12:40 PM
Please find me a credible source that thinks letting your 10 year old view 2 girls 1 cup is a good idea.

Letting your kids see lolcats is one thing, exposing them to goatse is quite another.
It definitely not a good idea...
But I for one would prepare for worse :D.
It's always what if...

I'm not saying that you should show your kids that, more that if they start asking like: I heard in school something about 2 girls on cup or whatever you'll have to explain.
In our country you have a something Like PG-13 for TV, some films or shows young children (up to 15 years old) should watch with parental supervision so that parents can explain what's happening.
When this was new everything from a action film to docu show about WW2 was marked as such. Now they only mark stuff which aren't supposed to be seen by up to 15-yrs/old like erotic films...
But I felt that watching such stuff and explaining is a good solution.
Again that doesn't apply to 2 girls one cup; you start with a film which has more graphic depiction of sex (every European movie has a naked man / woman ... in it)

etnlIcarus
May 18th, 2009, 04:36 PM
Please find me a credible source that thinks letting your 10 year old view 2 girls 1 cup is a good idea.
Silly statement. Decades of 'media impact' research with nothing conclusive to show for the effort simply doesn't justify this bad-'til-it's-not mentality. Sadly, this doesn't seem to stop people from presuming their own children are sick little f***s who need censoring, lest they becomes serial killers, sex offenders, or some other equally dramatic, paranoid delusion.

Also disappointed at the attitudes towards sex I'm seeing in this thread. Hopefully users' [hypothetical] children won't be imparted with their parents' hangups and will be able to shake the last vestiges of Victorian prudishness.


The real danger with nu/old media is a considerably different beast: the automatic babysitter. I've seen quite a few parents utterly stifle their children's interpersonal and emotional development (less so their intellectual development) by adopting the mentality that it's safe to stick their children in front of a screen and leave them there for hours on-end. These kids become too introverted (at least for their age), impatient and quick to anger, indifferent or reluctant to engage other children - and often simply lack the ability to interact with other human beings in a manner befitting their age. The utter dirth of life experience and social practice these kids receive just generally inhibits the development of anything that could be described as personality, ambition or passion.

It's not the Power Rangers, gangsta rap or flashing lights that's 'ruining our youth' - it's lazy and self-involved parents, who got bored with their children once they stopped being cute and simply look for somewhere out-of-the-way to stick their kids, while they pursue more interesting hobbies and social outlets.

And it's not just the lower socio-economic groups I've seen this happening in, either. Kids who should have all the opportunities in the world (and whose parents have no excuse) are developing into little Chance the Gardeners (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Being_There) because daddy's a career-obsessed manchild, mommy's a self-indulgent socialite and little Timmy is left to his own devices. Also, Timmy's statistical likelihood in only having 0.7 siblings means he was at a slight disadvantage to begin with and should have been enrolled in out-of-school hours activities but no one felt like driving him to footy club so Timmy's yet further socially maladjusted (and fat, too).

/rant

arsenic23
May 18th, 2009, 04:41 PM
I don't plan on letting my children on the internet until they are 14 and by then they should be old enough to decide what horrible horrible things they want to see on the internet.

There really wasn't an option for that though.

------------------------
----------EDIT----------
------------------------

Oh, another thought for all the parents who are confident in their content filters: I was a teenager in the mid 90's when the internet and content filtering where really starting to pop up in peoples homes and I remember making a ton of money off of my peers disabling the content protection (netnanny and the like) on their computers. If you are using it to try and stop your kiddies from accessing something they are actively searching for it will never work. Even if they can't they'll find someone who can. ( Looking back on it I guess I was an ornery little cuss back then. )

Anyway, I have a sister who is significantly younger then me whose computer I manage remotely. (( Having goten tired of making trips back to my parents to fix computer problems I got them to switch all of their PCs to linux and all parties have been happy since. )) Anyway, she's quite the delinquent, but instead of blocking things I log them and grep through them for things that would offend my mother and mail the results to her. That way there is no censorship, my sister can look up how to manufactor narcotics to her hearts content, but she can still be lectured for it.

etnlIcarus
May 18th, 2009, 04:56 PM
Christian spambots: the final frontier.

Dragonbite
May 18th, 2009, 05:03 PM
The trickier the fence the more motivated the ladder builder.

Anybody determined enough to do something is going to do it. The key is making it so difficult that only the most determined (or mentally obsessed) will achieve it.

For example, putting locks on your door will stop most burglars, but the determined ones will still find a way in (usually via brute force, or catch you while you are entering/leaving).

Using technology alone is not enough and abusing technology as an electronic lobotomy/babysitter is sad. In both ways, the kids suffer.

The other side I've seen are parents that fill their kids up with activities-after-activities and don't give their kids a chance to be kids, explore and just relax! If our kids didn't relax outside one night they wouldn't have seen the lightning bugs they gleefully caught last summer (and let go the next day). Now our kids, and a few of their friends, are looking forward to when the lightning bugs come out again!

Warpnow
May 18th, 2009, 05:30 PM
I believe it is safer to be exposed to the world through a glass box we call the internet. Fears of of internet danger usually manifest themselves in non-internet things such as child predators, which in all reality are far more likely to pick your kid up at the park than online.

I'll let them see whatever. Its a good way to be exposed to those parts of society that could be dangerous otherwise.

zakany
May 18th, 2009, 06:02 PM
I hope by saying "a site I don't like" I really hope you mean "a site which is considered unsuitable for children".

At her age, it's any site that allows open, unfiltered chat. I watch what she does, do a bit of research, and my wife and I make our decision. If we disagree, we err on the side of caution.

But it goes beyond that. If (to take a benign example) she spends too much time playing Webkinz and neglects her homework, it gets cut off. Computer access is a privilege and can be both carrot and stick.

Children need boundaries and every child is different.

So, to answer your question, no. It's not "a site which is considered unsuitable for children," rather it is a site which we determine is unsuitable for our child at this time.

Tipped OuT
May 18th, 2009, 06:05 PM
At her age, it's any site that allows open, unfiltered chat. I watch what she does, do a bit of research, and my wife and I make our decision. If we disagree, we err on the side of caution.

But it goes beyond that. If (to take a benign example) she spends too much time playing Webkinz and neglects her homework, it gets cut off. Computer access is a privilege and can be both carrot and stick.

Children need boundaries and every child is different.

So, to answer your question, no. It's not "a site which is considered unsuitable for children," rather it is a site which we determine is unsuitable for our child at this time.

Haha, keep up the good work man, you're doing good. ;)

zakany
May 18th, 2009, 06:18 PM
I don't plan on letting my children on the internet until they are 14...

You gotta sleep sometime. :p

Seriously, my daughter is in third grade and has already had several projects that required Internet access or were made a lot easier if done with a computer.

Take, for example, a three-page report on puffins. She learned how to look it up on Wikipedia. She used Google image search to find pictures of puffins for her associated diorama, YouTube for a video of Chef Gordon Ramsey catching puffins in Iceland with a giant net.

Of course, when searching for "puffins" it's a good thing the "n" and the "e" key are separated. :o

Tipped OuT
May 18th, 2009, 06:30 PM
You gotta sleep sometime. :p

Seriously, my daughter is in third grade and has already had several projects that required Internet access or were made a lot easier if done with a computer.

Take, for example, a three-page report on puffins. She learned how to look it up on Wikipedia. She used Google image search to find pictures of puffins for her associated diorama, YouTube for a video of Chef Gordon Ramsey catching puffins in Iceland with a giant net.

Of course, when searching for "puffins" it's a good thing the "n" and the "e" key are separated. :o

Once again, keep up the good work, you obviously know what you're doing. :)

People like to treat the Internet like a 24/7 access portal to adult content and other inappropriate things. If you don't want your kids seeing that, then block it. Theres even a plug-in for Firefox that does this. Simple as that. Then at the right age, YOU must take the time to talk to your son and/or daughter about it.

As years go by, kids will have to use the Internet more often. But in the end, they're still going to find out about the content you don't want them to see, one way or another. Whether it's when they're 18, or when there 12, they'll find out. Trust me. :o

Xbehave
May 18th, 2009, 06:35 PM
Of course, when searching for "puffins" it's a good thing the "n" and the "e" key are separated. I think that is the place for filtering. The internet is a dangerous place, i plan on using filters to prevent accidentally stumbling upon bad sites. But the fact is that if somebody wants to get around blocks, so the primary way of keeping children safe is educating them.
Stopping kids from accessing the internet/social networking sites is not feasible and means that they will not tell you what they are doing, its much better to be open about it (plus you can always check their history if their not worried about leaving it there (Don't think i would abuse my powers as root and sniff network access though)).

edit:

If you don't want your kids seeing that, then block it. Theres even a plug-in for Firefox that does this. Simple as that. Filtering at that level is clearly completely ineffective against deliberate attempts to view dodge sites (you would need to implement it at the system level host files, etc), but it is the easiest way to prevent accidental access!

CharmyBee
May 18th, 2009, 10:40 PM
All that block talk will mean nothing once they learn how to copy IP gateways and DNS server settings from one client to another, such as their own computer.

billgoldberg
May 18th, 2009, 10:48 PM
I'm not a parent, and I don't plan on ever being one, but I'm curious for those who are parents or those who plan to be parents, what are you doing or what you planning to do about content filtering?

If you are a parent whose kids are already grown up, please pick what you would have done if the internet were around when your kids were young... or what you did do when your kids were young (if they were young not so long ago).

I wouldn't shield my children from the potential dangers of the internet.

We all know you mean porn.

I would let them know I don't approve of them watching it and they won't.

When they hit puberty they'll watch some porn without us knowing it, as any of us did when we were that age.

--

Social networking sites are another thing, those are already blocked on my system as I just can't stand them. Not because of the potential dangers, that's just bullocks.

aysiu
May 18th, 2009, 10:50 PM
We all know you mean porn. Well, I don't mean only porn. But porn is included. And that could mean mild porn or extreme porn. It's not just limited to porn, though. Some parents might block social networking sites or some political hate sites. Who knows? It could be anything the parent deems objectionable or something she doesn't want her child exposed to accidentally and/or too early.

snowpine
May 18th, 2009, 10:51 PM
I wouldn't let them on Ubuntu Forums, that's for sure!

(too addictive ;))

Paqman
May 18th, 2009, 10:55 PM
All that block talk will mean nothing once they learn how to copy IP gateways and DNS server settings from one client to another, such as their own computer.

Only if you gave them enough access to change such settings. Which would be dumb.

CharmyBee
May 18th, 2009, 10:57 PM
Only if you gave them enough access to change such settings. Which would be dumb.
On a Windows LAN, that's hard to not do.

subdivision
May 18th, 2009, 11:40 PM
I would let them know I don't approve of them watching it and they won't.


Do you have kids?

etnlIcarus
May 19th, 2009, 02:24 AM
Children need boundaries and every child is different.This phrase is usually uttered in reference to rules and consistent discipline - not censorship. It's really not a catch-all. Agree with you on the second bit, however: knowing your child and knowing what they can process in an adaptive manner is extremely important.


I wouldn't shield my children from the potential dangers of the internet.

We all know you mean porn.

I would let them know I don't approve of them watching it and they won't.

When they hit puberty they'll watch some porn without us knowing it, as any of us did when we were that age.

--

Social networking sites are another thing, those are already blocked on my system as I just can't stand them. Not because of the potential dangers, that's just bullocks.

Man, I was with you up until that last bit. Shutting your kids off from things arbitrarily, that you simply dislike is probably worse than having an immature attitude towards sex. There's a big difference between influencing your child's broader development and controlling it, the latter of which is quite perverse.

SLEEPER_V
May 19th, 2009, 03:14 AM
This phrase is usually uttered in reference to rules and consistent discipline - not censorship. It's really not a catch-all. Agree with you on the second bit, however: knowing your child and knowing what they can process in an adaptive manner is extremely important.



Man, I was with you up until that last bit. Shutting your kids off from things arbitrarily, that you simply dislike is probably worse than having an immature attitude towards sex. There's a big difference between influencing your child's broader development and controlling it, the latter of which is quite perverse.

I have to disagree with the censorship bit. People are constantly censoring themselves and it is up to the parent to let the child know what is socially acceptable and what isnt. They dont learn those guidelines without some help if you want them to be socially adept. Granted there are times when those taboos, if you will, are set aside, like when having a tasty adult beverage with the fellas. I would say things there that I would never say in front of my wife or mother. Children, imo, have to be taught the broader spectrum of behavior, the behavior in public, and let him and his friends establish the smaller guidelines.

Personally, if my son can get by the filters, fine. Those are for his mother's sake. I'll be keylogging to see what he's doing and use that as a gauge of where he is in his curiosities and development.

etnlIcarus
May 19th, 2009, 04:01 AM
People are constantly censoring themselves and it is up to the parent to let the child know what is socially acceptable and what isnt. They dont learn those guidelines without some help if you want them to be socially adept.You conflate censorship of information with behaviour. The two are distinct. Also, I can't seem to find any point in your post where you've actually contradicted me. Perhaps you could explain to me how not censoring children precludes their education?

arsenic23
May 19th, 2009, 04:29 AM
You gotta sleep sometime. :p

Seriously, my daughter is in third grade and has already had several projects that required Internet access or were made a lot easier if done with a computer.

Take, for example, a three-page report on puffins. She learned how to look it up on Wikipedia. She used Google image search to find pictures of puffins for her associated diorama, YouTube for a video of Chef Gordon Ramsey catching puffins in Iceland with a giant net.

Of course, when searching for "puffins" it's a good thing the "n" and the "e" key are separated. :o

When my sister was just starting ellementary school I was still living with my parents and was the only person in the house with a computer. When the school began assigning 'computer' projects my parents asked me to let my sister use the computer. I gave her an old non-electric typewriter. I'ma do the same with my children, whenever I get around to making some. Builds character.

Family never did get her a PC to use. When she turned 13 I bought the family a computer for Christmas. Then the Old Man bought a laptop because he doesn't like to share.

xpod
May 19th, 2009, 10:25 AM
Social networking sites are another thing, those are already blocked on my system as I just can't stand them. Not because of the potential dangers, that's just bullocks.

I cant be bothered with them myself for the most part and although i have blocked them in the past i no longer do so now,not permanently anyway.
I dont allow the younger children to use them at all yet but my oldest two are members of facebook.
All use MSN of course and if my lot are anything like most other kids then MSN & Facebook etc can be more of a problem than the "two girls,one cup" type sites.

We eventually came to a happy medium here at home though so as long as none of them are spending all their free time on the places & as long as the same time & consideration is being given elsewhere in their lives then we dont mind them using the places.
They know about the potential risks and know their future employers will probably check out their profiles so the rest is up to them.I think letting them learn how to use & understand these places better protects them in the long run than actually depriving them of them,which you can only really do at home anyway.
We also moved home last Autumn so we`re not as close to most of their friends as we once were.Having contact with their friends via facebook & MSN saves me big/ger fat/ter phone bills.

Dragonbite
May 19th, 2009, 01:54 PM
You gotta sleep sometime. :p

Seriously, a friend of my 1rst grader son gloats of how she gets online while they are asleep. I can guarantee they don't have any blocking software on their systems (frankly, neither do I.. it's available 24/7).

Parental involvement is 1,000% more important than software filters and site blocking. We are getting them used to using the computer in a public room (Living Room), having us come by and see what they are doing and asking what they are doing (if it isn't obvious) and being involved. I also help them with finding stuff or directing them to interesting sites I've learned about.

None of this, though, keeps out social networks. When their friends start getting email and IM and such then that's a whole new ballgame. Now, though, is the time to try and teach them how to be safe online... not when somebody is asking them for a photo of themselves, or what school they are going to.

Just ran across KChildLock (http://sourceforge.net/projects/kchildlock), which is a tool one may use if running KDE.