Home
Log in / Sign Up
    Private Messages   Advanced Search   Rules   New User Guide   FAQ   Advertise   Contact Us  
Forum -> Computers, Phones and Devices
IDGI! Why are we teaching our kids Fakery?!
Previous  1  2  3  4



Post new topic   Reply to topic View latest: 24h 48h 72h

amother
Lawngreen


 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 8:54 am
amother DarkGray wrote:
It's not that anyone here objects to filters, rather the big brother state where you are more or less commanded exactly which type, to what degree, and which company to use, no less, and that you need to prove it because you aren't trusted by the authorities. It's way overstepping and demeaning. It's like asking a 10 year old to prove they brushed their teeth by opening their mouth so you can inspect it. Or making a person turn their pockets inside out bec they are suspected of shoplifting. Not because they gave any sign they are guilty but because you are suspicious and need to prove you are in control; the default is to assume everyone is guilty and untrustworthy. Sends a terrible message.


That's a good thing.

If they didn't require proof, then there would be a lot of people who wouldn't do it.
Back to top

amother
DarkGray


 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 8:58 am
amother Lawngreen wrote:
That's a good thing.

If they didn't require proof, then there would be a lot of people who wouldn't do it.

See that's the automatic default that's turning pple off and actually proves the op's point. Pple will figure out how to fake things.
Maybe pple, if given autonomy, would do a filter they find comfortable and not so draconian. Instead people will just throw the baby out with the bathwater and figure out how to have a hidden device with no filter at all. And if you don't think kids are aware of this, I have a bridge to sell you.
Back to top

amother
Lawngreen


 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 9:07 am
amother DarkGray wrote:
See that's the automatic default that's turning pple off and actually proves the op's point. Pple will figure out how to fake things.
Maybe pple, if given autonomy, would do a filter they find comfortable and not so draconian. Instead people will just throw the baby out with the bathwater and figure out how to have a hidden device with no filter at all. And if you don't think kids are aware of this, I have a bridge to sell you.


I'm not saying that people wouldn't fake anything. Of course they would.

A school having rules that you cannot have unfiltered internet at home creates a certain shared attitude in the school about unfiltered internet.

Even if people DO fake it and secretly have unfiltered internet, at least they won't talk about it in school. Which will make it a "discouraged thing"

When children don't talk about it in school, it prevents potential arousel among other children in the school who don't have internet access.
Back to top

amother
DarkGray


 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 9:42 am
amother Lawngreen wrote:
I'm not saying that people wouldn't fake anything. Of course they would.

A school having rules that you cannot have unfiltered internet at home creates a certain shared attitude in the school about unfiltered internet.

Even if people DO fake it and secretly have unfiltered internet, at least they won't talk about it in school. Which will make it a "discouraged thing"

When children don't talk about it in school, it prevents potential arousel among other children in the school who don't have internet access.

Again, it's not about having filters or not. It's the draconian way of treating everyone like a criminal and assuming the worst. It probably causes more people to end up with devices that have no filters at all, then if they'd simply do something along the lines of what a previous posted showed her kids school sends out, instead of unhealthy extremes of believing the worst of everyone by default and kids ending up with mixed messages (and I guarantee no matter how draconian there are going to be kids with internet access, anyway. It is naive to think otherwise.) This approach always backfires.
Back to top

amother
Lawngreen


 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 9:53 am
amother DarkGray wrote:
Again, it's not about having filters or not. It's the draconian way of treating everyone like a criminal and assuming the worst. It probably causes more people to end up with devices that have no filters at all, then if they'd simply do something along the lines of what a previous posted showed her kids school sends out, instead of unhealthy extremes of believing the worst of everyone by default and kids ending up with mixed messages (and I guarantee no matter how draconian there are going to be kids with internet access, anyway. It is naive to think otherwise.) This approach always backfires.


Trusting that every parent in the entire school will %100 conform to the rules in THIS day and age would be a leap of faith.
Back to top

giftedmom




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 9:55 am
amother Lawngreen wrote:
Right, but people seem so livid about technology-related regulations enforced by their children's schools, unaware of the positive impact these rules can have on their kids.

Because these regulations are imposed on the parents. And they have no positive impact as they’re not followed.
Back to top

amother
Whitewash


 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 10:02 am
My children’s school has a rule that mothers can’t have smartphones. Which is why my smartphone doesn’t have a filter. Because it’s illegal anyway. They can’t even monitor me because they don’t monitor flip phones. So that’s an upside I guess. They’re way more on my husbands case and keep asking him to bring in new smartphones because they don’t believe the ones he brings in are his real ones. Me, they just ask me if I have a smartphone and I say no and they ask what model flip phone I have and that’s that.
Back to top

amother
DarkGray


 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 10:04 am
amother Lawngreen wrote:
Trusting that every parent in the entire school will %100 conform to the rules in THIS day and age would be a leap of faith.

No. It's always been like this. I'm old enough to remember the days 30-40 years ago when parents had to sign about no TV or secular newspapers. People lied then and people lie now. It's human nature you are dealing with and the authorities should realize this.
Back to top

amother
Lawngreen


 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 10:11 am
giftedmom wrote:
Because these regulations are imposed on the parents. And they have no positive impact as they’re not followed.


But if people DID follow the rules, it would have a positive impact on the children.

I'm still trying to understand, what us adults, have such a strong feeling against filters?

What is the harm in installing a filter?

Given the MANY harms of excessive unfiltered technology on children, the benefits of a filter outweigh the costs
Back to top

amother
DarkGray


 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 10:14 am
amother Lawngreen wrote:
But if people DID follow the rules, it would have a positive impact on the children.

I'm still trying to understand, what us adults, have such a strong feeling against filters?

What is the harm in installing a filter?

Given the MANY harms of excessive unfiltered technology on children, the benefits of a filter outweigh the costs

You can require a filter. That's it. No required company to use. No needing to prove. No being told "come on, we know you have a smartphone you haven't told us about." No being told to your face you are lying and bring deceitful. Treat everyone decently and not like criminals who are assumed to be lying.
Once you make it clear you believe pple are lying No matter what, what incentive do they have to be honest? They won't be believed anyway.
Back to top

amother
Winterberry


 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 10:29 am
amother Lawngreen wrote:
But if people DID follow the rules, it would have a positive impact on the children.

I'm still trying to understand, what us adults, have such a strong feeling against filters?

What is the harm in installing a filter?

Given the MANY harms of excessive unfiltered technology on children, the benefits of a filter outweigh the costs


No one here is against filtering devices.

The problem is the schools that oversee it to this degree do not simply "require a filter". They require a specific filter, that does not work out for everyone for whatever reason. It might filter too much, or (in cases we've seen here on imamother) block something and refuse to unlock it even when the person calls them in desparation, etc.
Placing control in someone else's hands is very unappealing.
I use a basic filter on every device in my home. Its one I purchased myself, by simply buying it online. My husband and I share control, and we can both easily unblock whatever we want-and we also both see everything that was viewed or accessed.

These schools would never approve this filter.

So instead of so many families filtering their devices the way I do, they simply have the "school choice filter" installed on their fake device, go crazy with how restrictive it is/how annoying it makes life, and then get unfiltered devices.
Stupid, but predictable.

Nobody likes being policed. Educate, inform, empower, sure. Dont force.
Back to top

Trademark




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 10:31 am
The way I see it:

Either it's something that we want to do because we no that's the right thing to do or the mosdos should stop controlling us.

For example nobody's checking if we are keeping shabbos because it's something we believe in and we do because it's the right thing to do and we want to do it.

I think it's ridiculous that when it comes to technology the only leverage they have is our children. If somebody doesn't have children in the schools they can basically do whatever they want. Even though a person can technically violate shabbos it's not a thing people want to do. We trust everyone to keep shabbos and kosher etc

The same thing should be when it comes to technology. If we are frum Jews we should be trusted to do what's right, but because they have so many ridiculous extra rules that don't necessarily have anything to do with Yiddishkeit they have to use our children as leverage.
Back to top

the world's best mom




 
 
    
 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 10:44 am
amother Winterberry wrote:
No one here is against filtering devices.

The problem is the schools that oversee it to this degree do not simply "require a filter". They require a specific filter, that does not work out for everyone for whatever reason. It might filter too much, or (in cases we've seen here on imamother) block something and refuse to unlock it even when the person calls them in desparation, etc.
Placing control in someone else's hands is very unappealing.
I use a basic filter on every device in my home. Its one I purchased myself, by simply buying it online. My husband and I share control, and we can both easily unblock whatever we want-and we also both see everything that was viewed or accessed.

These schools would never approve this filter.

So instead of so many families filtering their devices the way I do, they simply have the "school choice filter" installed on their fake device, go crazy with how restrictive it is/how annoying it makes life, and then get unfiltered devices.
Stupid, but predictable.

Nobody likes being policed. Educate, inform, empower, sure. Dont force.

Regarding the bolded, yes, people are against filtering their devices. as you can read on this thread, one person believes she won't be able to look up medical things with a filter. Which BTW is not true. I have not had any trouble looking up medical things with my filter and dd watched some videos online for her biology class that had content she needed but that I was surprised wasn't blocked.

If nobody was against filters, then every single person here would have only filtered devices.
Back to top

amother
DarkGray


 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 10:48 am
the world's best mom wrote:
Regarding the bolded, yes, people are against filtering their devices. as you can read on this thread, one person believes she won't be able to look up medical things with a filter. Which BTW is not true. I have not had any trouble looking up medical things with my filter and dd watched some videos online for her biology class that had content she needed but that I was surprised wasn't blocked.

If nobody was against filters, then every single person here would have only filtered devices.

This is just a deflection of the points made in the last few previous posts. Which state they are fine with filters being required, the problem is the degree and method used to make parents submit to it.
Back to top

amother
DarkViolet


 

Post Thu, May 25 2023, 11:34 am
amother Iris wrote:
theres a new type of flip phone that looks like a flip phone but is actually a smart phone.

Just saying.


Its not new. I dont think you can buy dumb phones anymore - they are all smart phones, just "koshered" to only allow phone & text, but they can just as easily be unkoshered, so looks can be deceiving. Similarly, most smartphones can be filtered. When I was growing up, no cellphones flipped - they were all blocks, and even then you could get internet on them too. BTW, the latest smart phones also flip open for another screen inside!
Back to top
Page 4 of 4 Previous  1  2  3  4 Recent Topics




Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> Computers, Phones and Devices

Related Topics Replies Last Post
Do your kids names have a pattern?
by amother
72 Today at 8:20 pm View last post
ISO dishwashing contest ideas for kids 1 Today at 8:06 pm View last post
Museum that are interesting for kids ages 6-10
by amother
8 Today at 6:44 am View last post
Must see attractions in Amish, Lancaster, for kids
by amother
5 Thu, Jul 11 2024, 10:18 am View last post
"kosher" websites for kids
by amother
15 Thu, Jul 11 2024, 9:21 am View last post