Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

FTC's Game Teaches Social Networking Skills

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the just-say-no dept.

76

narramissic writes, "Your tax dollars at work. The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has launched an online quiz-show style game called Buddy Builder to test young users' abilities to spot potential threats on social networking Web sites. Naturally, the teen audience this is intended to reach is not going to go near the game except as a joke."

cancel ×

76 comments

Do you like Candy? (1)

AssCork (769414) | more than 7 years ago | (#16665979)

Of course you do you greasy, tangle-bearded nerd.

Re:Do you like Candy? (1)

PenGun (794213) | more than 7 years ago | (#16669733)

Gimme gimme ... comon I know trix ...

Anybody seen Tron? (1)

Itninja (937614) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666007)

In the game, players move through rounds by correctly reacting to common requests found on social networking sites.
I just keep hearing that little 'bit' in Tron going NO, NO, NO, NO.........

Re:Anybody seen 1984? (1)

Killall -9 Bash (622952) | more than 7 years ago | (#16668031)

That's funny. In my head I hear Parson's kid saying "You're a thought-criminal" over and over.
watch this [google.com] Start at 1 hour 31 minutes. (or not)

Re:Anybody seen 1984? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16669593)

"And as we know, idle time is the devil's hands. Right?"

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-155134833 6255792191 [google.com] (video above) @ 1:36:11

Re:Anybody seen Tron? (1)

DiEx-15 (959602) | more than 7 years ago | (#16668759)

I think he derezed himself when he found out he was going to be on that Game Grid.

---------
"I keep telling myself 'It is only a game' but it still isn't fun!"

A step in the right direction (3, Insightful)

jcarkeys (925469) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666021)

It might not be good at all, but someone needs to teach kids about the threats and hazards of social networking sites. It might seem cheesy, but at least we're getting people working on solutions to help teach children.

Re:A step in the right direction (1)

kidcharles (908072) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666129)

I'm with you jcarkeys. Yeah, a lot of kids would see this as a joke, but I wouldn't reject the thing out of hand. Their heart is in the right place. At least it's not some quixotic attempt to get teens to commit themselves to abstinence, that's what the administration usually likes to waste money on.

Re:A step in the right direction (1)

glarbl_blarbl (810253) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666493)

Yeah, trying to teach people to act in opposition to a biological imperative is totally insane. It's like telling them that they should stop breathing in order to avoid catching tuberculosis..

Back on topic: I wonder if they might consider doing the same kind of thing for my parents' generation to help them spot phishing attacks and deal with pop-ups.

Re:A step in the right direction (1)

mandie (69148) | more than 7 years ago | (#16669891)

There is, and it's actually pretty good for most non-savvy, authority-trusting adults. When I go back to Texas for Christmas, I'm going to have my mom play it and have her tell all her friends who like to forward stupid crap. She's pretty good about deleting just about any forward (they annoy her) and asking forward-happy friends to please just send her personal emails. She is also paranoid about any sort of financial transaction online - except for sending me her credit card details PLAINTEXT to my Gmail account so I could buy a plane ticket for her!

Re:A step in the right direction (1)

obeythefist (719316) | more than 7 years ago | (#16667519)

Who cares that they do see it as a joke? IMO that would be almost as effective anyway. No such thing as bad publicity. In a lot of ways, if a kid picks it up and plays it as a joke and derides it, at the same time he's subconsciously picking up the awareness that there's dodgey people on the 'net.

People make jokes about serious and bad things, murder, injury, kidney-bathtub-ice abductions. But at the same time there's a serious undertone that you pick up on. How many jokes were made about, say, being mugged in NYC? Even if you never had a serious warning about crime in NYC, if you heard all the jokes you're more likely to watch your personal safety.

Re:A step in the right direction (2, Insightful)

lawpoop (604919) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666225)

This mentality reminds me of a sig I saw somewhere:

Public: "Something must be done!"

Politician: "This is something; therefore, it must be done!"

Doing something, anything, even if it's bad, is a bad idea. I think Americans suffer from a hysteria of action -- if there is a problem, we must act, immediately, screw the consequences! Any problem we encounter in any facet of our life is a result of someone not doing their job or something not working right, and it must be fixed immediately.

Sometimes you have to take the time to think and plan things out, and take the best course of action. Sometimes the best course of action is to *do nothing for the time being.* Haste makes waste.

I'm not saying that this is a good idea or not, just that I think that the mentality of 'we must do something' is wrong.

Re:A step in the right direction (2, Insightful)

Breakfast Pants (323698) | more than 7 years ago | (#16668287)

I think you are wrong. It is more like:

Public: "Something is happening!"
Politician: "Everything must be done!"

Cue the Bear Patrol.

Re:A step in the right direction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16666543)

Step in teh right direction? Even the name "Buddy Builder" is gheh.

Re:A step in the right direction (1)

mrbooze (49713) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666737)

So who taught us? Chat rooms and message boards aren't exactly new.

Oh My God! (2, Insightful)

xQx (5744) | more than 7 years ago | (#16668305)

My god?! Did anyone actually play that game??!! It was boring and crap! I've sat through Occupational Health and Safety lectures that were more fun and exciting than that.

The only thing that's good for is so the grade three students can have some "educational time on the internet" and play with the computers..

Really, I feel dumber having played that game -- seriously it says someone saying "hey baby - you look hot :) wanna chat?" is a threat?? That's never a threat, that's someone who's just found out they can message anyone in the world and say what they want without consequences.

If the aim is to make kids think that every educational authority wants to make piss weak applications and call them 'games' in an effort to push their conservitive views onto them... JOB WELL DONE!

Won't someone think of the children!?!?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16669683)

ZOMG!

I learned a lot (1)

Sv-Manowar (772313) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666025)

Damn FTC - always ruining people's day. Here was me thinking xx_Sexy_Girl_99_xx was really interested in me, now I wonder why she always wanted my address.

Who is this for? (1)

NJVil (154697) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666065)

Is this intended to be a warning for children?

It's more likely to be a how-to for perverts and pedophiles than anything else since children won't go near it.

Let me be the first to say (1)

Nocterro (648910) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666081)

you misspelt "shills"

Re:Let me be the first to say (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16666511)

and you misspelled misspelled. :)

Re:Let me be the first to say (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16666891)

According to the American Heritage Dictionary [reference.com] , misspelt is an acceptable alternative spelling.

The game (4, Funny)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666083)

You'd think there'd be a link in the submission, but that's because you're new to slashdot.

Buddy Builder can be found here: http://onguardonline.gov/quiz/index.html [onguardonline.gov]
But whatever magic is needed to play, I don't have because it just pops up a blank window. Damn, now I'll never learn how to keep myself safe while having fun doing it!

Anyway, all I know from TFA is that this question: "Accept or Deny: Wazzup? I think I know U send me your pic (in swimsuit, pls!)?" was blatantly and may I add illegally ripped from my IM session. The worst part was that "partygrrl666", aka "Bert the middle aged FTC agent", did send me a pic of himself in a swimsuit. Okay, you got me twice now Bert!

Re:The game (1)

jfengel (409917) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666281)

The required juju is Flash.

Ten seconds of play-time and it's pretty damn weak. It spends a good deal of time in miscellaneous flash-intro-junk before turning into a quiz.

The first question was, "I just moved to the area, and think you're really good looking. R U dating anyone?" For which it dinged me for accepting the IM. Hey, letting them know my dating status is not doing anybody any harm. Sure, I'd be dubious about giving any actual data about myself after that, but the question itself is not a problem. Intrusive, but innocuous by itself.

The second question was, "Hi, remember me... [lots of details ending with a name]"? For which the correct answer was "accept", "assuming you actually were in Ms. Newman's drama class with someone named Juan Delgado." What the hell kind of a question is that? I wasn't in that class and I don't know anybody named Juan Delgado, and I'd assume this was an idiot. They want you to think of it as a hypothetical, but that's not at all clear from the context. The sixth question does the same sort of thing, presenting you with highly specific data and assuming you know that they meant "highly specific data, in a hypothetical kind of way".

The third question ("I'd luv 2 C what U look like! Let's meet in person!" is an obvious Mark Foley troll, but at least it's the first question with an answer I don't find stupid. The fourth question is similar.

The fifth question is vaguely interesting, asking for a birthday and address. It's not immediately obvious that those are private information, especially the birthday. (And it's intolerably weak that some companies actually use knowledge of your birthday as proof of identity, but that's a whole separate set of idiots.)

That's the end of round one, and this quiz (I wouldn't call it a game) is far too stupid to ponder any further. If they'd wanted to put any actual effort into it they'd have made up a AI system to interact with you and try to elicit personal data from you, then ding you when you did. But that would be work, whereas just banging out a flash quiz lets you pretend you've done something while still making it home in time for dinner. Hell, making it home in time for lunch.

Re:The game (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16666317)

But whatever magic is needed to play, I don't have because it just pops up a blank window

Needs flash (probably flash 9)

Game is interesting, though I'm not sure whether kids would actually "get it". It asks things like "Hi I'm your Uncle John, I read your page from the link you emailed be and think its awesome, can you add me to your buddy list". In the real world, your acceptance should be based on the fact that you have an Uncle John and that you did email him your address, however this qualification isn't present so many kids might say "No" since they don't have an Uncle John and they get penalized.

After making it through the first round of trick questions, I failed the second round of trick questions (True/False questions with fun words like "some" and "many").

Re:The game (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16666977)

Strangely, the introduction to the first round reads "[...] we'll introduce five made-up strangers who are asking to join your list of friends [...]", which really isn't helping in that respect. I didn't think of "Uncle John" as a trick question the first time around, but that was because I didn't read the introduction..

Re:The game (1)

Saikik (1018772) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666803)

Why do these and other PSA's always seem 20 years behind the times as far as what is cool?

The intro to this 'game' reminded me of being a kid and watching reruns of the Brady Bunch on nick-at-nite

Re:The game (1)

xkr (786629) | more than 7 years ago | (#16667361)

Was the swimsuit branded? Because if it is a Nike or Speedo, or any other brand, then the FTC will have to delete without notice your account due to the violation of the IP those brand holders.

Re:The game (1)

Virgil Tibbs (999791) | more than 7 years ago | (#16667367)

Hilarious

Re:The game (1)

Alsee (515537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16667623)

The worst part was that "partygrrl666", aka "Bert the middle aged FTC agent", did send me a pic of himself in a swimsuit.

Linky linky. [nickscipio.com]

-

Wireless hackers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16668419)

You're absolutely right — you shouldn't leave on the identifier broadcasting—you should disable it. Hackers use identifier broadcasting to find vulnerable wireless networks.


As if Kismet can't detect "hidden" networks.

Re:The game (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 7 years ago | (#16669539)

But whatever magic is needed to play, I don't have because it just pops up a blank window.

Pity you didn't say black window....It is dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

Re:The game (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 7 years ago | (#16675331)

The window was blue, actually. No grues to be seen (ha!).

wait (1)

Bizzeh (851225) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666085)

teaching social networking to someone who is sat at home on their own on a pc..

For the lazy (1)

imboboage0 (876812) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666087)

Buddy Builder [onguardonline.gov]

what a waste of taxpayer $$$ (1)

Seantotheizzo (1011799) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666103)

They should be incorporating online safety into technology courses in schools, not making game-show parodies to teach kids about the dangers of the Internet. The fact that they make it a game says a lot about how serious they are about tackling this issue properly...

Re:what a waste of taxpayer $$$ (2, Insightful)

AP2k (991160) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666401)

I think teaching a course of critical thinking skills would do kids far more than teaching them heuristics of bad things on the webbernet. You know, the "teaching a man to fish" thing.

Then again a great portion of graduates cant add 1 and 1, much less spell the equation in English...

Re:what a waste of taxpayer $$$ (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 7 years ago | (#16686905)

Then again a great portion of graduates cant add 1 and 1, much less spell the equation in English...
Really? I want to come and study in whatever country you live in, I could get another couple of degrees easily.

Re:what a waste of taxpayer $$$ (1)

Moofie (22272) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666425)

Yeah, because everybody takes everything they learn at school very, very seriously. Like when the gym coach was teaching Health class. Riveted, I was. Hanging on his every mispronounced word.

Re:what a waste of taxpayer $$$ (1)

xQx (5744) | more than 7 years ago | (#16668351)

lol!
If I had mod points I'd mod you up. That reminds me of almost every bloody subject -- but I did go to a public school in the country.

Not a waste of taxpayer $$$ (1)

spun (1352) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666443)

It's a small, simple game. It's actually noy as stupid as I was anticipating. The site also has games about identity theft and phishing, among others. Not everyone takes technology courses at school. Besides, mandating a new curriculum and either making states pay or using our tax dollars to pay is better how, exactly? Anyone can use these games. I, for one am glad that the government is spending what is no doubt a tiny fraction of our tax dollars on something which may actually help. Games are more accessible to the average joe than some dry textbook.

Re:Not a waste of taxpayer $$$ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16667447)

The "tax dollars" angle seems fairly ridiculous to me here; I doubt a lot of money has been spent on this. Incorporating something like this into school curriculums, on the other hand, would likely take lots of time and money, as well as taking away time that could be used to teach academical subjects. I'd rather not see schools reduced to just a vehicle for public service announcements.

Spelling and grammar... (1)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666173)

It's kinda funny - if you simply deny all the samples which use bad grammar and spelling, you'll get all but one right. And the one you get wrong is some guy you supposedly haven't seen for three years. All I can say is that if he can't bother putting in the effort to spell "you" and "are" out completely, he doesn't get on the friend list.

Re:Spelling and grammar... (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 7 years ago | (#16686831)

It's kinda funny - if you simply deny all the samples which use bad grammar and spelling, you'll get all but one right. And the one you get wrong is some guy you supposedly haven't seen for three years. All I can say is that if he can't bother putting in the effort to spell "you" and "are" out completely, he doesn't get on the friend list.
I'm not sure that children/teenagers have the same keenly developed nose for bad grammar and spelling. In fact, they'd probably be *more* suspicious of an IM with proper spelling and punctuation than otherwise.

Pointless (1)

alexn817 (1020995) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666221)

As a teenager myself, I have to say there is little to no point in making these quizzes. How many people will go to that site who are not already computer savvy and so probably know more than the quizzes teach? I was able to easily get every answer right without trying, and could think of ways to rephrase questions to make them better. I realize people have to try to teach kids, but a poorly designed quiz on a government site is not the best way.

Re:Pointless (1)

kbielefe (606566) | more than 7 years ago | (#16669603)

I know it's hard to see how someone could be näive enough to fall for something as overt as in the quiz, but it happens all the time or it wouldn't be such a big problem. My daughter is only two, but when the time comes a quiz like this will make a great tool as part of a discussion with her.

Naturally (1)

ipooptoomuch (808091) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666237)

Naturally the teen audience is intelligent enough already to spot someone that is going to rape them. This is intended towards children.

Re:Naturally (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16669419)

Ok, as I'm probably the only female Slashdotters reading this at the moment ;) I have to disagree with your statement of, 'Naturally the teen audience is intelligent enough already to spot someone that is going to rape them.'

I was raped at 18 by an uncle and again at 22 by a college 'friend' who spiked my drink.

It's not always easy to spot creeps in the real world never mind on the internet.

However, I would agree that this quiz is aimed at younger children, or at least I HOPE it is. It's ridiculously patronising.

Having aced it.. (1)

funkdancer (582069) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666319)

(not too difficult), I think this was a good effort. A lot of kids or even adults do not have the required know-how about this. Personally I don't care too much [if people can identify me] but with what some people are posting they certainly should.

Re:Having aced it.. (1)

rHBa (976986) | more than 7 years ago | (#16669479)

I failed the test :-( I don't have an Uncle John or an Aunt Mary so I clicked deny, I've also already got my swimsuit pics posted so I assumed the guy who asked me to send them was using Lynx and I clicked accept. Also there IS such an animal as a wombat...

I'm A Buddy All Star! (1)

sweatyboatman (457800) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666337)

At least the game said I did well enough to get on the Buddy All Stars list.

Of course, it didn't say how I would get on that list. Maybe they have a signup page where I can enter my name, address, social security number and a picture of myself in the bathtub. Oh, here it is [myspace.com] .

Re:I'm A Buddy All Star! (1)

Q-Branch (554342) | more than 7 years ago | (#16667121)

I'm a Buddy All Star too! (do you want to add me to your friends list?) I made the All Star team by accepting anybody who could spell more or less correctly.

who cares if it's only a joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16666351)

I think the point is to get kids to go, I don't know that it will be any less effective if they think it is a joke.

Is it true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16666399)

Is it true that they used a similar flash-multimedia based test to determine whether Iraq had WMD's?

Not that bad (1)

crabpeople (720852) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666415)

Look at the p2p section. It clearly was written by someone that has a clue. Their tips are: limit upload, be careful what your sharing and run antivirus. Those are the same basic tips that I would recomend to people using p2p. They don't seem to be doing any shilling for the *IAA's and the site is actually well layed out.

I could actually see it being a well rounded faq on common internet technologies for any age group. Just because its from the FCC doesnt mean its bad automatically. It does look like they did their home work on this one.

Re:Not that bad (1)

stud9920 (236753) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666559)

They're the FTC (Trade), they are the ones that should protect the citizens from monopolies like the ??AA

Re:Not that bad (1)

glarbl_blarbl (810253) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666679)

Just because its from the FCC doesnt mean its bad automatically.
Acutally, yes - if it had come from the Federal Communications Commission that would have automatically made it evil. But it came from the Federal Trade Commission, so I guess that's neutral.

So I clicked on "Buddy Builder" and... (1)

exp(pi*sqrt(163)) (613870) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666431)

...put my brain into "simulate teenager mode". My attention span ran out before the "Buddy Builder" splash screen had finished appearing. Sometimes I wonder if the people who make these kinds of things have any contact with teens.

Re:So I clicked on "Buddy Builder" and... (1)

borkus (179118) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666571)

I think the music came from a film strip from when I was in high school.

Yeah, that's right, I said "film strip". Maybe next time, they should use more current music like Ace Of Base or Hootie and the Blowfish.

Re:So I clicked on "Buddy Builder" and... (1)

exp(pi*sqrt(163)) (613870) | more than 7 years ago | (#16668155)

The sound effects remind me of (bad) computer games from the 80s. And the whole grid of faces reminded me of the Brady Bunch. On the other hand, Boards of Canada use music from educational film strips and I like them.

Re:So I clicked on "Buddy Builder" and... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16677911)

I think you are missing the ponit. This isn't REALLY intended for teens. Actually, it's intended for government officials who are new to the internets and might wander down the wrong tube looking for a lost internet from their staff. You know, something to fiddle with before being turned loose on The Google. You don't want them getting confused and end up chatting to the press or worse, the parent of a soldier killed in Iraq.

Maybe it'd be better for parents (1)

borkus (179118) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666499)

The questions on the quiz were pretty reasonable. However, I know plenty of adults who probably wouldn't pass. I find that there's a divide...around the age of 30 right now...between people who use social networking sites and those who don't. That means that there's a considerable need to educate parents, not just kids.

Based on the occasional hysteria over MySpace, many adults either assume that merely being on MySpace makes you a target for predators or on the other hand that kids implicitly know how to manage themselves. Like many things, the truth is somewhere in the middle - if you're reasonably careful, you can interact with people safely online. However, there are a few precautions to take.

Better social networking software would help... (1)

dominion (3153) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666595)


This is all sound advice, but ultimately, better social networking software would go a long way towards privacy on the internet. MySpace is probably the worst, with basically only two options (private or public profile), and very little granular control. Livejournal has gotten better with friends filters, but for a while there, once someone was on your friends list, they had access to basically everything. I've heard facebook, with their StalkerHelper 2.0 additions can be considered one of the worst. I might want to be able to see all the comments I've posted, but I don't want other people to be able to see them.

I've been working on a distributed open source social networking software called Appleseed for a while now, and one of the big concerns I have is to make privacy controls as powerful as possible. This isn't just to keep xxhotbro34xx from chatting up 16 year old girls, although that's a nice addition. It's also because I want control of what's available to whom. If I post a blog entry, I want to be able to restrict it's viewing to only certain portions of my friends list.

What I coded in was Friends Circles, where you can categorize your friends into circles. One friend can be a member of multiple circles. Then, you can restrict your journal entries, photos, etc. according to your friends circles. Eventually everybody is going to be doing social networking, it'll be as common as email. And with that in mind, I want to be able to have my family on my friends list, while still being able to restrict their ability to see the photos of my new tattoo.

It's a simple idea, but it's really important, because for too long social networking functioned on the idea of Privacy Through Obscurity. People simply hoped that their personal information wouldn't be found by family members, employers, etc. But that day is long gone.

So it's important that social networking take the privacy of the individual strongly into consideration. I want to be able to have a social networking profile that I can show to anyone, while still being able to post pictures from that crazy party last week or journal entries about how I think my boss is an idiot.

And this stuff becomes even more important when you talk about teenagers getting on social networking sites. If I had kids, I would never let them get a myspace profile, but I wouldn't mind them getting an Appleseed profile after I explain how (and importantly, why) to use the privacy features to keep themselves safe.

Re:Better social networking software would help... (1)

neminem (561346) | more than 7 years ago | (#16668293)

Uh... livejournal does that...? I'm generally too lazy to do anything more specific than occasionally locking, but I did once make a filter entitled "everyone except one person", just because there was something that one person wasn't supposed to see. I know people, though, who basically keep like 5 different blogs running on the same lj.

Re:Better social networking software would help... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16670115)

As was said in the GP:

Livejournal has gotten better with friends filters, but for a while there, once someone was on your friends list, they had access to basically everything.

You're All Missing Something Here... (1)

ewl1217 (922107) | more than 7 years ago | (#16666873)

From the summary: (my own emphasis added in bold)
Naturally, the teen audience this is intended to reach is not going to go near the game except as a joke.
All of you might not realize it, but more teens will see this then you think. Of course, they won't be doing it for fun, but it will probably at least make them think twice when they're talking online to someone that they don't know.

Jerks (1)

arvindn (542080) | more than 7 years ago | (#16667215)

Clearly, the FTC did something with a sincere intent, but /. can think of no way to present it except cynically. Is it surprising that techies have so little lobbying power and are not taken seriously by the mainstream?

What they should be teaching them (1)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 7 years ago | (#16667399)

A far more effective ad would be one which shows a potential employer giving a high school student/recent graduate a job interview. After the interview is over, cut to him doing a Google search for the applicant's name, and him going to the MySpace website. Then cut to him throwing his resume i the trash.

Seriously, I really fear for these kids putting so much of their lives online. They're going to regret it in 3-5 years when they graduate and find out they can't get a decent job because everyone knows all the nasty little things about their life no one should know.

fp h0mo (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16668439)

200 ruuning NT Arrogance was troubled OS. Now All major surveys politics openly. partner. A!nd if Another cunting win out; either the the wind appeared

child/adult incompatible question (1)

rgaginol (950787) | more than 7 years ago | (#16669491)

What we need to teach kids is how to ask questions only other kids know in order to verify the age of the person they're talking to. We should rely on the fact that the next generation will be smarter then us...questions like, "how do you program a set top box?" would eliminate most adults but I'm sure there are better ones:)

#irc.7rolltalk.com (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16669599)

MOVIE [imdb.com] bad for *BSD. As Example, if you Niiger Association the NetBSD project,

Biased questions (1)

Mr EdgEy (983285) | more than 7 years ago | (#16675361)

Some of the questions are rather biased, what's wrong with giving someone your first name? I had to answer a fair few 'wrongly' to finish the game

Re:Biased questions (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 7 years ago | (#16687751)

Some of the questions are rather biased, what's wrong with giving someone your first name?
That is quite naive.

An online stalker/pedophile or whatever slowly harvests as much information as possible, piece by piece, starting out with something apparently harmless (e.g. what are your pets' names? what's your favourite band?) until without realising it, their potential victim has revealed enough for them to be tracked down in real life. There's not really one single thing that it is wrong to reveal online (a predator is hardly going to ask "what is your full name and address"), it is the cumulative effect.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...