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!

Online Parent-Child Gap Widens

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the hable-con-elle dept.

The Internet 201

The Secret to Raising Smart Kids writes "A new study by Dafna Lemish from the Department of Communication at Tel Aviv University has found that there is an enormous gap between what parents think their children are doing online and what is really happening. 'The data tell us that parents don't know what their kids are doing,' says Lemish. The study found that 30% of children between the ages of 9 and 18 delete the search history from their browsers in an attempt to protect their privacy from their parents, that 73% of the children reported giving out personal information online while the parents of the same children believed that only 4% of their children did so, and that 36% of the children admitted to meeting with a stranger they had met online while fewer than 9% of the parents knew that their children had been engaging in such risky behavior. Lemish advises that parents should give their children the tools to be literate Internet users and most importantly, to talk to their children. 'The child needs similar tools that teach them to be [wary] of dangers in the park, the mall or wherever. The same rules in the real world apply online as well.'"

cancel ×

201 comments

Online white-nigger gap widens (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22302984)

Liberals cite racism to blame. Niggers cite rival gangs to blame. Whites wonder what the big fuckin' deal is about.

Online white-nigger gap widens (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303074)

Liberals cite racism to blame. Conservatives say "it's the economy, stupid". Niggers cite rival gangs to blame. Whites wonder what the big fuckin' deal is about.



I think, therefore I am. I'm think I'm black, therefore I'm a nigger. - Descartes

100% PURE AFRICAN NIGGER (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303316)

Mod this down bitches.

Liberals cite racism to blame. Conservatives say "it's the economy, stupid". Niggers cite rival gangs to blame. Libertarians say "fuck them niggers." Whites wonder what the big fuckin' deal is about. Coons ask where da white women at?


I think, therefore I am. I'm think I'm black, therefore I'm a nigger. - Descartes

I love affirmative action! - niggers everywhere

Did you hear that they're improving transportation in Harlem? Yeah, they're planting the trees closer together.

What's the difference between a bucket of shit and dumbasses who mod this post down? The bucket.

Why is Stevie Wonder always smiling? He doesn't know he's a nigger!

Re:100% PURE AFRICAN NIGGER (-1, Offtopic)

bdjacobson (1094909) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303462)

lmao I like the stevie wonder and harlem joke.

Corrected (0)

l33tlamer (916010) | more than 6 years ago | (#22302990)

The study found that 30% of children between the ages of 9 and 18 delete the search history from their browsers because of pr0n

Re:Corrected (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303018)

It takes one to know one.

As we all know.

Re:Corrected (1)

renegadesx (977007) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303198)

The study found that 90% of parents dont know what hidden folders are.

Re:Corrected (5, Interesting)

Ignis Flatus (689403) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303854)

hidden directories are fun. way back when, like early 90s in college, i had this cushy evening shift job where i filed and did computer backups. lots of 'down' time. so when i wasn't using the gym equipment, i was playing games on the phone receptionist's PC. so i'd create a hidden directory to store them in, and use non-printing extended ascii codes for the directory names. and back then, that was plenty sufficient to get away with running a few unauthorized programs. i guess today, if a kid wanted to be really sneaky, he'd just make another partition and dual-boot into linux or somthing. then, even if his folks were to somehow get wise, they'd have a whole 'nother layer of obscurity (and even security) to deal with. i don't think it's even possible to narrow the gap. unless your parents are geeks themselves, they just don't have the same amount of free time plus hormonal motivation to stay one step ahead of you.

Hmm? (4, Insightful)

JKConsult (598845) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303016)

Only 4% of parents think their child has given out personal information online, but 8+% (the only thing I can think from the way the summary puts it) believe their child has physically met a stranger they had met online? Is it just me, or is this backwards at best?

You don't have to give out your info to hook up (2, Insightful)

_merlin (160982) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303044)

Not really. You could meet up with someone you met online without giving them any personal info. Use an alias, don't tell them your address or anything. Just say where to meet and what you'll be wearing. But it's kinda weird that parents think that their kids will be prudent enough to play the game carefully like that. If a kid was meeting a stranger that they got acquainted with online, I expect they probably would've given out personal info at some time. But what do I know? I'm just an out-of-touch adult and Slashdot reader.

Re:Hmm? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303052)

Possibly backwards. What I want to know, and what the study doesn't provide, is an answer to this question:

How many 'strangers online' did kids meet that were their own age?

I'm sorry, but yes there are sicko pedophiles out there that will use the 'Net as a chance to meet your kid to molest it. But there are far MORE kids that want to meet the kids they hang out with online. It's part of that whole 'I have friends online' thing that some people think is hogwash.

Yes. I have friends online. Friends that I have never met. Why are they my friends? Because I've known them for 1+ year and we hear each others troubles and joys. It's like a Pub/Bar buddy. But with less drinking usually.

And considering how much computers are now a part of the newest generations lives, it wouldn't surprise me if more and more people hang out with the people they met online in real life.

Re:Hmm? (4, Interesting)

JKConsult (598845) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303144)

How many 'strangers online' did kids meet that were their own age?

Yeah, I wondered this, too. But are a decent percentage of kids (even those over 14 or so, which I don't think of as "kids" in the generally accepted sense) really out there finding people who live right near them and meeting them? I even say this as someone who technically meets this criterion. I started college at 17 in 1996, and I randomly ran into some girl online who also went to my ( very large) school and lived two blocks away. We went out a few times, nothing much happened. But have things changed so much that it's common place for high-school kids to do this? I considered it an extremely weird coincidence at the time.

Re:Hmm? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303290)

But have things changed so much that it's common place for high-school kids to do this?

"Like, ohmygawd, you are soooooo Becky's type! What's your phone number?"

Is that considered "meeting online" now? How about if Becky and her beau text each other instead of calling? What if s/he finally digs up the courage to write someone they know of but don't know a short note^H^H^H^Hemail to say "Hi" and get things going? Is all of that considered "meeting online"?

Because if it is, I'm 100% for it. I've got three young daughters, and frankly, I don't have any problem at all with my girls keeping suitors at arm's length. Any technology that makes it possible for them to get to know somebody first before they meet is A-OK in my book.

Re:Hmm? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22304136)

I'm BigBoy99, I'd never sign public keys on the first date, and I'll have Becky back by 10pm. Later mister C!

Re:Hmm? (1)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303418)

A couple of years I met a guy who knew me.
It took a couple of days but he eventually realized that he had heard of me from the net.
I didnt know who he was.

That was a very weird moment. :)
We didnt consider it normal at all.

Re:Hmm? (3, Interesting)

dmsuperman (1033704) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303538)

I met a girl online, through myspace. We talked, became friends, and eventually dated a couple times. This isn't uncommon.

Re:Hmm? (5, Funny)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 6 years ago | (#22304124)

I met a girl online, through myspace. We talked, became friends, and eventually dated a couple times. This isn't uncommon.

Actually, for a typical slashdotter, it is.

Re:Hmm? (1)

mqduck (232646) | more than 6 years ago | (#22304348)

But have things changed so much that it's common place for high-school kids to do this? I considered it an extremely weird coincidence at the time.
Me, I met all of my closest (real life) friends online.

Re:Hmm? (5, Insightful)

plover (150551) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303146)

And considering how much computers are now a part of the newest generations lives, it wouldn't surprise me if more and more people hang out with the people they met online in real life.

My youth was spent hanging out with friends I met online, and we're still friends. As a matter of fact I met my wife on line 27 years ago. There's nothing wrong with meeting new friends who share your interests, and on-line is a great way for those friendships to happen.

The whole 'pedophile' thing makes the nightly news because it's shocking and sells advertisements, not because it's commonplace. Even a tiny bit of common sense exercised by a parent is usually enough to keep their kids safe.

Re:Hmm? (1)

rronda (1139207) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303304)

"I met my wife on line 27 years ago" 27 years ago? Was the internet developed enough at that time? Pardon my ignorance.

Re:Hmm? (3, Informative)

_merlin (160982) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303338)

No, not the Internet as we know it. TCP/IP was built 26 years ago. But there was UUCP, BBS and other stuff, so it's possible that he's telling the truth. But if he is telling the truth, he and his wife must both be total nerds. Only nerds were online that long ago.

Re:Hmm? (1)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303592)

And this is Slashdot so it cant help his case. :)

Re:Hmm? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303716)

And by "wife" he means "porn".

Re:Hmm? (1)

Ignis Flatus (689403) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303906)

and by "porn" you mean ascii art.

and speaking of ascii art, i remember (yes, actually remember) when i was about 4 years old (which would place this clear back in 1973 or so), my dad brought home a printout from work. it was a big long computer printout on fanfold paper of Christmas-y stuff like Santa's sleigh and his reindeer. if there were any pron, well he didn't bring those home, but the art has been out there for a long time.

sorry, offtopic, but this has got me reminiscing for some reason.

Re:Hmm? (1)

tsa (15680) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303720)

She was in the next room in the building and also never came out for coffee.

Re:Hmm? (1)

Kryptonian Jor-El (970056) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303340)

Yes, except they didn't have the problem of fibre-optics cables getting cut...

if only we stuck with that "series of tubes"...

Re:Hmm? (5, Interesting)

plover (150551) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303348)

It wasn't "The Internet." We were both using the same time-sharing computer system via modems and dumb terminals. When it turned out we were only 60 miles away from each other, we decided to meet.

Re:Hmm? (2)

Joe Tie. (567096) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303844)

That's pretty amazing. You guys must be one of the earliest people to ever meet in that way. Not too many decades in the future, I can't imagine how odd that's going to be in some respects. It'd be like someone today talking about being one of the first people to move their relationship along by using an automobile to go on a date.

Re:Hmm? (1)

symbolic (11752) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303328)

After seeing several editions of 20/20 where they set up sting after sting, typically using an undercover female cop to pose as a much younger girl, I'm not so sure it's all that uncommon. Further, we have what seems to be an epidemic of female adults in trusted positions going after young males (13-17). I have to wonder how much of this is willing participation on the part of the "victim". It's definitely not my intent to suggest that adults should be going after kids, but kids need to wise up to the potential dangers, and parents especially need to get a damn clue about what their kids are really up to.

Re:Hmm? (1)

Kryptonian Jor-El (970056) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303356)

Would 20/20 show you a sting operation that, i don't know, wasn't a 45 yr old male? Ratings only. You have to wonder how many 16 yr old boys they have to set up before they get a "real predator"

Re:Hmm? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303370)

No way a 17 year old boy is having sex with an older women "unwillingly". We still legally define it as rape though. Maybe it's time to pull the AOC down a few years, I believe 18 is higher than most of the world already.

Re:Hmm? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303432)

After seeing several editions of 20/20 where they set up sting after sting, typically using an undercover female cop to pose as a much younger girl, I'm not so sure it's all that uncommon
I still believe that the majority of those men were baited deliberately into committing a crime. Why are we surprised that men want to have sex with an attractive, mature ACTING, and willing partner? Most of the charges don't stick either, watch the credits. The guys serve 1 day, which is exactly how long it takes for the case to get thrown out for lack of evidence. They still get their lives ruined though. Good job Dateline, keep chasing those ratings.

Re:Hmm? (2, Insightful)

plover (150551) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303474)

Exactly! It "seems" to be an epidemic because of the reporting. Do they report how many kids of the appropriate age are trying to make contact? In the context of all online meetings, though, what percent do predator-child contacts represent? 0.01% 1% 10%?

And I'm not suggesting recklessness, such as a parent letting an unknown 45 year old man drive off with their 13 year old daughter, or letting a 9 year old use IRC unsupervised. But even a small amount of parenting will teach most kids to avoid these sorts of situations, to meet people in a public place, or to have a bit of skepticism.

Re:Hmm? (1)

Eivind (15695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303534)

It depends heavily on what you're doing.

If you pose as 17 year old female and frequent chatrooms with names like !!!!!!teens on a saturday late evening, yes you *will* receive a lot of indecent proposals in short order. Some of them from young sexually frustrated males, and quite possibly a few from older people posing as young.

You'd have to be severly braindead to not figure that one out though. Infact, unless online sex-fantasies was what you where looking for you'd be monumentally stupid to do this in the first place. (and a lot of young people -are- curious about sex, nothing wrong with that, nor with the fact that online they can discuss hidden behind a curtain of anonymity.)

TV is also made to sell. Don't expect them to show all the normal activity that takes place. They'll focus on the attention-getting stuff, distorting the reality.

Re:Hmm? (2, Interesting)

bladesjester (774793) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303552)

After seeing several editions of 20/20 where they set up sting after sting, typically using an undercover female cop to pose as a much younger girl, I'm not so sure it's all that uncommon.

It's a lot less common than they'd like you to believe. It's sort of like the razorblades and used needles in Halloween candy thing in the 80's. It's the press sensationalizing something and making it sound widespread and ominous in order to get viewers and, consequently, ad revenue.

Further, we have what seems to be an epidemic of female adults in trusted positions going after young males (13-17).

Same answer as above.

kids need to wise up to the potential dangers

Kids are like everyone else - some of them do stupid things and some don't. As a teenager, I met a lot of people in person that I first met online, but that was a while back (I'm 27 now). I was smart about it and I was also pretty much an abductor's worst nightmare considering that I was the size of the defensive linemen on my high school's football team and studied martial arts from about the time I was 6.

I met a lot of really good friends that way. Met a few jerks too, but you'll have that. Never got into anything that I would have had trouble getting out of though.

Re:Hmm? (5, Insightful)

Ignis Flatus (689403) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303978)

you make a good point. for some reason, even in our "enlightened" equal-rights-for-the-sexes age, we still treat the girls like half-retarded children. case in point, that boy in Georgia that was prosecuted for getting a blowjob from a teenage girl. iirc, she was about 15, old enough to know what she was doing. if underage sex is illegal, then she should have been prosecuted, too. but yet, girls never get prosecuted. if they get pregnant, we reward them.

now, i'm not saying we should treat sex between young people as a criminal act, but... we can't keep treating females as feeble-minded victims. if anything, their social intelligence is much higher than the boys, and we have every reason to expect them to be accountable for their actions.

Re:Hmm? (1)

Arterion (941661) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303374)

You met your wife online in 1981? Uh...

Re:Hmm? (2)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303412)

Yeah. As a parent, it also strikes me as pretty silly to lump together ages 9-18. Nine is way different from 18.

'The child needs similar tools that teach them to be [wary] of dangers in the park, the mall or wherever. The same rules in the real world apply online as well.'
I'd rather have my kids out on the sidewalk getting some exercise and fresh air than have them cowering in their bedrooms, being afraid of child molesters lurking behind bushes. I don't want my kids to be wary. I'd like to teach them to be adventurous, inquisitive, and independent. My 8-year-old fell off the bars at school a few weeks ago and broke her arm. It's just part of growing up.

Re:Hmm? (1)

loss angeles (1227658) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303520)

My youth was spent hanging out with friends I met online, and we're still friends. As a matter of fact I met my wife on line 27 years ago. There's nothing wrong with meeting new friends who share your interests, and on-line is a great way for those friendships to happen.

Yes but... That was a different internet then. Or BBS boards or Compuserve or whatever you used in 1991.

Not that it can't be a great tool today, but back then you had to be pretty dedicated to be online, and probably shared similar (geeky) interests. It was also quite a civil place. You could have a real conversation with a stranger that could lead to real friendship.

Today it's a free for all, and it is not a friendly place. As wonderful as the anonymity these screen names provide us can be, it has also brought out the worst in us, where people feel pretty free to say horrible things to people they've never met. I would be somewhat wary of allowing my child to freely roam the internet, particularly when they're younger. I'm not saying bar them from all unpleasantness, but don't throw them to the wolves either.

The whole 'pedophile' thing makes the nightly news because it's shocking and sells advertisements, not because it's commonplace. Even a tiny bit of common sense exercised by a parent is usually enough to keep their kids safe.

On the internet of 2008 I wouldn't worry so much about a pedophile abducting my child. I would worry that my child was exposing too much of her- or himself, from flashing naughty bits to admitting drug use or petty crimes to just making a general ass of themselves in a way that could be traced back to them ten years down the road. The kind of foresight (and common sense) to worry about what (say) a future employer might think is pretty rare among teens (if not the definition of "immaturity") and again, is a good reason to monitor exactly what they're up to online. Not to deprive them of privacy, but at the very least make them aware you're checking up on them (and if you can, so can anyone else.)

Re:Hmm? (1)

loss angeles (1227658) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303528)

Yes but... That was a different internet then. Or BBS boards or Compuserve or whatever you used in 1991.


Okay, I made a simple subtraction error on Slashdot. I'm sure I'll get stoned for this.

But... you met someone online 27 years ago? How the hell is that even possible?

Re:Hmm? (1)

FishWithAHammer (957772) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303650)

UUCP. BBSes.

As he said in another post, he met her because they both had time-sharing on the same mainframe.

Re:Hmm? (1)

Skynyrd (25155) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303500)

36% of the children admitted to meeting with a stranger they had met online while fewer than 9% of the parents knew that their children had been engaging in such risky behavior.

I find it hard to believe that over a third of kids have met somebody online, and in real life. 36%????

Something is wrong with the study, the kids are lying, or it's being interpreted incorrectly. I'm just not buying it.

  - perhaps it's good that I don't have kids

Re:Hmm? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303766)

... Department of Communication at Tel Aviv University ...
Israel is a lot smaller than the US, both geographically and socially. It is also the only Hebrew-speaking country in the world. This might account for some of the discrepancy between what the article says and what you expect.

Re:Hmm? (2, Insightful)

matria (157464) | more than 6 years ago | (#22304360)

And I find that Israeli parents are extremely lax with their children. It is not at all uncommon to see kindergarden aged children running around the neighborhood at 11 pm. Truancy and school dropout rates are very high since nobody really makes the kids go to school. Schools are by-and-large zoos with no classroom discipline at all. I know several teachers from the US who quit teaching in disgust because they couldn't teach anything under those conditions. Late at night, 1 or 2 am, there are gangs of teenagers of various ages roaming the streets making noise and throwing beer bottles around. I've seen younger children playing a game where they take turns running and throwing a bottle as far as they can up the sidewalk, to see who gets the farthest scattering of glass, and nobody bats an eyelash. A young child was riding his tricycle up and down the isles of the supermarket, and when one elderly lady complained, was herself scolded by the store manager "he's only a child". Neighbor kids ripped all the wire netting off my garden fence to make birdcages with, and their parents got mad at me when I went to recover the netting. So I don't find this surprising at all.

Re:Hmm? (1)

arivanov (12034) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303918)

I would agree with it.

The Internet what for us used to be the local street. We used to go out, play in the street and meet people. Unsupervised. And we are pretty much alive.

Personally, I would prefer if we actually do it the Dutch and Danish way. In their residential districts they have wiped off the road markings, dropped the speed limit to 20 and put the vehicles on the lowest rung of the priority ladder. They also have suburbia. But they have kids playing out and about in it. The streets have been reclaimed and given back where they belong - to the children.

As there is no likelihood of USA or UK becoming civilised and accepting the Dutch way of thinking, the kids will use the Internet do we like it or not.

Open your mouth and meet my cock offline (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303100)

Dip-shit.

--

Obama on TV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM8hNJfRNSM [youtube.com]

Re:Hmm? (4, Interesting)

igb (28052) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303774)

I don't believe the numbers. I'm reminded of the `video nasty' hysteria of the seventies. A study showed that some huge percentage of kids had seen video nasties, a study at odds with the number of video recorders in houses. So some proper researchers, rather than people looking for a headline, repeated the experiment, but rather than naming real video nasties they made up a bunch of titles. The numbers stayed the same. Why? Because kids
  • Knew what the adults wanted to hear, and were keen to please; and
  • Knew that video nasties were cool, so wanted to appear cool to their peers and the adults.
The claim that 36% of children are meeting strangers they met online is prone to the same distortion. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and the number runs so counter to general experience that it must relate to a specific population, or have confounding factors. I'd be surprised if there were many communities in the UK, at least, where much more 36% of children simultaneously had access to computers and were allowed out unsupervised, which makes the number perhaps sixty percent of those with motive and opportunity. I'm sorry, I just don't believe that. ian

Risky Behavior (5, Insightful)

Kryptonian Jor-El (970056) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303030)

36% admitted to meeting strangers?? Risky Business? I call bull

When they say stranger, they mean...ANYONE THE KID HASNT MET BEFORE.

Damn media blows the whole "online predator" shit way out of proportion. The same kids that meet 45 yr old men are the same ones that would get into a van because the guy offered them candy.

Protect the children my ass. Just makes politicians look good

Re:Risky Behavior (1)

plover (150551) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303086)

Damn media blows the whole "online predator" shit way out of proportion. The same kids that meet 45 yr old men are the same ones that would get into a van because the guy offered them candy.

Well, you know what they say: "Strangers have the best candy!"

Re:Risky Behavior (1)

Skynyrd (25155) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303522)

Sorry I can't post an image, but here's my van. Want some candy?
http://hunch.se/stuff/free_candy.jpg [hunch.se]

Re:Risky Behavior (2, Insightful)

trytoguess (875793) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303188)

Eh, I agree. I've met a fair amount of strangers as a kid via online contacts. Course, it was always in a public space, usually with friends, and occasionally said person would be approved by someone else I knew. I mean I wasn't a smart kid or anything, but I've been drilled on the whole don't trust strangers thing to have a decent idea of how to meet one. This isn't to say that everyone will act like I did, but imo the simple act of meeting a new person isn't going to necessarily hurt a child/teen. Most people are decent enough for that.

The Internet is Like Television (1, Insightful)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303040)

Parents think they can sit their kids down in front of "the box" and let it do their parenting for them.

Then they want to "blame society" when their kids turn out to be basically "white trash" or whatever.

Here's a clue folks, if you don't actively "parent your kids", your kids will end up being hopeless lowlife clueless losers.

The forum's Like Fox News. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303302)

Well if the Internet's like television? What does that make Slashdot? PBS?

Re:The forum's Like Fox News. (1)

emilper (826945) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303428)

that makes Slashdot the equivalent of "Lost": it's a series with mostly unconnected episodes that lead to no conclusion, and still most of the viewers-posters get some strange satisfaction from being part of the crowd watching it. Parents having no idea what their kids are doing or thinking ? Is that different from what happened to the kids born in the '70s, or to the kids born in 1900 ?

Re:The forum's Like Fox News. (5, Insightful)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303508)

Well, in 1900, you didn't have adults having sex with 16 year old kids. Why? Because in 1900, a 16 year old wasn't a kid. It is sometimes amazing how bad the epidemic has become that has reduced an entire nation to the point that it takes ~30% longer to reach adulthood than it did just 100 years ago.

I would agree with the '70s though. There is no way that a parent with only partial custody of their child is going to be able to keep track of what their child is doing. At this point most most parents share custody, often having minority time, with the state through our 'public education' system.

Re:The Internet is Like Television (1)

cromar (1103585) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303822)

I agree with you... don't call people trash though.

I grew up on line (5, Funny)

plover (150551) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303054)

So I figured I knew what my teenager was up to. Nothing he'd find particularly worried me, as long as he didn't start espousing Nazi rhetoric or join some freaky cult.

I was mostly hoping he was learning to hack, but afraid that he was probably just surfing for pr0n and MP3s... I did warn him a couple times about file sharing, and I did maintain control of the router. But for the most part, he was responsible, so I let him be.

I was richly rewarded. He's 20 and turning out to be a hacker, much to my relief. :-)

Re:I grew up on line (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303130)

and I did maintain control of the router...

dad, sorry.. I...

Re:I grew up on line (1)

plover (150551) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303168)

and I did maintain control of the router...
dad, sorry.. I...
I figured as much. Not that you ever spotted it, but I do have the syslogs captured. ;-)

Re:I grew up on line (1)

A Pancake (1147663) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303202)

And here this whole time I was hoping my boy would discover women...

Re:I grew up on line (2, Funny)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303548)

You were modded funny because you claimed to have a child, which is logically impossible for a /.er

Re:I grew up on line (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22304102)

Yeah. I'm sure no /. has ever donated to a sperm bank.

Let's get serious. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303058)

"Lemish advises that parents should give their children the tools to be literate Internet users and most importantly, to talk to their children. 'The child needs similar tools that teach them to be [wary] of dangers in the park, the mall or wherever. The same rules in the real world apply online as well.'""

I feel a serious game [blogspot.com] coming on.

Alternate Summary (4, Funny)

Amorymeltzer (1213818) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303128)

According to a recent study [sciencedaily.com] , parents are becoming increasingly negligent when it comes to raising their children. The study found that over one-third (38%) of children had been allowed to meet with a stranger they met on the internet. Parental standards have been falling for years, but this recent study gives insight as to the increasing threat of a lack of parental oversight.

In an unrelated study, scientists found that approximately 40% of people aged 9-18 years old should be "destroyed for the good of mankind."

Re:Alternate Summary (1)

Lord Nerevar (1184053) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303242)

My question would be...

Why is it that surveys will always spout some crap-filled statistic that probably would be true if it was specified further, just to sensationalise it further. Like the "fact" that 38% of children have met strangers they met online in real-life. Is it just me or is there something horribly wrong with that "fact".

Fixed (2, Interesting)

trickster721 (900632) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303172)

"Lemish advises that children should give their parents the tools to be literate Internet users"

Seriously, the idea that the only people who meet new friends online are cruising for illegal sex reminds me of Victorians refusing to answer the telephone because that wasn't how suitable people became acquainted.

Remember that case of the girl who killed herself because her former best friend and their parents, people she knew from real life, were tormenting her online? I was just reading about how when the dead girl's parents finally allowed her to get a myspace account for her birthday, after much begging and pleading, it was on the condition that her mother literally be looking over her shoulder the entire time she was logged on. If anything contributed to her death, it wasn't insufficient paranoia, it was the superstitious awe this entire family apparently had for the internet.

Re:Fixed (3, Insightful)

vux984 (928602) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303308)

i don't want my kids on myspace. not because I'm 'paranoid and afraid of the internets' but because I think myspace is a stupid waste of time; an internet trailor park.

Of course I won't forbid it. Then they'll just create one and access it from the school library or their friends house or something. Or try and get sneaky and hide their tracks on one of the systems here.

But I'm going to do everything in my power to convince them that myspace and facebook and crap like that is beneath them.

Of course, this all coming from a guy on slashdot... but still I'd rather have them wasting their time here than on myspace. ;)

Re:Fixed (1)

igb (28052) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303742)

i don't want my kids on myspace. not because I'm 'paranoid and afraid of the internets' but because I think myspace is a stupid waste of time
Precisely. I don't even bother preventing it, although I make my general contempt for all social networking known. I just steer the kids towards other things they could be doing online, and then to real-world activities (music, sport --- there's the ferrying to Saturday morning orchestras, we swim together, cycle together, etc). If it became an issue I'd split the kids' machines onto a distinct VLAN and application gateway that the outside world, and if it became a more serious issue I'd put a squid transparent proxy machine with authentication in at the border and only NAT the protocols we need to the remote destinations we need. But it doesn't arise, because the kids have plenty of better things to do.

Unfortunately, some parents use computers like they use TV, as mind-rotting babysitters, and some have this idea that myspace is teaching people `computer skills' or `the way the world is today' or somesuch nonsense. This is like claiming hanging around in shopping centres is teaching economics.

We will also presumably have teenagers on this thread telling us that their lives are, like, so over? if they couldn't, like, hang on myspace. But teens acting out pathetic dramas about the concerns of the day are hardly new, and it's the responsibility of parents to know better, not to acquiesce to everything their children want.

Lots of friends on myspace: worthless. Lots of friends in real life and decent A Levels: worthwhile. Parents are responsible for protecting their children, including from things their children don't want to be protected from.

ian

Re:Fixed (2, Funny)

zenkonami (971656) | more than 6 years ago | (#22304076)

I wouldn't let my kids on MySpace just because I wouldn't want them to learn poor web design.

If I had kids.

Completely misleading (5, Interesting)

unbug (1188963) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303184)

Let's RTFA for a change. It says: "Thirty-six percent from the high school group admitted to meeting with a stranger they had met online" (empasis mine). That is, these "children" are between 16 and 18. Also, I strongly suspect that those strangers are mostly other kids just like them. Talk about spin.

Re:Completely misleading (2, Informative)

StargateSteve (1054492) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303298)

16 is old enough to drink in several countries, it is old enough to meet with other people. I have with people I meet online, but mostly because I find we go to the same school, or are in the same major.

Re:Completely misleading (1)

Kenoli (934612) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303850)

Meeting people I've met online can be pretty tricky. A lot of the people I know don't live in the same state, or even in the same country as me.
I can't imagine how a high schooler meets up with anyone that isn't already in their same community.

Re:Completely misleading (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22304332)

Flights are cheap in Europe.

I met my ex when I was 18 and she was 16 - we had talked online and then I flew a thousand miles to meet her.

Aaand got my heart broken a year or two afterwards, but that's an another story.

Meeting strangers online (1)

Middle - Adopter (906754) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303232)

Regarding the 36% of kids who apparently meet strangers online - I know that sounds scary at first blush but does it not make sense that this would happen, given the rise of social networking sites in the last 5 - 8 years? I mean, "meeting strangers online" use to mean kids were meeting up with weirdos from shady IRC chat rooms in McDonald's parking lots. Nowadays so many more kids are active on these sites, would you think that they would naturally want to meet up with each other?


"Meeting a stranger online" could also refer to answering a Craigslist personals ad, for instance. I'm not saying kids are/should be doing that, but I think that the phrase might be broader than you might think.

Re:Meeting strangers online (1)

lucas teh geek (714343) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303388)

the wording "meeting a stranger online" is weighted to sound like something much worse than it is. if it was just "meeting new people" all of a sudden it doesnt have that creepy ring to it, even though it's essentially the same thing

Re:Meeting strangers online (1)

Eivind (15695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303494)

Sure. If you never "meet strangers" you will never have new friends at all, will you ?

parents, children, and life (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303256)

Surprise, 80 years ago parents didn't know what their children were up to. Unless you're willing to chain your kids in the basement until they turn 18, realize that you will NEVER know what your children are really up to. Unless you manage to come across as the coolest parent who will literally not outwardly judge your kid for *anything* (the "I do it out of love and to protect them/knock some sense into them" reasoning doesn't cut it, either), your kid is going to keep secrets from you. You're absolutely naive and swimming in wishful thinking if you believe you know what your kid is up to.

Parents need to teach their children some basic real-world sensibility, and then let them find their own way. Step in with some guidance once in a while, but realize that this is their life and not yours. And when your kid makes a mistake, let them learn from it. No matter how much you try to prepare them for everything life will throw at them, there are still going to be bumps.

And for the love of someone, when those bumps hit, don't start blaming the teachers, doctors, community, and technology (including the internet) for not shielding your child from the inevitable. If anybody other than your child is to blame, it's you. If your child was missing some piece of knowledge that could have helped them avoid a situation, it is your fault you didn't impart that wisdom on your child. And if your child *did* have the knowledge and still screwed up, then they either weren't prepared for it this time around (in which case they'll learn and use it next time), or they made an intentional decision to go against what they were taught, in which case it is up to them whether they'll adapt their behaviour for future situations.

This is Earth. We live under a constantly changing blanket of an infinite number of variables, most of which we have zero or next-to-zero control over. For the few variables we CAN influence, allow yourself and others to experiment with them and see which "settings" and "preferences" work best for that individual. There's no such thing as a "perfect upbringing", where someone's entire life has been a smooth ride from day one. Life would be boring as hell if we didn't have free will over how we interact with the world.

Age range is too wide? (4, Insightful)

Nemilar (173603) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303280)

There's a pretty big difference between a 9 year old and an 18 year old, especially when it comes to what they should/should not be doing online.

For example, deleting your search history? The nine year old hasn't really got anything to be doing that for; the 18 year old may be googling about any number of things he/she doesn't want her parent to be aware of: sex education (protection, diseases, etc), boyfriends/girlfriends, etc.. Teenagers are especially protective of their privacy.

Giving out personal information online, i.e, signing up for things, is something 18 year olds may do every day, while a 9 year old shouldn't be doing it at all. Myspace, anyone? (Although the 4% response by parents make me think they don't know what's required to sign up for a lot of these things, or the type of information you post to facebook.)

Meeting with someone you met online is risky business no matter what age you are; a 9-year-old certainly shouldn't be doing at all, but hopefully the 18-year-olds aren't dumb enough to meet a stranger at his/her house, or in a dark alley somewhere. But (take Craigslist for example) there are some reasons why you'd legitimately be meeting someone you only came into contact with on the internet, and it's perfectly safe as long as you do it smart (public place, daylight, etc). 18 year olds are smart enough to do this (hopefully); 9 year olds are not.

So yes, while they are doing a survey of minors (who are the responsibilities of their parents/guardians), the age ranging from 9 prepubescent to 18 (ready to go off to college) is too wide for the figures to be of any real meaning.

Re:Age range is too wide? (2, Insightful)

Eivind (15695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303576)

The questions seem designed to evoke alarm more than enligthen. I give out personal information freely every day, dozen of times. Look, I'm named "Eivind", and can be reached at a certain email-adress. Both are true. Both are personal information. Both put me in no risk I can think of.

Besides, the entire "17 year old = kid" thing is stupid.

I've had a 17 year old girl "give out personal details" to an adult online, namely me. Infact she even took an airplane to come visit me where I lived at the time, and the expectation was, from both sides, that we'd probably sleep together, if we liked eachothers as well in real life as online. I was 20, we where a couple and lived together for the next 2 years or something. There's a word for these things, and it's not "online predator" it's "normal".

Re:Age range is too wide? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303760)

Picts?

/ Sorry... sorry... couldn't be helped

What is this "it" everybody is so afraid of? (1)

Nemilar (173603) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303354)

FTA: She suggests that common filtering software may not be effective, since children will access what they are looking for elsewhere -- at a friend's house, an Internet café, or school. And if the child accesses dangerous material outside of the home, they will be unprepared and uninformed when it happens, she says. (Emphasis mine)

What is this "it"? "It" is a word that must refer to something previously stated. Unprepared and uninformed when what happens? And what is this "dangerous material" that everyone is so afraid of? Porn? The Anarchist Cookbook?

People are so terrified of the dangers lurking on the internet. It's just a method of information exchange. Sure, okay, "it" can refer to meeting some 47 year old guy pretending to be a 10 year old girl, but for the overwhelming majority of things that a kid is doing online, "it" is undefined.

Oh - and, if it is porn... why the heck are you blocking/getting up set at your teenage kid from watching porn? And if it's "how to blow stuff up 101" then you should be teaching them better (so they don't have to go online to find out. It's safer this way!).

Re:What is this "it" everybody is so afraid of? (2, Insightful)

unbug (1188963) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303532)

What is this "it"?
I think it's pretty clear that "it" refers to accessing dangerous material. Whatever that may be.

Re:What is this "it" everybody is so afraid of? (1)

blackdew (1161277) | more than 6 years ago | (#22304024)

And what is this "dangerous material" that everyone is so afraid of? Porn? The Anarchist Cookbook?

Slashdot. A single visit to this site can ruin a teenagers life forever!

Yeah (2, Funny)

barakn (641218) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303392)

... and children never lie on surveys.

supervision (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22303420)

Hang on a minute, you mean to tell me that if you give a child an internet connection with no supervision, then they will do stuff you are not aware of? What a world.

If you give a child (under 16) access to the internet and don't supervise them, you deserve what ever you get.

Re:supervision (1)

sanso999 (997008) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303544)

And when said "child" is sent to school where social networking sites are blocked, they simply find a mirror site. Nexopia....oh, the horrors of that one! You can't supervise them all the time once they are older teens. Then again, if my parents had heard the sort of conversations I had on the phone.....

Re:supervision (1)

Myrcutio (1006333) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303804)

At work, they blocked myspace and redirected to google. it took about 30 seconds for the 18 year old new guy to find a proxy and get to myspace anyways. Please, half the parents i've met don't even know what browsing history is, much less how to look at it or delete it. It's more important what your kids are doing, not what they're watching. Honestly who grew up without watching pr0n? Well, maybe Bush, but that only helps my case...

Molesting begins at home (4, Insightful)

Animats (122034) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303440)

Child molestation is mostly by friends and family, plus the occasional priest. 80% friends and family, 20% strangers. So, kids, get out of the house, stay away from churches, and head for the mall.

Wrong advice (1)

techno-vampire (666512) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303506)

Lemish advises that parents should give their children the tools to be literate Internet users and most importantly, to talk to their children.


No. I'm sure that almost every parent talks to their children already, and if this study is to be believed, it doesn't do any good. What's needed is for parents to talk with their children, and that includes both listening to what they say and discussing things with them instead of just lecturing them.

Childhood's End (1)

oblivious (453096) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303542)

I'm one of those "older" people on the internet. I work in the field, and still, it's a struggle for me to keep up with even the guys that work for me, mostly 20- and 30-something people. My daughter met her husband on the internet in a teen chat room about 12 years ago. Things worked out well, as I suspect most meetings on the internet do. People are out to meet people, and the internet is breaking the boundaries. 'Eastern Standard Tribe' is just a convenience, if you really connect with someone across the globe, time really isn't an issue. The bigger fear for me is 'Childhood's End', the kids are out-pacing their parents to the extend the singularity will come from people, with the aid computers.

Re:Childhood's End (1)

bladesjester (774793) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303898)

Agreed on basically everything.

Most meetings that I know of which happened because of the internet worked out quite well. In fact, I've known several people like your daughter who met people online that they later married (and I'm glad things worked out for her. It's always nice when that happens).

I think I had my first face to face encounter with someone I initially met online when I was 15 or 16. Most of the people I met that way have been well worth knowing.

I got to know some people that I became very good friends with that way. Heck, some of them are more like family than certain members of my biological family. There have been instances when one or more of us have traveled halfway across the country because one of us has needed help (which is something that, in my experience, quite a few biological family members don't do).

Then again, because of the experiences I've had, I've become of the opinion that, as you grow older, your real friends basically *become* your family and end up being more tight-knit than the one you were born into ever was.

As for kids out-pacing their parents, I have to say that my parents didn't know probably 90% of what I did, tech or not. It wasn't because they weren't involved parents (in fact, at times, they were downright overbearing), but rather because I'm fairly private and had/have an independent streak several miles wide.

And yes, I'm one of those pesky 20-somethings (though I feel a lot older than that half the time) =]

What about (2, Informative)

kylehase (982334) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303634)

the parent-technology gap? I mean who's going to educate the kids about the dangers of the Internet when the kids know more about the Internet than their parents? I know a lot of parents that click on those "warning your computer is infected with viruses" banners. Can you imagine if they told their kids, "Click on that! We must have a virus!"

Re:What about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22304398)

When my dad does that, I thwap his fingers, shoo him off his 'puter and update his content blocker.

I took control of the router when I was 16 and dad's never had a snowball's chance of getting it back.

Meeting strangers (1)

AdamHaun (43173) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303718)

The article doesn't go into detail about what "meeting strangers" actually means. Is this one-on-one? In a group? I've met plenty of "strangers" that I knew online because they were friends of friends.

Parents (2, Interesting)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303746)

I could be wrong her, but it seems that people fear what they don't know. Are there reasons to fear some things on the internet? Yes, there certainly are... and there are tons of wastes of time on the internet, tons of bad things, etc. But when a parent decides the whole thing is incredibly dangerous - because the don't know any better - then there's a problem.

I'd imagine it's like parks. What if the only thing you heard about public parks was drugs, for example. Well, that's quite possibly true at 3am. This is probably not news to most parents - and if it is, they shouldn't be parents - letting your 13 year old daughter walk around the park at 3am is probably not a good idea. Now, if parents knew nothing about parks and figured that the whole thing was a bad place, that's totally different... whether or not your kid can ever go alone or not (during the day) is a personal decision, and I'm sure there are parks that probably are bad, period, but in general, ignorance of the park contributes to paranoia, if anything.

Applying that to the internet then, ignorance of it seems to be a huge problem. Giving a 9 year old complete access of the computer, not talking to him about anything, giving him a 1.5Mbit connection... uh, well, that seems pretty silly. Giving him nothing because you're afraid of the whole thing, that's also bad. Why is this so hard to figure out? Do you just give your kid a car when he turns 16 and hope he can end up driving safely? (sorry, had to use a car analogy). Nooo, seems like one of the points of parenting is to impart your wisdom from experience, and if you don't have experience in it, get experience in it and exercise wisdom, not paranoid behavior as if everything not around in 1975 is bad.

Oh, last comment. I find it interesting that parents think public schools are great places to send their kid and have no clue what goes on and get paranoid about the internet. I dunno. Maybe it's just that society is stupid now (parents included in that social generalization).

Results are hard to believe.. (1)

Simonetta (207550) | more than 6 years ago | (#22303922)

36% of 'children' met with strangers that they met on-line

    Not in the USA. Maybe in Israel, but still, .... probably not.

    And the category of children being between the ages of 9 to 18? 18-year-olds are not children in any sense except in certain legal categories. 'met strangers'? Yeah, maybe, 18 year olds in neighboring high-schools meeting each other for coffee or just hanging out after looking at each other's picture and trading instant messages about common interests. Not the same thing as 9-year-olds meeting 'strangers with candy' on the big bad internet!

    Totally meaningless study. Just easy grant money for half-wit psychology grad students.

    Garbage in: Garbage out.

Cugals... (2, Funny)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 6 years ago | (#22304062)

In Israel, if a girl working at a check-out counter thinks you are hot, then she'll write her phone number on the cash register slip. So does a check-out line count as an on-line encounter?

Actually a sound suggestion (3, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#22304100)

Hey, the suggestion those guys give is actually a good one! Teach your kids to use the net sensibly. Protect your privacy, be wary of strangers that offer you deals that are "too good to be true", don't just trust people because they appear nice online...

And that teaching should come from the same people that fill out every damn form on a "click the monkey to win" spin, answer "easy money fast" spam and hand out their banking details to widows of Nigerian presidents?

Sorry, but first of all we'd have to teach the parents, the adults, how to be safe online. But that is so much work, and we don't want to deal with that internet thingamajig stuff that our kids are so much into, ain't there some program that could do it? Or wait, what do we have a government for, anyway, they should handle that!

Gap? (1)

certsoft (442059) | more than 6 years ago | (#22304134)

I'm much more worried about a mine-shaft gap.

It's the "friends" who do the most harm (1)

chromozone (847904) | more than 6 years ago | (#22304396)

There is a contradiction in this article. It encourages parents to "educate" their kids about the Internet while stating the kids know more about the Internet than they do: "Prof. Lemish believes that one problem is that parents are not as media-literate as they could be. They don't have a handle on using popular online software and chat programs, and tend to have no clue about what is really happening online" Having been a moderator in large teen forum, I know its a kid's friends and close peers that will do them more harm than the bogeymen trying to talk dirty. A bigger problem is girls getting drunk and then being taken advantage of by people they thought were friends. That was a weekly issue. Meanwhile the parents might have home tweaking the Internet filters. Fact is many parents are lazy these days and like to seem engaged more than they are. They dont like to be upset and will ignore a kids school environment and friends (the "friends" do more damage than anybody) while feeling "super vigilant" about phantoms they will likely never encounter - its a compensation. A lot of these parents have pretty lame friends and relationships themselves and kids know it. Another problem is an effort to redefine what pervy is. Schools and groups on Internet will teach kids S&M is ok if and they shouldn't be narrow minded about it. Parents coast right along with this sort of thing. But tell them someone "older" thinks their kid is attractive (and keep in mind a lot of the "older" people being busted with MySpace kids are like 19yr olds with 16 yr old high school juniors) even if their is no intention to follow through and the parents often want to freak out.
Load More 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...