Who Else Is Bucking the Smartphone Trend?

[index]

Kids under age 13 should not have them.

I disagree... but with strings attached. To all those who say "We didn't have smartphones when we were growing up." or "We didn't have mobile phones when we were growing up.", I respond by saying, "Yeah, but there were plenty of payphones, and it helped to have a quarter with you at all times." The number of payphones went from a peak of 2.6 million in the United States in the mid 1990s, to around 100k in 2019. AT&T exited the pay phone business in 2007, and Verizon followed in 2011, thus pay phone services are only offered by third party providers.

Having said that, the kid need to understand that having a phone is a privilege, not a right. In an ideal world, the kid would receive a basic "dumb" phone that was locked down so that all he could do is call/text their parents, school, trusted relatives and friends, and doctor's office. If they want a smart phone, congratulations, there is a garage to clean, lawns to mow, and chores to do. No, you cannot make monthly payments. After all, if you work hard for something, you are likely to treasure it more and take good care of it. The reality is that the kid is probably going to receive a hand-me-down phone, and hopefully, the parent is tech-savvy enough to lock down the phone.

Considering what my 12 year old niece (my wife and were the guardians for awhile) has done on her phone and how much I’ve had to take it away I would definitely say no.  Her Dad is the one that lets her have it but her interactions with other slightly older kids have me really concerned what might happen if one creepy adult comes into the picture.  Either way, it sure put the question in my mind for if and when we have a kid.

The amount of unsavory people and downright pedos/groomers on the internet today seems to have surged with the advent of platforms like Discord and the still-ever growing popularity of Twitter and other sites, as unfortunate as it is. I've heard of people setting their profile picture to that of a young girl for the purpose of catching these people and immediately getting creepy/downright sexual messages, totally flooding them with the most disgusting garbage ever. It seems like every damn week there's some popular personality on social media that's revealed to be a pedophile or someone who grooms minors or other awful garbage like that, especially in the circles that I'm in, I'm not sure about the internet at-large. Not to mention you have the elsagate crap that was on YouTube a while ago. I would be worried if I had kids with the kind of stuff they're seeing on the internet and what I myself have encountered.

There's the potential for serious manipulation and something needs to be done about that...I myself have known people who have been manipulated into literal mental trauma by some people on the internet. Growing up as a child, my parents had a pretty laissez-faire approach to my computer use and I turned out fine, but there also wasn't such a pervasive presence of these weird people like there is now and I didn't do social media or instant messaging. I never ran into anything I might remember as creepy or objectionable. The whole thing is just about the worst double-edged sword ever right now. I've met a lot of great people via the internet who have genuinely really helped me out, and the internet is my primary source of income as well with the stuff I do on there and has seriously boosted my future, but I've heard so many shitty stories from those I know about people on it too.

[nexus73]

At a local sandwich shop I saw a 2 year old working on a smartphone.  That was scary.

Rick

[Scott5114]

At a local sandwich shop I saw a 2 year old working on a smartphone.  That was scary.

Did the 2 year old at least make your order correctly?

[webny99]

Kids under age 13 should not have them.

I disagree... but with strings attached. ...

Having said that, the kid need to understand that having a phone is a privilege, not a right. In an ideal world, the kid would receive a basic "dumb" phone that was locked down so that all he could do is call/text their parents, school, trusted relatives and friends, and doctor's office. If they want a smart phone, congratulations, there is a garage to clean, lawns to mow, and chores to do. No, you cannot make monthly payments. After all, if you work hard for something, you are likely to treasure it more and take good care of it. The reality is that the kid is probably going to receive a hand-me-down phone, and hopefully, the parent is tech-savvy enough to lock down the phone.

I think it's potentially unsafe and borderline child abuse for kids under 12 to have their own phone. I don't see any reason why any of the things you mention would need to occur before a kid turns at least 13, if not older. The most convincing case for a kid actually needing to have a phone is when they start driving - and that's usually between 14 and 17.

[Roadgeekteen]

Kids under age 13 should not have them.

I disagree... but with strings attached. ...

Having said that, the kid need to understand that having a phone is a privilege, not a right. In an ideal world, the kid would receive a basic "dumb" phone that was locked down so that all he could do is call/text their parents, school, trusted relatives and friends, and doctor's office. If they want a smart phone, congratulations, there is a garage to clean, lawns to mow, and chores to do. No, you cannot make monthly payments. After all, if you work hard for something, you are likely to treasure it more and take good care of it. The reality is that the kid is probably going to receive a hand-me-down phone, and hopefully, the parent is tech-savvy enough to lock down the phone.

I think it's potentially unsafe and borderline child abuse for kids under 12 to have their own phone. I don't see any reason why any of the things you mention would need to occur before a kid turns at least 13, if not older. The most convincing case for a kid actually needing to have a phone is when they start driving - and that's usually between 14 and 17.

I got my first smartphone at age 12, got my first dumb phone at age 11. Most kids in 6th-7th grade have a phone nowadays.

[1995hoo]

It must be hellish for teachers trying to police cheating on tests with the proliferation of phones, smart watches, etc.

(Of course, sometimes I think if kids spent the time they devote to finding new ways to cheat on learning the material, they wouldn't need to cheat.)

[Scott5114]

It must be hellish for teachers trying to police cheating on tests with the proliferation of phones, smart watches, etc.

(Of course, sometimes I think if kids spent the time they devote to finding new ways to cheat on learning the material, they wouldn't need to cheat.)

In pretty much any situation that a person would need the material they're being tested on, they'd have the same Internet connection available to them, so what's the point? "But what if you trip and fall into a Faraday cage and don't have your–" okay yeah how many times has that actually happened to you? Because in my experience it's pretty close to zero.

It's been thirteen years since I was in school of any kind, and even then, you were gradually seeing more open-book/open-note tests.

[NWI_Irish96]

Kids under age 13 should not have them.

I disagree... but with strings attached. ...

Having said that, the kid need to understand that having a phone is a privilege, not a right. In an ideal world, the kid would receive a basic "dumb" phone that was locked down so that all he could do is call/text their parents, school, trusted relatives and friends, and doctor's office. If they want a smart phone, congratulations, there is a garage to clean, lawns to mow, and chores to do. No, you cannot make monthly payments. After all, if you work hard for something, you are likely to treasure it more and take good care of it. The reality is that the kid is probably going to receive a hand-me-down phone, and hopefully, the parent is tech-savvy enough to lock down the phone.

I think it's potentially unsafe and borderline child abuse for kids under 12 to have their own phone. I don't see any reason why any of the things you mention would need to occur before a kid turns at least 13, if not older. The most convincing case for a kid actually needing to have a phone is when they start driving - and that's usually between 14 and 17.

I got my first smartphone at age 12, got my first dumb phone at age 11. Most kids in 6th-7th grade have a phone nowadays.

My wife and I have kids that are currently 12 & 11 and we have been having the debate about when to get them phones. Two years ago, we got new phones and let them have our old ones, but without service. They only work when connected to wi-fi, and through the wi-fi we can control the hours that they will work and the content they're allowed to see.

We are due to get new phones soon and are debating giving them service when we pass our current phones on to them. Without the ability to control their usage through our wi-fi, I'm looking for other ways to monitor/control their usage.

[Roadgeekteen]

Kids under age 13 should not have them.

I disagree... but with strings attached. ...

Having said that, the kid need to understand that having a phone is a privilege, not a right. In an ideal world, the kid would receive a basic "dumb" phone that was locked down so that all he could do is call/text their parents, school, trusted relatives and friends, and doctor's office. If they want a smart phone, congratulations, there is a garage to clean, lawns to mow, and chores to do. No, you cannot make monthly payments. After all, if you work hard for something, you are likely to treasure it more and take good care of it. The reality is that the kid is probably going to receive a hand-me-down phone, and hopefully, the parent is tech-savvy enough to lock down the phone.

I think it's potentially unsafe and borderline child abuse for kids under 12 to have their own phone. I don't see any reason why any of the things you mention would need to occur before a kid turns at least 13, if not older. The most convincing case for a kid actually needing to have a phone is when they start driving - and that's usually between 14 and 17.

I got my first smartphone at age 12, got my first dumb phone at age 11. Most kids in 6th-7th grade have a phone nowadays.

My wife and I have kids that are currently 12 & 11 and we have been having the debate about when to get them phones. Two years ago, we got new phones and let them have our old ones, but without service. They only work when connected to wi-fi, and through the wi-fi we can control the hours that they will work and the content they're allowed to see.

We are due to get new phones soon and are debating giving them service when we pass our current phones on to them. Without the ability to control their usage through our wi-fi, I'm looking for other ways to monitor/control their usage.

I didn't get data until Freshman year.

[interstatefan990]

This discussion needs to be modernized. Digital devices and their role in society have completely and totally changed in the age of COVID. Heck, I'd give a 6 year old a phone with supervision if they wanted to see their friends on Zoom/Facetime. Kids can only kill so much time without devices, I think it's okay to let them use their own electronics for a little bit of time each day. Most are forced to be on a laptop doing school for 6-7 hours a day now, so what difference does a phone make?

Also, cheating. It's not like teachers can do much about cheating nowadays because it's become loads easier now that most of America's students are learning online. They no longer need to hide the things, they can just put them out of sight of their computer's camera.

[ZLoth]

I think it's potentially unsafe and borderline child abuse for kids under 12 to have their own phone. I don't see any reason why any of the things you mention would need to occur before a kid turns at least 13, if not older. The most convincing case for a kid actually needing to have a phone is when they start driving - and that's usually between 14 and 17.

As I said before, phone use is a privilege, not a right, for a kid. What if you are stuck in traffic and need to let your child know you are running late? There are GPS tracking apps that can run silently in the background to know where you kid is. The kid can also take pictures of things they find interesting and share with you.

BUT.... should someone under 18 be given unrestricted access to a smartphone? NOPE! If I were a parent, that phone would be locked down tight, and you can only send/receive calls/texts to allowed phone number (parents, coach, teachers, doctors, maybe a trusted family friend). Maybe have access to a weather app. Everything else? Must be earned and determined on a case-by-cases basis. Organizer app? Probably. Transit app for tickets? If the circumstances warrant it. YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter? Not on the kid's phone. Disney+? Definite privilege-based and depends on the circumstances.

[nexus73]

At a local sandwich shop I saw a 2 year old working on a smartphone.  That was scary.

Did the 2 year old at least make your order correctly?

The child belonged to an employee instead of being one.

Rick

[Max Rockatansky]

At a local sandwich shop I saw a 2 year old working on a smartphone.  That was scary.

Did the 2 year old at least make your order correctly?

The child belonged to an employee instead of being one.

Rick

As an aside I did eat at a family diner in Utah recently which had their 10-12 year running orders.  That kind of thing used to be really common but I hardly see it in the United States anymore.  Most of my Cousins in Minnesota were essentially farm hands and free labor when they were growing up. 

[JoePCool14]

I think it's potentially unsafe and borderline child abuse for kids under 12 to have their own phone. I don't see any reason why any of the things you mention would need to occur before a kid turns at least 13, if not older. The most convincing case for a kid actually needing to have a phone is when they start driving - and that's usually between 14 and 17.

As I said before, phone use is a privilege, not a right, for a kid. What if you are stuck in traffic and need to let your child know you are running late? There are GPS tracking apps that can run silently in the background to know where you kid is. The kid can also take pictures of things they find interesting and share with you.

BUT.... should someone under 18 be given unrestricted access to a smartphone? NOPE! If I were a parent, that phone would be locked down tight, and you can only send/receive calls/texts to allowed phone number (parents, coach, teachers, doctors, maybe a trusted family friend). Maybe have access to a weather app. Everything else? Must be earned and determined on a case-by-cases basis. Organizer app? Probably. Transit app for tickets? If the circumstances warrant it. YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter? Not on the kid's phone. Disney+? Definite privilege-based and depends on the circumstances.

Seriously? All kids under 18 can't have unrestricted access and need their parents to verify all contacts and apps? I had a girlfriend when I was 16, should I have gotten approval for that when I wanted to text or call her? Or the many other friends I was making in high school?

I think 13 is a much more appropriate age to draw the line at for unrestricted access. Entering high school just makes sense to me.

Also, unrestricted access doesn't mean kids should be able to do whatever they want. I obviously wouldn't want my kids finding porn or giving out addresses to random people online. It just means that they're at an age where it should be "Everything is allowed except..." instead of "Everything is banned except..."

Edit: I will add though that you're correct in saying smartphone usage is a privilege, not a right. Parents still have jurisdiction and don't have to oblige their teenagers whether it be for financial or other reasons.

[JayhawkCO]

While I understand the thought process of not wanting a smartphone so that you can't be consumed by it, I guess I just feel like willpower is an important thing.  When my wife and I are together eating a meal, watching a show, etc., we have a rule that we don't use our phones.  I'm also not active barely at all on social media with Facebook only being for posting trip photos or 14er summit pictures.  And I read Twitter during important sporting events to catch national reactions.  I'm on social media for less than 10 minutes a day probably.

Chris

[JoePCool14]

While I understand the thought process of not wanting a smartphone so that you can't be consumed by it, I guess I just feel like willpower is an important thing.  When my wife and I are together eating a meal, watching a show, etc., we have a rule that we don't use our phones.  I'm also not active barely at all on social media with Facebook only being for posting trip photos or 14er summit pictures.  And I read Twitter during important sporting events to catch national reactions.  I'm on social media for less than 10 minutes a day probably.

Chris

Those are good rules to have. If someone can't focus on each other one-on-one as a married couple, I feel that there might be a problem!

It's frustrating when I'm at a social event and everyone just instinctively gravitates towards going on their phones. And for the record, I'm guilty of this as well. But how are we supposed to just live in the moment when that's all everyone wants to do? Interact with the people in front of you and stop worrying so much about posting about it on your Snapchat or Instagram story.

[Roadgeekteen]

I think it's potentially unsafe and borderline child abuse for kids under 12 to have their own phone. I don't see any reason why any of the things you mention would need to occur before a kid turns at least 13, if not older. The most convincing case for a kid actually needing to have a phone is when they start driving - and that's usually between 14 and 17.

BUT.... should someone under 18 be given unrestricted access to a smartphone? NOPE! If I were a parent, that phone would be locked down tight, and you can only send/receive calls/texts to allowed phone number (parents, coach, teachers, doctors, maybe a trusted family friend). Maybe have access to a weather app. Everything else? Must be earned and determined on a case-by-cases basis. Organizer app? Probably. Transit app for tickets? If the circumstances warrant it. YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter? Not on the kid's phone. Disney+? Definite privilege-based and depends on the circumstances.

Yikes calm down

[Scott5114]

At a local sandwich shop I saw a 2 year old working on a smartphone.  That was scary.

Did the 2 year old at least make your order correctly?

The child belonged to an employee instead of being one.

Rick

What kind of work were they doing then?

[Roadgeekteen]

At a local sandwich shop I saw a 2 year old working on a smartphone.  That was scary.

Did the 2 year old at least make your order correctly?

The child belonged to an employee instead of being one.

Rick

What kind of work were they doing then?

This thread is a little sus

[nexus73]

At a local sandwich shop I saw a 2 year old working on a smartphone.  That was scary.

Did the 2 year old at least make your order correctly?

The child belonged to an employee instead of being one.

Rick

What kind of work were they doing then?

Being a sandwich shop, let's see if you have the sense to figure it out Scott.

Rick

[kphoger]

Some of the things I do require it, and the college I'm going to routes all their account verification and two-factor authentication over a phone app, as one example.

Does it not offer a non-smartphone option?  I use a two-factor authentication at work, which is why I still keep my old smartphone in my desk drawer and connect via Wi-Fi.  But, if I wanted to , I could change my account settings and have a robot call me with my code instead of having a robot text it to me.  The other MSO we work for has a desktop PC widget that gives me the code.

At the time of the event, I can click on the location and use my phone's navigation to find the best route.

Any roadgeek should strongly disagree that your phone can tell you the "best" route.  Fastest, maybe.  Best, no.

Because of Covid, some restaurants have made their menus available online through the phone instead of a paper menu.

I get really irritated at COVID stuff that went smartphone-only.  When my wife and I went out for lunch a while ago, she had to scan a QR code on the table and look at the menu on her phone.  So I had to crane my neck to look to.  I wonder if they even have paper menus!  Probably.  Also, Chick-Fil-A does curbside pickup, and they don't start filling your order until the app notices your smartphone is getting close to the restaurant.  So, when we order CFA, I have to take my wife's cell phone with me.  Is there another way to do it?  Probably.  Maybe I'm just too lazy to look for the workaround.

What do you suppose a business would do with that data if they couldn't associate it with a user they could deliver advertising to?

Does a data broker know it's bad data before they buy it, though?

[JoePCool14]

Because of Covid, some restaurants have made their menus available online through the phone instead of a paper menu.

I get really irritated at COVID stuff that went smartphone-only.  When my wife and I went out for lunch a while ago, she had to scan a QR code on the table and look at the menu on her phone.  So I had to crane my neck to look to.  I wonder if they even have paper menus!  Probably.  Also, Chick-Fil-A does curbside pickup, and they don't start filling your order until the app notices your smartphone is getting close to the restaurant.  So, when we order CFA, I have to take my wife's cell phone with me.  Is there another way to do it?  Probably.  Maybe I'm just too lazy to look for the workaround.

Chalk this up as a "minor thing that annoys me". Looking the menu on a phone is annoying, unless the menu only has a handful of items on it. It's not because I can't read the text, it's just annoying having to scroll up and down constantly.

[jeffandnicole]

At the time of the event, I can click on the location and use my phone's navigation to find the best route.

Any roadgeek should strongly disagree that your phone can tell you the "best" route.  Fastest, maybe.  Best, no.

For most people, fastest is best.  If you don't want to drive on highways or pay tolls, usually there's an option to eliminate those options.  But if your Best way involves going down an out-of-the-way scenic road, seeing a construction site or clinching a route, of course a phone isn't going to suggest those routes.

I get really irritated at COVID stuff that went smartphone-only.  When my wife and I went out for lunch a while ago, she had to scan a QR code on the table and look at the menu on her phone.  So I had to crane my neck to look to.  I wonder if they even have paper menus!  Probably. 

Generally, restaurants are supposed to have paper menus to be thrown away after someone looks at them.  Even if they don't, I'm sure you could've asked for a regular menu, then just wash/sanitize your hands afterwards.   If you didn't ask, that's not really the restaurant's fault, and all they're doing is following state/local guidelines.

The only time I was irritated at something like this was when the smartphone QR code took you to a generic menu without prices.  So we just asked for a printed menu instead.

Also, Chick-Fil-A does curbside pickup, and they don't start filling your order until the app notices your smartphone is getting close to the restaurant.  So, when we order CFA, I have to take my wife's cell phone with me.  Is there another way to do it?  Probably.  Maybe I'm just too lazy to look for the workaround.

The workaround?  You could just drive thru the drive-thru and place the order there. 

[kphoger]

At the time of the event, I can click on the location and use my phone's navigation to find the best route.

Any roadgeek should strongly disagree that your phone can tell you the "best" route.  Fastest, maybe.  Best, no.

For most people, fastest is best.  If you don't want to drive on highways or pay tolls, usually there's an option to eliminate those options.  But if your Best way involves going down an out-of-the-way scenic road, seeing a construction site or clinching a route, of course a phone isn't going to suggest those routes.

I get really irritated at COVID stuff that went smartphone-only.  When my wife and I went out for lunch a while ago, she had to scan a QR code on the table and look at the menu on her phone.  So I had to crane my neck to look to.  I wonder if they even have paper menus!  Probably. 

Generally, restaurants are supposed to have paper menus to be thrown away after someone looks at them.  Even if they don't, I'm sure you could've asked for a regular menu, then just wash/sanitize your hands afterwards.   If you didn't ask, that's not really the restaurant's fault, and all they're doing is following state/local guidelines.

The only time I was irritated at something like this was when the smartphone QR code took you to a generic menu without prices.  So we just asked for a printed menu instead.

Also, Chick-Fil-A does curbside pickup, and they don't start filling your order until the app notices your smartphone is getting close to the restaurant.  So, when we order CFA, I have to take my wife's cell phone with me.  Is there another way to do it?  Probably.  Maybe I'm just too lazy to look for the workaround.

The workaround?  You could just drive thru the drive-thru and place the order there. 

For the record, |ZLoth| didn't say those last two things.  I did.

[Scott5114]

At a local sandwich shop I saw a 2 year old working on a smartphone.  That was scary.

Did the 2 year old at least make your order correctly?

The child belonged to an employee instead of being one.

Rick

What kind of work were they doing then?

Being a sandwich shop, let's see if you have the sense to figure it out Scott.

Rick

Humour (Commonwealth English) or humor (American English; see spelling differences) is the tendency of experiences to provoke laughter and provide amusement. The term derives from the humoral medicine of the ancient Greeks, which taught that the balance of fluids in the human body, known as humours (Latin: humor, "body fluid"), controlled human health and emotion.

People of all ages and cultures respond to humour. Most people are able to experience humour–be amused, smile or laugh at something funny (such as a pun or joke)–and thus are considered to have a sense of humour. The hypothetical person lacking a sense of humour would likely find the behaviour inducing it to be inexplicable, strange, or even irrational. Though ultimately decided by personal taste, the extent to which a person finds something humorous depends on a host of variables, including geographical location, culture, maturity, level of education, intelligence and context. For example, young children may favour slapstick such as Punch and Judy puppet shows or the Tom and Jerry cartoons, whose physical nature makes it accessible to them. By contrast, more sophisticated forms of humour such as satire require an understanding of its social meaning and context, and thus tend to appeal to a more mature audience.