Microsoft Plans Parental Controls in Windows Live

I have mixed feelings about this, Ron. On the one hand, I'm sure there are many people that would love to have this feature. On the other hand, I don't care for censorship, in general, and I don't like the notion of spying on one's kids. It's up for people to decide for themselves, but I see access to the internet as a priveledge and a responsability for a child. Either they are responsible, or not.

The other aspect of this that I question is giving Microsoft an even greater ability to direct traffic, and decide what is going to be allowed to be viewed. That they already wield considerable clout in this area is hardly questionable.

If, by some chance, Microsoft were to emerge is the de facto standard for parental controls, I just don't imagine that parents are going to be the ones doing all of the controlling

-HandsOff

 

True, and I agree and understand what you're saying in regards to the thin line of "intrusion".....and thus the need for mixed emotions. But while all of which you said is extremely valid....isn't it up to the parents to ensure that they are raising "responsible" children? And to point out harmful, bad and/or inappropriate behaviour when it occurs? How will they KNOW what their children are doing, if they don't and aren't paying attention?

I really don't see it as that. I see it as Microsoft ALLOWING PARENTS to determine "what decisions children are going to be allowed to be viewed". Maybe you're on the right track here, and I'm wrong.....but that's how I currently interpret this software decision on behalf of Microsoft. It will be interesting to see how it evolves and what it turns out to be......

 

Some kind of Disney-internet for children.

 

LOL....I bet that's how Microsoft HOPES it will turn out (in the minds of parents, at least)....

 

Hi, and I agree it is the parent who has to decide what is the best course. I'm not saying it is right, I'm just saying that the breach of trust between a parent and his own child could have worse consequences than inappropriate web content.

Again, just my opinion, but society today is such that I would rather a child be shown what to avoid and how to avoid it, then to try to shield them from it. If, for instance, something is made more mysterious, and they are blocked from seeing something, it just seems to send a mixed message. Surely, an intelligent child would think, "If it is so bad, why would my parents think I would be interested in the first place. Is it really something good? Do I impress them as being a sleazy low-life child? Is my mind and character so weak, that one glimpse of some seedy site will send me on a one way trip to moral terpitude?"

How else would they know...just by talking with them. Anyway, it might be very convenient to block this stuff. I block it on my own computer, just for convenience. The spying feature on the other hand...that's just wrong, in my opinion. Wrong, and a sign of insecurity and weakness. A pretty poor example for a child.


-HandsOff

 

Internet viewing is just another activity that falls into the category of parental control. Reading material, TV viewing, movies - just another activity that parents are concerned about. But much more pernicious and more easily accessible without parents' knowledge.

I attended a conference that focussed on small businesses. Two teenagers in attendance - brother and sister ages 13 and 14 - did software programing and computer graphics.

They were asked if their parents had installed a program like NetNanny on their computers. They looked at each other quizzically and responded that they didn't know what this program was, and that anyway, their parents would have no need to install programs on their kids' computers since they had their own computers. A light chuckle from the audience, and you could sense people thinking, how innocent!

On pressing further, the moderator referred to the parents monitoring what the kids were doing on the computer. They responded, why would they want do that? The moderator then referred to "non-suitable web sites" such as pornography.

The two teenagers looked at each other and didn't say anything for a few seconds.

The sister then commented on the whole nature of pornography that I wish could have been recorded and transcribed. She referred to the lyrics of much of the current pop music scene that emphasizes sex and violence. She mentioned an interview with a current female singer who admitted to the interviewer that she wouldn't take her daughter to one of her concerts. When asked how she could use lyrics that were so abusive, especially to women, the singer responded that "sex sells."

The sister continued that in a report she did for a class, she concluded that the distinction between pop culture and pornography was becoming less and less.

The brother added that there was no place in their lives for such material which degrades the most intimate of the male-female relationship, especially the status of women. They both commented that their parents trusted them in their use of the internet, as they did with other activities in their life.

Unusual occurrence? I think not.

In talking with them afterward, they spoke about how from a very early age, their parents emphasized how important it is that people trust each other. The parents had rules, but they were established within the context of trust. Certain types of literature, movies, and of course any of that type of content on the internet, was just not acceptable. The parents had strict rules - curfews, phone contact when away - but always within the context of trust. They did touch a bit on their religious beliefs.

But whatever the framework in which a family operates, parents can shape the attitudes and values of their children, and more and more, teachers in public schools are speaking out on this topic, that the schools cannot be blamed for students' behavior and values: these are the responsibility of the parents.

In my own work, I see many examples of kids like the above.

So, while parental controls on the internet may be necessary in many situations, it's not a "given" that all families need such a thing.

---

 

My 2 cents would be this. I have two young daughters. I cannot take back any hardcore porn image they see. . I love my Filter from K9. I would like to ask if any of the responents here have children??

 

Having a little problem with objectivity, are we? My girl has her own computer in her room. It is not connected to the internet. She is five years old! I didn't notice where you live, but here in the bay area, all libraries have computers connected to the internet with no restriction. Most of the kids I know know more about computers than their parents. Kids have to given guidelines, rules, information. They will need these alot more than a program to do their thinking for them. How long do you think that program would stop me, if I were a kid? I was smaller, yes, but I was not stupider. If I saw it as a challenge, and a betrayal of trust, I would probably make is a mission to circumvent it. When it comes time for Jessica to use the internet, I will have to devote some time to watching her. She always tries to do what's right. There are plenty of tools to help US avoid bad sites, but nothing works as well as good judgement. Like I said, I, in principal, use some blocking of bad sites. Not a specific program exactly, but through settings, hosts lists, kill bits, search filters, and so on. I'm not terrified by these sites, they're simply unpleasant pests, and as virulent in the electronic way, as I'm sure some of the participants are in the biological way.

-HandsOff

 

I live in SW Ontario its in my header. Our libraries and schools must use filters. My daughters would not actively go searching for questionable stuff, but its nice to have a filter that backs you up. I think its just a comfort level with different people. I feel better using it.

BTW try and crack it if you want....have fun...let me know when you give up.

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=595165&postcount=1

 

Hi-

Yes, you're header is just where I would have looked, except that it is not visible when I was in the editing window. Anyway, don't misunderstand me, your program is probably very helpful. For a kid it might be appropriate for a while since they will not be skilled internet veterans...for at least a few months...

My initial concerns were and are that Microsoft is the last person I want involved in...essentially, redirecting web searches. I just don't think if you are living with an 800 pound gorilla, it's such a good idea to inject it with anabolic stearoids!

To recap,

- screening is useful
- spying is bad
- i doubt I would give up...

By the way, I've never had to break a program, so to speak, but if it can be done so easily that trojans, with no preknowledge of your system can do it, how hard could it be for someone sitting right there at the keyboard? and the kids around here are nerds! back when I had 16 mb, somebodies little 13 year old brother had customized his computer to use 512mb. That was bigger than my hard drive!



-HandsdOff

 

Turn it the other way round. What if in a case where the parent knows nothing about computers and the child knows more?
The child may be smart enough to cover up his/her tracks, or even better, restrict what their parents do on the computer. That's when I think parental controls will be useless progs.
Use some software restriction policy/method and when the parents resort to finding out what their kids have been up to and try to install monitoring software, it'll be useless. Technology offers infinite possibilities don't you think?

 

yep, plus if they inherit their intelligence from me, they'll be smarter than I am, too.


-HandsOff

 

VERY WELL PUT!!!!

Sadly this world now seems to be populated by"parents"(biological at least)
that totally ignore their offspring and seem not to care in any way what they do or where they go.

They take no active part in their childs upbringing....schools are seeing children that arrive in reception classes that cannot even use a bathroom or dress themselves properly.
Here in the UK kiddies as young as three can be seen wandering around on their own in the street,when something happens to that child who do the parents blame??

Here they are now chopping down trees because they have poisonous berries,
trees that have grown for 100's of years ,suddenly kids are going to eat them?
It all comes down to PARENTAL responsibility...you have kids you should look after them,guide them teach them right from wrong,safe from unsafe.
Youngsters should be supervised (even from a distance) and when online you should at least know what they might come face to face with and talk to them about it.
There are content filtering sets out there already BUT they don't and can't cover all the bad stuff and lazy parents who use these are likely to walk away and leave their children to it.
Oh they will soon scream when little Suzy gets an eyefull of porn or lured by a paedophile ,what they just can't seem to understand is that the children are their responsibilty!!

 

Upasaka- Thanks, I'm glad you understood what I was getting at.

Your story about the tree's...I realize that it's very difficult to combat the, "if it saves just one life" safety fanatics. And maybe there is a genuine issue with the trees if three year olds are running around unattended. But I'd say cutting down trees is not the answer. I'm with you on that one.

One good antecdote diserves another:

I have a female friend who works in daycare. Naturally when parents are checking out a school, the ask lots of questions express lots of concerns. but this one couple were just over the top. Not only did they visit several times but called constantly with new questions. Finally, ever so reluctantly, they decide the daycare is up to their perfectionist standards and leave the kid there. Well the child is at the diaper wearing age and she told me something they do, which is actually sort of clever, is that they write the time on the diaper that it was changed. So that evening the parents arrive and pick up the child and all is well. The next morning the child is dropped of again. Not only is the diaper in need of changing, he is still wearing the one that day care put on the day before. Next day, same thing. The super parents come in with the kid with another full diaper from the day before. These parents have installed an automatic system that enables them to drink and watch tv, or whatever, and the kid is covered.

I don't know/remember how the situation progressed. I am always frustrated by how tollerant day care is. I know that sounds odd, but, man, you want to hear some horror storys....hang out and talk with a day care worker!


-HandsOff