Introducing Messenger Kids(newsroom.fb.com) |
Introducing Messenger Kids(newsroom.fb.com) |
does anyone believe this is really for the betterment of any child's life? say anything you want about how children use messenger apps now and this just improves that experience for them but accommodations aside that's basically the same excuse that drug dealers use - "they're going to get it from somewhere so they might as well get it from me". we all know this is just another vehicle for ads (their promises notwithstanding) and we all know that fb/social media has pernicious effects on psychology, let alone child psychology.
i don't live in a cabin in the woods and i'm not amish and i'm not a luddite (i consume technology more or less like everyone else) but yet still i challenge someone to show me the intrinsic value (as opposed to circumstantial to the fact that fb/social media inundates us).
It's a long-term play. I believe FB when they say they won't show ads to kids, or use their chats for ad scraping. What they really want is for those kids to become so familiar and dependent on the system (FB), that they naturally transition to being active FB users as adults.
It's not a secret that FB has a perceived "uncool with kids" problem - hence the rise of things like Snapchat. If you hook them when they're really young, though, then FB just becomes an unquestioned part of life.
As far as the tool itself, i dunno - I mean messenger tools have been a fact of life for quite some time now. AIM, ICQ, etc. I don't think FB messenger is particularly different other than the fact that it's attached to, well, FB.
Both children attend a Music group which has used a facebook group for years. The older children (17-18) all have active facebook profiles - the younger children don't they use Instagram and Snapchat...
why do you believe this? i have no reason to believe it (since their entire business model is targeted ads) except the "first hit is free" alternate hypothesis.
does fb have a single "loss leader" feature?
Exactly like religion. Facebook is learning from the best!
Presumably, these kids have had and will have their entire lives documented on the internet (and most likely by a single platform, FB). From the time they were conceived (or ever before, a lot of parents having their first children were in middle or high school when FB became popular) until their death (or FB goes away, whichever is more likely) will be documented.
Facebook keeps spewing this "we won't do evil" rhetoric, but so far I don't see any evidence that they are using their powers for good.
Between the photos, psychological insights gathered from chats and posts, biometrics from face scanning, and even nude pics (but only to stop revenge porn, they swear!) - Facebook will know more about these kids then anyone else.
I can't imagine a scenario where hoarding all this information is even remotely useful, let alone what could happen if a major data breach happens.
I know it's a bit like throwing bottled water on a house fire, but I have been actively encouraging peers to at least be selective about what they share on Facebook. We have to resist the urge to overshare before it's too late, if it isn't already.
I'm more than saddened to see that among the tech giants, they are encouraging _children_ to just use face filters and video chatting, rather than encouraging them to go outside and interact with friends in person. Why does an app made specifically for children and families need filters at all? It doesn't really matter that they are not putting in ads in this app. It is still an app and it is still imprinting children to accept artificial, screen-based relationships as equal to real, in-person conversations with your family.
Facebook is transforming the most important relationships in your life to a product. Commericalized.
> After talking to thousands of parents, associations like National PTA, and parenting experts in the US
Which "parenting experts" are in favor of giving kids more time on electronics?
[0]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-companies...
The target audience is using cellphones and SMS already; this isn't about more time on electronics, it's about the particular electronic communication medium (for parents, it's about control, for FB it's about getting nindshare early so they don't get displaced by something else becoming popular with youth.)
Chat is a communication tool. Why so much hate for facebook chat app? None of that I've seen when facebook dumped ton of brain dead (often pay to win) games on children or when apple did the same with their app store.
There's no market for baby phone toys for adults. However, kids who get into the facebook ecosystem via "messenger kids" could be locked in for years.
> Chat is a communication tool.
I agree that it's much better than games, but it's still a way to get kids attached to a system that they don't fully understand. Yes, it's just a chat app, but, given that facebook is a business, its ultimate purpose is to make money.
I’ll translate: Your child’s information will be used, but not for ads.
That's simply not true.
> Facebook is opening up to children under age 13 with a privacy-focused app
I feel like I want to throw up.
Now even kids below the age of 13 will have a Facebook account, setup by their parents who are already on Facebook anyway and enticed by exactly what they want to hear ("More Fun For Kids, More Control For Parents") thanks to the marketing team.
They already had, they were just lying about their age. Anecdata: all of my colleagues with children let their child create a Facebook and Whatsapp account (that one is really big here in the Netherlands) at age 10, because not doing so means having your kid be the one child in class without it (with all the bullying and ostracization that implies).
Facebook announces a novel app trying to solve common problems with kids using and communicating on the internet and everyone in the comments just comes out with their personal ax to grind with Facebook.
I get it. You hate Facebook, Facebook is a drug, Facebook kicked your dog. All of those might be valid criticisms, and if this was an article titled 'Facebook is destroying everything' I would be very interested in reading those opinions.
But as it is, all I see are shallow criticisms of Facebook as a whole rather than any kind of nuanced discussion of the Messenger for Kids app.
Personally I'm intrigued by the idea. Kids want to communicate using the internet (and before the internet it was phone numbers and texting), but this is the first time I've seen an approach that really helps parents to monitor who their kids are connecting to on the app.
Maybe Facebook is the wrong company to present this app; maybe the connection to Facebook is concerning. But the app itself I think represents the right direction to go in designing apps that minors can use to communicate and helping parents to keep their kids safe online.
Of course it's wrong. Why would you continue giving more free data to this evil monopoly?
To me the appeal of what Facebook is doing here is that it lets you give your kids freedom to use the app while letting you as a parent create the whitelist of who they're able to talk to.
I do wonder what quantity of data Facebook will collect on child users of this service though, and how that could be used. I’m not too well versed in COPPA outside of account creation restrictions, but I would hope that it has provisions for data collection on children.
"Our vendors and service providers. We may transfer information we collect to third party service providers that support our business, such as companies that provide technical infrastructure or support (like a content delivery network), provide customer service, or analyze how Messenger Kids is being used to help us improve the service. These partners must adhere to strict data confidentiality and security obligations set out in the agreements we enter with them (such as compliance with data privacy and protection laws and maintenance of administrative, physical and technical safeguards to prevent unauthorized access or disclosure of data) that are consistent with this Privacy Policy, including obligations that they only use the information we provide for performance of the services we specify.
Facebook Family of Companies. Messenger Kids is part of Facebook, and we may share the information we collect in Messenger Kids within the family of companies that are part of Facebook to support the uses described above, and to improve the services provided by the FB family of companies. For example, parents use Facebook Messenger to communicate with their children on Messenger Kids, and Facebook uses information from Messenger Kids to support seamless cross-service communication."
https://www.facebook.com/help/118909212153483
(Edit for typo)
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev...
I quote:
> You will not use Facebook if you are under 13.
Don't vote Republican. In the EU it's much less of an issue thankfully but still, vote for the right party and not the popular or nationalistic party.
Does FB typically not include Android on betas?
for the lazy: https://www.facebook.com/help/118909212153483
Understanding how kids engage with software is the perfect way to figure out what the future of software will be.
I seriously have no idea why this is so hard to understand.
I'd prefer no chat client whatsoever, which I can enforce as a parent.
Not a luddite, have just seen the damage large tech corporations have caused to societal fabric in the name of profits and keeping that out of our family.
Disclaimer: Grew up on EFnet, would rather have my kids playing outside.
Because why say it otherwise? Facebook could've easily left all of that out and just said "Introducing messenger for kids! We're making sure it's carefully curated and safe for your children" etc. etc.
People would've speculated that it was being used for ads, sure, but it wouldn't have caused a major outrage. I'd bet significant sums of money that most (not all, obviously) parents don't really care about their children being advertised to or used for market research - I mean hell, TV was doing that way before FB was a thing. Most parents probably worry about more obvious things w.r.t. children chatting online: Bullying, talking to strangers, etc.
Saying "we're not scraping childrens' messages" and then turning around and doing exactly that would be such a monumental PR disaster if it ever came out. I don't think FB is quite that stupid. They're clearly focused on the long-term.
Another possibility is that they're actually just legally barred from scraping messages sent by children, and this is them putting a PR spin on "we're complying with the law!"
So basically, I just don't see a lot of benefit to promising not to scrape messages if they really want to do that.
This is probably true for of most people not living in their hometown or having connections through college or work.
Adult equivalent of baby toy phone is a phone (landline, cell, whatever). You might as well argue that people who as children were hooked on baby phones will use a phone as adults. Which is trivially true because everyone will use a phone as adult.
Same thing with chat. Children addicted to children's facebook chat will use some form of chat in the future because everyone will. They are already using chats. LoL in-game chat for example. Recently 10 year old from my extended family thanked me through Clash Royale in-game clan chat for some random promotional stuff my girlfriend gathered during shopping and passed to him through her brother.
> ... kids attached to a system that they don't fully understand.
This pretty much describes any system kids are attached to and many systems adults are attached to.
> it's just a chat app, but, given that facebook is a business, its ultimate purpose is to make money.
So? Same goes for anything. TV, print, games, sports, clothes, even partially education if you live in US. Should you avoid attaching your children to all of those systems?
The only thing you should do for your children is to make sure Facebook is not the only chat app, that some better chats can be created and alive even if they don't have as much money for lawyers and greasing the wheels as facebook has. You can do that by coercing companies to disclose details of their technology or at least stop helping them protect it. You want to create new chat product? Fine, but you have to release protocol that your chat app uses so anyone can write a client. Your protocol docs are outdated? Company gets a fine of amount associated with their revenue, operational costs or whatever number that correlates with their success that their accountants can't hide.
Thanks for pointing that out though!
