Kagi for Kids(help.kagi.com) |
Kagi for Kids(help.kagi.com) |
I literally Pi-Hole Blocked all of YouTube after my son started reading the Bible after a Minecraft Influencer started preaching throughout most of his videos to the point my son became a bit too much interested in the topic.
Not that I'm a rabid atheist or would deny my child such a thing, but if THAT can enter my 8yr olds brain via his short allowed time where he can browse by himself, i'm worried what else is coming his way through it.
I'd love to give him access to valuable videos between rules I describe by natural language and can test myself, but nothing like this exists.
My kids aren't allowed to use TikTok and now Google decided to shove it in Youtube - and make it impossible to block.
Just trying to recreate the media conditions of my youth, with modern content as well as long as it’s “pure”.
I’m also putting me-vetted YouTube content like Kurzgesagt on it.
What I do understand is that I don't want my kids being tricked into watching ads because something about watching adults open toys is entertaining.
There is a metric ton of professionally made non-commercial content for kids.
What holds me back is knowing that -- if this was an iPad app, for example -- I'd be at the mercy of both Google AND Apple. It's a minefield of sensitive topics:
- Kids & privacy
- Content moderation
- Intellectual property
- Third-party UGC
Way too risky.
sorry there are too many whackos out there. I'd feel more comfortable with my kids learning from Catholic Priests than some random youtuber. In fact, my kids are probably going to go to catholic school.
The reason why we have denominations in part is to maintain the education of the clergy and keep dogma, or theology, in check.
(even if we disagree at times, at least most of the organized christian church can agree on the basic creeds - something that youtube seems hell bent on for clicks is getting you into nontrinitarian and whacky stuff!)
I feel a lot of people talk terribly about YouTube Kids because they’re imagining you just hand them a tablet with the app, let them pick what they want to watch, and walk away. And then the kid finds some super suspect videos and gets brainwashed or something.
But here I am letting my 2 and 4 year olds watch Miss Rachel and Super Simple Songs and Big Block Singsong and the occasional Elmo’s World on the TV, while I’m in the room, and people on this forum would call me a monster for doing this… it’s really wild.
Strong claim. I like the idea, but wish they were more realistic about what they can provide. If you ever get a Reddit result you're likely one click away from harmful content.
That said, I like the lenses applied in this case. It may be the best we can get today in terms of search filtering.
I think aiming for better rather than perfect is the best option, as you said. As long as it's framed in this way, and not as an ideal option to let your impressionable child loose on the internet.
I have been really happy with NextDNS though. My kids, not so much. But hey ... that's parenting.
I have two young kids of my own (4, almost 2) and have so far been able to avoid the issues of letting them free roam on the net, but it's obviously something that's coming. This was not something I ever paid attention to in my youth but now as a parent the open internet completely terrifies me. And I say that as a core millennial that basically grew up with the internet.
The current status quo of "kids friendly" content (eg YouTube Kids) is mostly awful. I would still never let my young kids browse something like that without supervision.
I am appreciative that Kagi knows this is an issue and is investing into the area.
I stumbled with some f up stuff that i still remember to this day. But somehow I'm grateful that it wasn't the current brainrot
I'm so glad the worst I feel like I ran into were freaky gore/porn.
On this topic I have been drafting and collecting thoughts on internet and digital media curation the last few nights. Here is what I have so far:
Thesis: The role of children's teachers and caretakers in curating an environment for children to learn and grow is more important than ever with the overwhelming variety of books, videos, shows, etc all of varying quality and alignment with caretaker and child interests. However, curation in the digital age is also more difficult than ever. The web is a collection of walled gardens which give parents limited and inconsistent controls over what the child will see once inside the walled garden. And, adding controls on-top of a walled garden is impossible or only possible by very computer savvy users (e.g. YouTube frontends).
What are ways care takers can practically and easily curate today?
Examples
- YouTube Kids: https://abparenting.substack.com/p/effective-youtube-kids
- Jellyfin or Calibre for ebooks
- Open WebUI with a custom system prompt for kids
Counter Examples
- Netflix, Disney, Amazon, etc: difficult to non-existent curation controls - all or nothing
- Kindle Kids: there are controls but for Library books the process is 12+ clicks between the Libby and Kindle app: https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/devices/can-you-share-kindl...
"Our young students are just beginning to develop their powers of discernment. By curating a good library collection, we can help them learn to weigh the merits of a few authoritative works on a subject rather than plowing through hundreds of internet sources of uneven quality. And while a computer search is undeniably efficient, we firmly believe that browsing a shelf of books is more rewarding and more educational. It deepens students' understanding of organizational principles, brings them unexpected discoveries, and rewards patient exploration rather than offering instant gratification"
The internet is wildly useful but it's just filled with so much trash and thanks to google going horribly terribly south, search doesn't work anymore.
Which means kids are no longer able to actually have the joy of surfing the web and finding very interesting things to read.
So the main question that I have is, is there a guarantee that bad sites will not show up here?
Given that everyone has different definitions of "bad" and that someone malicious can put bad stuff on "good" sites, no.
Kagi allowing you to assign what is good and bad makes your argument void.
> So the main question that I have is, is there a guarantee that bad sites will not show up here?
You shouldn't rely on the company alone. While it may be what Kagi is aiming for but they can only do so much.
If you're concerned for your kids you too should always double check if the content is good/bad regularly.
I read it a few times and saw only one plan. What’s the second one? If it’s the Team plan, that seems like poor copy.
(Kagi Ultimate subscriber here)
I'm not exactly certain but under the family tab there are two options: Duo and Family
In 2025, id definately prefer kicking dirt as a kid.
However, they're all subscribed to SkibidiDirtKickerz on Tiktok, YouTube and Snapchat. Don't forget to smash that like button!
I love it
Granted, this doesn't mean we shouldn't try to build filters. I'm just rather pessimistic about a hands-off experience with such software.
I don't want my kids to be able to "discover" content. Why is that always the feature? Rhetorical question....I know the answer, engagement and stickiness. I just don't like the answer.
I think the first and best way to ensure this is to not do it yourself.
It is a very hidden feature though. You have to link your kids account to yours, and then in the Youtube mobile app (not on the web), you can click the three dots button and then share > "with kids"
So that way you can build up a whitelist of channels that they can see in the YT kids account.
Not sure why my argument is void, but you restating my exact point with different words is valid?
If so, you then got to expect what Kagi decides what is bad and what is good and accept that's it.
It could be bias it could be not. I like to think they know but I personally would never put all my eggs in one basket.
What?
Parent commenter asked if it was guaranteed to block the bad stuff. I answered no. That's the entire conversation summarized.
Then you came in, said I was wrong, and then answered the question with "no", just like I did.
I didn't say anything about my expectations, or what I would do, or how I do it.
When you read kurzgesagt's reasoned response, and you consider the motivations of the primary accuser, it's a lot less dramatic than you make it sound. Nobody's perfect; and sometimes organisations' messaging align without it being bought. They are not primarily funded by billionaires, they have editorial independence enforced by contract, and have a lot to lose if that's not the case. Of course, make up your own mind (as kurzgesagt would like you to do); but I'll still be watching their work. If in doubt, check with other sources afterwards! (Like you should anyway).
Towards a better Jellyfin solution, I wonder if adding Whisper and an LLM model could transcribe the YT videos and flag any which contains themes that go against parents values.
I built this with Jellyfin and Home Assistant for my kids: https://github.com/philips/homeassistant-nfc-chromecast
Not everything has to be competitive or official either. Like you can just go to the community pool during the summer without joining a swim team. I think some parents forget this, but this was normal for previous generations.
So my kid has a few extra curricular activities and then I also do plenty of activities with them at the house like play chess or card games or whatever. They're also watching some of my old favorite sci-fi shows with me. Nearly all of YouTube kids is steaming garbage designed to turn your kid into a mindless consumer. Netflix kids is pretty good though. There are a lot of shows that have character progression and multi season plot arcs that cover complex subjects. Avatar the Last Airbender is an example of a show I was comfortable with my 7 year old watching without worrying about brain rot. Mind you, I think all screen time needs a limit.
by teaching them that work is good and necessary. There's a book by Neil Postman Amusing Ourselves to Death, the central idea of which is that "form excludes content". The problem with Youtube, or in his time TV, isn't just the content, it's that all content by the nature of the medium must be entertaining. If it isn't entertaining, it isn't content.
Hobbies feel like work because they are like work, because most things worth doing have a component of work to them. Rather than just trying to see what sticks, the best thing you can teach kids these days is that they should stick to the thing and that expecting "fun" at all times is a bad expectation to have.
The way I look at it though is that spending a lot of time with your kids early on to build a strong relationship and work on any behavioral or other issues will ensure you will set them up better for success in life. I see a lot of kids being raised by tablets and can't help but predict that the parents are going to regret it later down the road. Sorry if I got a little off topic there.
OP comment comes off as "I want Kagi to do it for me and to be how I want it" when Kagi doesn't know what you want blocked. How can it? If Kagi is to support blocking why wouldn't they?
I am saying what Kagi wants to block may not be the bad stuff you want blocked and so you should then verify the content of what is blocked.
I think you are...
The only thing I've said in this comment chain is that Kagi cannot guarantee that bad stuff won't show up. Which you seem to agree with (despite saying my argument is void, for some reason, before agreeing with it).
The rest has been you having a conversation with... I'm not sure who. Because you're asking a bunch of questions as if I am using this feature. I am not using this feature. Literally the only point I am making is that Kagi cannot guarantee that bad things wont show up.
Your argument is moot in that sense. Just because it's good today doesn't mean it won't be bad tomorrow. If Kagi is putting best efforts to guarantee that today it's safe that's better than nothing, no? And which to me is kore worthy than not.
