Sally Davies, UK, Twitter discussed on Philip Teresi
On Twitter, finally at Hewlett tiresias. Right now, continuing the conversation started last hour about a recommendation. From chief medical UK chief medical officer Dame. Sally davies. She's issuing formal guidelines. Urging parents to limit their children's social media use to two hours a day. Now, I happen to agree with the guideline two hours. A day is plenty of time for a child to be exposed to social media or the open internet in general. I'm not talking about when they're doing something that's productive. When they're researching something, no, I'm talking about unstructured, especially social media focused internet time. Two hours is plenty for any kid, frankly for anybody. But my my concern is that we start with a government issuing guidelines, and that eventually turns into a government. Writing laws. That I happen to disagree that I happen to agree with this guideline that I happen to in my own household adhere to something similar to that. Doesn't make any difference. I don't want the government telling me how to raise my kids, and there's a guy. This is Europe. Okay. You look at what's going on in the Pacific Asian nations and the way that the Chinese and the Japanese are handling social media and government control of those things, especially the Chinese and. You're getting off into some kind of crazy totalitarian nightmare where it's being used by the government to actually make things harder for the population. Four hundred fifty eight fifty eight the number do you? Let your kids you social media. Do you agree with restricting that? Does the government guideline change your mind one way or the other is this the slippery slope? It appears to be four nine hundred fifty eight fifty eight Samson is next on KM J. Good afternoon, sir. How you doing today? This is the thing we got a one hundred percent. There's no way the government should be in. They're trying to dictate or set up guidelines and how you can raise your own kid know, what you'd have them do in your own house. But I tell you what parents have got to get get here. And I think I think it's the thing. Also, it's a perfect business opportunity. I don't find my. So mike. I don't mind him being on the internet. Want to be if you're in my house and they're under under eighteen in there. My child I'd say that. The businesses should come up with phones that Kim. They can enter you can control. That's why. Tool set some guidelines with a kid it. It doesn't make sense to have the government is really stupid meniscus linear. The solution. We get that the public can do that can solve this problem. Sampson. I agree with you there. There's a private sector solution. There's a money making opportunity here for for some smart programmer. Yeah. And there are situations where a kid does need a phone, and we see it all the time in the news and stuff when the kid gets kidnapped or or he's lost somewhere. If he has a phone that allow you to track that phone, then you build the fine pm easier. Yeah. That's a very good use of phone. Also, you know, I think that the private sector ought to come up with a phone that if achieved has that he's under eighteen in your house, and you don't want him to be the point sites and stuff if he has it whatever she goes on to you can see it on your phone. So you can monitor it all the time. And he knows you're monitoring or she or she knows your mom, and those sorts of things that can solve this problem without getting the government involved. That's just plain stupid to get the government involved. The parents have distance role they should take back control. And and and have these things I mean technology is coming along so fast. Now, we gotta get to the point where we can use it effectively without destroying our society. You might say. There are ways to do this stuff Simpson. You're absolutely right there. There is a solution out there right for the picking for for some clever coder or for some service provider who wants to attract that audience, there's a great money making opportunity here and by virtue of I think being very profitable and opportunity to improve safety for our kids because my daughter hop on recipes dot com, where is she gets some of these recipes that she works off of no problem. My daughter's spending a little bit of time goofing around browsing Pinterest on on any given day as long as the contents family friendly. No problem. My kid being out on the open internet accessible to other people and able to access any content. She so desires that I got a problem with because she is a good kid. She's a smart kid. She's still a kid. And I don't see unfettered access being the way to go my worry. And the reason that I think you're seeing this guideline being issued across the pond is that this free market solution seems very very obvious. And the programming could be it could be difficult. It could be challenging. But I'll programming is all good programming is. If there was a market for this wouldn't this product already exist. Why aren't parents looking for this? Why aren't parents encouraging this by going to the developers that have something close to what they need and pushing for it to get modified and expanded and improved to be truly useful. That's what bothers me. We could have this solution already. And I don't think anybody's looking for Samson. Great call dude, always good to hear from you got to keep moving four hundred fifty eight fifty eight the number here in town. We're going to talk to Bill next. Welcome to KM J Bill. Bill. Are you there, sir? Okay. Bills phone cut out. That's all right bills comment was that parental controls should be used on any internet use for kids. And then that goes with what I I was just saying, yes, they should. Content. Filtering is an imperfect art the the complexity of successfully programming something that will absolutely positively definitely filter one hundred percent of undesirable content. I don't think it's possible. For two reasons one it's actually really really complicated to teach an algorithm how to see a picture accurately. Shot from the top lot. Hey, foam art, could definitely be mistaken as a human body part. By a machine. Likewise for somebody like my daughter who would just go go to that website. Because there's something there. I'm not supposed to see there's something that it's not appropriate for me to see. Again. I go to my son at ten or eleven he was fighting. He was worried about any of this stuff. By sixteen seventeen years old. My son had figured out how to bypass basic security on our home network. And I am look I I I'm not hacker, man. I'm I'm no IT genius. But I'm pretty competent when it comes to setting up a network and filtering out undesirable stuff and my sixteen year old figured out. How to get around that? And I assure you. Most of the folks that I know who are my age, and my parents age would not have figured out how to get around that. But he he figured out how to circumvent that security and programming this stuff, it is an uncertain art. But I think that there's money it. I think that there's potential in it, and I don't understand why market pressure has it generated a more robust. A more robust set of products already. And again, my fear is that we have a bunch of parents who aren't paying attention don't.