Children's Watch Allows Parents To Track Their Kid 607
pickens writes "The Telegraph reports that a new wristwatch called num8 has a GPS tracking device and satellite positioning system concealed inside so parents can locate the wearer to within 10 feet with Google maps. The watch sends an alert if it is forcibly removed. The makers of the watch claim it gives peace of mind to parents and makes children more independent. 'Losing your child, if only for a brief moment, leads to a state of panic and makes parents feel powerless. The overriding aim of num8 is to give children their freedom and parents peace of mind,' says a company spokesman. Critics of the watch say tagging children is a step too far in paranoia about child safety. 'Is the world really that unsafe that parents need to track their children electronically? I don't think so,' says Dr Michele Elliott, director of children's charity Kidscape."
Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:5, Insightful)
Sometimes I wish for some apocalypse just so the "Please won't someone take care of me!" dolts realize that the only person who can take care of you - IS YOU!.
Good for pre-teens, but not older (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I wouldn't use this for teenagers because at that age, they have matured enough that they deserve a little privacy, and they will be going to difference places and such as part of their normal social life. However, for pre-teens, they generally will not be going anywhere but the places you expect them to. If they're not at those places, then they're generally in trouble (whether they've wandered off on accident, been abducted, or are just being mischievous). I don't see how this bracelet really compromises much convenience on their part, so personally I wouldn't hesitate to use it on younger children.
We never needed them before (Score:5, Insightful)
Training (Score:3, Insightful)
If I were subjected to this, the first thing I would do would be to figure out how to remove it without setting of the alarm and then tie it to, say, a car exhaust. If only for the challenge!
On another note, the world may not be more safe or unsafe as it has in the past. The difference is that it has becomes easier to hear about what *does* happen with the internet and such.
Electronic child leashes (Score:4, Insightful)
That's funny, I was having a discussion with my mother about how I thought child leashes were stupid and too invasive on the child's freedom.
My mother told me she used to think like that too, until the day she lost one of her children (either me or my brother, don't remember) in a busy place. When that happened she realized that maybe the leashes are stupid, but at least you'll never lose your child in one moment of distraction. Thankfully, she never went though with it :-)
I think a GPS bracelet is a nice compromise between having peace of mind and being too imposing on your child's ability to move and sense of independence. At least when they really are children -- for teenagers it's a different story, IMHO.
Re:Training (Score:3, Insightful)
That's simple... take it off several times a day claiming it feels uncomfortable.
In other words, set off the alarm intentionally, repeatedly.
Tag chip (Score:2, Insightful)
Big Brother starts with you! (Score:4, Insightful)
Hey, we should use devices like this to get children used to the idea of being watched constantly. . .
Then, when they are adults, they won't mind Big Brother watching every little thing they do. It's for their safety, after all!
~AA
please... (Score:5, Insightful)
oh, for fsk sake. have you people lost your damn minds?
"lets get our children used to electronic monitoring early"
We have a device like that here allready, we use it for work release from jail.
How about we raise children that we trust out of our sight?
If you need to track your children like criminals, then I feel sorry for you.
sort of.
Re:So, Dr Elliott, (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:We never needed them before (Score:5, Insightful)
What is it with the large proportion of parents who feel it suddenly is necessary, though? I'm a parent, and he may still be less than 18 months old and so not going very far, but both me and my wife feel that a lot of this stuff (including net nanny monitors) is overkill and is just going to destroy the child's concepts of trust, personal space and self-reliance.
Instill good values in your child and do your job as a parent and you can't go far wrong. Start to let technology do your job for you (because, shock-horror, the other alternative is putting in effort and teaching stuff to kids) and it'll all go wrong.
Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older (Score:2, Insightful)
At 12 I was biking to work, a carnival type job and legal. Preteen. Really you have to know your child, but I also think you have to prepare them. For some I think those the do the former, would not do the latter. And those that would track their child, wouldn't care to teach them to take care of themselves. I don't know what the cut off should be, but either they should have direct supervision in a safe environment, limited freedom, or full freedom. A lot can happen when you are looking up the child's location on the computer.
It reminds me of dog owners. A leash is less necessary for a well trained dog, than one that hasn't received it.
Re:We never needed them before (Score:3, Insightful)
Parents have been perfectly capable of looking after their children without GPS tracking for millennia... IMHO with a little trust and good parenting, these devices are completely unnecessary.
A statistically low percentage of child kidnappings, etc, does not in any way assuage the grief and pain of a parent who happens to be one of the unlucky few. As someone else above stated, this is probably not appropriate for teenagers, but rather is suited for young children. The fact that the human race will continue without your child isn't any kind of comfort to a parent. If they make a value judgment that the peace of mind and possible benefit of purchasing one of these is worth the cost, then so be it.
Deeply troubling (Score:4, Insightful)
Meanwhile I see mothers using phones (illegally, here) while driving their kids to school and weaving across the road. That's not a "perceived" danger. They let their kids get fat. Also not a perceived danger. They don't teach them the dangers of alcohol, which will kill far more people prematurely than all the world's pedophiles and kidnappers.
We really do need to get across the idea that something can be technically feasible and yet undesirable, because a significant number of people do not get it. And in thirty years time the world is going to be run by people still metaphorically tied to mommy's apron, infantilised by never being given any freedom or responsibility. It's not a nice thought.
Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older (Score:3, Insightful)
If you think 13 is a magic age where children suddenly deserve privacy of their whereabouts, heck no.
That privilege is @ the parents' discretion. Usually people under age 17 must at all times tell their parents where exactly they are going, at what times. Typically parents just have to believe them, because it would be too inconvenient to have them watched at every moment, and well-behaved teens don't need it.
And their parents may use any method at their disposal to verify the children are at the places they say they are. Privacy of location is not a right children have at any age.
But usually if Children have demonstrated they can't be trusted the response isn't "Ok, wear this tracking bracelet", the response is "You can't go out, you're grounded." IOW, removal of privacy of location by disallowing them to leave.
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:2, Insightful)
Is the world really that unsafe that parents need to track their children electronically? I don't think so,
So what's to lose? Say you have a 6 year old kid: is it really going to harm them to wear one of these? Sure, chances are very very high that this'll never be needed, but so what? It's kind of like Pascal's wager, isn't it? The bit that irritates me most about this is the retailer's website "Loc8r", "Where R U" etc. I'd be more worried about the effects of this on their spelling than their general well being.
Re:We never needed them before (Score:2, Insightful)
We were perfectly capable of using motorized or animal transportation without seat belts for millennia... IMHO with a little care and good control these devices are completely unnecessary.
It's not that I don't agree with your point, but I don't agree with the argument that you've made. Just because we've gone without something for a long time, and care will mostly mitigate circumstances that would result in an unfavourable result, this does not mean the device is unnecessary or useless.
Now I don't think I should need such a device with my daughter, but I can easily imagine plausible circumstances in which an urgent matter arises and such a device would be handy to have available if only to give me peace of mind. Because you are not going to be able to watch your children 24hours a day forever... it's part of growing up. And maybe instead of following them to school the first time that they walk "alone", I will make sure my daughter arrives safely by checking my iPhone from my living room.
Re:So, Dr Elliott, (Score:5, Insightful)
> what exactly would have happened to Madeleine McCann if she was wearing one
> of these when abducted ? Either: (a) it would have been forcibly removed -
> causing an alert, or (b) police would have been able to track her.
Or (c) Tracking Police would have found her chopped-off arm, incl. intact bracelet.
Re:So, Dr Elliott, (Score:4, Insightful)
Before or after her parents killed her and dumped her body?
Oh and unless she slept with her watch on it would have made fuck all difference if she was abducted. Most child abuse comes from within the family, after that the majority comes from trusted family friends and people who are expected to be with the kids, only a small amount comes from strangers, so this will only be marginally more effective at preventing abuse than snake oil and kids would be better off allowed to go out freely (they would be out of reach their family & family friends). It's not that i think this is bad technology, but its very ineffective (and users should be aware of that) and may encourage bad parenting (not letting the kids go out enough).
Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older (Score:2, Insightful)
And then your kids will sneak out of your house or get very, very lonely.
Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older (Score:4, Insightful)
If you think 13 is a magic age where children suddenly deserve privacy of their whereabouts, heck no.
That privilege is @ the parents' discretion. Usually people under age 17 must at all times tell their parents where exactly they are going, at what times. Typically parents just have to believe them, because it would be too inconvenient to have them watched at every moment, and well-behaved teens don't need it.
Why would people under the age of 17 have to have little locational privacy? Personally when I was 13-ish I simply stopped telling my parents where I am, usually through either flat out lying or through giving nonspecific information, simply felt I didn't want them quite knowing where I am. Besides, if there was any sort of trouble, I always had my cell phone with me so it wasn't like I magically vanished out of sight ... having to know where children are was, imho, important only before the age of mobile communication.
However, nowadays, when I'm 21-ish my parents still keep pestering me about where I am and I _still_ don't tell them. Just goes to show parents never learn, ever.
Not always paranoia (Score:5, Insightful)
As a parent of an autistic child with escape artist tendencies, I would love to have this kind of watch. That is, assuming that my kid will wear it for more than 5 minutes in a row without trying to cut it off.
My kid is 10 and incredibly fast. He doesn't understand the concepts of safety and fear, and is constantly figuring out ways to break our locks to go out wandering alone (he's even done it at school, which was actually a bit funny because he took off running in front of the principal, so for the first few minutes there was a gaggle of huffing and puffing teachers and secretaries chasing through an apartment complex until the cops arrived). A watch like this, combined with some kind of alarm could help us keep him alive and unharmed until he is 18.
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:4, Insightful)
When you're 5 or 6, you can't take care of you though.. That's what family and parents are for; the world's one big adventure, and you can cross oceans sailing in a top hat, with no food or water, and it'll be fine!
For every hour of every day, it's overkill, but if you're going out to the local mall, and your kid's just at the age where they're free to wander a little, it may be a good idea.. I can remember (very vaguely) as a kid starting to explore away from the parents' house. I wandered up some side streets and got lost.. I was absolutely terrified, and so were they.. I wanted to go home and had no idea where home was, and they had no idea where I was.. Thankfully, back then, the community was more closely knit, and one of my mother's friends saw me and escorted me back home.
So, yes, I can see some perfectly valid cases where this'll head off a lot of grief on both sides if used judiciously.
Think it could sell as a student tool too (if I pass out in a ditch after a few too many, come pick me up please!!)..
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:5, Insightful)
Until the advent of mass spectrometers in every household, the difference between a nice cool drink and a delicious cup of cancer comes down to what someobody else may or may not have been dumping into your water supply. The difference between a safe commute and exciting fiery death comes down to whether or not some multinational car company decided to do a recall on the car the guy behind you is driving in response to a defect report from one of their subcontractors.
There are, to be sure, loads of problems that are best solved yourself, ideally by means of not being a moron. However, pretending that all problems are such is nothing more than a good way to end up alone and helpless against people who are neither.
In fact, that is the reason why you have to "wish for some apocalypse" for people to "realize that the only person who can take care of you is you". Under non-apocalyptic conditions, there are loads of people who can take care of you. Like your doctor, and the guy who makes your garbage go away, and the chap who (eventually) comes out when your internet connection isn't working, and the whole massive supply chain that keeps your widgets flowing. Contemporary society, really anything beyond the barest forms of subsistence scavenging, absolutely depends on division of labor and specialization. And, the necessary consequence of specialization is dependence on others. Not absolute, Smith's pin factory isn't a hive society; but pretending that you can have autarchic self reliance and division of labor at the same time is silly.
Useless as a kick stand on a bass boat. (Score:5, Insightful)
Almost all child abuse is from family members. Wearing a GPS watch won't help to stop the step dad from hurting the kid. Abuse or abduction by strangers is so rare that it is hardly worth mentioning. All this does is extract money from parents and lets them pretend the danger is somewhere that it isn't.
Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older (Score:1, Insightful)
Your statement assumes that teenagers and pre-teens won't find a way of circumventing this device. That is never a wise assumption.
Re:We never needed them before (Score:1, Insightful)
I believe it's called stranger fear.
Thanks to Oprah, Nancy Grace, CSI, Law & Order, etc., people think that the next stranger they meet is going to molest, maim, or kill them. It's often put up that a certain percentage of people are criminals, another figure are hardened criminals, you live within X feet from criminal Y in your neighborhood, there are some percentage (Z!) of criminals in the nearby city, etc.
This extends then to the precious ones, children.
It probably has some to do with the higher percentage of people living in cities these days and the mob mentality of the above, that someone somewhere is going to harm you (despite cities having a lower percentage by population crime rate than rural and suburban areas typically, just substantially more geographically dense because of the number of people packed on top of each other).
It also doesn't help that overt verbal racism (as opposed to cross burning and the such which is another level entirely) has gone to slightly less --instead of people yelling directly at individuals or families, you have your motorcycle gang or tuner buddies conspire to harass, throw trash on someone's yard, gun your engine all hours of the day in front their house, etc.
Surprisingly, this targets a general area versus a particular individual or family, and people feel less safe. This is similar to "crime watch" areas pretty much being a sign of "police don't care to come here so the neighbors have to watch and then call and hope the police show up at all, to hell with timely that would be godsend".
Remember, next time you're at a park, there's a good chance a criminal is watching you.
Re:Electronic child leashes (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a kid. There's a reason children need their parents. They need protection, and boundaries. If I lived in a busy city, and had a kid that always wanted to run around, I'd probably sometimes have them on a leash and let them run around more than they'd be able to if they were squirming around in their stroller.
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:3, Insightful)
I can remember (very vaguely) as a kid starting to explore away from the parents' house. I wandered up some side streets and got lost.. I was absolutely terrified, and so were they..
That experience taught you something. It was a small step towards being a more responsible person. Kids who are under 24/7 surveillance never learn that freedom comes with responsibility, that their parents' trust to let them wander around by themselves must be earned by not getting lost. Getting lost taught you to be cautious.
The grand-parent AC is right: Preempting every bad decision and the following consequences creates irresponsible children who turn into irresponsible adults.
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:4, Insightful)
"Contemporary society, really anything beyond the barest forms of subsistence scavenging, absolutely depends on division of labor and specialization."
That's a hell of a jump there. Besides which, you are setting up a strawman. The GP didn't say "all the problems of the world are solvable by rugged self-reliance and insolvable by other means". He was bemoaning the fact that people expect others to take care of them and keep them safe. One can be responsible for oneself without roaming across the post apocalyptic wilderness.
Let's take an example. Who is responsible for keeping you safe from criminals? Most would say "the police". But are you aware that, legally, the police are NOT responsible for that? Their job is to deal with crime AFTER it happens. To take it further, "police" as we know them didn't exist until 1829 with the founding of the London police. Prior to that, who was responsible for keeping people safe? The answer is that the individual, or family, was responsible.
There's a big difference between the interactions of specialists in trade and a state of perpetual childhood. It's the difference between knowing some people make and sell shoes and it's my responsibility to acquire them by fair and legal means, and believing that it's the cobbler's responsibility to ensure that you have shoes. Or someone elses responsibility to force the cobbler to give you shoes.
Re:Electronic child leashes (Score:2, Insightful)
I find that the leash would be more invasive as you're treating your child like a pet, not a fellow human. A stroller just seems more civilised even if they both give the same restrictions. Except a stroller is handy for carrying everything you need with your child, provides shade as well as giving your child a chance to rest when they get exhausted. Everyone hates that tired, noisy toddler
However if you've raised you child to stick near you, never let go of your hand, etc then the 'electric leash' is for those worst case scenarios when they are abducted or drift off somewhere at the beach (yes, bad parenting but it happens to the best, most cautios parents)
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, but the child may not know the parent can find them.
The child could be lost a lot longer before the parents are worried (the child is not lost to the parents, but the child doesn't know that), therefore actually *enhancing* the educational experience for the child.
Seriously, aside from the price, it isn't invasive, and it does help the parents do their jobs.
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:1, Insightful)
You can still give them privacy, but you can at least know where they are at any given moment
I don't remember having any privacy as a 6 year old.
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:2, Insightful)
plug for my all time favorite /. sig (Score:5, Insightful)
"If you spend all your time childproofing the world you won't have any time to worldproof your child."
I saw that in a sig awhile ago. Don't remember from who. It's a great one though.
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:3, Insightful)
True. But if these things become prevalent then the parents that don't track and log their children's movements will be seen as irresponsible. Woe to the parent in court having her children taken away by Social Services because she's a negligent parent that obviously doesn't care.
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't have a problem with this watch, as long as it was used at tool and not a leash
I think that's why people are against it. Because it will probably be used as a leash. It will be one more way of controlling your kids in lieu of good parenting.
Re:Not always paranoia (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:3, Insightful)
There are towns in the US in which every aid need be applied to protect kids. Some places are simply way too dangerous.
This might also be useful for law enforcement as well as personal protection in that people can prove that they were not in a certain place at a certain time. For example many men have a problem with former wives who imagine that the old ex is stalking them. Having solid proof that your former mate is a dingbat could offer serious legal protections.
Anyone here a parent? (Score:3, Insightful)
Jeez... I was going to mod this one, but as a parent, I've just got to weigh in. Those of you acting like it's some police state conspiracy to track my four-year old, really have no idea what you're talking about. It doesn't change my attitude about keeping an eye on him, it's not invasive or dehumanizing, and the kid doesn't care --the kid probably doesn't even understand. He'd think it was cool to have his own watch.
I lost track of the little guy at a theme park about a year ago when he ran off while I was --ahem-- indisposed in the restroom. We found him 10 minutes later, but it took weeks to get back in my wife's good graces. He's typically obedient, but these things happen --and no, training him in karate, giving him a copy of the Fountainhead, or some other moronic suggestion wouldn't have helped. As he becomes more capable of self-governance and demonstrates responsibility, we will give him increasing autonomy.
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:2, Insightful)
"is it really going to harm them to wear one of these?"
As with most "think of the children" babbling, this is just a disguised indoctrination. Once it starts to catch on, it will be mandated for ALL children, ages ~3-15. Of course, once a child has worn the thing for 12 years, he'll be "used to it", the next step will be ALL MINOR CHILDREN. Justification will be a double whammy: "Think of the girls being victimized" along with "Male teens are responsible for 3/4 of all criminal acts, so we need to track them!" After the first generation of people who have been indoctrinated becomes voters, everyone will agree that ALL CITIZENS should wear such a device - and again, the double whammy. "Think of the helpless" right beside "We've got to track those dangerous males".
I remind people of the theory, "People get the government that they deserve". Eventually, anyone who does something "out of character" as defined by a computer program designed to track them will be hauled in for questioning. "Why did you skip work today, then go to the beach? Are you a subversive? Are you a deviant? Were you looking at little girls?"
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:5, Insightful)
"How do you expect a 6 year old to take care of themselves if they wander off somewhere?"
In today's world? How many people live where a 6 year old can wander very far from SOME ADULT? Do you live in outback Australia, where the nearest neighbor is 30 miles away? If so, the GPS probably isn't available anyway.
But, back to the 6 years old thing. Notice my nick. At six years old, a kid may not have great judgement, but they CAN take care of themselves. At age six, I had explored almost all of the township that I lived in. By age 10 I had covered almost all of my county. Get a grip - children are more capable than a lot of people want to give them credit for. Toddlers are the ones most likely to benefit from this idea, but if a parent NEEDS GPS to track their toddler, they aren't very good parents.
Re:Not always paranoia (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:4, Insightful)
> Exactly. like karate lessons. How about teaching your kid how to defend themselves,
> along with all the goodness that comes with learning a discipline and being able to
> utterly kick the crap out of the playground bullies.
Um... So how does this address the little people getting abducted or lost? Even if they were 2nd degree black belts, it's not like they have the mass to defend themselves against most adults. Sounds like somebody has watched Ninja Kids [imdb.com] one time too many.
(BTW: I am enrolling both my toddlers in karate when they're old enough, but mostly for the discipline and a physical outlet.)
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:2, Insightful)
Oh I agree that it's like Pascal's wager, but that's more of a bad thing than you'd think. Granted, I've never raised a kid so I don't know how difficult any of this is, but the Pascal's wager logic is just weird.
Yes, Pascal's wager is a decent justification for being religious but it proposes a pretty terrible way to get into a spiritual life, as a way of basically covering your ass in case God exists. It's basically the tattoo on the ass of the "Archbishop" in Johnny English [imdb.com]: "Jesus is coming - look busy." Sure, you end up with a lot of people going to church, but they're going 'just in case,' rather than honestly believing that God is someone who should be praised. It's a lousy excuse for showing up to mass, and you'd probably be better off concentrating on being a decent, moral, secular person than faking that you believe in God, however well you manage to halfway convince yourself.
Same thing with this watch. I mean a protection "just in case" your child gets abducted sounds great, but it's also a lousy excuse for not teaching your child to think about what they're doing when a stranger in a van offers them candy, or , or just in general. Sure, you end up with a lot of parents feeling safe about their children, but it's because they trust some strange device they're paying a monthly fee for, not because they trust their actual child, and which would you rather trust, some company called Lok8r, or your own offspring?
Plus, there's plenty of technical reasons why this is a terrible idea. Ignoring the very real possibility for someone other than you to track your kid, you're saying you can't think of a way for someone to get the watch off without "forcibly removing" it in the ways they've come up with? I can, and they're more horrifying than a simple abduction.
Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older (Score:3, Insightful)
So what about that, what if you have a child whom lets you catch them on small lies, but never on big ones?
Then you wonder why the hell your son is lying all the time and why you can't trust each other. I guess.
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:5, Insightful)
Once it starts to catch on, it will be mandated for ALL children, ages ~3-15.
Arguing against a "think of the children" [wikipedia.org] fallacy with a slippery slope [wikipedia.org] fallacy. Classic.
Top 10 reasons this is silly (Score:4, Insightful)
1) MOST the problem people for children are FRIENDS AND FAMILY! This fact can not be stated enough. Obviously, tracking does little good.
2) The majority strangers are good people and will help / watch out for kids; well, not in lawsuit crazy countries or ones were the culture of fear makes everybody a threat; even the child who needs your help or supervision. Parents today seem over protective, possibly because they are so much more negligent than previous generations? (its not their fault they are this way)
3) Teenagers will not wear such a watch, outsmart it etc. Teens get themselves into trouble; much of it not requiring tracking-- knowing where they are being foolish is not that useful. Its primary use here would be kidnapping into the sex trade which is much higher in some areas and at certain ages and genders. This is still quite a low percentage even in relative bad areas.
4) Young "adults" would be better suited to a cell phone. Lots of ideas possible here. Ideally, something that was set it off with you yelling help... Your phone tracks you ALREADY to a general area if not precisely by this point-- no gps required. Eventually most children will have a cell phone too.
5) Drug sex offenders to kill their sex drive. Similar to drugging the mental cases as we do now (both are mental problems.) This would possibly even help with the #1 cause of the problems. Makes more sense to have the sick people pay to treat themselves than everybody else pay to see where their kid was before / during victimization.
6) How about we put the tracking devices ON THE OFFENDERS instead of all the kids? (which wouldn't help with biggest group-- friends and family.) This is a lot like house arrest bracelets.
Seriously, somebody who preys on unknown kids/teens has a mental problem not a criminal problem-- punishment doesn't work; they only learn how not to get caught next time or go after safer targets (friends/family) or kill the victims. It requires life-long treatment, not temporary punishment. Its just as foolish as punishing gay people for being gay and thinking it will fix the situation. Legalized prostitution would also cut down the numbers- hey its a fact - prohibitions never work.
7) Bad Behavior / Drugs: Knowing where the child is will not help a whole lot; most the drug users I've known did it around friends, at home, or even at school.
8) Parents: Do you want to have data that could be used to prosecute your child?? In the USA, we prosecute children for stupid shit and are quite foolish about punishing them (in some areas even corrupt about it... http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/519/150 [ahrp.org])
9) Clever hacker types (who could be kids) will combine with the power of the internet to provide less talented people easy ways to hack the watches so they don't work as planned
10) What about bad coverage areas? GPS doesn't work in all places and sending the data back is even more troublesome. Should a parent call 911 because the child disappears near some kids basement? Would wrapping foil over it cause it to do the same thing?
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:2, Insightful)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/04/warrantless_gps_tracking/print.html [theregister.co.uk]
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/05/no_warrant_requ.html [schneier.com]
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/10/1549252 [slashdot.org]
http://www.divorcenet.com/states/new_jersey/spying_on_your_spouse [divorcenet.com]
We're already on the slippery slope. Google around, and see who can track you, with or without your permission, with or without a warrant.
Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:2, Insightful)
"You do know that most municipal water supplies have hundreds of toxic chemicals intentionally dumped into it? For example, there is a strong link between fouride and bone cancer or flouride and brain damage."
I'd take your concern for our precious bodily fluids more seriously if you hadn't misspelled fluoride. Twice.
Re:Good for pre-teens, but not older (Score:2, Insightful)
And the simple answer is that you're obviously sticking your nose in other people's (your son in this case) business.
Yes, it is a simple answer. It's my moral, legal, and ethical obligation to take care of my children; they have no privacy except what I provide them in the interests of teaching them and correcting any mistakes they might make. I take great pains to demonstrate privacy to my kids with the knowledge that I may take it away at any time if caught in a lie and just yesterday, I had to tell my boys that I lost a lot of respect for them and quite a bit of trust when I caught a "little white lie."
Seriously, if my parents weren't so nosy they'd probably know a lot more about what I do day to day.
Oops. I'm sorry, I made the above comment with the presumption that I was responding to a mature adult. This laughable statement proves me wrong.
Re:Kid won't know what to do when an adult (Score:4, Insightful)
With that training and attitude, you will need all you got when assigned to a level 4 classification in prison. I'm sure you can find someone your skill there, perhaps multiple encounters.
I don't know any real karateka would be taking pride in permanently disfiguring other people, even though they did have it coming. Self defense is one thing. Bragging about how you maimed people on a public forum is another.
As a practioner of karate , for 14 years , i have to agree with you.
The first objective of karate , is to improve one's character . The karateka has to train with (not against ) other people , and learns respect.
To quote Gisjin Funakoshi : "the purpose of karate , is not victory or defeat , but the improvement of the character , and personality of the practioner. Karate is sport , self-defence and body culture . If violence erupts , it is only the because of disharmony between body and spirt . "
"To be violent , is to be weak" .
While i can understand that , in the above mentioned situation , it might have been necessary to break someone's nose , to survive , this is nothing to be happy about . You survived , you can learn from the situation , but if you truly feel good about hurting someone , you are not practicing karate , as that mindset doesn't fit in karate.