Made some comments about it in the past (Also David Pierce is coming on Mac Power Users this Sunday) but I am glad that it is getting good reviews and perhaps pave a way forward for a better way to deal with tech. I think there is something there in re-thinking operating systems so that its conducive to us doing our best work. I have been really interested in E-Ink Products for that reason.
3 Likes
As a grandfather I’m Sorry that there is not more discussion of usefulness for children.
1 Like
as a school teacher I would ban the sale of smart phones to anyone under 18. All a kid needs is either a watch or a light phone.
4 Likes
Usually the parents buy them. At some point in high school better mobil communication is necessary.
I guess the question is what are we protecting them from. That is not a simple question. In addition to educating them about the specific dangers, what do we allow, what do we restrict, and how?
No child I think needs the internet in their pocket everywhere they go. Their brains need to chance to develop focus.
2 Likes
They get underfoot sometimes, but they’re not so bad once you get to know them. 
5 Likes
I finished college more than a decade before the first handheld cellphone went on sale. And I can’t see why a child might need more than a $50 feature phone. Especially now that the first law restricting the sale of apps to minors has arrived.
Personally I haven’t a clue how Apple and Google will be able to verify ages. Utah says “That will most likely have to be done using credit cards,”. 
1 Like
I had access to a home computer from a young age (probably less than 8) yes, the scope between a ZX81 and an iPhone is massive, especially with the iPhone connected to the internet. But an iPad or a phone is the equivalent 40 years later.
The world has changed now, and in many cases for the better. Sure there are dangers in access to smartphones and the internet at a young age, but we need to teach kids to live in the world they’re going to grow up in. Giving them a lite phone is an option, but so is locking down an iPhone or an android phone, and or teaching them to use these things in moderation.
Regarding giving kids the ability to grow mindfully, phones aren’t the only distraction, tv, films, music, video games are all again good for kids, in moderation.
My kids grew up with a love of books and music, we showed this by doing it ourselves. Sure we have all succumbed a little to our devices, but we all still pick up a book or go for a walk.
Regulation of this at a federal level or even at a county level is not the answer. Parents needs to take ownership of this issue and lead by example.
2 Likes
The learning benefits from having access to the internet in your pocket are significant, and barring kids from having access is a massive step backwards IMO.
W C Fields’ answer to the question “How do you like children?” is for the ages:
“Preferably boiled”
Oh I would do something akin to a tiered system.
When learning is to be had, kids should learn the internet through a tablet or computer. They should learn how to healthily manage the internet. But, phones have basically destroyed the mental health of all of us and especially kids and there should be some hard limits from it.
and yeah, government laws are probably a non starter. Im just venting.
I dispute “all of us”
We’ve all been through a learning experience and I’m seeing a general feeling of disillusionment with social media (which is a good thing).
Many people use their phones sensibly, they don’t stay glued to them, they use them as the tool they are.
Think about it though, 20 years ago staying in touch with people was letters or emails from a computer.
Now, you see something that makes you think of someone, and you can send them a message or a photo immediately.
I dispute that phones have ruined the Mental health of “all of us”
People who 20 years ago you’d probably have lost touch with, you can stay in touch with them, lightly, via Facebook or Messages or ex colleagues on Linkedin.
And history shows that the Dunbar Number Dunbar's number - Wikipedia is still about 150, despite new technology which makes it easier to stay in touch, it’s just that instead of connections being local, they can be further afield now.
In the end it’s down to the individual to decide how much they use their phone. Self Discipline/good habits are key.
+1
1 Like
This is one of the many, many reasons why the answer is about parenting and not government. Each kid is different and age is a very rough proxy for “ready” or “mature.” We have 3 right in the ages where this is relevant and there’s no single answer that’s best for all of them. Some ham fisted regulation from anyone outside our household would be a nuisance at best and, more likely, unhelpful.
1 Like
I think this is both/and.
Kids spend around 1/4 of their lives going to, sitting at, or coming from school. Given that, schools have to model appropriate behavior as much as parents.
For example, I’m not in favor of just confiscating phones at the start of every school day. I think there are valid reasons for a kid to have access to their own phone. But during class, phones should be in backpacks, in desks (do kids still have their own desks, the kind with hinged tops?), etc. There are parents who insist that they need to be able to get ahold of their kids 24x7x365, and that’s where sensible laws & regulation could support teachers.
There’s also ample room for guidance and education from the school, to parents as well as kids. If we know the negative consequences of unrestricted, “always-on” access to devices, why not work to educate parents as well?
The challenge is, I don’t think most people know about Dunbar.
Back in the day, salespeople contrived elaborate systems to attempt to maintain contact with thousands of prospects, previous customers, etc., as part of their jobs. Those systems are the forerunners of modern CRMs. But they realized what they were doing, they realized that these were relatively shallow relationships, and they did it intentionally.
Now we have Facebook accounts, where people actively complain that they can only have 5,000 “friends.” I realize that some of those people are (improperly) trying to run businesses from their accounts, but there are a lot of people who have 1000+ “friends” that they feel they should be keeping up with.
Going back to the topic of education, things like this would be prime topics for coverage in schools. 
1 Like
I dunno. This is one of those things that is well intentioned and good in theory but experience suggests it won’t be effective. People know phone addiction is bad for them and for their children. We can spend a lot of money and time on educating people about health but it doesn’t seem to impact human behavior for those who weren’t already sensitive to the issue.
We are a forward-leaning school regarding technology. We issue a school iPad to every student (I implemented a 1:1 laptop program in the mid-90s), have extensive STEM labs and robotics, have just launched an aviation program, Apple TVs in every classroom and conference room and many offices, and more. But, we also believe that phones and other technologies are a destructive distraction from focused learning, dialog, and community. Digital temperance describes our approach. Years ago, we adopted the following policies to regulate personal technology so that students benefit from the appropriate use of technology while mitigating distraction that is detrimental to learning and relationships.
Technology Standards
As we prepare students to engage the world and change it for Jesus Christ, we acknowledge both the power of technology and our responsibility to yield that power in appropriate ways. We, as Christians, have the opportunity to create, innovate, and restore in ways never before possible. Modern technology also creates the potential for destructive distraction. Digital temperance, focused learning, and strong community are at the heart of the following technology standards.
Educational Technology Standards
Digital temperance, focused learning, and strong community are at the heart of the following technology standards.
All students will be issued a school-managed iPad. These should be used for school purposes only during the school day (Middle School: 7 a.m.–3 p.m.; Upper School: 7:55 a.m.–3 p.m.). Managed device use is regulated by the Acceptable Use Policy (AUP). No unmanaged educational devices are allowed on campus during the school day.
If a student is off task on an educational device, it will be collected and turned into the grade level office. If a device is collected in first period but contains a student’s third period homework, that work will be late as a natural consequence of the student losing his/her device.
Educational technology devices are limited to the classroom, grade level commons, and Academic Hub during the school day. Devices should not be brought to the lunchroom, Chapel, the restroom, or the locker room. Devices in these “no technology zones” will be collected.
Personal Technology Standards
All personal digital devices must be powered off and put away from 7 a.m.–3 p.m. in the Middle School and 7:55 a.m.–3 p.m. in the Upper School. This means devices should be turned off and kept out of sight for the entire school day, exempting upper school lunch. Students are required to store personal devices in their lockers or backpacks. If a student is seen using earbuds, his/her cell phone will be taken with the earbuds (see below). If a personal device (phone, earbuds, smart watch, etc) is seen or heard by faculty or staff, the device will be collected and turned into the grade-level office.
Accountability for Technology Standards
The following progression will be used to hold students to device standards for the duration of the school year:
-
First occurrence: The student may pick up his/her device from the upper school or middle school office at the end of the school day.
-
Second occurrence: A parent will be contacted. Students with a second personal device violation will be required to leave their personal device in the upper school office daily. Earbuds/head phones are only allowed with teacher permission. If a student is seen using earbuds/headphones, his or her phone will be taken as a consequence. Smart watches are not allowed unless approved by school nurse for medical purposes.
1 Like
I question that. Anybody that hangs out on this forum obviously knows it. Most people who spend time in technology fields know it. But “people” is a pretty diverse crowd. And even if they “know” it, that’s no guarantee they’re ever thinking about it.
I was a volunteer leader for a K-2 church youth group, and there was this line of toys called “Shopkins.” The product line’s slogan, I swear I’m not making this up, is “once you shop, you can’t stop!” That’s even more overt than Pokemon’s “gotta catch 'em all!”
People voluntarily buy this stuff for their kids. Some of them complain when their kids aren’t happy with the ones they have. People, it’s right there in the product’s marketing.
I am, therefore, not inclined to believe those people are thinking deeply about the short- or long-term behavioral consequences of their child’s smartphone.
1 Like
In many cases, because the parents are just as addicted. And, like most things requiring restraint, it is one thing to know what is right, it’s another thing to do it. This is why policies are needed to regulate undisciplined behavior in school—including the undisciplined use of phones in school. If everyone did what was right, there would be little need for policies and no need for enforcement. 
Perhaps Paul sums it up best:
For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want … For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing (Romans 7:15–19).
1 Like
I hear ya, and maybe you’re right. But I read your example as making my point. The information needed to make a good decision is being presented to them. It’s right in front of them. They’re not choosing to understand and act on it. My thesis is that no PSA campaign is going to impact that at a statistically impactful level that justifies the time and money spent on the whole.
In our family, we try to impact people - and to be impacted - toward this way of thinking through relationships (church, friendships, parenting) rather than regulation, legislation, or forced reeducation campaigns. That sounds like what you do as well, you’re just more optimistic than I that the other option isn’t a waste of time and money!