I'm not sure if this story is true but it leads me to a question:
Should any parent let their child use any IT system that creates a permanent record that they are not in charge of.
I would be far happier with a child writing a blog that their friends can access rather than ever posting to Facebook. Have logging turned off on comments entered using your child's account and you have plausible deniability.
I suppose the problem is telling them that are not allowed to comment on their friends Facebook posts.
It'll be interesting to see what we have in 15 years time?
You can't monitor children 24/7, especially not teenagers, and cutting them off from the internet in this day and age would only stunt them socially and intellectually.
I count myself very lucky that as a teenager I was allowed to have my own computer and internet connection. For all the valid worries about what trouble I might have gotten myself into, I instead grew up to be the most successful member of my family with a career in IT.
We can't let fears of isolated incidents like these drive all of our decisions, or we'll just end up with the parental equivalent of the TSA.
> Should any parent let their child use any IT system that creates a permanent record that they are not in charge of.
This is the same as thinking that not telling your children about sex or alcohol will keep them from experimenting. It's much better to have a respectful, grownup conversation where you explain the risks and how to reduce them.
In the article, the dad points out how his son was not the sort to read newspapers, or watch the news. I am not sure why the Dad thought it wasn't important for his son to do these sort of things.
I do not have children yet, and one of the reasons I am reluctant to move to the US (even with people sometimes insisting me to do so because of SV and all) is that I think US is one of the worst places in the world to raise a child, excepting other obvious bad places (ie: any country US attacked since the end of cold war, like Somalia, Libya, Iraq...)
Listen, not getting into the obvious nationalism that tends to color something like this, but the US is a damn fine place to live. Is it better than the UK, France, or Germany? In some ways, yes, and in other ways, no. The problem is that you are reading some very specific articles that are coloring your perception. You're focusing your attention to only the negative, which will obviously make you think everything is negative.
The US is in the middle of make gay marriage legal. Not being gay legal, but the idea that two men or two women can be in a state-recognized marriage. They'd hang both parties in Iran.
A state Senator in Texas openly spoke against an anti-abortion bill for over 10 hours, without sitting, leaning against a podium, or going to the bathroom. She brought national news to a decisive issue without being arrested.
Say what you want about the job he is doing, but we have an African-American president. That's pretty progressive considering that he wouldn't have even had same rights as a white person only 40 years ago.
I can drive from Portland, OR, to New York City and not have to show a single sliver of paper to anyone (unless I get pulled over for speeding).
So, feel free to fear that which you don't understand but know that your feelings are tainted by a small sub-section of information.
Actually, the US is full of narcisistic egocentric and overly individualistic people.
The defense you made for the US, even kinda proves it, I don't care the race of the president, or about anti-abortion...
The issues I DO care when taking care of children, are the ones that US outright suck.
I don't want to give GMO-ed milk to my children, or all the crap you put into your food, or live in a country that teaches that invading other countries over and over again is nice, or that has more aircraft carriers than the rest of the world summed and think this is being peaceful, or that has people more concerned about gay rights/feminism/etc... instead of being concerned about true well being of future generations and of the country.
From your profile, I see that you live in Brazil. One of the top 20 countries for homicide rate[1]. Plenty of it's own human rights abuses[2], and one of the bottom 15 for income equality and distribution.
The defense you made for the US, even kinda proves it, I don't care the race of the president, or about anti-abortion...
My examples were showing the freedom we have here in America. Whether it be personal or financial, it's certainly not as bad as you portray it. It's on the same level as the UK, France, and Germany. There's give and take for what you are going to have to live with. You aren't going to find some utopia in the world today, but the US is a fine place to live.
So if not the US, assuming you have zero restrictions for moving, what do you think would be a better country to live in?
Except maybe some farm areas in the middle of nowhere, but I dunno yet.
I am currently searching, interesting spots so far have been Singapore (not without its faults though), other SE Asia countries, Scandinavian countries, Quebec, New Zealand...
But I don't had a decision yet of where I will go, but certainly not the US, although it has some very free and interesting places, the US federal government infamously is quick to meddle into stuff (like your raw milk, or Waco, or Roe vs Wade).
Brazil has the same issues as US, plus some other ones... But Brazil living in the middle of nowhere is more feasible (the government here last pulled a Waco in 1800s, currently it leaves people that want to live far from urban areas mostly alone).
Your focus on Waco is making my point that you are only focusing on very high-profile subset of the negative. Waco was terrible but not as innocent as you are portraying it as. If you would've said Ruby Ridge I think you might get some agreement.
If you want to live in the middle of nowhere in the US, have at it. The government won't bother you unless you do something really messed up, like manufacture drugs for sale, murder people, or don't pay your taxes. You can milk your own cows, grow chickens for eggs, be a subsistence farmer if you want - there's no one to stop you from doing that. I'm not sure what you want to do that you'd think the feds would bother you.
I don't know if you saw in other posts of mine, but I am very much against current US government behavior, I am outspoken about it, and I support non-terrorist organizations related to that subject.
I am very sure I don't need to do anything "wrong" to attract negative attention of US government, even if I live in the middle of nowhere...
Should any parent let their child use any IT system that creates a permanent record that they are not in charge of.
I would be far happier with a child writing a blog that their friends can access rather than ever posting to Facebook. Have logging turned off on comments entered using your child's account and you have plausible deniability.
I suppose the problem is telling them that are not allowed to comment on their friends Facebook posts.
It'll be interesting to see what we have in 15 years time?