Klox

Friend, you are the one that brought a legal argument to the discussion. You’re being disingenuous by saying it’s now irrelevant when I asked for specific evidence supporting your claims.

I don’t know what a formal right is.

A “healthy kid” can also understand the need for parental guidance, particularly before teen years.

There is no general case. We’re discussing minors. Kids are not being victimized by being raised by competent, privacy minded parents. They don’t need the privacy in their digital communications while they are a minor. They need it when they are an adult, and my kids will know the value of that privacy better than you understand it.

Take care.

I guess I didn’t explicitly say this in my original comment, but my intended point is that kids do not have a right to privacy. I explained from a personal POV why I as a parent make this choice, but since you’re interested in the legal side: kids cannot provide or revoke consent because they do not even have this right. Legal guardians have this right on behalf of their kids. This is true pretty much universally across governments. If you have a specific example I am happy to change my mind. Particularly for ages 3 to 9, which is what this toy is targets to (which I would never buy heh).

The government provides many legal safety protections for kids (so we can skip the arguments related to invasive privacy that is violating some other protections), but by and far most countries and US states do NOT provide kids a self-managed right to privacy. Parents/legal guardians control the consent of their kids. So you’re simply wrong.

With that said, kids should absolutely bring up home problems and concerns with other trusted adults. If privacy is being violating another legal safety protection for kids, then they should absolutely bring it up. If the kids don’t like that the parents are violating their privacy (even if it’s legal), they should bring it up. I personally would never hide any monitoring I have on my kids, and wouldn’t recommend that approach to any parent.

There could be a legal issue for violating a second party in a two-party consent state, or third-party monitoring. But it’s almost universally true again that single party monitoring is allowed for minors. And I’d be happy if you brought any specific claims if you disagree.

I think you’re missing the major thesis of my comment. This is not at all about trust. For example, they literally do not understand when they are behaving like a bully. It requires educating them. They don’t understand when they are being rude sometimes. They don’t understand many aspects of culture, why would they? I’m not going to let middle school group dynamics shape my kids moral compass. Empathy needs to be taught, sometimes very explicitly.

I’m sure they will come to us for advice and help, and I also know they won’t come going to us for everything, which is fine. But I’m not going to half ass raising my kids. That goes for dozens of topics.

Well we are out there. Cheers

deleted by creator

Middle schoolers don’t need to be sexting classmates. Are you a moron every day or just today?

Well my kid was texting other middle age kids from her school. There’s already been cases of kids screenshotting conversations that are just “between friends” to share with others. I also have no idea what those kids are aware of – maybe they have seen these movies and understand the memes better than she does.

Yeah, there is a shit load of potential harm. Are you not aware of cyber bullying? Are you not aware of how mean kids can be? You think kids fully understand gaslighting, manipulation, and scams? Most adults don’t understand this, and this privacy forum thinks I should just let the events unfold randomly for my kids? I am not being a helicopter parent simply by monitoring and educating my kids. I understand the stereotype. I discuss science, philosophy, politics, finances, privacy, anonymity, permanence of digital communications, atheism, world tragedies, case studies in exploitation/scams, and dozens of other topics with my kids.

My spouse and I are both sex positive, so it’s not that it’s something we “dislike” our kids discovering. Frankly, we are excellent parents because it’s something we value, discuss, and try to be intentional about. But thinking they will just intuitively navigate digital communication is very naive. We have an excellent relationship and I’ll do my best to keep making it stronger. I hope they will feel comfortable coming to me for any topic, including sex. I’ll basically be setting them up with a much better understanding of the values of privacy than 99% of parents.

But kids are dumb. You can’t just lecture at them. They are learning, but they are dumb, and will make mistakes as they learn. Why would I not be involved in that?

I appreciate the conversation. I fully expected a lot of downvotes on an anonymous privacy sub about kids not having privacy. It doesn’t bother me. Someone asked an interesting question about the intersection of kids and privacy, and it’s a topic I am passionate about. So yeah, I am happy to defend my choices as a parent if there’s more questions even if it goes against the norms of the community.

Last I checked this is an anonymous platform. I also generally rotate accounts when it feels relevant. You have a problem speaking about generalities in a public platform? The more specific example seemed necessary to clarify the discussion.

lmao. Sure buddy. My kids are fantastic and they are becoming amazing people. Good luck with your life.

That’s somewhat my point. They were not having those thoughts, but using memes in a way that it could be construed.

edit: Specifically, they were using a bunch of mayonnaise memes from movie scenes that they haven’t seen, but in the movie context it’s intended to be cum.

In my experience, absolutely not. And it’s not about sheltering kids. It’s about teachable moments. My spouse and I review the conversations my kids are having with their friends a couple times a month (and they know this) and I know a few other parents are doing the same. There’s so much harassment and bullying that IMO you are being a negligent parent if you don’t review and step in. We don’t need social interactions to be unhealthy and feign ignorance when they grow up to be a shitty person.

Kids are kids. They aren’t fully developed, they are impulsive, and groups of kids are just exponentially dumber. IMO empathy should not be treated as a natural skill. It can be taught and that often requires lessons, teachable moments, and correcting course through interventions. I’d say the toughest is the group texts with their friends.

My 11 year old was having super obnoxious “meme conversations” a couple weeks ago, often with unintended sexual inuendos. I can’t imagine that someone else is going to tell me I’m violating her privacy by being proactive. We discussed the memes and how they should conduct themselves in conversations. Another time, we saw her agreeing with a bullying conversation from another kid. We’re going to step in because that’s not a healthy conversation.

It won’t be like this forever. They will have their privacy at some point, but they need to demonstrate their maturity much clearer before that can happen.

And no way in hell am I giving my kids an Internet connected chat bot stuffed toy.

It can absolutely be overwhelming, and very easy to forget specifics over a long time. It’s partly why I don’t really go for CLI apps, and ~all of my apps are just Ansible manifests. Which apps are causing the biggest problems for your family?

What exactly is breaking each of these times? Guides that cover 95% sound pretty solid to me. It’s hard to write a guide covering 100% of scenarios. Admittedly I also worked in the field, but the field is extremely wide so maybe there’s some knowledge areas to deepen that are commonly giving you problems and/or move towards a less brittle setup.

Re-evaluating what’s important is important. If it’s not fun then you should reflect on having the right balance of what is helping you and your family vs causing excessive stress. IMO the “avoid all tech companies” is slightly overblown (blasphemous, I know). It’s a good guiding principle but it’s fine to “buy services” that make your life better. For example, I self host a lot, but I was totally fine buying a finances tracking app (the spreadsheet-based one) because it’s doing a lot of heavy lifting that I can’t reasonably do myself at the level of convenience I want.

they are typically for things like carnivals.

Well xAI is a circus, so it’s fairly accurate.

All fair criticisms that I also hold.

Search and YouTube’s ranking algorithm (and all the dimensions and weights/coefficients) are trade secrets and 99% of the company will never see for pretty good reasons. I never had access to them. I have discussed with multiple YouTube people that know the algorithm skewed towards bubbles for exactly the reasons you said: it is literally more engaging. My understandimg is it was the kind of unintentionally, institutional bias-type when you don’t properly control for human psychology. The top line metrics get adjusted to try and compensate for these things in ways I am not too familiar with (for example changing the metric from “watched minutes” to “positive engagement” because Google does not want angry viewers). IMO they were too slow to respond and are definitely culpable in misinformation and radicalization in our culture. I was never in YouTube so I can’t speak to it in any more specific terms.

Android I wholeheartedly agree, but to play the devil’s advocate, I provide a lot of support for non-tech folks. They are constantly losing their email credentials, getting spyware/adware/malware, etc. There’s a lot of cases of scams guiding people to allow third party apps and allowing permissions they should never be allowing. People are far too gullible and can’t see warnings right in front of their eyes. I don’t know that Android is improving it by locking down AOSP. I personally moved to GrapheneOS after leaving Google and I know it’s not for everyone, but it’s got some nice improvement. Google gets paid by phone companies to have play store and a bunch of services installed, and then Google pays back the companies to have their search as a default. The first part never really gets brought up, but phone companies could go without Google services. They just don’t want to make the competitive investment. It’s disappointing.

100%. Google could easily disallow specific uses of their systems. ANTIFA and anti-police state could be terms, but they don’t. And Google is so freaking profitable, theres zero reason to cater to those business segments AT ALL. It would be a boon to their company image to actively NOT participate. So disappointing.

I hear a lot of different far out theories: microphone spying on Android (as a feature, not some 0-day bug), manipulating search results nefariously, handing information over to the government, and dozens more. Google wants user profiles to sell ad segments, but beyond that they do not want your data:

1. Some data is product-scoped. Emails, pictures, YouTube videos, etc. Google can’t just delete these because people want them back heh. Most product-scoped data is not accessible for analytics at all. For example, there’s no scanning gmail to inform ad decisions. Data is encrypted in ways that would make that impossible, e.g. only an SRE or bug investigation might be able to review a specific email. Another example is Maps tracking data. Maps Timeline is now user-device local. Google no longer has the data. Thats pretty impressive, to have a timeline feature and not have the data!

2. All the other tracking and analytics data (that comes from every individual user) have time-locked controls. Data types expire at specific business intervals ranging from hours, weeks, months, and more rare is a about 1.5 years. Some very special types may get retained indefinitely, such as legal holds, or data that is business-produced (as opposed to user-produced). There are both row and column wipeout processes always running for hundreds of reasons.

3. Google has aggressive internal goals to cut costs. They don’t want to host infinite pictures and videos. They improved consolidating user data so that Google Wipeout is pretty much a guarantee that you are gone from their system. Very few people do that though, so they also push the data plans to recoup some of those costs.

4. All the user data they collect is downloadable: https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/3024190?hl=en. Everything there can be deleted.

Yeah, they are excellent at monetizing data, but IMO it’s not for sacrificing user privacy. From my engagement with privacy communities, that is not well understood at all.

I have for sure been avoiding programming since I left. Yes avoiding some tech as a result. I’m de-googling as they say. I’ve spent a lot of time with my family, pursued other hobbies, and volunteered more, which has all been fantastic.

I know I will get back into programming at some point. I really enjoy the selfhosting community and I think I will likely be focusing on the areas of decentralized private networks (similar to Tailscale), decentralized apps (not really web3, but open source apps that can leverage ipfs easily and make it dead simple for others), and tools for public good (promoting good information, skepticism and rational thinking, promoting democracy, fighting against fascism/GOP, etc.).

I hear you on that. It seems like there’s room for it, but it’s just covered in this gross amorphous hyper-capitalist structure.

I am inspired by DeepMind giving away the AlphaFold protein structure database for free. That was awesome!

Or developing and giving away anonymous, decentralized, Bluetooth-based proximity detection for COVID tracking. That’s freaking awesome!

YouTube too is awesome, and it’s profitable, but they slowly make insane, gross decisions to chase 30% YoY growth. 1.5 hour ads, double ads, cutting creator payments, etc. Just make it sustainable!

Repeat ad nauseum across the business units. It’s upsetting.

Good question. I wasn’t. I was not located in California, and the union never really came up in any of my conversations with colleagues. I vaguely thought dues were 5-8% of total compensation (I see now they are 1% which seems reasonable, either I am misremembering or they have since lowered, or maybe I looked at a different union) and they did not have any negotiating rights. Admittedly, if the union isn’t negotiating then I don’t know what it is for. But maybe it just needed to get to critical mass to have that negotiating leverage and I could have helped by joining. My total compensation was very good though, so it didn’t really seem like something a union had to protect. I had excellent work-life balance, good benefits, etc.

Edit: Internally, Googlers are fairly transparent. There were multiple anonymous surveys run by employees for collecting compensation statistics broken down by gender, role, region, office, etc. It had a pretty high number of participants. That was very informative and I always participated.

I took a voluntary layoff from Google last year. It’s probably self-rationalizing, but IMO I had an excellent role at the company for the last 5 years of my time. I helped design a system that locks down and redacts server logs across many of Google’s services. Only on-call engineers with an emergency backed by a post mortem review could get temporary access to original server logs. The system doesn’t delete all data but it can enforce codified contracts, country/state regulations, make certain privacy gurantees, and surface problems for auditing.

Google has made and continues to make poor business decisions, but from my experience they are one of the best big companies managing user privacy. I can’t speak for all of Google’s business units (well I can’t speak for the company at all, heh), but the privacy zeitgeist says the opposite which I’ve found misleading, but could never really speak to while being employed.

User data is taken extremely seriously at Google, and I worked with hundreds of people that would gladly get fired if asked to do anything unethical with user data. They audit and lock down access, build systems for guaranteeing anonymization (systems in place long before I worked there), report compliance, and most importantly they work independently from the employees that use the data. Every business unit had committees to consult and review privacy specifically. I was also an expert consultant for several privacy incidents and the number of people involved and the seriousness taken was personally impressive for even minor incidents.

IMO it’s still one of the best companies to work for, but there’s many legitimate reasons to cut them out. My opinion switched when Google had their first layoff in January 2023. The company had issues (I am sure there are plenty of legit lawsuits that I know nothing about that can be fixed with money and internal/external controls and improvements), but in that moment I realized it’s not the company I thought I knew. Rough ordering of reasons for my exit:

1. Government contracts supporting fascism (Israel, CBP, ICE, face tracking, etc.).
2. The layoffs.
3. Pichai going to inauguration and capitulating. GOP donations.
4. 180 on remote culture.
5. AI slop.

There’s probably more if I reflected longer. Maybe I should have resigned sooner, idk. I’m glad I made the choice that I could.

Google was good to me for the years I was there. I got up to L6 and saved enough for my family to exit on my own terms and find a better environment. I’m still looking heh.

Happy to answer some questions (culture, privacy, SWE/SRE, oncall, etc.) if there are any. The company is massive and I saw only a small slice.

I’ve never used any steam points. Is there something I’m missing?