• @pandapoo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    47
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    That story is incredibly disturbing…

    Only one 11-year-old girl in an entire class did not have a smartphone…?

    How long has smartphone ownership and normalized for that age? What age did they first get them?

    That’s got to be wreaking havoc on their developing minds…to say nothing of their social development.

    I guess what I’m trying to say is, go long on pharma.

    • Bob Robertson IX
      link
      fedilink
      138 hours ago

      Just because a kid has a phone, it doesn’t necessarily mean they have full access to it. My daughter has had her own phone since she was 3 years old, she is now 8 and still rarely gets access to her phone - maybe an hour a week on Saturday mornings or if we’re going on a long drive. There’s never any fights when she has to put it away, and she’s learning good device usage habits.

      • @pandapoo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        10
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        I’m unclear how your comment relates to the article, or my comment. Because even if I took you at your word, your anecdotal story would still seem to place you as an outlier, maybe.

        Clearly an entire class of preteens, minus one girl, has full access to their smartphones, and I’m betting at least a portion of them had just as much access when they were 8 years old.

        Also, not for nothing, but you might want to consider the possibility that a child’s usage and behaviors on a smart device might change once it becomes an unsupervised activity. Or maybe it won’t, I don’t know you or your child, so who am I to say.

      • @mortalglowworm@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        47 hours ago

        I need your notes. My daughter is 2.5. I would appreciate if you can share your experience, how is it working, how you set the rules of engagement, etc.

    • @agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      58 hours ago

      On the one hand, the grumpy old man in me agrees completely.

      On the other, they’ve been saying this for all of history, since that new-fangled writing wreaked havoc on our ancestors’ children’s memories. And it did in fact do that, but we changed.

      Attention span is just going to become vestigial in the general population as it becomes less necessary in an evolving technological and sociological environment, just like memory and penmanship.

      • @pandapoo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        Yeah it’s not really up for debate, the science is only growing more conclusive on how smartphones negatively impact a developing brain, especially social media.

        Also, attention span is not vestigial… It’s pretty important function of your brain, and can’t just be replaced by technology…but I was more referring to anxiety and depression disorders, which again, are on the rise.

        I’m also kind of confused why you included penmanship in there, as that is not something a child’s development requires to be healthy. It’s simply a skill, and one that has been replaced by typing, almost 1:1.

        • @agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          16 hours ago

          Once upon a time people argued penmanship was crucial to building a well developed brain. Same with memorizing epics by rote. Books were actually considered bad for students because they would become dull and lazy if they did not commit all their knowledge to memory.

          But memory can largely be replaced by technology, and that enables access to more knowledge than one person could ever memorize. Who knows how society will develop, for better or worse.