internet age limit

thebaz

What age do you think children should be allowed access the internet unsupervised ?
Should age restrictions be put in place ?
I think it is difficult to resrict minors from accessing internet, and in general they can learn from it and benefit from internet access , even unsupvised as long as they are aware of potential pitfalls, such as on-line predators and pervs, porn etc.
Many 12 - 16 year olds access Bebo unsupervised, and like mobile phone usage i don't think this can be stopped, if anything kids will start going online earlier.
This post, follows the assumption by many that it is bad practice to let 14 year olds online unsupervised , on the MySpace lawsuit thread.

Gone West

age limit?
got the right word there?

BMH

I don't think age should be the factor. Mental health appears to be what's wrong with those getting fiddled every day.

dbnavan

I dont think my kids will get online Unsupervised till 15 or 16

Terry

proper use of the content advisor and the blocking of certain sites should be properly utilised.
the internet is a great resource for education, but kids shouldn't be allowed access to forums and myspace/bebo type sites.
it's hard to put an age limit on it because all kids are different.
there are some 15 year olds here who use this forum responsibly, but there are 17 year olds who may be susceptible to perverts.

CurtisHeaven

I don't agree on an age limit being put on the internet. If parents spent the money on decent parental controls everything their kids do can be monitored down to what websites have been visited and what websites they have tried to visit and also what emails they have been recieving and sending.
If all parents took these precautions the internet would be a much safer place for kids.

grimloch

Both myself and my sister have had unsupervised access for a few years now. My sister probably first started when she was perhaps twelve or thirteen and it was no problem whatsoever. Granted this was a bit before Bebo/Myspace et al.

The problem isn't necessarily the age, my sister just isn't a jackass and she knows much better than to fall into traps that others have fallen into. I'm not saying that everyone under the age of sixteen using the internet is a jackass or has been brought up badly or lacks common sense, merely that it should depend on the child.

aidan_walsh

age limit?
got the right word there?

Its called a lower limit.

If parents spent the money on decent parental controls everything their kids do can be monitored down to what websites have been visited and what websites they have tried to visit and also what emails they have been recieving and sending.
If all parents took these precautions the internet would be a much safer place for kids.

Most parents have much less of a clue than their children. There are fully grown adults out there who don't know how to use their phone or program a VCR, how are they going to set up these restrictions?

Zapp Brannigan

I've used the internet since I was 12 unsupervised. Though I've always been mature and I treated the internet like it is, on a computer and I didn't try to meet up with people or any foolish stuff like that. I mainly just looked at Games Workshop stuff online, cos I was fascinated with that stuff at the time.

netwhizkid

I think that children from ages of 5 to thirteen shouldn’t really have access to the Internet but teenagers over 13 should as long as it is supervised using the correct softwares, which will block out undesirable sites. I myself have being on the Internet for the last 8 years since I was eleven. I have learned loads from it and what to avoid too.

Good nosing of what sites were visited by teenagers is essential to amok sure they aren't looking at unsuitable content. Then of course if they start staying one step ahead by clearing the cache and temp internet files the there can be trouble. The advice to parents is invest in monitoring and blocking software. The big trouble is most parents cannot even turn on the Computer and their children could be dealing in weapons of mass destruction for all they know.

CurtisHeaven

aidan_walsh wrote:

Its called a lower limit.


Most parents have much less of a clue than their children. There are fully grown adults out there who don't know how to use their phone or program a VCR, how are they going to set up these restrictions?

Well if parents can't use the internet themselves and don't take the time to learn to protect their children they shouldn't waste their money on a pc and should certainly not allow their young children online.....Thats bad parenting.

JC 2K3

grimloch wrote:

Both myself and my sister have had unsupervised access for a few years now. My sister probably first started when she was perhaps twelve or thirteen and it was no problem whatsoever. Granted this was a bit before Bebo/Myspace et al.

The problem isn't necessarily the age, my sister just isn't a jackass and she knows much better than to fall into traps that others have fallen into. I'm not saying that everyone under the age of sixteen using the internet is a jackass or has been brought up badly or lacks common sense, merely that it should depend on the child.

Indeed, I'm 17, been using the internet since I was about 10/11 and interacting with online communities since I was about 13/14. It's common sense not to give strangers your personal details. Sure I accessed porn a few times when I shouldn't have, but then again kids do things they shouldn't anyway, I don't think porn is necessarily that damaging to horny teenagers, it just has a stigma attached to it that makes it seem like something awful.

CurtisHeaven wrote:

I don't agree on an age limit being put on the internet. If parents spent the money on decent parental controls everything their kids do can be monitored down to what websites have been visited and what websites they have tried to visit and also what emails they have been recieving and sending.
If all parents took these precautions the internet would be a much safer place for kids.

lol, parental control software. I don't think my parents ever bothered with it because they knew I'd get around it.

thebaz

Many 13 , 14 and 15 year olds are now using bebo and MySpace unrestriced .
I just don't buy the fact that these teenagers parents are "bad parents" cause they let them do so, as has been suggested by some here , particularly on the MySpace lawsuit thread.
Bebo is fun for younger teenagers, and probaly younger users as well , and i don't think parents can be labelled bad, if they let there children use these social networking sites, but do outline potential pitfalls.
Do you think the Bebo users would use bebo , if there parents were looking over there shoulder and reading every entry .
Bebo would collapse , teenagers want privacy !
Most teenagers have email accounts now, should there parents also read all there email , i don't think this would be a good idea for anyone, unless in crisis situations.

eamoss

I have been on the internet since I was about 8(god I cudnt go back to a 28k modem ) and I was never supervised. After a few years I went onto chat rooms out of boredom but there was always I line I never passed when giving out info(e.g my real/full name, any photos ect).

I just think if the kid is aware what type of ppl could be on the internet they will know not to give out too much detail about them selfs.

I think bebo is good, Like I have just finished school and I think bebo is a great way to keep in contact. But for 12yr olds

GrumPy

thebaz wrote:

bad practice to let 14 year olds online unsupervised

That is b0llox, I dont agree at all 14? There what, second years? I think that crap tbh.

Even if an age restriction was decided, how in the name of christ would they police it?

Creamy Goodness

tbh age isn't a factor. as someone said above it's mental health and how sensible the person is.

the old saying never take candy from a stranger comes to mind.

seamus

Removing access to the internet from a child is like telling a child that they can't read a book or watch TV because they're too young.

However, like TV or books, you should definitely supervise what it is they're experiencing, at least till they're 14/15.

In terms of predators, well I thinks that's a new (and probably short-lived) phenomenon. Up until the internet, most activities that your child got involved with were supervised by an adult (soccer, hurling, etc), or they were strictly one-way (TV, books, music). Now with the Internet you've got a form of entertainment which most people consider as one-way as the TV, but which in fact is two-way and completely unsupervised.

I don't have any children, but I'm a firm believer that if you educate your child correctly, and know what the child will or won't do, then your chances of hitting these problems are reduced. We were all told as kids that "Men who you don't know, asking you to get in their cars" were evil. (In actual fact, a child is much more likely to be molested by a family member, but you can't really protect against that initially). So too, must we educate children - "Not everyone is who they say they are on the Internet, no matter how nice they sound".

It's the fact that technology has passed so many parents by which contributes to this problem. Cries of "shut down the chatrooms" displays the complete ignorance (on behalf of the media too) of the issue at hand, and the way the technology works in general.

biko

As soon as my brats' little stubby fingers can order beer delivered to me from Tesco I'm happy. Besides, who's gonna send me porn links if I don't let them use the PC?

Bruscar Bán

b3t4

I think there should be an age limit as to when a child can use the internet unsupervised and I believe this age to be 18. After all this is the age when a child is no longer a child and is considered an adult. Yes, I am aware that there are very mature 15, 16 and 17 year olds out there but in the eyes of the law you are still a child. This bugged the hell out of me when I was those ages but there was nada I could do about it. I do believe however that they should have access but in a controlled and supervised way as the internet is an amazing educational tool.

The thing is though that a child won’t automatically give out their real name and details. Real name and details will generally be exchanged once the child has become familiar with the internet and the people/person they are talking to. A pedophile will have to do as much preening as they do in real life as they would on a website or chat room. A pedophile will gain a child’s trust before they get any real details this is generally a long process.

As for the people here saying that parents should setup all the parental software they can, as someone else pointed out, what about those that don’t understand computers or anything about the environment? They probably have the computer so that their child/children can avail of the educational information available on the web or use it to type up projects. They aren’t being bad parents they are just doing their best. For these parents I would advise them to keep the computer in an area that has a lot of traffic, e.g. the sitting room, kitchen, until a child is past the age of 18. At 18 the then adult can make there own decisions in life or will probably move out

Also, seamus made a good point when he says that in normal social events that a child is involved in they are generally supervised by an adult. Why should the internet not be the same? What’s to stop the people who provide chat rooms from supervising or modding what goes on in them? Sure we even have modding on this website to prevent muppetry, could the same modding not be applied to chat rooms?

Also, how long did it take before people who use this website considered going along to a boards meet up? Do you know everyone on here? Do you really think you know people by what they post on this board alone?

A.

FranchisePlayer

Tbh I think bebo is just a paedophile haven lots of children give out there real names and address which is a bad idea.

Piste

I'm 15, and I've been using the internet unsupervised since I was 9 or 10. In fairness, parents have better things to be doing that giving up their time to sit down with their brat while they browse sites I think for children under 12 there should certainly be some content filtering software in place, but kids older than that got around it. My parents got a firewall/content filter when we got broadband, and I just used proxies until I disabled the content filter (and they still don't know about that) so spending money on those things for older cxhildren is a complete waste. As with everything we learn by expercience. I have no problem giving my name or age on the internet, but contact details are another story (that said I did once post my phone number in the boards irc channel) Another issue is privacy, most parents generally wouldn't read their teenager's texts or post, or listen in on their phone conversations or hang around with them when they're with their friends, so why should msn conversations or emails be any different? Children and teenagers quickly learn that that X on the top right hand corner of the screen is there for a reason and can be used to get out of things that are offended.

When I was younger my parents made me promise to tell them if I saw anything offensive online, luckily things don't offend me easily so I never had any issues.

simu

I don't see the problem with kids going online tbh. I don't think it's possible to keep an eye on every page they visit but once you have an idea of what sites they go on and once you warn them about paedophiles and so on (same way you would about people acting inappropriately irl), they should be grand.

nesf

What I'm really curious about with all this furore is the stats. Considering the vast numbers of children online how many are actually raped/etc? Is there a higher chance of it happening than the more "traditional routes", if you know what I mean?

You do need to be responsible with children being online etc, but a 13 year old going off and meeting some stranger without the parents knowing is not exactly something that reflects well on a parent. Nevermind a 10 or 11 year old. Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned in my thinking but the idea of 10-13 year olds being able to leave the house unsupervised to go meet up with whoever they want strikes me as not very good parenting tbh. If they are being left out on their own to meet whoever they want I don't think the internet is the real problem here.

Piste

I was hanging around in town with my friends when I was 13 and look how I turned out.

*twitches*

seamus

Piste wrote:

spending money on those things for older cxhildren is a complete waste.

Well, not entirely. It's a complete waste when you don't know how to use it. Think of it this way: if you bought a home alarm system off-the-shelf, and installed it yourself, hooking up the sensors to all of your windows and doors, and programming the zones yourself, do you think it would properly? Or do you think there would be some obvious gaps - sensors that don't work properly, other sensors that continually keep tripping?

The same applies here. Anything installed by someone who doesn't know what they're doing is instantly flawed.

Orion

When my kids start using the computer I'll be setting up a proxy like ClarkConnect which they'll have to connect through. I will use the content filter on it sensibly - not the way NetNazi etc do it - based on their maturity level not their age. You can keep your kids safe without being over-protective imo.

nesf

Macros42 wrote:

You can keep your kids safe without being over-protective imo.

I completely agree. You don't need to block and monitor everything, just like with books where the guideline age isn't necessarily the one you should follow for an individual child/teen.

nesf

seamus wrote:

Well, not entirely. It's a complete waste when you don't know how to use it. Think of it this way: if you bought a home alarm system off-the-shelf, and installed it yourself, hooking up the sensors to all of your windows and doors, and programming the zones yourself, do you think it would properly? Or do you think there would be some obvious gaps - sensors that don't work properly, other sensors that continually keep tripping?

The same applies here. Anything installed by someone who doesn't know what they're doing is instantly flawed.

The problem is that some of these products are being marketed as "fool-proof" systems where you simply insert a CD into the machine and now your children are encased in virtual bubblewrap. The people who will know that these aren't fool-proof are the ones who will be able to set it up properly, or at least know someone to ask to do it for them. So, it's a bit of a problem imho.

JC 2K3

Content filtering programs are a waste as they are píss easy to get around if you have half a brain.

Then again, any teenager who would go out to meet a stranger off the internet obviously doesn't have half a brain in the first place so.......

Orion

JC 2K3 wrote:

Content filtering programs are a waste as they are píss easy to get around if you have half a brain.

But proxies aren't if you lock down the internet connection to use it. And if the kids don't have root access to the proxy server. ClarkConnect is a good one and if you're using XP or any flavour of Linux you can force internet traffic through it.

Admittedly this is beyond the average parent but it's what I'll be doing.

thebaz

it amazes me the differences in opinion, we have a balanced 15 year old online , and debating intelligently -- and others saying you should be 18 years of age to go online unsupervised. So you can smoke fags and have sex but not go online . Like it or not , many 14 year olds , are using bebo , and for 98 % i believe it is ok, as long as they are made aware of the dangers and threats online , for the 2% vulnerable , yes it is a problem , but by the same token should all children be locked up for the summer , and stay away from parks , cause of the threat of underage drinking and drugs .. Reality is sometimes not very nice, and there are nasty people out there , but a bit of balance goes along way

JC 2K3

Macros42 wrote:

But proxies aren't if you lock down the internet connection to use it. And if the kids don't have root access to the proxy server. ClarkConnect is a good one and if you're using XP or any flavour of Linux you can force internet traffic through it.

Admittedly this is beyond the average parent but it's what I'll be doing.

Could they not use a CGI proxy through that proxy?

And I'm presuming you'd need a password to get root access -> Keylogger

Taters

Children should be free to access the internet unsupervised. For heavens sake, if they go around saying “here is my name, age and address” it’s the parents fault. I started on the Internet at six or seven. Never gave out my address, age or real name.
If a parent feels that they have to supervise their child on the Internet, why not just download things that prevent your children from not going on any ‘naughty’ sites such as Bebo, Myspace, Bingbox and any porn sites. I myself am ten. I’ve never met any paedophile on the Internet because I am smart.

By the way, I’d just like so point out that my spelling and grammar is better then anyone else’s on this page. I’m not even in secondary school, and English is not even my first language. You people should be ashamed.

Sarky

Taters wrote:

I myself am ten. I’ve never met any paedophile on the Internet because I am smart.

By the way, I’d just like so point out that my spelling and grammar is better then anyone else’s on this page. I’m not even in secondary school, and English is not even my first language. You people should be ashamed.

You have single-handedly rekindled hope in my heart that the species might not be doomed after all. Thank you.

Faith

I've been using the internet since I was about 12, and interacting with online communities since I was 15. Sure I experimented at the start when I didn't know what I was doing, but I was never stupid enough to give out my name or address or age. In fact, I quickly assumed a fake name, address and age (My name was Cordelia, I was from SoCal and aged 16. I was going through my Buffy obsession!). Most kids with half a brain would be able to do that.

I don't think there should be an age limit inposed, but kids should definately be educated in the potential dangers that exist, just like in every other aspect of life.

Victor

CurtisHeaven wrote:

I don't agree on an age limit being put on the internet. If parents spent the money on decent parental controls everything their kids do can be monitored down to what websites have been visited and what websites they have tried to visit and also what emails they have been recieving and sending.

But the internet can be accessed in many different places. Cafes, friends houses, mobile phones .....

But yeah, bebo is the porn source of choice for 12 year olds these days.

thebaz

thebaz wrote:

So you can smoke fags and have sex but not go online .

You have to be 18 or over to buy cigarettes.

challengemaster

Myth wrote:

You have to be 18 or over to buy cigarettes.

that doesnt mean you have to be over 18 to get hold of them.I know of MANY people who are >15 and smoke everyday. (i stay well away from them).

To set an age limit for the internet is idotic at the least.I am 15, and take part in one of irelands gaming communities UIE,unreal ireland.I got my OWN PC at christmas and can do whatever i want with it. My parents trust me enough and know my maturity levels to know that I won't go onto porn sites etc.Also, the internet is now accessable in schools and "children" are becoming more and more educated about computers at this day and age. so called "naughty" websites like bebo,etc are blocked in schools but to set an age for the WHOLE internet is dumb.And to monitor "childrens" emails??!!??!:mad: Is there not a basic human right about privacy somewhere? Just educate the "children" about the rights and wrongs of the internet like you do when taking them to public places for the first time "dont take candy from strangers" etc. basic education is the way to do it not supervision and webfilters IMO

pyramuid man

IMHO I honestly think there should be a product like websense available for personal use in homes.
Something where you can log in and have restricted access to content depending on your logon.
Children have access to too much **** on the internet and we are allowing them to access this at their most impressionable time.
If a child goes on to a white supremicist site and see racial slurs and people talking about these things they can easily be impressed upon.
Not a good thing.

Slippin Jimmy

I myself am 16. I have being using the internet unsupervised since we got it. That was about 3 years ago. At this moment in time, I am into the hole Bebo thing, but I really thing that is just a craze, it will blow over. Fair enough, I give out my real name, but not my address. I only use it to stay in contact with my mates.
My parents don't have a clue about computers, so they can't put on parental controls or whatever. If parents were more cautious and took these precautions, then the internet would be much safer. As for meeting up with people, it is like when your parent says, "Don't go off with a stranger." It is the same on the internet, if you are stupid enough to go off with someone you don't know personally, then you are just planely stupid. I don't mean personally as in chatting in chat rooms and that, but as in you know the person from your locality. I think the best option for a parent would probablly be to pop in every so often when their child is on the net and watch them.
There would be no actual way to enforce a age limit.

Shellie13

I started bout 13ish n i thought i was really late...
At that stage though all i did was msn friedns and look up crap for school...
I was terriefied (perhaps a lil extreme tbh!) about things along the linea myspace etc...wouldn'ta even used boards incase a paedophile came on...
scare tactics on my teachers parts...hilarious but safe!

New_Departure06

There is software like Netnanny that can be used to block material unsuitable for children. Does it work? If not then set the age at 18.

Slippin Jimmy

New_Departure06 wrote:

If not then set the age at 18.

But how would this be enforced?

New_Departure06

DonnybrookGhost wrote:

But how would this be enforced?

The primary responsibility rests with the parents obviously. Age-verification software could also help.

New_Departure06

#Elites wrote:

Parents cant watch Children 24/7.

And how can software tell if your under or over 18...

Age-verification works by requiring the person to fill in certain info e.g. credit-card number, driving-license no. etc. to prove your age. Usernames, passwords, security-questions would also help.

CuLT

My ten year old sister has enough cop-on to use the Internet responsibly, and not to venture into the realms of weirdness. She doesn't appear to have any interest in the Internet outside of flash games anyway.

Slippin Jimmy

New_Departure06 wrote:

Age-verification works by requiring the person to fill in certain info e.g. credit-card number, driving-license no. etc. to prove your age. Usernames, passwords, security-questions would also help.

Then wouldn't that just encourage more people under the age of 18 to use it. Think about this for a second, a lot of young people drink and smoke because you have to be over 18 to do so. They think this makes the look cool or whatever. So by bringing out a law or whatever, they would more than likely just go out of their way to use the internet and look up porn or whatever. And I know from speaking that not all young people would do this, as I am only 16 myself. I think that the responsibility is on the parents of the child, if they don't want their child looking at unsuitable stuff on the net then they will take the right percautions. And as for the credit card numbers, not everyone over 18 has a credit card, so they would be screwed.

New_Departure06

DonnybrookGhost wrote:

Then wouldn't that just encourage more people under the age of 18 to use it. Think about this for a second, a lot of young people drink and smoke because you have to be over 18 to do so. They think this makes the look cool or whatever. So by bringing out a law or whatever, they would more than likely just go out of their way to use the internet and look up porn or whatever. And I know from speaking that not all young people would do this, as I am only 16 myself. I think that the responsibility is on the parents of the child, if they don't want their child looking at unsuitable stuff on the net then they will take the right percautions. And as for the credit card numbers, not everyone over 18 has a credit card, so they would be screwed.

Sorry not convinced. These rules would work.

aidan_walsh

Sure, prohibition has a history of working exactly as intended, after all...

I used to think like you. But then one morning I woke up and realised what an utterly bad idea it was. How do you define who a person is? How do you do it securely and privately, in a manner that can't be abused? How can you assure that people can't fake this information?

Nope, not going to work, because no matter what technical limitation you implement there is always a way to avoid or abuse it.

The best thing you can do is have a proper education system. You have to teach people that the internet is not a one way process. Going to meet strangers you meet in a chatroom is essentially the same as sitting in the back seat of a strangers car, and how many years have children been told not to do that? However, some don't seem to equate the two.

Slippin Jimmy

#Elites wrote:

not really...

Whats stopping the child from accessing his Parents wallet and just recording the info??

Exactly they can do that. It is not a secure way at all. But consider a person that is over 18 and does not have a credit card, what do they do?

Slippin Jimmy

#Elites wrote:

And www.3v.ie

:rolleyes:

New_Departure06 Your Idea is flawed

I have one of these cards. I was 15 when I got it. When I was applying for it, it said that you had to agree to the terms and conditions, one of which is that you must be 16 or older to get the card. I got it no problem. So if I can get it anyone can, even people who are younger than me again.