For me, the only annoyance is that the controls apply to the entire console, not to individual users of the console. But, that makes sense as things are today, since I don't think there's any way to authenticate individual users every time someone wants to use the console. Also, that may conflict with the way that games stay "running" most of the time, even when you come back to the console later.
IMO the biggest difference is the style of games. Switch games are much more comprehensive like Zelda.
iPad games are geared towards button mashing and showing ads for other games that do the exact same thing.
A switch game will be $30-60. An iPad game will be “free”. Subjecting your kids to advertising driven games which aim to have them play much as possible to drive revenues is noticeably different. I’ve taken away the iPad entirely after seeing how my kids respond to it.
Contrast it with the WiiU or Switch that we’ve had and it’s a totally different experience. Right now I TRUST Nintendo with the game experience that’s best for my kids.
While there are obvious concerns about the effects of spending too much time playing video games, it doesn't seem like people are focusing much on the possible psychological impact of the kind of surveillance that modern technology affords parents. Kids need some privacy to explore and express themselves, and I'm worried that as we try to let parents take their natural risk aversion to further and further extremes, we're going to hamper that.
I was delighted to find out Nintendo took the care to approach this issue the way they did.
If I had children, I would definitely buy a Nintendo Switch for them because of their focus in this aspect. Since I don't have any, I bought the Switch for myself instead. =)
> For me, the only annoyance is that the controls apply to the entire console, not to individual users of the console.
You might consider it an "annoyance" for quite a few other people it's simply yet another sign of Nintendo being stuck somewhere a decade ago.
Every other console manages to allow parental controls on the account level, in addition to having login authentification.
But with the Switch there's nothing like this, in that regard, the "console wide parental controls" feel more like the result of not having individual user login authentification than being an actual "feature".
The lack of login authentication also comes with its very own set of issues: Like Kids playing on their parent's accounts, overwriting their savegame progress or vice versa.
It is my hope that Apple is able to pioneer tools which make it possible to interrupt addiction forming (dark) patterns.
Addressing this on the device/os level (vs possibly legislation) could be very effective.
Right now this is a lawless territory and creating + exploiting addiction at the cost of depleting millions of people’s cognitive resources as free is very profitable.
The long term costs associated with this profit are still to be seen but I am sure they exist.
They should be pushing for a study on neck injury / muscle strain on smart phone use. Millennials and the next gen after are going to pay dearly from injuries from bending their necks/heads down for years and years looking at their phones.
Do you have a source for smartphone usage having any impact on neck or muscle strain, versus non-smartphone usage, and why it would disproportionately affect millennials?
Full disclosure: I work for a company called DnsLearning (although we are rebranding to StudyCity)
Our system is simple, you point your child's device at a DNS server then add various accounts to supported educational sites like Khan Academy, Duolingo, Prodigy Math, etc. Our server detects when your child earns points on these platforms and disables access to non-educational (junk) sites until they earn X points to unlock Y time. Most of our user-base has noticed their kids now fully understand the value of their time instead of being stuck in a zombie-like YouTube spell of watching 5 hours of minecraft videos recommended next.
Your company doesn't appear to have a privacy policy or anything similar on the website, assuming that site is at dnslearning.org. How are you monetizing this? What kind of data are you collecting, and what are you doing with it?
I mean, I think a study of iPhone addiction in general would be a good thing. Adults definitely know they are dependent on their devices, but it would be interesting to see if any long-term effects can be extrapolated. Moreso I'd just like to see any of the negative effects people claim are more than anecdotal.
But as always, what is the cause and what is the consequence. One could totally argue that it's the original person's behavior that push them into "addictions", and the opposite, or both at the same time in mutual reinforcement.
Also consider that most big players in the game have very little incentive to reduce screen-time in a meaningful way. The more time spent on devices consuming media the more they sell from their App store.
I really hope that this doesn't get caught up in/confused with the moral panic of teenage phone use—which is 99% just "teenagers want to be socializing 100% of the time" and has nothing to do with the medium they use to do that.
I hope the App Store’s ‘Today’ (Home screen) content is examined. Apple “editors” shill absolute garbage. An “app” and “game of the day” ensures they have to regularly dumpster dive.
Note that, when you first go there, a "Terma & Conditions" popup appears once the page finishes loading. But, I think that requires JavaScript in order to trigger. Also, at least in Safari, reader mode was able to show the letter's contents without having to click through (or around) the T&C popup.
I'm sure Apple can create some more granular controls to restrict certain apps, but it's probably going to hurt CalSTRS.
I took a look at their 13F filing and some of their holdings include Google, Facebook and Twitter. They should probably start with divesting that if they feel really strongly about this.
I sometimes wonder how much of this is actually on the parents as well? I see some of my co-workers handing phones with some games to distract their child. Previously we had smaller toys - plastic etc, now it seems phones are an easier go to medium.
15 years ago it was called "VCR parenting" now we call it "tablet parenting" - People live hard and complex lives, so I'm not going to make judgment on a single parent trying to provide for their kids being unable to be a full-time entertainer as well. The good news is technology and apps are making it easier for parents to be better with less effort (which may sound harsh but is how life gets better overall)
Somewhat related, if you want to see some thoughts on designing computing experiences to involve logging intentions / distractions better, check out Joel Edelman's talk "Is Anything Worth Maximizing" (2016) : http://nxhx.org/maximizing/
My toddler is allowed about a half hour of cartoons on Youtube on the big TV per day. He's played with the iPad a few times in his life. Lots of books and Legos and physical toys in our house. Waiting for longitudinal studies to come out, not taking chances with the little brain.
Weird. I was expecting some wacko motion on the agenda for their annual shareholders' meeting but it is just a letter to management from two major investors.
These discussions I've been seeing on this lately have been making me wonder if there's something odd about me. FB and Twitter simply do nothing for me, no dopamine at all. I get on once a week, maybe for 5 minutes, and then easily turn it off. I could give a damn about any of it really. Maybe I'm anti-social or have a chemical imbalance.
It is more likely that you find other activity exciting: exercise, food are two likely candidates, so are sexual gratifications. As you are active on Hacker News, I suspect that something code-related could be where you find fulfilment.
Most developers have strong opinions about the tool they use: key layout, editor, code & test patterns, project methodology. This is because they learn to use those effectively through neurological short-cuts. That makes not having them incredibly frustrating. Having rewards at different time scales (instant feedback from seeing your ideas on the screen, seeing code compile, error rates go down, a product being launched) can play the role that social media plays for people whose main activity is more conversational.
On android phones I have used before I can set password for each individual app, but you cannot do that on iPad or iPhone via iOS's parental control, that's too bad after I realized that, am I missing something?
I've seen versions of several of these ruin people's lives very close to me. For example, I knew someone who played WOW to the detriment of his schooling, health, and social life. WOW is another product that is explicitly engineered to be addictive. The difference between then and now is cell phones and social media are consumed at a scale that affects almost everyone, to a degree that hasn't been seen before. It's worth studying whether this is something we should worry about or not.
Yeah, no. The moment content creators realized they can engineer addiction by borrowing ideas from the gambling industry and often innovating in this area, we have a problem. Especially when more and more companies profit from 'habit forming'.
Read up on why Dong Nguyen pulled Flappy Bird off the app store and why Steve Jobs was a low-tech parent.
I agree, we shouldn't think of the children, we should probably think of the adults also.
Exactly! If it wasn't a problem before then it won't be a problem today either. Nothing fallacious about that. The evolution of technology usually has very limited impact; WW1 and WW2 were barely more destructive than the wars that preceded them, after all, and WW3 will surely be no worse.
Edit: The above is sarcasm. It probably deserves the downvotes, but at least I want to make clear that I don't mean this stuff. The amount of psychological research, behavior tracking, and personalization that goes into keeping people "engaged" with their phones has never been seen before. It just seems so outlandish to argue that it won't be a problem because we turned out fine despite having TV as kids, nevermind that it only offered a handful of completely un-personalized TV channels and zero user tracking (apart from the tiny fraction with a Nielsen box). I just don't get it, especially here on HN where I'm sure many people have an idea of what's going on behind e.g. the Facebook feed.
What's wrong with doing all of these studies? Aren't you glad we know about the harmful effects of tobacco smoke, UV light, radiation, too much sugar etc.?
Did any of the pre-internet Time sucks have the ability to monitor billions of people’s usage patterns and incrementally fine tune so as to increase time/money spent? No, I didn’t think so...
One of the most effective things about capitalism is that when new things replace old things, the new things are preferred by consumers over the things they replace.
This is an extremely good feature when talking about most consumer goods. Modern cups are just as good as old cups but way less expensive. Modern cars are significantly better in basically all ways (perhaps excepting repairability).
There may be a danger, however, when talking about technologies that people use, in part, to keep themselves from being bored - to absorb their attention in other words.
For me personally, Facebook/Internet/Computer Games >> TV >> Radio >> Books at capturing my attention. I suspect that this isn't a very unusual experience.
It may seem reasonable on its face to not let technological artifacts push you around or manipulate you, but honestly, it's not just a computer or a TV. Between TV, the Internet and Computer Games, it's the very best and most able of hundreds of thousands of people working every day to capture your attention.
Honestly, I have no idea if the current generation of attention capturing technology is dangerous. But I do know that what ever displaces what we have now will be better at capturing our attention. And the next generation will be better than that. And eventually, if the trend continues, there will be something that's so good at capturing attention that it is dangerous.
Each of those was progressively more addictive (well, barring D&D which involved reading books and thinking).
In 2020s, it will might be VR, in 2030s, it might be they spend too much time socializing with artificial beings, and so on. There is a point where it is worth thinking about whether it is a good thing or not. I know I will for my kid.
The annoying thing (to me) is, I think it would be awesome to have a study (or studies) of how X [fill in X for the appropriate decade] affects/interacts with children. But not just children, how about people of all ages?
I'm pretty sure that there weren't studies about comic book addiction and dungeons and dragons addiction, although there were studies on the influence of violent comic books, and possible associations of violence and dissociation with reality with D&D.
Other than those two, video game, internet, and Facebook addiction are real things. And now, video games and Facebook are being intentionally and consciously designed to encourage addiction.
The only thing I'd agree with you about is that it's just as bad for adults as it is for children. Presumably, though, we generally allow adults to make their own decisions about their addictions, and just offer help when they want to break them. Also, kids are creating the habits that are going to be the substrate for their thinking over the rest of their lives. If you think somebody who got hooked on heroin in their 20s has a tough time quitting at 40, imagine somebody trying to quit at the same age but who started at 10.
The WHO actually defines addiction to video games as a (psychological) disease now in their ICD. Not sure if the new list is in effect already, my last update was "will be on the 2018 list".
I vaguely remember the Jonathan Blow video where he talked about Facebook games and how gaming companies hire psychologists to make sure that skinner rat feeling is maximized. It was pretty disturbing at the time, these days tons of games seem to be "optimized" this way. My guess is higher addiction rates are a logical conclusion.
Looking at some Pokemon Go players or WoW players gives me enough anecdotal evidence to think one can get addicted t games quite quickly.
Why one would expose children to this psycho-lab unsupervised...I don't know.
Kids are going to use whatever their parents put in their hands. All of my nieces and nephews has some type of smart device (tablet, or phone). They are on it all the time. They never paid for it but it was given to them by their parents.
If parents stop giving their kids smart devices, then they will use that spare time doing something else (e.g. video games, homework, hanging out, smoking, idunno). There's no need for a study at all. Kids, in general, don't have money to buy an $800 device.
Funny, but I feel phone/Internet addiction in my own life. I don't need a study or concerned parents to know it's real, at least for some susceptible people.
[+] [-] CaliforniaKarl|8 years ago|reply
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03bAayBtcb0
I think it's worth watching, if for no other reason than to see Bowser & Bowser Jr..
iOS app link: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/id1190074407 Play store link: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.nintendo.z...
For me, the only annoyance is that the controls apply to the entire console, not to individual users of the console. But, that makes sense as things are today, since I don't think there's any way to authenticate individual users every time someone wants to use the console. Also, that may conflict with the way that games stay "running" most of the time, even when you come back to the console later.
[+] [-] brightball|8 years ago|reply
iPad games are geared towards button mashing and showing ads for other games that do the exact same thing.
A switch game will be $30-60. An iPad game will be “free”. Subjecting your kids to advertising driven games which aim to have them play much as possible to drive revenues is noticeably different. I’ve taken away the iPad entirely after seeing how my kids respond to it.
Contrast it with the WiiU or Switch that we’ve had and it’s a totally different experience. Right now I TRUST Nintendo with the game experience that’s best for my kids.
[+] [-] mistercow|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thalesmello|8 years ago|reply
If I had children, I would definitely buy a Nintendo Switch for them because of their focus in this aspect. Since I don't have any, I bought the Switch for myself instead. =)
[+] [-] freeflight|8 years ago|reply
You might consider it an "annoyance" for quite a few other people it's simply yet another sign of Nintendo being stuck somewhere a decade ago.
Every other console manages to allow parental controls on the account level, in addition to having login authentification.
But with the Switch there's nothing like this, in that regard, the "console wide parental controls" feel more like the result of not having individual user login authentification than being an actual "feature".
The lack of login authentication also comes with its very own set of issues: Like Kids playing on their parent's accounts, overwriting their savegame progress or vice versa.
[+] [-] drivebyops|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andrei_says_|8 years ago|reply
It is my hope that Apple is able to pioneer tools which make it possible to interrupt addiction forming (dark) patterns.
Addressing this on the device/os level (vs possibly legislation) could be very effective.
Right now this is a lawless territory and creating + exploiting addiction at the cost of depleting millions of people’s cognitive resources as free is very profitable.
The long term costs associated with this profit are still to be seen but I am sure they exist.
[+] [-] hilyen|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gpmcadam|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] krisives|8 years ago|reply
Our system is simple, you point your child's device at a DNS server then add various accounts to supported educational sites like Khan Academy, Duolingo, Prodigy Math, etc. Our server detects when your child earns points on these platforms and disables access to non-educational (junk) sites until they earn X points to unlock Y time. Most of our user-base has noticed their kids now fully understand the value of their time instead of being stuck in a zombie-like YouTube spell of watching 5 hours of minecraft videos recommended next.
[+] [-] rock_hard|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 659087|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 659087|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dhagz|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hycaria|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] trothamel|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] krisives|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] derefr|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lloydde|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Tempest1981|8 years ago|reply
Or just show # of minutes by app, each day -- to observe where time is being spent... even for adults!
[+] [-] CaliforniaKarl|8 years ago|reply
Note that, when you first go there, a "Terma & Conditions" popup appears once the page finishes loading. But, I think that requires JavaScript in order to trigger. Also, at least in Safari, reader mode was able to show the letter's contents without having to click through (or around) the T&C popup.
[+] [-] IBM|8 years ago|reply
I took a look at their 13F filing and some of their holdings include Google, Facebook and Twitter. They should probably start with divesting that if they feel really strongly about this.
[+] [-] thisisit|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] krisives|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] seltzered_|8 years ago|reply
Related medium post: https://medium.com/what-to-build/is-anything-worth-maximizin...
[+] [-] pbkhrv|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] uiri|8 years ago|reply
I doubt anything will actually come of this.
[+] [-] debt|8 years ago|reply
I do mean specific apps, not a whole class of apps based on rating. I mean blocking just one app.
[+] [-] Pigo|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bertil|8 years ago|reply
Most developers have strong opinions about the tool they use: key layout, editor, code & test patterns, project methodology. This is because they learn to use those effectively through neurological short-cuts. That makes not having them incredibly frustrating. Having rewards at different time scales (instant feedback from seeing your ideas on the screen, seeing code compile, error rates go down, a product being launched) can play the role that social media plays for people whose main activity is more conversational.
Or maybe, you just drink too much coffee.
[+] [-] edwinyzh|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dragonsky67|8 years ago|reply
1960's Can we have a study of Television addiction in Children.
1970's Can we have a study of Dungeons and Dragons addiction in children
1980's Can we have a study of Console game addiction in Children.
1990's Can we have a study of Computer game addiction in Children.
2000's Can we have a study of Internet addiction in Children.
2010's Can we have a study of Facebook addiction in Children.
Oh would you please think of the children...
[+] [-] ModernMech|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] decebalus1|8 years ago|reply
Read up on why Dong Nguyen pulled Flappy Bird off the app store and why Steve Jobs was a low-tech parent.
I agree, we shouldn't think of the children, we should probably think of the adults also.
[+] [-] peferron|8 years ago|reply
Edit: The above is sarcasm. It probably deserves the downvotes, but at least I want to make clear that I don't mean this stuff. The amount of psychological research, behavior tracking, and personalization that goes into keeping people "engaged" with their phones has never been seen before. It just seems so outlandish to argue that it won't be a problem because we turned out fine despite having TV as kids, nevermind that it only offered a handful of completely un-personalized TV channels and zero user tracking (apart from the tiny fraction with a Nielsen box). I just don't get it, especially here on HN where I'm sure many people have an idea of what's going on behind e.g. the Facebook feed.
[+] [-] quickthrower2|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] j2bax|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nordsieck|8 years ago|reply
This is an extremely good feature when talking about most consumer goods. Modern cups are just as good as old cups but way less expensive. Modern cars are significantly better in basically all ways (perhaps excepting repairability).
There may be a danger, however, when talking about technologies that people use, in part, to keep themselves from being bored - to absorb their attention in other words.
For me personally, Facebook/Internet/Computer Games >> TV >> Radio >> Books at capturing my attention. I suspect that this isn't a very unusual experience.
It may seem reasonable on its face to not let technological artifacts push you around or manipulate you, but honestly, it's not just a computer or a TV. Between TV, the Internet and Computer Games, it's the very best and most able of hundreds of thousands of people working every day to capture your attention.
Honestly, I have no idea if the current generation of attention capturing technology is dangerous. But I do know that what ever displaces what we have now will be better at capturing our attention. And the next generation will be better than that. And eventually, if the trend continues, there will be something that's so good at capturing attention that it is dangerous.
[+] [-] seanmcdirmid|8 years ago|reply
In 2020s, it will might be VR, in 2030s, it might be they spend too much time socializing with artificial beings, and so on. There is a point where it is worth thinking about whether it is a good thing or not. I know I will for my kid.
[+] [-] musage|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] CaliforniaKarl|8 years ago|reply
For example, here's a 1955 short educational piece on addition to toys: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eGxoNMFE3s
[+] [-] tim333|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pessimizer|8 years ago|reply
Other than those two, video game, internet, and Facebook addiction are real things. And now, video games and Facebook are being intentionally and consciously designed to encourage addiction.
The only thing I'd agree with you about is that it's just as bad for adults as it is for children. Presumably, though, we generally allow adults to make their own decisions about their addictions, and just offer help when they want to break them. Also, kids are creating the habits that are going to be the substrate for their thinking over the rest of their lives. If you think somebody who got hooked on heroin in their 20s has a tough time quitting at 40, imagine somebody trying to quit at the same age but who started at 10.
[+] [-] kriro|8 years ago|reply
I vaguely remember the Jonathan Blow video where he talked about Facebook games and how gaming companies hire psychologists to make sure that skinner rat feeling is maximized. It was pretty disturbing at the time, these days tons of games seem to be "optimized" this way. My guess is higher addiction rates are a logical conclusion. Looking at some Pokemon Go players or WoW players gives me enough anecdotal evidence to think one can get addicted t games quite quickly. Why one would expose children to this psycho-lab unsupervised...I don't know.
[+] [-] anigbrowl|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sreyaNotfilc|8 years ago|reply
Kids are going to use whatever their parents put in their hands. All of my nieces and nephews has some type of smart device (tablet, or phone). They are on it all the time. They never paid for it but it was given to them by their parents.
If parents stop giving their kids smart devices, then they will use that spare time doing something else (e.g. video games, homework, hanging out, smoking, idunno). There's no need for a study at all. Kids, in general, don't have money to buy an $800 device.
[+] [-] freyir|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] CamperBob2|8 years ago|reply
This is a valid opinion, backed by citing decades of various pointless moral panics, and should not have been flagged.
[+] [-] lerie82|8 years ago|reply