> Or hell, maybe they won't feel stifled, even by the time they're 15, because pervasive surveillance will be so normalized to them that it would feel strange not to be tracked. IMO that's the worst possible outcome.
To play devil's advocate here - my wife and I, and several of friends that we frequently travel with, all cross-share each other's locations on google maps permanently. Doesn't really feel stifling, and it's come in handy quite a few times. Why is this a terrible outcome?
I think everyone imagines the overbearing parent micromanaging their kids' lives. Maybe the problem isn't the tracking, it's the overbearing parents. As an intellectual exercise, would you rather be a kid of overbearing parents who didn't have tracking technology, or permissive parents that always know where you are?
You don't have significant control over your wife and friends. At least hopefully. They're also adults who are self sufficient and you trust to be. That not the same for kids. Even if your kids trust you
If my kid, when he reaches a certain age of maturity (let's all agree this number is greater than 6), wants to separate from the group location share - then that's a reasonable conversation to have then?
The grandparent poster literally said that it's the worst possible outcome if the 15-year-old _wants_ to be part of a location sharing group. If they still want it, what's the issue?
I feel like people are bringing a lot of personal baggage from their upbringing into this conversation.
I don't know you, I don't know your kids. But I think you need to be aware of the implications and biases of "opt-out" vs "opt-in".
> I feel like people are bringing a lot of personal baggage from their upbringing into this conversation.
Of course? Are we not supposed to learn from the mistakes of our parents? And we're supposed to be aware of the nuances and subtleties that exist.
But I'm confused over your point. Is it "I know people will abuse this, but __I__ won't?" Because I do not think that is a great excuse. You instead need to argue about percentages and the harm. That's the ratio that matters. Because you, and your children, are not the only entities in the world. Of course people bring in their personal experiences. Why should we not be learning from others? Our experiences are limited and not all encompassing. Ignoring others experiences is naive and egotistical. I'm not ignoring yours, I just think the rate of abuse and the harm it does is not worth it. I do recognize there is utility, and I think most here do. It's a common discussion in anti-authoritarian groups about how surveillance becomes pervasive through mostly good intentions. After all, is that not what the path to hell is paved with? And this is why I'd refuse to call you bad, evil, or ill intentioned. In fact, I think you have good intentions. I just think the world is complex and there is more that we need to think about than our individual cases and people similar to us. If it was that easy, we would already be living in a much better world.
To play devil's advocate here - my wife and I, and several of friends that we frequently travel with, all cross-share each other's locations on google maps permanently. Doesn't really feel stifling, and it's come in handy quite a few times. Why is this a terrible outcome?
I think everyone imagines the overbearing parent micromanaging their kids' lives. Maybe the problem isn't the tracking, it's the overbearing parents. As an intellectual exercise, would you rather be a kid of overbearing parents who didn't have tracking technology, or permissive parents that always know where you are?