a heavy handed approach, but I don’t see one that is not heavy handed, private, and effective enough.
slight modification: mobile phone is ok if it only has a small screen like on old feature phones, no capabilities for mobile data but only calls (that’s probably a software limitation), and no social media apps (or any installable apps).
perhaps wifi capability with a weak antenna, or a wifi interface that only supports low speeds.
private communications is a question though, because phone calls and SMS are anything but private.
hey people, this could work!
and its not like we need to ban kids from the internet, but to only allow them with the active supervision of a parent.
leftzero@lemmynsfw.com 5 days ago
Pagers. Kids under 21 can only get pagers.
They get within two meters of a smartphone, both kid, parents, and whoever owns the smartphone go straight to jail.
WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
that does not seem to be right. 21 is way too high, and also this would effectively be a universal restraining order kids and not-so-kids, and adults. I don’t want to go to jail just because of walking by a kid or a young adult, let alone converse with them, only sick people would actually endorse this.
but also pagers only do one way communication, don’t they? that is worthless here. the goal is not to just put a GPS tracker to kids, but to give them a simple communication device.