no internet at home: how realistic when having kids

[JeenLeen]

Can anyone give me advice to the idea of not having any internet at home?

My wife has a smartphone with limitless data, so she can look up directions or phone numbers for sudden needs. I have internet at work for the rare cases I need it for anything productive and non-work (or watching Youtube videos on lunch break.)

But we have kids. We currently watch PBS Kids and some kid stuff on Netflix, but I could see just buying box sets of DVDs of those. It'd be more expensive than one month of internet + Netflix, but cheaper in the long run.

It would make a lot of things more boring, as I like being able to veg with Netflix or Youtube, but I think I'd be happier overall and know I'd be more productive without the option of wasting time online.

My bigger concern is that, as the kids get older, we might need internet for school. Either for them to do research, or if the teachers expect us to do anything online to interact with the school. (Due to personal, irrational feelings, I really loathe the idea of needing to be technologically connected to school. Basically a "it's different than when I was a kid, so I don't like it.")
Even moreso as we plan to eventually homeschool, so we might need or want the internet for certain research topics.
I could see a middle ground of dropping the internet for a few years, unless it's really needed. My kids are pretty young, so I don't think it'd be necessary until middle school age or so.

So any advice on how unfeasible my hope for no internet is, or (more apropos) experience from parents about how they think it'd go with or without it?


EDIT: part of what I really want is advice on why no internet is a bad idea. My wife is opposed to the idea, as are other family, and I'd like some convincing beyond "it'd be tough without TV".

[factotum]

I'm unclear on what you consider the advantages of this to be? I remember what things were like pre-Internet (I was 26 before I got online) and I'm not sure I'd want to go back there, to be honest!

[ve4grm]

Well you wouldn't be able to come here as much?

To be honest, with your kids at this age, you're probably ok to drop it if you needed to. But know that those box sets of DVDs won't last nearly as long as you seem to think (before the kids get bored/grow out of them).

You would lose out on a lot of modern communication. A lot of communication and planning these days is done via email/facebook/whatever. Your wife's phone would mitigate this, but you personally would be losing this avenue.

BUT when your kids get to school, it's obviously a different story.

They'll need to do research (not MIGHT but WILL need) for things like science projects as early as grade 2. While that's a limited time of the year, libraries are often running reduced hours these days. Many won't be open long past school hours for them to do their research there. The school library is limited, and similarly time-restricted.

Depending on the school, more might be online as well. Some have you hand in homework digitally, for example. Because of how the modern world works, they're trying to get kids to have solid computer skills sooner, so they can thrive in a computer-based world.

If you're homeschooling, you're losing out on the computer lab and library access of a standard school, so online access will become even more important.

Also on the subject of communication, a lot of communication and socializing between kids these days is done online (as is a lot of bullying, but that's a different story). I can't count the number of kids I know of who play Minecraft with their friends, rather than Lego. This will be especially true as the ages grow and other online games become appropriate for their age group.

Additionally, not having access to certain online things that are popular around the school could lead to feelings of being excluded (or even bullying in extreme cases). For example, let's say all their friends play on a Minecraft server, building things and socializing with each other. If your kid can't participate, they probably won't be happy about it.

............................

The second biggest reason I can think of, though, is that in today's world, learning how to navigate and stay safe online is the BIGGEST SKILL for kids to learn that will help them throughout their lives. I'm an Engineer. I've learned advanced math and physics, design, and more in 5 years of university, and the most helpful skill I have for my day to day job is knowing how to find things quickly and safely on the internet.

If you drop the internet at home, you're 1) delaying the kids access to this skill, and 2) relying on the school system to teach them it effectively. If you're homeschooling, it is now doubly on you to make sure they learn this.

I can't count the number of people my age (35, millenial) who, despite growing up with computers are absolutely rubbish with them and don't know how to keep themselves safe. It's positively frightening in a day and age where one major misstep because you didn't recognize a Phishing site can compromise your entire identity. And with today's Cyberbullying and modern dangers out on the internet, it's way more important than when I was growing up.

It is theoretically possible for you to teach these skills to your kids using only library computers, but would be a lot more difficult.

But again, you'd probably be fine until the kids are school age or close to it, if you really wanted to cut it until then.

............................

But the biggest reason I can think of, is that your wife is against it.

Is this really the hill you want to die on?

If you're concerned about productivity and your own ability to resist the draw of wasting time, I'd recommend getting a program like Freedom (https://freedom.to/ but there are probably free alternatives, including all sorts of parental control apps) and setting yourself a schedule, or getting your wife to do so. You can do the same to limit screen time for the kids, if it becomes an issue.

(Though I also advise thinking critically about what sort of screen time is being had, as some can be positive, in addition to the negative types.)

[Honest Tiefling]

When your children get older, they WILL need to research and communicate on the internet. They aren't going to always be able to call their friends on the landline to get notes they missed, and knowing how to use the internet to politely contact a teacher regarding homework. They are going to be contacted regarding school matters like field trips or changes via e-mail.

Very often when children are sheltered from something, it can backfire horribly. They are going to have access to the internet through school, going to a friend's house, the library or school. And how are they going to feel when all of their friends are on chat groups talking to each other and they are excluded from participating? That they don't get invited out because they can't be contacted? They aren't going to NOT try to get access to it more if it means being excluded by their friends and peers.

I'm on your Wife's side. You are purposefully limiting their ability to socially interact, setting them up to be that 'weird kid', impairing their knowledge of skills needed to succeed academically, and for what?

[JeenLeen]

I'm unclear on what you consider the advantages of this to be? I remember what things were like pre-Internet (I was 26 before I got online) and I'm not sure I'd want to go back there, to be honest!

Mainly saving time and money. I don't see any clear advantage to having internet besides minimal time-saving and a lot of junk entertainment. Well, there are good uses, but I don't utilize them.


When your children get older, they WILL need to research and communicate on the internet. They aren't going to always be able to call their friends on the landline to get notes they missed, and knowing how to use the internet to politely contact a teacher regarding homework. They are going to be contacted regarding school matters like field trips or changes via e-mail.

It's disgusting to me to think of the need to communicate digitally or email teachers, but I recognize that it's an unfounded disgust and irrationality on my part.

Do kids in early grades really have e-mail for school?


Very often when children are sheltered from something, it can backfire horribly. They are going to have access to the internet through school, going to a friend's house, the library or school. And how are they going to feel when all of their friends are on chat groups talking to each other and they are excluded from participating? That they don't get invited out because they can't be contacted? They aren't going to NOT try to get access to it more if it means being excluded by their friends and peers.

I'm on your Wife's side. You are purposefully limiting their ability to socially interact, setting them up to be that 'weird kid', impairing their knowledge of skills needed to succeed academically, and for what?


You would lose out on a lot of modern communication. A lot of communication and planning these days is done via email/facebook/whatever. Your wife's phone would mitigate this, but you personally would be losing this avenue.

BUT when your kids get to school, it's obviously a different story.

They'll need to do research (not MIGHT but WILL need) for things like science projects as early as grade 2. While that's a limited time of the year, libraries are often running reduced hours these days. Many won't be open long past school hours for them to do their research there. The school library is limited, and similarly time-restricted.

Depending on the school, more might be online as well. Some have you hand in homework digitally, for example. Because of how the modern world works, they're trying to get kids to have solid computer skills sooner, so they can thrive in a computer-based world.

If you're homeschooling, you're losing out on the computer lab and library access of a standard school, so online access will become even more important.

Also on the subject of communication, a lot of communication and socializing between kids these days is done online (as is a lot of bullying, but that's a different story). I can't count the number of kids I know of who play Minecraft with their friends, rather than Lego. This will be especially true as the ages grow and other online games become appropriate for their age group.

Additionally, not having access to certain online things that are popular around the school could lead to feelings of being excluded (or even bullying in extreme cases). For example, let's say all their friends play on a Minecraft server, building things and socializing with each other. If your kid can't participate, they probably won't be happy about it.

............................

The second biggest reason I can think of, though, is that in today's world, learning how to navigate and stay safe online is the BIGGEST SKILL for kids to learn that will help them throughout their lives. I'm an Engineer. I've learned advanced math and physics, design, and more in 5 years of university, and the most helpful skill I have for my day to day job is knowing how to find things quickly and safely on the internet.

If you drop the internet at home, you're 1) delaying the kids access to this skill, and 2) relying on the school system to teach them it effectively. If you're homeschooling, it is now doubly on you to make sure they learn this.

I can't count the number of people my age (35, millenial) who, despite growing up with computers are absolutely rubbish with them and don't know how to keep themselves safe. It's positively frightening in a day and age where one major misstep because you didn't recognize a Phishing site can compromise your entire identity. And with today's Cyberbullying and modern dangers out on the internet, it's way more important than when I was growing up.

It is theoretically possible for you to teach these skills to your kids using only library computers, but would be a lot more difficult.

But again, you'd probably be fine until the kids are school age or close to it, if you really wanted to cut it until then.


Regarding learning skills: I reckon those are good arguments. I figure I'm shooting myself in the foot professionally to some degree in that I refuse to use a smartphone; someday a job might require one and -- while I'd use a company phone if needed -- my ignorance about them would probably be embarrassing and hurt my chances at getting a job. I imagine it'd be far worse for my kids.

Regarding communication: I don't communicate online except e-mail, and I only do that during spare time at work. My wife and I are pretty set against our kids having a phone until they're older. Not really sure yet what 'older' will be, but probably when they have to be independently on their own, such as when driving, and thus might need emergency ways to contact us. I reckon I'll get a landline or a "family-use" cell phone they can use for talking to friends.

But, sad and angry (again, acknowledging said anger as irrational) as it makes me, I guess it would make it really hard on my kids if they were limited to phone and rare text to communicate with peers.

---

All that said, I might drop it for a couple years. I think my wife's main arguments are that she wants internet on her phone, for communicating with family. We just recently got unlimited data, so I'm hoping that won't matter as much now. It will bug my in-laws when they visit and there's no wi-fi.

And I'll admit part of it is that I get a sort of pleasure out of being a weird Luddite who dislikes all this stuff.
Lastly, thanks for the responses. It's helpful to bounce my perspective off others'.

[Honest Tiefling]

Mainly saving time and money. I don't see any clear advantage to having internet besides minimal time-saving and a lot of junk entertainment. Well, there are good uses, but I don't utilize them.

I think it's time you took the plunge and set an example for your children. They aren't going to function in college unless they keep up with the times and the sooner they are familiar, the better.


It's disgusting to me to think of the need to communicate digitally or email teachers, but I recognize that it's an unfounded disgust and irrationality on my part.

Do kids in early grades really have e-mail for school?

When I was in early school as a youngin, we were expected to be able to do research online and via computers in the library in 5th grade. Having the internet is going to be a great incentive to have the kids be familiar with computer use. (Not to mention, help their typing skills). So Email was more for the parents to stay in touch and get alerted about things, but the kid was expected to have the internet. All of us were pretty familiar with search engines, and not having that skill would have set us back tremendously.

If you are really reserved about internet use, maybe talk to someone more familiar with it on ways to slowly introduce it to them, such as limiting what websites a computer can access in a way a kid can't get around so easily. Tablets might be better than phones for the younger set, they do make tablets for children with limited function that are under a very generous warranty.

The kids are going to want phones, but I suggest having those be tied to academic performance and behavior. They do well in 6th grade, you'll consider one in 7th. After all, there aren't really pay phones around so if something happens you might want your child to be able to contact you in case a friend ditches them and leaves them stranded or they get lost or the public transit is on fire.

A bit of an older technique, but once those children are ready for the internet give them a box of computer parts and a youtube tutorial on how to assemble a PC. That skill isn't going to be necessary for college, but it'll help a lot.

And yeah, maybe having the children be able to talk to family via the internet isn't such a bad idea, especially if they have different vacation schedules.

[FinnLassie]

I think what you want to really look at is what devices you give to your children and how long you allow to use them for, and for what purpose. Have the internet! It's fun and convenient! But just because you have internet doesn't mean it will be always readily available for the children. Set up certain allowance times, for example, they're free to do school research on the computer as much as they'd like to, but entertainment use for the internet, or any entertainment device for that matter, could be limited. Honestly, don't make that time account just for the use of internet, make it count for all etertainment. It makes internet not be this magical super forbidden place, that REALLY helps with their attitude towards the whole thing.

Also, for the love of God, don't wait til the kid is 16 to get their phone. That's just torture and bullying at this day and age, and I don't care how grumpy you feel about it. Because I feel really grumpy about it too! I really want to avoid having my kids online or on digital devices as much as possible, but at the same time my parents didn't want me to watch tv and stay inside. It would've been heaven in the late 90s and early 2000s if our parents would've bought box loads of dvds (well, more like vhs) for us to watch at home! My point being - times change werther we like it or not.

Example: My nephew is turning 8 this year, he got his mobile phone for his 7th birthday as he started first grade. He rarely takes it to school with him, he forgets the whole deal. He forgets to take it to so many places, because he just doesn't need it. He only really makes a point of having it if he goes somewhere where we cannot be 100% sure there will be a trusted adult to aid him. He has a separate alarm clock, his waking up isn't relying on a phone. He isn't allowed to be on his phone looking at videos, they have a computer and iPad for that. Maybe when he's older, but not now.

I got my first phone at the age of 12 due to a paedophile approaching me, otherwise I would've not hve gotten one til I turned 13. Before cellular phones were a mass thing, say 10 years prior in 1994, I would've probably become extremely anxious, would've not dared to go out at all and had to have my parents drive me EVERYWHERE. But nope, got my older sibling's hand me down that had been in the cupboard as a spare for a while, and it gave me so much freedom and safety. Kids have it easy these days, AND IT'S AWESOME!!!

[Honest Tiefling]

I'm with FinnLassie. I don't really like the idea of keeping up with the Jones, but I do think you are making your kid a target for not allowing internet/phone access until 16. You really should want them to become familiar with things before that age.

Also, what if they get into trouble? I got left behind on a field trip once, no cell phone. Got lucky that a parent noticed I wasn't with the group. Pay phones aren't an option, and businesses aren't always going to let kids access the phone, particularly younger ones. And would you rather rely on the child using a phone, or a stranger helping them get into contact with you?

[Ravens_cry]

I admit, not a parent, but I think it's better to teach boundaries and responsible behaviour than try and enforce strict abstention. They're going to use the Internet, whether at school, the library, or their friends' houses, so why not set examples and guidelines at home, rather than have it become 'forbidden fruit'.

[Brother Oni]

This is solely from my perspective in the UK with both a primary school and a secondary school aged children; your country and school may vary.

Both my children's schools have switched to solely online communication, so important events and information are sent via email, often in the form of a PDF newsletter.

In addition, payments for things like school trips, art supplies, lunch money, etc are done electronically via an electronic payment system (ParentPay).

Finally my eldest only receives homework online via a school app.

While there are contingency measures for parents who don't have internet access, this is not the norm.


Finally your children WILL have to become acquainted with the internet (unless you go completely off the grid survivalist mode) and this is much better done at home with parental supervision and guidance rather than through their friends in an uncontrolled environment.
While both my children have mobiles, we delayed getting them until they were 10, with use clearly tied to academic performance and behaviour. In addition, internet access is limited (both time and sites) via QOS software on the router.


I haven't gotten into the leisure, sharing and other learning opportunities of the internet yet, but this will vary on your family's lifestyle and circumstances.


Since your wife already has unlimited data, you have a way of making long distance calls cheaply - this is important for me as my in-laws live ~6,000 miles away, so internet access keeps my 'phone bill down! :smallbiggrin:

[Themrys]

If your wife is opposed to the idea, then I don't see why you need any more convincing. No internet is the kind of thing you can't just decide without the consent of your spouse.


But, as others said, the kids will need internet, and you will want to supervise their first steps on the internet. If you catch them watching porn on your home computer, then you can talk to them about it.
If they watch stuff on other children's smartphones, you have no control at all over that.


As for your habit of wasting time on the internet, I'm sure there's programs you can install, childproofing-style, so you won't be able to access specific pages except for the two hours in which you plan to watch netflix shows.

[Vinyadan]

On a related tangent, why the homeschooling? It just doesn't exist where I live, so I can't help but ask.

Also, joining homeschooling to no internet and no TV (which appears to be a very likely consequence of no internet), you'd probably be cutting off your children from a lot of cultural channels. What about newspapers, would you buy paper newspapers to let them see some journalism? Elaboration of news is still pretty much all done by newspapers, TV and radio simply cherry-pick content.

I don't know, it seems like a massive amount of work to get less and, in the end, pay more. Although I do believe that physical books tend to be easier to interact with and to learn from, compared to digital content. Digital newspapers however are a lot more convenient than paper.

[veti]

No Internet is not a bad idea for young kids. If they need to get online for school, you can route the connection through your wife's phone (or, if she doesn't like that, get another phone specially for the purpose). The benefit of that is that it will be super easy to monitor and limit your kids' time online.

But "until they're 16"? That seems unreasonable. If I were planning this, I would imagine allowing very limited, closely monitored access much earlier than that - more like 8. Gradually allowing more time and autonomy until they're 16.

You should be able to keep them away from social media (just firewall Snapchat and Instagram and the rest) at least until they get their own smartphones. Also put a blanket ban on online gaming, and you'll have stripped out the worst half of the Internet.

(Note, you can't stop them from playing on their friends' connections - and you shouldn't try to, that would only force them to lie to you. But they won't come to any harm that way, because the access will be tightly time-limited - and also usually in the presence of a friend, which is a pretty good safeguard.)

[JeenLeen]

I'm a bit too busy to fully reply now -- but thanks y'all for answers -- but to clarify a couple points:

1) I would plan to start internet up again in a year or two, when the kids are elementary school age.

2) the "until 16" was thinking for a personal cell phone, not for internet access. I reckon there'd be a home computer (or tablet, whatever) they could use for gaming, research, etc.
We'd probably limit the time on 'digital entertainment', be it TV, internet, video games, whatever, but have access to them (albeit likely with some software to limit certain sites.)

I realize that might not've been clear. Or maybe I wrote something directly contradictory to my 'clarifications' and forgot my original stance vs. what y'all've persuaded me of.

[GloatingSwine]

Prepare your children for the world they're going to live in, not the one you grew up in.

Digital connectivity is the new norm, and your children are going to need to understand how it works and how to interact with it safely.

[Rynjin]

Mainly saving time and money. I don't see any clear advantage to having internet besides minimal time-saving and a lot of junk entertainment. Well, there are good uses, but I don't utilize them.

Well, being able to crowdsource your decision making is an advantage you're using...right now.





Regarding communication: I don't communicate online except e-mail, and I only do that during spare time at work.

I see you around here a fair bit, so that doesn't seem accurate either.

You may be misunderestimating your internet usage a little.

I'm not nitpicking these statements to rag on you, just kind of point out that a little more common use of the internet has crept in and you may be brushing it off as "not counting" for whatever reason, as we all do sometimes.

[GloatingSwine]

I’m just going to add a little anecdote here.

Where I work we take on apprentices out of high school.

In the last batch most of them, 16-17 years old, did not have a computer at home. They all had smartphones and had grown up with them.

Kids now are going to grow up into a world where the internet is ubiquitous. They are going to be always online.

[Ninja_Prawn]

*Prepares to add voice to chorus*


I would plan to start internet up again in a year or two, when the kids are elementary school age.

Well that's certainly not the impression I got from the way the thread started. A year or two of internet detox before the kids hit real school seems like something you could do without really suffering too much (given your wife's got a phone and you have internet at work). Honestly though, there's no upside to it either, so...

And like, taking into account your general tone ("I really loathe the idea of needing to be technologically connected to school", "It's disgusting to me to think of the need to communicate digitally", "I get a sort of pleasure out of being a weird Luddite", "sad and angry"), it kind of seems like your main motivation with this idea revolves around some personal/emotional stuff. I'm not a therapist, so forgive me if this comes across badly, but... my recommendation would be to try to deal with your own stuff in a way that doesn't involve inflicting it on your family. It just doesn't seem fair on them, you know?

[Scarlet Knight]

I am older and my kids did not need the internet until they were older, so I cannot speak from direct experience, but some lessons do still apply.

They will likely need computers later in school; they can have it then. Schools already know how to teach young kids who can't afford computers and adjust. They will not be set back.

They will need smart phones/computers prior to 16 when they attend after school activities alone; you will want to contact them if plans change.

DO NOT allow phones at the table! What kids gain in "computer savy" they lose in social skill. I HATE looking at a table of kids who ALL think someone elsewhere is more important to talk to than the people around them.

I detest when a parent uses their smartphone as a babysitter. I see too many kids who behave around phones the way we acted toward a cookie jar. Please avoid that.

As for kids growing up with smartphones, I am terrified for our future when I see a mother breastfeeding a baby and checking her phone instead of looking into the baby's eyes and bonding. We have no idea what damage is yet to show.

[FinnLassie]

The kids will MOST DEFINITELY need mobile phones, with internet or not, before the age of 16. Period. It's honestly just bullying from the parent's part at that point. Pick your battles with society, and trust me, don't pick this on. Not having a personal phone as a teenager is archaic, limiting and alienating. Feel free to limit their internet access when they're in elementary school, but for the love of God it's just for the best that they acquire the phone at an earlier age than sixteen. If for nothing else, have it for safety. Not safety in the sense that you're calling your kid 24/7 where they are etc, but for the rare chance that something might actually happen when they're alone.

[veti]

The kids will MOST DEFINITELY need mobile phones, with internet or not, before the age of 16. Period.

The "with internet or not" clause is important, here. You can give them dumb phones, if you don't want them spending hours glued to them and having unrestricted access to social media.

[FinnLassie]

It's also important to be reasonable. You could allow some sort of social media use, but that's something you need to negotiate with your children. As a parent, people need to learn to negotiate with their children where it's reasonable, and it teaches children negotiating as well. Social media can be rather crucial in terms of social life, and it's important to not ignore the social effects of social media amongst young people, both negative and positive. Perhaps allow instagram, but make sure it's private (I honestly think all accounts for kids less than 16 years of age should be private with no chance for public accounts), and that they're only allowed to add IRL friends - especially if you're concerned about safety. Make sure you and your child are aware of app age restrictions, and that there will be/might be consequences if they lie about their age. ALWAYS give proper reasons to your opinions and really take account what your child wants. You could also restrict mobile data access, and only allow your child's phone to use wifi.

Though, I think soon there will be free wifi available everywhere in the public, but hey, you'll save money with a non-data plan!

[Honest Tiefling]

I think the main thing is to establish a way to have something between 'no internet' and 'ALL OF THE INTERNET'...Problem is, if JeenLeen's kids are smart, they will find ways around basic controls, just as many kids I went to school with. Through I imagine you can no longer change the time of the computer to fool them.

If your wife is more tech-savvy, maybe she needs to be the one to set limits, because it seems like she'll have a better idea where they should be, and how to enforce them. For instance, she'll probably know to e-mail other parents to confirm that IRL accounts are actually IRL accounts.

Through one argument for a less dumb phone is that they could look up directions or public transit schedules.

And I must strongly urge tying access to fun internet stuff with grades or extracurricular performance. Learning to balance fun and work early is going to help a lot of kids, instead of going from outright banning everything to complete freedom once at college. Kinda like junk food.

[Asmotherion]

Moderation is better than total restriction; Don't buy them a computer 'till they're old enough and do monitor their browsing history on the home computer. Definitelly don't allow them to be on social media 'till they're at least teens and be aware who they communicate with.

Not having access to the internet is not really an option in the modern age. if they can't find it at home they can find it elsewere.

Would you rather have them get online at home or in a public space were you can't monitor them?

[Honest Tiefling]

I'd like to point out something. I was reading an AskReddit thread about kids who were VERY sheltered and stupid things they did. What was a common theme? No phone until they were 16.

Look, if you're going to do it, at least be active in preventing your kid from being that sheltered weirdo no one talks to because they don't have any common ground with other kids.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Regarding mobile phones, I'd like to relate that I was the last person in my class to get a mobile phone. I was viewed as a sheltered weirdo for this reason and I felt like I was playing catch-up on digital literacy for years even after getting a phone. I was 11 when I got my first mobile phone. In the year 2000. I honestly struggle to believe anyone would contemplate something like 'no phone until you're 16' in this day and age. :smallconfused:

[Barastur]

Can anyone give me advice to the idea of not having any internet at home?

My wife has a smartphone with limitless data, so she can look up directions or phone numbers for sudden needs. I have internet at work for the rare cases I need it for anything productive and non-work (or watching Youtube videos on lunch break.)

But we have kids. We currently watch PBS Kids and some kid stuff on Netflix, but I could see just buying box sets of DVDs of those. It'd be more expensive than one month of internet + Netflix, but cheaper in the long run.

It would make a lot of things more boring, as I like being able to veg with Netflix or Youtube, but I think I'd be happier overall and know I'd be more productive without the option of wasting time online.

My bigger concern is that, as the kids get older, we might need internet for school. Either for them to do research, or if the teachers expect us to do anything online to interact with the school. (Due to personal, irrational feelings, I really loathe the idea of needing to be technologically connected to school. Basically a "it's different than when I was a kid, so I don't like it.")
Even moreso as we plan to eventually homeschool, so we might need or want the internet for certain research topics.
I could see a middle ground of dropping the internet for a few years, unless it's really needed. My kids are pretty young, so I don't think it'd be necessary until middle school age or so.

So any advice on how unfeasible my hope for no internet is, or (more apropos) experience from parents about how they think it'd go with or without it?


EDIT: part of what I really want is advice on why no internet is a bad idea. My wife is opposed to the idea, as are other family, and I'd like some convincing beyond "it'd be tough without TV".


If this was something like I don't want my kids looking at porn I would suggest using filters and controlling their time online.

But since it's a personal issue why not just... You know... Not use it? Why bring your wife intro this hassle? You may not see a problem but she clearly does and nothing is forcing you to simply abstain from using it while still allowing her to have a normal life?

[veti]

Everyone here is, more or less, a fan of the Internet. We're a self-selected audience for that trait.

But you'd have to be some kind of blind not to be aware of how bad it can be for young kids. I was having an earnest discussion with an 8-year-old this weekend about some videos he's seen on YouTube, "documenting" real life encounters with aliens and dinosaurs.

He's seen Jurassic Park, and he knows full well the difference between movies and reality. But he doesn't know that when a YouTube video is presented as reality, that doesn't necessarily make it so. And YouTube, notoriously, actively serves up endless streams of this tosh to anyone who lacks the discrimination not to click.

I'm not too much worried for him yet. Heck, at his age I was reading books about UFOs and the Bermuda Triangle and Atlantis. But there's still a danger there. And that's just one example of the hundreds of things that we adults take in our stride, every day - but kids don't have the knowledge and tools to do that.

Which is why you need to monitor them closely, talk to them constantly about what they see. You may think you've forewarned them, but believe me - there are dangers you haven't thought of, just because they're so obvious that you don't even see them any more.

[Honest Tiefling]

Which is why you need to monitor them closely, talk to them constantly about what they see. You may think you've forewarned them, but believe me - there are dangers you haven't thought of, just because they're so obvious that you don't even see them any more.

But that's the thing. No one is proposing every darn thing on the internet, and removing the internet isn't going to help the kids learn to navigate it when they are finally old enough. Several have even encourage parental controls or devices with built in limitations.

Tossing kids into the deep end when they're older doesn't work for junk food, video games, the opposite sex, the same sex, or anything else. Parents need to be involved instead of just strictly banning things, because kids need help learning moderation.

[Barastur]

As someone who was not allowed to use the internet, have a computer, eat fast food and watch disney movies until I was 18 and left the house.

Don't do this. Your kids will hate you for it.

They will understand that you were trying to protect them, bu they will hate you anyway.

The worst thing you can do as a parent is to forbid things. That will only make them seem cooler.

It's quite offensive and patronizing to hear that we don't have a thing because you don't trust on our ability to use it. Why not be frank and constantly have serious conversations about the potencial risks and problems? This way you don't offend our intelligence and make sure we know why in an intelectual level.

If you forbid the use it will only give them the excuse to overuse it later to compensate all the time lost. That's what I did.

Tv, internet and D&D being forbidden did not make a deeper, more spiritual and intelligent being, it just made my life boring.

Don't do the same with your kids.

[Bohandas]

I'm unclear on what you consider the advantages of this to be? I remember what things were like pre-Internet (I was 26 before I got online) and I'm not sure I'd want to go back there, to be honest!

This.

There's really not any advantages to not being online, and the significant disadvantages of not being able to access reference works or how-to videos, or engage in any way with modern culture

[Bohandas]

DO NOT allow phones at the table! What kids gain in "computer savy" they lose in social skill. I HATE looking at a table of kids who ALL think someone elsewhere is more important to talk to than the people around them.

Right, because sitting slack-jawed around a table is so much more sociable than communicating with other people

[Honest Tiefling]

It's quite offensive and patronizing to hear that we don't have a thing because you don't trust on our ability to use it. Why not be frank and constantly have serious conversations about the potencial risks and problems? This way you don't offend our intelligence and make sure we know why in an intelectual level.

Yeah, and the kids will probably not trust you if you ban things like whatever the modern day equivalent of Club Penguin is until they are 16. So THAT'S why I got banned from the internet!?!?


Right, because sitting slack-jawed around a table is so much more sociable than communicating with other people

I don't have kids, but I wouldn't say that Scarlet Knight isn't wrong, but a blanket ban is going to result in kids sneaking out to play Pokemon Go or something at best. If the kids want to play games, force them to learn things like taking turns or talking to people during the game. At the very least, teach moderation not temptation.

Or be mean and only give them games in foreign languages.

[Barastur]

Yeah, and the kids will probably not trust you if you ban things like whatever the modern day equivalent of Club Penguin is until they are 16. So THAT'S why I got banned from the internet!?!?

Fortnite maybe?


Or be mean and only give them games in foreign languages.

The funny part is that this was the default setting for kids outside the USA english speaking countries.

[Honest Tiefling]

The funny part is that this was the default setting for kids outside the USA.

I've heard people in the UK sometimes speak Yankese, but I haven't had this confirmed. I mean, could be worse things for a kid to do than learn another language. I don't know how things work for schools in the US nowadays, but I'm pretty sure many schools in the UK/US have some sort of foreign language requirement.

And if you're careful with your foreign language choice, the school won't know how good the kid is at the language beforehand and not get them placed in higher levels for the language.

[Asmotherion]

Right, because sitting slack-jawed around a table is so much more sociable than communicating with other people

You can chat all you want alone in your room; During Dinner you comunicate with the people around you.

Not to mention how incredibly rude it is to ignore the people around you to be on your phone; You're communicating that you'd rather be elsewere than with your family/friends.

[Ninja_Prawn]

I've heard people in the UK sometimes speak Yankese, but I haven't had this confirmed.

Mostly we do a terrible impression of it, roughly on the level of the "pip pip, tally-ho!" impressions that Americans do of us. :smalltongue:

Yee-haw!

[snowblizz]

You can chat all you want alone in your room; During Dinner you comunicate with the people around you.

Not to mention how incredibly rude it is to ignore the people around you to be on your phone; You're communicating that you'd rather be elsewere than with your family/friends.






I used read comcis at the dinner table. Not paying attention to the loser parents is not a phone thing. It's kid/teenager thing. Also parents, be more interesting if you want kids attention. Droning on about what some lady I never met or heard about before said the other days isn't "conversation".

[Knaight]

Not to ment[/COLOR]ion how incredibly rude it is to ignore the people around you to be on your phone; You're communicating that you'd rather be elsewere than with your family/friends.[/SIZE]






Seeing as how everyone at the table is doing it it's clearly not considered that rude by the people involved. Rudeness is cultural, rudeness is relative, and you can't just take your standards and demand that they fit every group you're not even in.


I used read comcis at the dinner table. Not paying attention to the loser parents is not a phone thing. It's kid/teenager thing. Also parents, be more interesting if you want kids attention. Droning on about what some lady I never met or heard about before said the other days isn't "conversation".
What parents? The original post specified a table full of kids, which probably means a bunch of teenagers hanging out. This isn't dinner with the family.

[JeenLeen]

First off, thanks for the response. I think it's helpful to bounce these thoughts off others.

I reckon overall y'all are right.
As much as I dislike that things change, things have changed since I was a kid.

The major benefit is being forced to spend my time better -- which is nice given tendency to laziness, but I can practice better restraint instead -- and saving several hundred dollars a year by not paying the internet bill.
But, as annoying as restraint and an extra bill are, I can afford both.

And, as one person pointed out, a lot of this is tied to my emotional stuff.
I've accepted I've got irrational views on other things and largely don't let those views impact my life or those around me, except I avoid the things that tick me off. So I'll avoid social media and grip about it, but I don't give my wife a hard time about having a Facebook page.

On phones and age
I say 16 because that's about when my wife and I got ours.

I do think a ban on phones at the dinner table is a good idea. I'm also very hesitant about any sort of social media for kids, but I'm also pretty ignorant of it. (Haven't used any besides Facebook, and haven't used it for years.) I don't see any real positive to social media, but that's probably because I just see the negatives. (Well, I do see a positive as easy way to coordinate events, but I'd think texting would fill that gap fine enough... but if everyone is using a Facebook group or whatever it is, you get left out if you don't have Facebook. Blah.)

And to reply to an older one:


I see you around here a fair bit, so that doesn't seem accurate either.

You may be misunderestimating your internet usage a little.

I'm not nitpicking these statements to rag on you, just kind of point out that a little more common use of the internet has crept in and you may be brushing it off as "not counting" for whatever reason, as we all do sometimes.

Rather, I have a fair bit of spare time at work. Or waiting for code to run.

At home, I pretty much do use the internet exclusively for Netflix and Youtube. Sometimes I'll check some webcomics I'd rather not check at work (e.g., smbc-comics) or, very rarely, check e-mail. But those e-mail checks are almost always due to some bother and I'd rather have the excuse that I can't. The occasional game purchase from Steam or GOG is an issue, but I think I figured out a work-around (or have enough games installed for a couple years.)

I did just remember that sometimes my back goes out and it is quite handy to work from home at those times. It'd cost me some leave if I'm bedridden for a couple days and can't have the laptop working remotely by me.

And, on that note, back to work.

[Bohandas]

Also parents, be more interesting if you want kids attention. Droning on about what some lady I never met or heard about before said the other days isn't "conversation".

This. 1000x this.

[Honest Tiefling]

And on the flipside, remember that when young your kids aren't just not interested in your gossip of people they are unaware of, but that they will notice that you are disinterested in their own topics. Yeah, you may hate pokemon, or skylanders, or fortnite, or whatever, but it matters to them. Younger kids just can't always wrap their heads around the idea that adults just don't want to hear about it. Don't teach them to keep their interests to themselves if you are concerned about their safety, as they won't be inclined to talk to you about it later on if they keep hearing criticisms, keep being brushed off or being mocked for it. They'll learn to enjoy things 'dull' adults hate and to keep it under wraps.

Also, if you are worried about their internet usage, learn about what they do. What are they using it for, what does it do, and what to teach them about it. If you are encouraging even in their dumb videogames, they'll learn to trust you with news of the hobby and you'll have a better handle on what they are doing. Learn the difference between giving them privacy and just being plain ignorant of their activities.

[Scarlet Knight]

I used read comcis at the dinner table. Not paying attention to the loser parents is not a phone thing. It's kid/teenager thing. Also parents, be more interesting if you want kids attention. Droning on about what some lady I never met or heard about before said the other days isn't "conversation".

I'm sorry you think it's the "loser" parent's job to entertain a teenager. Most parents have already spent years entertaining their children, starting from before the child can even understand words in a comic. We don't just suddenly decide to stop for no good reason. We stop because a child enters the next stage of maturity. Kids should not need puppets while eating.

While it is usually better to be entertaining in life, not every one can be so. Plus teenagers often don't like (or won't admit they like) to converse with their father, even if he is a world class comedian much less a quiet plumber or pharmacist. It is how evolution designed us to want to kick our children out of the tree.

Also, anyone can pay attention to someone entertaining...even the family pet does that.

The skill to learn is how to listen to a droning story, learn the moral, or at least why the teller thinks it's a good story. This will serve you well the future when a VP goes on about the "splendid regatta" he just attended. A good listener is often surprisingly well-liked. And this is learned from conversing to normal people in a safe place, which for most normal people, is their home. It is not learned with your head down staring into your lap.

[Aedilred]

For my money, the internet is pretty much the single greatest and, at an individual-cost level, best-value resource available to people today, beyond those needed to physically keep yourself alive.

Admittedly I don't know what the monthly cost of internet in your part of the world is, but round my way it's pretty much the cheapest utility I have available, only a little more than a landline phone (which sees no use at all) and less than a number of subscription TV services. Excluding the electricity supply, it's certainly the best-value utility I have in terms of what I get from it relative to how much it costs. If I had to make cutbacks on the utilities for cost reasons, I'd turn off the heating altogether and wear a jumper to bed before I'd surrender the internet.

If all you can see in the internet is timewasting and TV streaming then I hesitate to say it but you're probably using it wrong. In terms of what it can offer both for communication and for access to information it is unparalleled. What is needed is not to cut it off but self-discipline when it comes to use. Otherwise it's not entirely dissimilar to starving yourself to death to save on food costs and because you're worried about getting fat.

It's not just the obvious stuff. Not having the internet is choosing to be increasingly cut off from the world you live in. A lot of businesses simply don't have customer phone lines any more, and if you want information you have to go online. If you want to look up practical information, such as directions, opening times, someone's address etc. it can be done through other means but why would you? It'll take longer, be more hassle and probably less accurate. The ability to communicate by email is essential in the modern world. It's bad enough trying to manage without a smartphone, which I resisted for a long time until a year or two back. Trying to manage without the internet altogether for any length of time is all but unthinkable.

You might not even notice how much you use it and need it until you don't have it any more.

Disconnection from the internet for short periods of a week or so can be refreshing if you can really pull it off, but it's not viable long-term, in the same way that you can't live your whole life like you're on holiday unless your circumstances are exceptional.

And that's you. Other people have gone into the effects on your family in more detail. Your kids are going to grow up and live in a world where having internet access is not only expected but required in order to interact meaningfully with the rest of society. You might not be entirely happy about that but making the decision to cut them off from it is not only going to hamstring them in their development, both personal and vocational/professional, but probably, as people have said above, make them hate you.

And your wife is against the idea. I have to say that if a partner of mine cut me off from the internet without my express agreement I'd barely stop to pack.

Overall, I'm really struggling to see any upsides to this plan at all.

[Red Fel]

Can anyone give me advice to the idea of not having any internet at home?

My wife has a smartphone with limitless data, so she can look up directions or phone numbers for sudden needs. I have internet at work for the rare cases I need it for anything productive and non-work (or watching Youtube videos on lunch break.)

But we have kids. We currently watch PBS Kids and some kid stuff on Netflix, but I could see just buying box sets of DVDs of those. It'd be more expensive than one month of internet + Netflix, but cheaper in the long run.

It would make a lot of things more boring, as I like being able to veg with Netflix or Youtube, but I think I'd be happier overall and know I'd be more productive without the option of wasting time online.

My bigger concern is that, as the kids get older, we might need internet for school. Either for them to do research, or if the teachers expect us to do anything online to interact with the school. (Due to personal, irrational feelings, I really loathe the idea of needing to be technologically connected to school. Basically a "it's different than when I was a kid, so I don't like it.")
Even moreso as we plan to eventually homeschool, so we might need or want the internet for certain research topics.
I could see a middle ground of dropping the internet for a few years, unless it's really needed. My kids are pretty young, so I don't think it'd be necessary until middle school age or so.

So any advice on how unfeasible my hope for no internet is, or (more apropos) experience from parents about how they think it'd go with or without it?


EDIT: part of what I really want is advice on why no internet is a bad idea. My wife is opposed to the idea, as are other family, and I'd like some convincing beyond "it'd be tough without TV".

I've actually known people who went without TV or internet. Their logic was that they wanted to control their kids' media intake, in all forms, until the kids were adults and able to make decisions for themselves. They chose what books, movies, and so forth were available in the house, and that's what the kids had. When they wanted to play, the kids played with toys or board games. When they wanted to watch something, the parents knew exactly what they were watching, because it came from the pre-selected library. This allowed the parents to offer the kids the illusion of greater independence as well - let's face it, if your kid is on the internet, you need to be basically be hovering over them (or running a backdoor on the computer) to see what they're doing, but if your kid just asks to use the DVD player to watch a movie you know, you don't need to be there to make sure it's on the up-and-up. So the kid feels like they're doing things for themselves, without the need for a chaperone, which is a good thing.

That's my argument on the "pro" no-internet side. Here comes my "con."

1. We live in a society! That is, we live in a society where computer skills are basically mandatory. And while it is possible to learn these things in an academic setting, most kids are learning them at an early age, and building them over time to the point of being instinctive. It's like never letting your kids play with a ball until they're in school - yes, once they get to gym class they can learn to throw and catch, but you have set them behind their peers by refusing to allow them to develop those skills when everyone else was.

2. We live in a society! Again? Yes, again. Only this time, I'm referring to the interconnected nature of society. Look, I'm considered a bit of a dinosaur by some of my peers - I don't Book Faces, I don't Tweet the Twitches or Gram Instantly or Log my B's or V's. That's by choice. But I do maintain email and text contact with peers, coworkers, and a professional network. I use this forum. I do a lot of things on the internet that connect me to other people. Because we live in a society that is part offline, and part online - and when you decide to go net-free at home, you are keeping your kids out of that society.

3. They have to get there eventually anyway. At some point in their lives, your kids will need to be on the internet. You can either introduce it to them while they're under your roof - and thus, while you're able to protect and comfort them - or let them jump in the deep end later. Sure, there are a lot of bad people, bullies and other bad actors, to avoid on the internet - but your kids will have to learn that eventually. Do you really want them to fall victim to a Nigerian Prince scam simply because it's the first email they ever receive? It's like alcohol - your kids will probably drink someday, and better they learn responsible drinking with you, at home, then that they binge at college and choke on their own vomit.

I could offer more explanations, but this is the gist. Yes, it means you have to supervise your kids on the net. (Always supervise your kids on the net.) But the alternative is to cut them off from something that definitely will benefit them, for some possible concerns you have. If it bothers you, set ground rules. Internet is a sometimes activity. Internet is only available during certain hours, for certain purposes, after you have earned the privilege by doing your homework/chores/etc. Internet time must be supervised. Internet time can be lost.

You can set ground rules. Don't like the kids being too connected to school? Don't let them be. Don't want them wasting time on Tubes Full of You and Fork-Knives? Don't let them. But there's a difference between blocking certain things on the internet, and cutting off the whole thing.

My parents got internet when I was young. The old dial-up kind. They limited my access, my hours, what I could do. But they let me use it. Because it meant communication. Because it meant learning. Because it was a clear positive. They didn't give me free reign with it, didn't let me go crazy. But they allowed it. And now, they're in favor of their grandkids using internet-enabled tablets to access web-based educational software. Because it's a clear positive.

It's one thing if it's a financial issue. I get that. Or if it's a religious or ideological issue. I won't even go there. But where it's simply a question of, "Is it good for the kids, though?" The answer, overall, is, "Yes, having the internet is better for them than not having it."

[Bohandas]

I've actually known people who went without TV or internet. Their logic was that they wanted to control their kids' media intake, in all forms, until the kids were adults and able to make decisions for themselves. They chose what books, movies, and so forth were available in the house, and that's what the kids had. When they wanted to play, the kids played with toys or board games. When they wanted to watch something, the parents knew exactly what they were watching, because it came from the pre-selected library.
....
That's my argument on the "pro" no-internet side.

Are you sure that's the "pro" side? Because it sounds like a summary of a George Orwell novel.

[Red Fel]

Are you sure that's the "pro" side? Because it sounds like a summary of a George Orwell novel.

I didn't say it was a particularly compelling argument.

[Honest Tiefling]

Are you sure that's the "pro" side? Because it sounds like a summary of a George Orwell novel.

Or a way to turn your kid into that weirdo who has to ask for permission for everyone and no one wants to bring around in case they want to watch a movie or play some video games without calling home. Which they have to do the old fashioned way for some reason? Yeah, let's not invite that one.

Or a way to waste all of your time trying to watch movies you're not even into.

[False God]

Since it seems the OP as come around, I'd just add that you'd be better off having something, and teaching your kids to use it respectfully, in meaningful ways, and in limited amounts.

If sitting around vegging out to Netflix or Youtube is a problem, then work on that and teach your kids how to better utilize their time (like theorycrafting charop builds) rather than just sit around doing nothing much all of use.

Sure, it's good to relax sometimes, but everything in moderation.

[Bohandas]

Since it seems the OP as come around, I'd just add that you'd be better off having something, and teaching your kids to use it respectfully, in meaningful ways, and in limited amounts.

If sitting around vegging out to Netflix or Youtube is a problem, then work on that and teach your kids how to better utilize their time (like theorycrafting charop builds) rather than just sit around doing nothing much all of use.

Or steer them towards the many educational Youtube channels like Periodic Table of Videos (https://www.youtube.com/user/periodicvideos) or Veritasium (https://www.youtube.com/user/1veritasium) or Mathologer (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1_uAIS3r8Vu6JjXWvastJg) or Numberphile (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoxcjq-8xIDTYp3uz647V5A) or Overly Sarcastic Productions (https://www.youtube.com/user/RedEyesTakeWarning)

[Knaight]

Or a way to turn your kid into that weirdo who has to ask for permission for everyone and no one wants to bring around in case they want to watch a movie or play some video games without calling home. Which they have to do the old fashioned way for some reason? Yeah, let's not invite that one.
Or, as often as not, they're the kid who definitely doesn't ask permission for any of that and ends up finding stuff that is way more dubious for kids than basically anyone else.

[False God]

Or steer them towards the many educational Youtube channels like *links*

Sure, but I wouldn't consider that vegging out. I love watching science youtube stuff, but it's learning, even if I find it relaxing.

Apparently I can't quote messages with links yet. lol

[Matinta]

{Scrubbed}

[Ninja_Prawn]

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote.}

What are the odds this is one of JeenLeen's children? :smallwink:

[snowblizz]

What are the odds this is one of JeenLeen's children? :smallwink:

ROFL!

:smallbiggrin:

[Aspheric]

I'm sure you have plenty of responses already to mull over; but as someone who grew up when smart phones began to become a huge thing, I'll just say that they will get there, one way or another, and you don't have much control over that. Regardless of how you, your wife, your kids, or anyone here thinks about smart phones or the internet, they are everywhere now. Your kids will either be using them or whatever replaces them.

More importantly, holding your ground here isn't necessarily stopping them from accessing the internet. It just means they will circumvent your authority by hiding their access (looking at stuff online at a friend's house, during lunch breaks at school, at the local library, etc.) and learn about smart phones/the internet without you. They're also likely to learn that you're an obstacle to them learning what they feel is important, and that they can't trust you to ask about certain important questions. The combined impact of the above can sucker-punch you later when they ignore your warnings on other habits like, oh I don't know, let's say smoking cigarettes. Now I don't know much about you, but I'm willing to bet the mental image of your kids developing a smoking habit likely bothers you more than them getting addicted to the internet.

The internet isn't a harmless place, and you're right to be worried. Here's the thing though: that's all the more reason to make yourself a good resource for your kids. There are many ethical obligations and responsibilities your kids should know about to be good people, in real life and online. If you don't teach your kids how to be good people in these spaces and think critically about what they see and hear, who will? If you don't trust public schools to teach your kids about digital communication, who do you think will teach your kids these skills, and where do you think they'll get them?

If you want your kids to formulate healthy relationships online as adults, like the one you have with this forum, teach them the important lessons. Your kids aren't familiar with how the internet works, but you are. When your kids want to make accounts on social media, online games, or something else, confirm that this is a thing they want, and go through account creation. Stop when you get to the Terms & Services agreement, and go over it with them.

All of it.

Explain what it means to be nice to other people and why they should try to avoid swears and slurs. Explain how these sites store and save your private information. Explain how to make good passwords they can remember, a username they won't regret having later, how to set up good security questions, and so on. Be as thorough as possible, and answer their questions fully. This is what my dad did when I first wanted to make an account online, and I swear it was way more helpful than getting told off by an adult, and learning to hide my activities from people who claimed to care about my interests. Hearing from my dad what the "n-word" was when I was ten taught me a lesson I suspect a lot of adults today never learned.

Be as available as you can. It's hard, you won't always be right, and you won't always keep them from sites you'd rather they didn't visit. Proving to your kids that you care about them and respect their independence (within reason, of course) will help them far more than sheltering them ever will. Your kids won't wait to ask for your permission for things forever. Take advantage of that and be the parent they'll love now and through into the future. Hey, they might even make a point of calling you once a week after they've moved out, if that's your thing.

[Arutema]

I'll add, because I haven't seen it said yet, that there are, and likely to continue to be, some very good jobs in the fields of computers and internet technology. Being able to start developing those skills early on will be a boon.

[samwoodblack]

When they will be older just give them phones with endless data.

[Vinyadan]

I'll add, because I haven't seen it said yet, that there are, and likely to continue to be, some very good jobs in the fields of computers and internet technology. Being able to start developing those skills early on will be a boon.

Interesting thought: what happens if you tell a kid that they can only use run what they have programmed themselves? Do they lose all interest, or do they become experts at age 10?

[truemane]

Interesting thought: what happens if you tell a kid that they can only use run what they have programmed themselves? Do they lose all interest, or do they become experts at age 10?

Neither, they figure out ways to do an end run around the rule. People never work so hard than when they're avoiding work.

[darkrose50]

A hoop and a stick was good enough for our ancestors, it is good enough for them!

Seriously now . . . no electronic devices in the kids bedroom after 8:00 PM should do the trick (else no sleep, or less sleep).

[veti]

A hoop and a stick was good enough for our ancestors, it is good enough for them!

Seriously now . . . no electronic devices in the kids bedroom after 8:00 PM should do the trick (else no sleep, or less sleep).

Heck, no electronic devices anywhere after 8:00. The rule for my kids is, no internet after 6:00, although I'd be happy to extend that deadline a bit if I thought they'd do anything more constructive than watch YouTube.

[Chen]

Neither, they figure out ways to do an end run around the rule. People never work so hard than when they're avoiding work.

This. Not to mention writing in machine code is way too advanced/abstract for most adults let alone kids. Plus you’d need something like punch cards until you could create something digital to actually write the subsequent code in.

[Irrelephant11]

My two cents: Anything your kids would gain by preventing their internet use is less than what they'd gain if you taught them responsible internet use.

Though I will note that it's been internationally agreed that children under 12 months old should have extremely little to zero screentime for brain-development's sake