Simple Way To Watch Over Kids On The Internet ? ? ?

[Leythos]

And the schools foster an attitude in kids that their parents cannot
punish them at all.

You missed the boat on this one - it's the liberal parents that put an
end to punishment and block the schools from imposing any real form of
punishment. The Liberal parents bread kids that learn they can sue their
parents if they discipline them, those brats teach others that become
brats.....

 

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:

You missed the boat on this one - it's the liberal parents that put an
end to punishment and block the schools from imposing any real form of
punishment. The Liberal parents bread kids that learn they can sue
their parents if they discipline them, those brats teach others that
become brats.....

I wonder how it is, then, that my sister the born-again Christian who
sent her children to a private, religious school has had so much more
trouble from her children than I have had from mine. I wouldn't trust
one of them even as far as I could throw him or her.

Do you think it's because she is a liberal parent? Hardly. Maybe the
real reason is that the situation she was in did not permit her to give
time and attention to her children because she popped out four of them
and just couldn't keep up? Or maybe it is that her very conservative,
very "biblical" ex-husband was also an abusive control freak with both
her and the kids.

I have one child. She has a younger half-brother who managed to become
addicted to heroin at the tender age of 12. His younger brother is not
an addict, but he has...um...issues. Their mother is bipolar and was not
treated for her condition until the older boy was about 2. My daughter's
father believes that men go to work and women rear the kids, so he was
not involved in the childrearing except to the extent of "wait till your
father gets home."

In the latter case, when the school tried to intervene, all hell broke
loose, because "they don't have the right to raise [sic] my children"
said their mother.

Don't try to blame this problem on "the liberals" (whoever they are)
because I have tons of empirical evidence to the contrary.

rl

 

[Guest]

Rhonda I have 2 dauughters one 14 and one 17. We have great relationships.
I let them do most everything they want to and trust them. What's great aout
America is you do have the right to raise your children as you see fit as
well as does Leythos. I do not want my children being stalked or worse by
someone on the internet. Unfortunately even at 18 children do not possess
all the mental maturity to make good sound decisions. This was proven by
raising the drinking age from 18 to 21. Unfortunately we as parents must
sometimes put our foot down and let them be pissed at a decision we make that
some day they will appreciate. Let's let this go to rest. It is true that
many laws have changed to take away power from the government in raising your
children and I think that is good. I am a conservative but also more toward
the middle. I think too much government in your life is not a good thing.
It'll usually cost you more, you'll get less and ususally get teh opposite of
what you want becuase of the red tape.
--
In the quest for knowledge.

Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:

You missed the boat on this one - it's the liberal parents that put an
end to punishment and block the schools from imposing any real form of
punishment. The Liberal parents bread kids that learn they can sue
their parents if they discipline them, those brats teach others that
become brats.....

I wonder how it is, then, that my sister the born-again Christian who
sent her children to a private, religious school has had so much more
trouble from her children than I have had from mine. I wouldn't trust
one of them even as far as I could throw him or her.

Do you think it's because she is a liberal parent? Hardly. Maybe the
real reason is that the situation she was in did not permit her to give
time and attention to her children because she popped out four of them
and just couldn't keep up? Or maybe it is that her very conservative,
very "biblical" ex-husband was also an abusive control freak with both
her and the kids.

I have one child. She has a younger half-brother who managed to become
addicted to heroin at the tender age of 12. His younger brother is not
an addict, but he has...um...issues. Their mother is bipolar and was not
treated for her condition until the older boy was about 2. My daughter's
father believes that men go to work and women rear the kids, so he was
not involved in the childrearing except to the extent of "wait till your
father gets home."

In the latter case, when the school tried to intervene, all hell broke
loose, because "they don't have the right to raise [sic] my children"
said their mother.

Don't try to blame this problem on "the liberals" (whoever they are)
because I have tons of empirical evidence to the contrary.

rl

 

[Guest]

I am not going to enter the debate, I'm just going to answer your question.
The answer is yes there is a simple way to do this via group policy, however
if you do it the simple way by simply just blocking the ability to clear the
history, you leave many simple ways for other programs to do it for them.

I have several user accounts on my pc, one parents account, which has admin
acess that my spouse and I use, and one for each of the kids with user
rights. I have restricted many of the tabs in control panels, and IE and
they cannot install anything, they need me there to install it for them then
I grant them access to use them. Unfortunately for you none of this is
simple, and I work with group policy and large networks everyday.

If you want a simple solution that does not require you to be a technical
expert I recommend that you do install something like net nanny etc. it's
simple and works effictively for minimal effort.

*********************side note
I also recommend that you save the hosts file located at
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm, as per security staff at microsoft
to your <windows dir>\systems32\drivers\etc folder, read the associated
website to find out why, and then restrict access ot the etc folder so the
kids can't modify it.

 

[Guest]

Have you read the recommendations that came from the lady who studied child
molesteres for years, impersonating children she would infiltrate these rings
so she could find out how they were coaxed into it bit by bit, their methods
and why they were successufl, many of the victims were from happy households,
however the major factors that the victims had in common were.

1)All hour, or long term unsupervised, unfetterd access to the internet.
2)All hour, or long term unsupervised access to a mobile phone
3)Access to leave their home without detection, or with little chance of
being caught out if giving reasons.

I would never let my 7 year old walk around unsupervised why would I let him
on the net and the chat rooms unsupervised, I wouldn't let my 13 year old out
without knowing exactly where they had been, why would I let them on the
internet without knowing exactly where they had been. I don't want to know
exactly what they have been doing and saying to their friends etc. but I want
to know who those friends are and where they have been.

 

[Guest]

This would never work because then millions of the men could not hide their
porn surfing habits from their wives. I don't condone their porn surfing,
but there are some truths out there and that's one of them, there would be an
outrage.

 

[xfile]

Just one question for Paul, why is has to be Johnny which is my name?

And how did you know I surf "bad" sites all the time, such as this one?

 

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

Have you read the recommendations that came from the lady who studied
child molesteres for years, impersonating children she would
infiltrate these rings so she could find out how they were coaxed
into it bit by bit, their methods and why they were successufl, many
of the victims were from happy households, however the major factors
that the victims had in common were.

1)All hour, or long term unsupervised, unfetterd access to the
internet. 2)All hour, or long term unsupervised access to a mobile
phone 3)Access to leave their home without detection, or with little
chance of being caught out if giving reasons.

I would never let my 7 year old walk around unsupervised why would I
let him on the net and the chat rooms unsupervised, I wouldn't let my
13 year old out without knowing exactly where they had been, why
would I let them on the internet without knowing exactly where they
had been. I don't want to know exactly what they have been doing and
saying to their friends etc. but I want to know who those friends are
and where they have been.

Y'know, people who use electronics to babysit their children will reap
what they sow.

Using the internet to keep ones children occupied is no different than
using television. No one said that limiting a child's time on the
computer is bad.

But if you play Sherlock Holmes with your kids instead of forming a
relationship with them that includes dialog on all subjects, you will
pay for it. Teaching kids that violating someone's privacy is okay is a
bad lesson for later life. Teaching kids that he who has the power makes
the rules--regardless of how onerous, burdensome and oppressive--sets
them up for exploitation. Parents just don't realize that the habits we
form early in life--how we react to all classes of situations--follow us
forever.

And sometimes parents just don't think.

When I was 12, a Princeton University student lived up the road. One day
when I was riding my bicycle, the chain fell off and when he saw me by
the side of the road, he came out and fixed it. Why did he take an
interest in a 12-year old? Because he had a passion, and he loves to
teach and because (from what I've read recently) befriends others
easily. He offered to take me birdwatching. This is a rural area (even
now, I see foxes and deer and wild turkey and hawks in the woods when I
look out my bedroom window), so it was good for that.

Anyway, my mother said no.

I managed to stay friends with him for the time he was here, and he
taught me a lot of interesting things in spite of the limitations. I
googled him the other day, and he is now one of the most highly
acclaimed ornithologists in his field--oft-published and internationally
known.

And I had and lost an opportunity to learn from him in the area for
which he has become famous.

If parents are going to limit their children, they need to be very sure
about the limits they place, or the opportunities they could foreclose
are incalculable. And they may also fail to recognize the real dangers
to their children, because most often those dangers come from trusted
sources.

The lady you cite was studying a particular phenomenon, and those are
her conclusions for that particular subgroup. But most children are
molested by close friends and family members, not by strangers.

rl

 

[Leythos]

Y'know, people who use electronics to babysit their children will reap
what they sow.

Using the internet to keep ones children occupied is no different than
using television. No one said that limiting a child's time on the
computer is bad.

And today, my kids have to do research on the internet, as required by
their teachers, to research all sorts of things - Math, Health,
History... While I would like to sit over the shoulder every time they
are on the net, to explain things they see, protect them from clicking
on bad links that appear to be good links, from other interactions they
should not have to experience, the firewall and web blocking makes this
easier for me and a better experience for them.

Most parents, at least the ones asking about protection, don't use the
Internet as a babysitter, they allow their kids access for all the same
reason we have access - to learn, to interact with many different
subjects, etc....

Your job as a Parent is to educate, raise, protect your kids at least
until they are 18 (some until much later), and not using electronic
means to protect them (and you) from internet threats is just plain
stupid.

 

[Don Taylor]

<<<The original question, which I think was how to block kids access to
some net-scum sites, wasn't included, but I think that started this.>>>

Then

I am not going to enter the debate, I'm just going to answer your question.
The answer is yes there is a simple way to do this via group policy, however
if you do it the simple way by simply just blocking the ability to clear the
history, you leave many simple ways for other programs to do it for them. ....
*********************side note
I also recommend that you save the hosts file located at
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm, as per security staff at microsoft
to your <windows dir>\systems32\drivers\etc folder, read the associated
website to find out why, and then restrict access ot the etc folder so the
kids can't modify it.

Now I'll ask a quick directly related question.
For those who do not know this,
<windows dir>\systems32\drivers\etc\hosts
does not support entries like
127.0.0.1 *.doubleclick.net
You have to explicitly add every complete domain name, and scum
like doubleclick.net have created dozens or even hundreds of different
domain names to try to hide and to stop you from getting all that
advertising and behavior tracking they know you want from them.

One alternative is the file mentioned above, to add tens of thousands
of domain name entries, 99.9% of which you will probably never ever see.

But, is there any trick buried in XP somewhere that logs the domain
names as they are accessed? With that I could scan the list of the
last few days now and then and only add those that I see I want to
block in the future? At the moment two dozen entries in hosts is
blocking a majority of the net crud that I get sent.

Currently I have to bump up all the cookie handling and have to manually
(you can't even SCRAPE the domain name off the little message box!)
type in those domain names I want to add to etc\hosts.

Thank you for helping combat fraud, spam, viruses, porn, Nigeria,
lottery winnings, penis pills, and any other crap on the net.

We NEVER should have told the public about the net.

 

[Guest]

FINALLY SENSE.

I never said that I used electronics to replace me or babysit my children,
it's about making it easier and improving quality of surfing without getting
annoying pop ups and ads with naked woman and using it as a set of things to
help. It's also about alerting me if my kids try and surf at 12pm at night
without my knowledge to sites they don't understand. I would always say that
having a relationship with your children is most important, way more
important than what I have talked about technically. If my restricitions
told me that my child was trying to access stuff like that or trying to
sneak, I would openly discuss it and explain it with them not punish them or
get angry etc. As my children get older, they will get more trust, more
access to the outside world, more room to make their mistakes for themselves,
but little by little, I am not about to expose my 7 year old, to the internet
unsupervised and unrestricted, yet I want him to start learning about it now,
so he is up to date with computers.

The other day I was googling some sites and mistakenly clicked on a site
which seemed to be fairly legit and the ads down the side were from an adults
single site with woman on all fours facing away from me. The content was not
so bad mostly about music, band etc. stuff my 13 year old would google. And
it's not the end of the world if they had come across them and I'm not saying
they will be scarred for life, but as Leythos said the restrictions can
actually improve the quality of surfing, I don't want to see woman on all
fours while trying to read about my fave bands. It's one thing if I go
searching for Porn it's quite another when it's forced upon me.

On a side note I played cat and mouse with restrictions on my dad since I
was 13 and it became more of a game than a restrictive device it helped me
learn about the computer and those same theories I learnt to beat my dad to
more access are the same underlying understandings that gave me the expertise
and love of computers which is the industry I am in today.

To tell you the truth this is a technical column if we want to really talk
about parenting there about one million parenting forums we can move to
discuss this further, the guy asked a technical question on a technical
website, I think it is fair enough he gets a technical response not a
parenting one.

 

[Wesley Vogel]

Try posting in the same thread as the question.

--
Hope this helps. Let us know.

Wes
MS-MVP Windows Shell/User

In

 

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

The other day I was googling some sites and mistakenly clicked on a
site which seemed to be fairly legit and the ads down the side were
from an adults single site with woman on all fours facing away from
me.

You can set your google search preferences to prevent this.

I don't get pop-up ads from porn sites--even on the rare occasions I
view porn sites. I don't get pop-up ads from sites, actually.

Maybe it's not the kids we should be worried about.

rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be
the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than
under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may
sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those
who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do
so with the approval of their own conscience. C.S. Lewis

 

[Guest]

This is just hilarious. Its been a year since the last post but if any of you
are still bearing grudges and reading this...

Here's my take.
You people are immature. Cant you just stick to answering the question
instead of going into a debate about good parenting skills.?I was trying to
solve my own technical issues until I came across this. Couldn't help but
give my two cents worth.

So what? You think that a few posts and a few links are going to change a
parent's concept and mindset of parenting. (Im not supporting either side
here.)

By the way, Im 19. And I have great parents.

-K-

 

[Guest]

Oops looks like I replied to the WRONG post. and this debate turns out to
last LONGER than I thought. anyways glad this guy closed it. Cheers

-K-

 

[Rock]

This is just hilarious. Its been a year since the last post but if any of
you
are still bearing grudges and reading this...

Here's my take.
You people are immature. Cant you just stick to answering the question
instead of going into a debate about good parenting skills.?I was trying
to
solve my own technical issues until I came across this. Couldn't help but
give my two cents worth.

So what? You think that a few posts and a few links are going to change a
parent's concept and mindset of parenting. (Im not supporting either side
here.)

By the way, Im 19. And I have great parents.

Who exactly are you talking to? You haven't quoted any of the messages to
which you refer, so if this is truly a year old thread, folks aren't going
to see the other posts in this thread. In other words, you're talking to
yourself.

 

[Shenan Stanley]

This is just hilarious. Its been a year since the last post but if
any of you are still bearing grudges and reading this...

Here's my take.
You people are immature. Cant you just stick to answering the
question instead of going into a debate about good parenting
skills.?I was trying to solve my own technical issues until I came
across this. Couldn't help but give my two cents worth.

So what? You think that a few posts and a few links are going to
change a parent's concept and mindset of parenting. (Im not
supporting either side here.)

By the way, Im 19. And I have great parents.

hmmm
http://groups.google.com/group/micr...hread/thread/635202395c9d317/66a36cda72a30cd6

 

[Ronnie Vernon MVP]

I'm not sure why you are replying to this thread. the last message was
posted over 8 months ago on May 4, 2006???

< By the way, Im 19.

OK, I guess that explains it.

--


Ronnie Vernon
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User

 

[Poprivet]

I'm not sure, but I think I recall the posts; you didn't give any references
or quotes, so I'm not sure. However, that said, you're right. You'll find
that over time the "culture" of newsgroups varies and the swing toward
condscension and ego is still in force, as evidenced by a couple of the
reponses alreayd made here. And by MVPs yet, who have violated their own
terms to hold MVP status via the responses.

ON the other hand, you have to have a thick skin on any newsgroup as there
are always detractors, trolls and narcissists who have to get in their own
two cents worth with off topic and untagged as such, missives.

It's mostly a case of patience and perseverence on newsgroups. Since it's a
peer situation they have bad days just like you do, and there's almost
always a need to pick thru the posts for real data. Unfortunate, but true.

Personally, they can call me anything but late for supper if they've given
me a usable response to my problem. It's not worth letting negative remarks
get to a person.

Enjoy,

Pop`