cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Meta Discuss Children's VR Saftey

kevinw729
Honored Visionary

kevinw729_0-1642017148121.png


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-59937610

https://vrawards.aixr.org/ "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities" https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959
55 REPLIES 55

Zenbane
MVP
MVP

Perhaps using Steam as an example can help put things in to perspective regarding the limitations Corporations have on governing a minor's ability to use a social service.

 

https://store.steampowered.com/join/

 

Steam's Sign-Up Process works entirely on the honor system.

 

Zenbane_0-1642737366354.png

 

 

Note that to sign-up for Steam, you have to voluntarily agree that you are at least 13 years old. It's interesting that Valve uses the age of 13 as their minimum requirement, which is the same requirement for Facebook and Oculus VR; yet this age requirement comes under such scrutiny for Meta while being perfectly acceptable for Steam.

 

For the Steam Sign-Up, if an under-age child isn't being monitored by their parents, then they can easily and freely create an email address and Steam Account, and freely engage in social activities. All while masquerading as an adult.

 

Steam does have parental controls:

https://www.bark.us/guides/gaming/steam

https://www.commonsensemedia.org/blog/parents-ultimate-guide-to-steam

 

But what good are they if the child is unmonitored and created their account under the guise of being an adult?

 

Ryanality
Community Manager
Community Manager

I just deleted the last two posts in here. @OmegaM4N, this post above from @Zenbane is not a person attack, off topic, or targeted at anyone. It's a suggestion about how another company handles the topic of this thread as an example of what a possible experience could look like.

Help others find great discussions and answers by adding kudos and marking solutions to your questions.

ohgrant
Superstar

 As far as the age limit being a "cop out" on FB part. I think it has a little more to do with not knowing the effects it will have on the development of a child. Possible danger ? or What could go wrong . At least something parents should consider before letting them in VR. How could it even be in their IPD range is something I've wondered about. 

 

 As far as their safety from predators and bullying. I don't think it's hardly the urgent fire that must be put out now, but as Meta grows I think they will need to think tank some passive form of moderating because there will indeed be people out there with no other cause but to ruin other people experience. I once again refer back to second life which worked well in three DOF VR on my Z800 a decade ago.  Most folks there were awesome but there was a spawning point that many mischief makers would wait for someone to show up then gang up on them being as obnoxious as they possibly could. Second life's solution was simply an ignore button that popped up above their head when someone was talking to you. Once someone was ignored, poof they vanish and if I remember correctly they got temp banned automatically after so many people put them on ignore within a certain time until their case can be reviewed. 

 

  Not something that is really any urgency now IMO, I think it's best to let the individual app dev's to monitor their own apps but hold them accountable if things get out of hand. 

Gigabyte  AB350 Ryzen 2700x, 32gb ddr 4 3200, 2080ti. HP Reverb G2, Index controllers, Quest 1 and 2x Quest 2. 65" 3DTV HD3D DLP projector.

Deleted

Final attempt to return this thread to the rails.

CV1/Vive-knuckles)/Dell Vr Visor/Go/Quest II/ PSVR.

That rule is very underrated.

 

Reminder to anyone genuinely concerned about this topic to please use the Ideas thread to vote or create a suggestion, on this, or any other subject.


@ohgrant wrote:

 As far as the age limit being a "cop out" on FB part. I think it has a little more to do with not knowing the effects it will have on the development of a child. Possible danger ? or What could go wrong . At least something parents should consider before letting them in VR. How could it even be in their IPD range is something I've wondered about. 

 


 

Well said! The IPD impact often gets overlooked during these age limit discussions. There are many doctors who try to help guide parents in the eye (muscle) development of children. Staring at screens for a long time doesn't just have the general negative impacts on the brain (excessive blue light, increase in dopamine levels), but it also leaves the eye muscles stagnant since they are fixated on a flat surface for so long. The eye muscles of children become under developed, which can lead to problems with reading and focus.

 

With a VR HMD, that problem is compounded with the fact that a child's eyes may "cross" inwards or widen outwards due to their small IPD range.

 

A 15-20 minute VR session every week or so will likely be a non-factor. But younger children using a VR HMD for an hour or more every single day may be engaging in an activity that does more harm than good. Even in a perfect harmonious world where child safety (from strangers, predators, etc.) is perfectly implemented, children can still suffer negative ailments with long term impact caused by prolonged exposure to digital worlds; VR or otherwise.

cmat100
Adventurer

Instead of proffering a solution, which I have no magic wand to create as it is outside of my control, I will post my primary concerns and wants.  For the avoidance of unnecessary posts, I will exclude the more sinister concerns that we all have.

 

At the present time, I do not allow my kids use of the headset.  For two reasons – IPD is one of them (yeah,  how!!!???) and they are still figuring out reality.  VR is a no-no.

 

How I achieve this prohibition is my business.

 

But as they age the parental digital wall becomes harder to maintain.  This is why I have a great interest and concern regarding this topic as I will be hitting this soon.

 

Parents have different priorities – For some it is blasphemy and naughty words.  Not in my case, so I will list my personal primary concerns. 

 

When I was child, school ended with the bus home.   Now classmates a.k.a bullies can digitally enter my kids bedroom.  And this is not limited to FB / WhatsApp.  You can throw all other SM platforms in the bucket as well.

 

A VR headset,  by it’s direct-to-retina nature,  is more hard to police.   So I would like to able to assign my kids secondary accounts,  based upon my master account,  using a traditional web browser.  With comprehensive parental controls.  Ideally I would like to be able to monitor any communication to and from VR.  I appreciate that children, rightly, have privacy expectations  – but I have to balance that against protection from abuse.    This isn’t easy.

 

I can police a PC very well (20+ years in IT)…….as for the Quest……a bit more difficult.


@cmat100 wrote:

At the present time, I do not allow my kids use of the headset.  For two reasons – IPD is one of them (yeah,  how!!!???) and they are still figuring out reality.  VR is a no-no.

 

How I achieve this prohibition is my business.


Exactly, it is your business; not the business of external entities like corporations. That is my point. 😁

 

The only reason I asked how you achieve it is to shed light on how corporations are supposed to protect children "without" parental involvement.

 

 


@cmat100 wrote:

I can police a PC very well (20+ years in IT)…….as for the Quest……a bit more difficult.


 

I'm not sure how the IT resume helps here though. I also have 20+ years in IT (as well as 4 credentials), yet I know parents with 0 years in IT who very effectively monitor their children's electronic peripheral activities.

 

Quest is not more difficult than policing a PC in the least bit. Both utilize Apps and Browsers. Quest can Cast to any device so that you can "see" what they are doing. Quest's browser can be locked down. And you can control which Apps they install and use.

 

There's nothing more difficult about controlling PC vs Quest usage. It just takes time, effort, and willingness by the parent.  Because, as you said, it is "the parents business." 

 

 


@cmat100 wrote:

Instead of proffering a solution, which I have no magic wand to create as it is outside of my control, I will post my primary concerns and wants.


I think the general idea is that you, as the end-user, propose a solution to the provider, and the solution provider can run with the proposition to meet the need/demand. It works like this in IT solutions as well. 🙂

Anonymous
Not applicable

I wish everyone replying in this thread would at the very least read the article in the original post - what this thread is all about. It is pretty serious business and absolutely more needs to be done by all parties involved.

Zenbane
MVP
MVP

Directly from the article:

 

Zenbane_0-1642903421842.png

 

 

For those actually reading the article in the original post, it seems clear that Meta is working with a Government body on an ongoing effort to improve standards and tools used to help protect children. That only leaves the parents to actually do their part. Reading the article thoroughly doesn't change this conclusion.

 

It's good to note that Standards are superior to Guidelines in these situations, since Standards "must" be followed whereas Guidelines are merely "optional recommendations."