this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2026
90 points (95.9% liked)
Asklemmy
53554 readers
690 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's so bad for a child's development. A computer can't guide a kid's hand to practice fine motor skills. It can't impart social skills to help kids interact with each other. It can't help kids revolve conflicts with each other, or handle behaviors that require a human touch. Imagine a couple kids fighting because they can't share - what's a computer gonna do? A kid can just ignore its instructions. What's to stop a kid from physically attacking a robo-nanny or whatever fresh hell gets developed in this field?
I work with kids with difficult behaviors. There are ethical boundaries we need to be aware of. Will a robo-nanny be imparted with those rules? How accountable would it be if it did something ethically questionable? What will it be trained on - actual knowledge of children's psychology (in which case, using a robot at all should be discounted right off, as children thrive on human interaction)? Or will it be trained on what parents/teachers have already been doing, which would inevitably result in being trained on outdated techniques that don't follow updates in science? If a robot thinks spanking, isolation, or withholding food is okay, that'd be extremely troubling. There's so much that could go wrong, and knowing this tech isn't being designed with ethics in mind makes this whole endeavor terrifying.
Are parents going to be comfortable with their kids being alone in a room without an adult? A group of kids could simply band together to lock the robot in a closet or something and let chaos reign. They could figure out how to power it down, or throw things at it until it stops functioning. A kid having a tantrum can be a powerful force, potentially injuring other children in the act, and I highly doubt a robot alone could handle that situation effectively. Where I work it can take a team of adults with blocking pads, and coordination with even more adults to clear other students from the area. Sometimes those other kids are playing games and don't want to leave, and it takes a trusted adult to convince them that yeah, no, we need to move now. Which brings us to the relationship the teachers have with the students, and how it is crucial to gaining what's called "instructional control," which basically means, "this kid will listen to your instructions." Can a robot foster that? Do we want a robot to be able to foster that? I don't like the idea of kids personifying machines to that extent, and we're quickly learning how damaging (literally, it can cause brain damage) that can be for young minds.
I could go on and on, but suffice to say this whole topic is an ethical clusterfuck.