Did you know the mass producer of these toys is China?

The Chinese government created laws banning these toys to children 18 yrs and under.

And for those with technical issues, here's the YouTube version .

It's an interesting article, but it's also important to look at the missing context. This is not the first time humanity has unknowingly engaged in such an unwitting experiment, and it probably won't be the last. There were similar concerns expressed about the widespread infiltration of tv into family homes back in the 50s, exposure to increasingly violent video games in the 80s, exposure to the internet in the 90s, online multiplayer role playing games in the early 2000s, and of course the malevolent/beneficial double headed beast that is social media.

All of these things have had untold influence upon formative minds because no-one knew any better, and to a large extent we still don't because there's insufficient study of any of them. Perhaps the wildly immoral attitudes of the tech bros in the use of addictive algorithms is the result of being raised on a steady diet of tv and violent video games - who knows?

But we also have to look both further afield beyond the tech world and a little further back in history - because childhood has never been a protected space despite what we'd like to believe. Children in impoverished communities in the world are regularly sold and trafficked as commodities for all purposes and there's far too little being done to stop that. Children as young as four were working in mines, mills and factories in Victorian times, and quite often ending up with curtailed lives or deformities as a result. Children were bartered into service in households of strangers from the middle ages through to the 1800s and never saw their families again. Children were stolen from communities such as Reunion Island as recently as the 60s on the pretense of education and never returned, but subjected to all kinds of abuse. And let's not forget the very deliberate mistreatment and brainwashing that indigenous children were intentionally subjected to for decades. There are so many examples of shameful practices children were subject to, some in the past and some that continue to happen today. This is one more in a very long list of harmful practices.

And while I'm all for more research, more studies and more standards - and more legal and regulatory frameworks with enforceable penalties on the people behind exploitative technologies (not just financial which will simply be charged back to customers, but loss of licences, trading restrictions, jail time!) - let's also err on the side of common sense because psychologists get it wrong on a regular basis as well - how many children have been harmed by the allegedly expert advice that children should be left to cry themselves to sleep? So if we're looking to build safeguards, let's ensure they're built by a mix of interest holders, driven by people who are ordinary parents first and foremost.

That's my tuppence

The problem I have with it is that there are:

• no references which means this is clearly an opinion piece.

• The perspective is obviously American (mentions COPPA) and does not reflect Canada's environment.

• Explains neuro-psychology brain development (which I never took and can not verify)... and lacks references. Is there a neuro-psychologist in the house? Neuro-scientist? Any neuro-person?

• This discussion was generated by a chat-bot (Claude). What was its training data based on?

The other thing that caught my attention was:

"The first question is consent. Parents purchasing these devices aren’t being asked: “Do you consent to enroll your child in the first cohort exposed to conversational AI during critical developmental windows, with effects measurable only after decades?” They’re being shown marketing materials emphasizing educational benefits and safety certifications. But those materials don’t address the neuroscience concerns outlined in this analysis. The question becomes whether parents would choose differently if they understood they’re participating in an experiment."

Have you ever seen this on a child's toy !?

And the other statement:

"Notably absent from this rush to market: comprehensive regulatory frameworks, safety standards requiring developmental psychology review, mandated testing for long-term effects, or requirements that manufacturers wait for longitudinal data before deployment at scale."

Really good read - but be critical.