In a rather humbling revelation, the New York Times posted a very counter-intuitive view held by a few of the world’s most-famous technical giants around “screentime”, when the screen is in their home, with their children. What we might expect – the uber-geeks would surround their progeny with virtual control over everything accessible … is precisely wrong. In fact, many restrict their children’s access much more than I would have guessed. Chris Anderson, the CEO of 3D robotics, restricts his kids' time with “operating systems” and activates parental controls, as well, to help shelter his children from becoming reliant, or even “addicted” to technology. “… That’s because we have seen the dangers of technology firsthand. I’ve seen it in myself, I don’t want to see that happen to my kids.”
“Children under 10 seem to be most susceptible to becoming addicted, so these parents draw the line at not allowing any gadgets during the week.
‘This is rule No. 1: There are no screens in the bedroom. Period. Ever,’ Mr. Anderson said.”
Mr. Steven Jobs, the development and sales genius behind Apple Computers’ phenomenal success, casually informed the reporter that he hadn’t created the same obsession with the Apple culture at home as he famously generated in Mac-crazed consumers.
“Every evening Steve made a point of having dinner at the big long table in their kitchen, discussing books and history and a variety of things,” [Jobs biographer Walter Isaacson] said. “No one ever pulled out an iPad or computer. The kids did not seem addicted at all to devices.”
Other strategies for containing the virtual world: in the attempt to not stifle creativity, but with less desire to avoid the virtual world, Twitter's CEO Dick Costolo's family is given unrestricted screentime in the living room. And parents who supply cellphones to their children need not purchase data, as well.
from Steve Jobs Was a Low-Tech Parent http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/11/fashion/steve-jobs-apple-was-a-low-tech-parent.html