Schools and parents should not be scared to take smartphones and other electronic devices away from teenagers, the headmaster of Eton has said.
Simon Henderson, head of the private school since 2015, says it is sometimes appropriate to take devices away.
Speaking at a Girls' Day School Trust conference in London, Mr Henderson said Eton now requires its Year 9 boys to hand in their devices at night-time.
He said the boys liked the move, as it removed the pressure from them.
Asked how schools could help teenagers navigate social media, Mr Henderson told the conference: "It's a 24/7 culture, but there's a place for taking phones and things off them.
"Sometimes parents and schools are reluctant to do that.
"We've done that now at Eton. Our Year 9 pupils have to hand their devices in at night.
"We thought there'd be outrage from the boys, but they actually liked it - they had permission to not have to check this overnight."
He said Year 9 boys, aged 13 and 14, handed them in at around 21:30 and got them back at around 07:45.
"Parents know it is happening and so are encouraged to call outside of those times.
"If there is a particular pastoral reason why a boy should have it overnight (eg homesickness) then the housemaster can give permission on a case-by-case basis."
Individual school policy
Many schools, both state and private, ban pupils from having mobile phones with them in school.
While teachers have the legal right to confiscate items from pupils, there is no government policy about mobile phone use in England and individual schools make their own rules on the issue.
While Mr Henderson's comments may have many parents thinking "easier said than done", research from the London School of Economics found banning mobile phones in schools has the effect of giving pupils an extra week's education over the course of an academic year.
The study looked at schools in four English cities and found test scores increased by more than 6% in those which banned phones.
Former Ofsted boss and vice-chancellor of Reading University, Sir David Bell, who also spoke at the GDST conference, was keen to point out the positive side of social media.
Sir David said it was a wonderful opportunity for youngsters to "connect up".
But he acknowledged there were elements of social media that left young people vulnerable.
"We've had some students excluded very quickly by horrible social media traffic."
It was important to help young people identify the "right sort of community" to be a part of, he added.
13/ Handig. In de persmap voor de #KimTrumpSummit zit een mini usb fan. Handig om koel te blijven tijdens het schrijven. Het is hier in Singapore idd vrij heet. 33°C of zo. Maar haalt het niet bij Dubai, koning van de oven.
The tweet reads: "Handy. In the press kit for the #KimTrumpSummit, there is a mini USB fan - convenient to stay cool while writing. It is pretty hot here in Singapore, 33C or so. But it does not reach Dubai, king of the oven."
But cyber-security expert Prof Alan Woodward, from Surrey University, said: "For years now, engineering people to plug in a USB stick you supplied has been a classic way of circumventing security measures to get your software on their machine.
"There's an adage in cyber-security: if you give someone physical access to your computer, it's no longer your computer. Use an unknown USB stick and you are doing just that."
The gift packs were assembled by the Communications Ministry in Singapore.
Maybe the fan is just a fan. Bad bet, though. I should probably add: if you did plug it in you’re human. Malware authors abuse the instinct to trust. Until someone competent has a look, I recommend you power down your machine if you can and change passwords with a clean device. https://twitter.com/bartongellman/status/1006288000106549248 …
I was doing my daily scroll of the BBC News website the other day, when I happened upon an article that really struck a chord with me.
An American schoolteacher asked her class of seven and eight-year olds to write about an invention that they wish had never been invented.
And nearly 20% of them wrote about the same thing: mobile phones.
The reason? All those kids felt that their parents spent too much time staring at a mobile screen, and not enough time in the real world, enjoying time with their children.
One child had this to say, “I don’t like the phone because my parents are on their phone every day. A phone is sometimes a really bad habit”.
As is so often the case, there’s a deeper, wiser point being made by these children – mobile phones have changed our society, and articles like this make us ask the question: has it changed for the good, or the bad?
What do you think? Do mobile phones stop you from spending quality time with your kids? Are you ‘present’ when you’re hanging out with them, or does the temptation to scroll overcome you?
Complaints have been filed against Facebook, Google, Instagram and WhatsApp within hours of the new GDPR data protection law taking effect.
The companies are accused of forcing users to consent to targeted advertising to use the services.
Privacy group noyb.eu led by activist Max Schrems said people were not being given a "free choice".
If the complaints are upheld, the websites may be forced to change how they operate, and they could be fined.
What's the issue?
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a new EU law that changes how personal data can be collected and used. Even companies based outside the EU must follow the new rules if offering their services in the EU.
In its four complaints, noyb.eu argues that the named companies are in breach of GDPR because they have adopted a "take it or leave it approach".
Media captionWATCH: What is GDPR?
The activist group says customers must agree to having their data collected, shared and used for targeted advertising, or delete their accounts.
This, the organisation suggests, falls foul of the new rules because forcing people to accept wide-ranging data collection in exchange for using a service is prohibited under GDPR.
"The GDPR explicitly allows any data processing that is strictly necessary for the service - but using the data additionally for advertisement or to sell it on needs the users' free opt-in consent," said noyb.eu in a statement.
"GDPR is very pragmatic on this point: whatever is really necessary for an app is legal without consent, the rest needs a free 'yes' or 'no' option."
Privacy advocate Max Schrems said: "Many users do not know yet that this annoying way of pushing people to consent is actually forbidden under GDPR in most cases."
The complaints were filed by four EU citizens with local regulators in Austria, Belgium, France and Germany.
Analysts and regulators had expected complaints to be filed shortly after the introduction of the law, as organisations and privacy advocates argue over how the law should be interpreted.
Some companies based outside the EU have temporarily blocked their services across Europe to avoid falling foul of the new legislation.
However, others such as Twitter have introduced granular controls that let people opt out of targeted advertising.
Companies that fall foul of GDPR can be - in extreme cases - fined more than £17m.
Facebook said in a statement that it had spent 18 months preparing to make sure it met the requirements of GDPR.
Google told the BBC: "We build privacy and security into our products from the very earliest stages and are committed to complying with the EU General Data Protection Regulation."
WhatsApp has not yet responded to the BBC's request for comment.
Well would you look at that – day one of the new General Data Protection Regulation and BOOM, Google gets its first complaint.
It’s hardly surprising – we all know that Google’s been watching us for years, following us around the web and showing us targeted advertising.
For some people, it’s no big deal, and for others, it feels like a massive invasion of privacy.
Where do you stand on it?
I guess the big issue for lots of us is that Google is so ingrained into the fabric of our lives that it can be really hard to extricate ourselves from it.
I mean, where else would you find the number for your local takeaway?
Maybe you’re uncomfortable with the way Google uses your data, maybe you’re not, but if you fancy giving Google less information about you and your browsing behaviour, it’s worth pointing out that there is an alternative.
DuckDuckGo is ‘the search engine that doesn’t track you’.
They don’t believe that your data should be monetised, which is why they provide a browser plugin that:
Blocks advertising trackers
Keeps your search history private
Allows you to take control of your personal data
Click HERE and give it a go – you never know, you might like it.
"I would say that I don't like the phone," one child wrote.
"I don't like the phone because my parents are on their phone every day. A phone is sometimes a really bad habit."
The student completed the work with a drawing of a mobile phone with a cross through it and a large sad face saying "I hate it".
The picture was posted last Friday and has been shared almost 170,000 times since, including by shocked parents who are stopping to think twice about their technology habits.
"Wow. Out of the mouths of babes! We are all guilty!" responded one user, Tracy Jenkins.
"Strong words for a second grader! Listen parents," added Sylvia Burton.
Another wrote, "That is so sad and convicting. Great reminder for us all to put those phones down and engage with our kids more."
Other teachers also joined the discussion to add their own experience of children's reaction to their parents' internet use.
"We had a class discussion about Facebook and every single one of the students said their parents spend more time on Facebook then they do talking to their child. It was very eye opening for me," commented Abbey Fauntleroy.
Some parents offered their personal experience of trying to address the problem.
Beau Stermer wrote that he has seen his two-year-old son reacting negatively to his use of his mobile phone: "I've noticed if he and I are playing and my phone rings for something at work, he has nothing to do with me after I get off the phone.
"It kills me. I have made an agreement with myself that if I am playing with him everything else can wait."
However, one mum pointed out that her teenagers were just as bad, often choosing their phone over family time.
Before robots can take over from humans, we need more humans
With private companies leading AI development, defence departments need their own specialists
In a world where technological prowess, rather than manpower, defines military might, the UK needs to focus its resources on developing an industrial and research base in artificial intelligence and robotics.
So says the Ministry of Defence in its new Joint Concept Note, titled Human and Machine Teaming, where it also laments the UK's skills shortage and suggests maintaining ‘a register of security-cleared UK nationals' with AI and robotics expertise.
Don't worry if this all sounds a bit 1984 - all documents from the MoD come across that way.
The document sets out the Ministry's vision of the future in a world where artificial intelligence is critical to national defence, which relies on access to two ‘critical indirect elements': qualified experts and investment.
The lead in technology development has shifted from the public to the private sector in recent decades, with ‘civil commercial investment in AI and robotic technologies and the recruitment of subject matter experts' vastly outstripping the resources available to nation states.
The best systems thus begin and remain in the civilian sector, making military access a challenge: ‘Some Western commercial entities have publicly declared policies stating they will not contract with defence or security agencies which may compound the challenges facing the UK Ministry of Defence. This is in stark contrast to other states which have enshrined access rights to expertise, technology and data in their national legislation.'
The MoD goes on to paint a picture where countries with low GDP or manpower, but strengths in mathematics, programming and other technologies, could increasingly ‘punch above their weight'. Just to drive the point home, the Note specifically mentions the West's bogeyman, Russia.
How does the defence industry compete?
Technology giants like Google are keen to bring AI and robotics experts on board and keep them there, through recruitment drives and M&A movements. The defence industry struggles to compete in a market where private companies might pay the equivalent of $10 million per expert acquired in such a way.
The MoD suggests ‘[being] innovative to secure access to subject matter expertise' and ‘[needing] to nurture sufficient in-house knowledge and understanding to generate intelligent customer capabilities'.
In English, that means that the Ministry wants to make sure its own experts are...well, experts, who can understand what they're being told by contractors. As the MoD, and defence departments worldwide, have to buy AI systems from commercial companies, that is vital to ensure that budgets are spent responsibly.
That's where the proposed register comes in, as a list of security-cleared experts could help the MoD understand the technology behind the hype; much the same as the cybersecurity experts that GCHQ can call upon.
‘This may be as valuable an advantage as the ability to fabricate high grade steel during the Victorian age', the Note claims.
You might have noticed that there's very little mention above of the way that the MoD intends to actually use AI in the field. Just to keep you happy, here's the view of a future command centre:
‘Longer term research efforts should be focused on the use of intelligent software agents that manage all aspects of information processing. Ultimately, this could eliminate technological constraints that confine us to our current monolithic headquarters approaches. The whole system could be built on a federated, disaggregated and self-organising peer-to-peer command, control, communications, computers and intelligence (C4I) network - effectively a combat cloud. Such a system should be able to draw on reachback access to cloud-based servers, but be capable of resilient operation provided by command and control applications across a variety of in-theatre platforms. From an operator's perspective such a system will handle user requests for information and data passage as an intelligent assistant service.'
Campaigners want US authorities to break-up Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger into separate companies
Activists have opened a digital advertising campaign today to persuade the US Federal Trade Commission to break-up Facebook.
The coalition of ‘progressive' groups have formed Freedom From Facebook to campaign for the FTC to separate Instagram, Messenger and WhatsApp from Facebook, and to oblige the company to make it easier for people on different social media networks to communicate with each other.
"The FTC should spin off Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger into competing networks [and] require interoperability, so we have the freedom to communicate across social networks, and impose strong privacy rules that empower and protect us," the campaign group argued. "It's time to make Facebook safe for democracy."
The groups behind Freedom from Facebook include the Open Markets Institute, MoveOn Civic Action, Demand Progress, Jewish Voice for Peace, and Mpower Change, the Muslim Grassroots Movement.
Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg have amassed a scary amount of power
The campaigners' message continues: "Most of us use Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Messenger. They're important ways for us to communicate and connect with each other.
"But Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg have amassed a scary amount of power. Facebook unilaterally decides the news that billions of people around the world see every day. It buys up or bankrupts potential competitors to protect its monopoly, killing innovation and choice.
"It tracks us almost everywhere we go on the web and, through our smartphones, even where we go in the real world. It uses this intimate data hoard to figure out how to addict us and our children to its services. And then Facebook serves up everything about us to its true customers - virtually anyone willing to pay for the ability to convince us to buy, do, or believe something.
"And it is spending millions on corporate lobbyists, academics, and think tanks to ensure no one gets in their way.
Companies that are already big and influential can sometimes use inappropriate means, anticompetitive means to get big or to stay big
"Enough. The five members of the Federal Trade Commission, which is the part of our government tasked with overseeing Facebook, can make Facebook safe for our democracy by breaking it up, giving us the freedom to communicate across networks, and protecting our privacy."
FTC chairman Joseph Simons, a corporate antitrust lawyer and President Trump's nominee for the post, has indicated a willingness to scrutinise Silicon Valley technology giants more closely.
He added: "Oftentimes companies get big because they are successful with the consumer, they offer a good service at a low price. And that's a good thing, and we don't want to interfere with that…
"On the other hand, companies that are already big and influential can sometimes use inappropriate means, anticompetitive means to get big or to stay big. And if that's the case then we should be vigorously enforcing the antitrust laws."
He was non-committal, under questioning, on the subject of the market power amassed by the likes of Facebook and Google. Furthermore, none of the new FTC commissioners recently appointed have suggested breaking up technology or online giants.
However, an indication, perhaps, of the strength of the campaign so far is its follower count on Twitter, which this morning numbered eleven.
The Chancellor is to promise a major expansion of Britain's superfast broadband network in a bid to boost the post-Brexit economy.
In a speech at the annual CBI dinner later, Philip Hammond will pledge to make "full-fibre" connections available to most homes and businesses by 2025.
He will also set out other measures to improve Britain's productivity rates.
However, experts cast doubt on the broadband plan, saying many small and mid-sized towns would miss out.
In his speech the Chancellor will say that full fibre - which can be 40 times faster than typical high speed services - will help firms to compete after Britain leaves the European Union.
"In the 21st century, fibre networks will be the enabling infrastructure that drives economic growth," he will say.
Fast fibre networks will drive economic growth, the Chancellor will say
"Over a million premises already have direct access to them… but if we are to achieve our ambition of a truly high-speed economy, and keep up with our competitors, then we need a step change in our approach."
The government will target full-fibre connections in 15 million homes and business premises within the next seven years, Mr Hammond will say.
This would be delivered by the telecoms industry, he will say, but not via "government Diktat".
"We will do it by creating the conditions for the market to deliver… and we will use all the tools at the government's disposal to ensure all parts of the country can benefit from fibre technology," he will say.
'Towns will miss out'
Carolyn Fairbairn, CBI Director-General, said businesses would "warmly welcome" the Chancellor's commitment.
But consumer advice website Thinkbroadband told the BBC the government was unlikely to reach its goal.
The telecoms industry has already begun a number of major high speed broadband rollouts, with firms including BT, Vodafone and Virgin Media hoping to reach up to five million premises by 2020.
However, these projects have faced delays and are mainly focused on cities and some rural areas.
Thinkbroadband's editor Andrew Ferguson said there it would take a lot of work to reach the target, adding: "If other government policies such as building more affordable homes come to fruition, then 15 million will not be a majority but account for around 45% of premises."
Instead, he predicted that by 2025, the government would need a new initiative to connect UK regions that are likely to be overlooked.
"We are expecting the small and medium sized towns to be the ones that miss out in the full fibre roll-out race," he said.
In his speech, the Chancellor will also launch a review of the UK's productivity, which lags behind many of its peers in the G7 group of developed nations.
It will hear evidence from business leaders from around the country in a bid to help "more firms realise their potential".