Well if you decide to create rules to remove freedom and then say "you can only get your freedom back with this device I'll force you to wear" and call that "more freedom", we have different definitions. You could let them go to the same places they will go with the watch already, you were the one limiting freedom, not the absence of a watch.

Learning how to deal with anxiety in limited doses is an important part of childhood too.

> If anything this gives kids more freedom

I hope you're not too optimistic there. If it lets kids roam around outside more, than the upsides massively outweigh the downsides. But that's a very big "if".

I am speaking from experience as a father of two. The watch teaches the kids to reach out when they feel overwhelmed. They are fully in control of their own destiny. They don't always end up where they planned they were going and that is perfectly ok for me because they can reach me if there is an issue.

I will note that a way to reach out does not need to involve location tracking capabilities.

My kids spend a lit if time outside, riding bikes running around the forest...

If they have an accident it's useful to be able to get to them quickly.

Please spare me a response about the qualities of facing adversity and walking home 3 miles with a broken collar bone.

If you lack the imagination of how location information is useful then that is ok. Companies offer it because it is, and people want it

I didn't say that.

Should I just quote my adjacent reply that I guess you didn't see? "Even in that situation, at most you need some way to get a location at that moment when they chose to reach out to you, not tracking."

And the ability to get in contact is 90% of the benefit.

No, but it becomes a lot more useful when your kid calls scared and barely able to talk and have generally no idea where they are.

Even in that situation, at most you need some way to get a location at that moment when they chose to reach out to you, not tracking.