The purpose of this text is to point out how the smartification of children’s toys impacts the concept of trust. We make use of the 4Cs conceptual trust framework – context, construction, curation, codification – to analyse how the technological, commercial and legal developments central to the arrival of the web of Toys have an impression on the trust relations of youngsters , parents and therefore the companies behind smart dolls. We found that the introduction of smart dolls brings forth several trust issues. First, important vulnerabilities, like monitoring practices and data-sharing, happen beyond the notice of youngsters and fogeys . albeit they struggle to read the terms and conditions or check out the technical specifications of the toys, these products remain black boxes because the operating systems are proprietary and not all information is disclosed or understandable. Second, with the arrival of smart dolls, a sort of hybrid ownership arises. due to the networked character of the dolls, they continue to be under the influence and control of the corporate . Children and fogeys need to trust the businesses to not abuse this connection. and eventually , the regulatory framework that ought to protect children isn’t only inadequate, it’d actually exacerbate trust issues. Sex Dolls
Almost all children within the Western world are online – then are an increasing number of the artefacts that surround them. Not merely computers – including smart phones and tablets – but the mundane physical things around us, like thermostats, television and washing machines, are increasingly connected to the network of networks to form our lives more fun and convenient. These interconnected items become what are called ‘smart devices’ that are capable of predicting individuals’ preferences and wishes supported their online and offline behaviour. the web of Things – as we call this phenomenon – is extending also to children’s toys, i.e. smart toys. Smart toys are internet-enabled toys that interactively engage with children while they’re playing. Sbobbet
The best-known example so far is Hello Barbie, which is an internet-connected Barbie doll that talks to children and answers questions. When the doll is activated, everything the kid (or anyone else present for that matter) says is transmitted to ToyTalk, a corporation that analyses the conversation and provides Barbie’s response to the kid within (milli)seconds (Gibbs 2015). Moreover, smart cuddly toys exist that also allow children to talk with them as a part of their play.1 The smart play experience are often augmented by apps on smart phones and tablets. Additionally, smart computing devices – like smart phones, smart watches and tablets – are developed as children’s toys.2 Star Wars Casino
The development of smart toys fits in with broader trends of hyper-connectivity, datafication and commercialisation (van der Hof 2017) and changes the trust relationship between toy manufacturers and consumers by adding new complexities that tie in with each of those tendencies. With traditional toys, trust is usually a matter of expecting toys to be appropriate in terms of physical safety. Some toys or the materials they’re made from are safe just for certain – mostly older – ages. Toys that become digitally connected devices – despite superficially resembling their traditional counterparts – have whole new trust dimensions added to the equation because the character of the artefact changes considerably and these changes cause increased complexities.
Smart toys are available different forms but they need one thing in common. the event of those toys isn’t just a feature of ongoing technological developments; their emergence also reflects an increasing commercialisation of children’s everyday lives. twiddling with toys is not any longer just that; the aim and meaning of the toy changes because its design changes – i.e. the artefact (in this case the smart toy) is augmented by digital technologies. In other words, the toy becomes a part of a meticulously orchestrated game plan of companies during which they construct and script a world which will be fun and entertaining but, more sophisticatedly, serves their economic interests. Hence, a toy may – within the case of smart dolls – still appear as if its traditional counterpart, but actually , below the surface of their cute appearances, the identity and intentionality of the artefacts have changed completely.
Trust within the relation between the manufacturer and therefore the consumer starts playing a way more pivotal role due to growing uncertainties. How is that the child’s personal data used? Who has access to it? Will the info be safe?3 Will the kid or parent be told when data is compromised? Will the merchandise be safe (e.g. not overheat or emit harmful radiation) and secure? Can the kid be manipulated by a talking toy? Etcetera. The answers to those questions aren’t always easy – or possible – to seek out , and corporations haven’t any incentive to be sufficiently open about a number of them. Marketing works best, as an example , when people aren’t conscious of being manipulated, and various ways exist to trick people’s minds without them noticing (Kahneman 2011).
The purpose of this text is to point out how the smartification of children’s toys impacts the concept of trust. to line the stage for our analysis we first outline important technological trends (section 2). Then we’ll present the conceptual framework which will be wont to analyse smart toys in reference to trust (section 3). This conceptual framework encompasses the four C’s – context, curation, construction, codification – which will within the subsequent sections (4 to 7) be used as lenses for the analysis of the concept of trust in reference to smart toys. The article wraps up with conclusions in section 8.