[Telaneo]

> Your local library has age and ID requirements.

It literally doesn't (at least not if I don't intend to borrow a book and take it home; if I stay there and read, I can do so without any ID. I only need ID to get a library card, and I don't need that to enter and read a book).

[bluegatty]

It literally does - and you just admitted it.

The point is that 'even the local library' enacts rules and social conventions - not that they're exhaustively and acutely enforced in all corners.

No 4chan section in the library?

You might wonder why it doesn't have vast array of avant guard adult content, porn or art with really aggressive themes and people calling each other the n-word?

In society we have 'age related' conventions all over the place ... including your Library.

This is the absolute worst of HN, where people dissolve into Reddit-like discussions of bad meatphors and totally out of context hair splitting.

I just can't believe anyone here has any relationship with the reality of children, teaching or parenting whatsoever. It's the same argument made by the 'drugs should be legal and accessible' crowd - completely oblivious to the instantaneous massive health epidemic we'd have with opioids and fentanyl, or the 'anti vaxer' crowd - narrow ideological arguments about expression disconnected from any kind of reality or nuance.

There's a variation of social media that will be fine for the kids, they can be exposed to more into their late teens. Parents that want to opt out, will de facto be allowed to - and there is always a slippery slope with every law.

[Telaneo]

> It literally does - and you just admitted it.

I can be 9 years old and go to the library and read any book they have without showing ID. Whatever your point is, it escapes me.

> The point is that 'even the local library' enacts rules and social conventions - not that they're exhaustively and acutely enforced in all corners.

Then let us do the same thing on the internet. Age verification is not that (at least in the forms being pushed).

> No 4chan section in the library?

No, but there are 4chan-style books I can read there. Anything that isn't outright illegal (Anarchist's cookbook) is pretty darn available there.

> You might wonder why it doesn't have vast array of avant guard adult content, porn or art with really aggressive themes and people calling each other the n-word?

That'd be because it does have books like that. Your point continues to escape me. Maybe my library is really pushing whatever limits.

> I just can't believe anyone here has any relationship with the reality of children, teaching or parenting whatsoever

I've literally been an assistant teacher for about a year. You probably won't believe me though.

> It's the same argument made by the 'drugs should be legal and accessible' crowd

Who I agree with! Funny how that works!

> completely oblivious to the instantaneous massive health epidemic we'd have with opioids and fentanyl

Imagine a world where we can have that regulated, so people know what they're taking, and can see a doctor to get help without getting the police on their back, rather than the unregulated shitshow we have now.

> or the 'anti vaxer' crowd - narrow ideological arguments about expression disconnected from any kind of reality or nuance.

This comparison escapes me too. Anti-vax started with (or at least got a massive growth boost by) Andrew Wakefield, whose paper was based on science so bad and whose research was so heinous he's no longer a doctor. If the 'drugs should be legal and accessible' stance is based on science that bad, I'd love to see it.