[ibejoeb]

Not for the past 20 years. I also don't participate in Patronscan and other similar surveillance operations.

That is beside the point. I'm talking about the incoherent argument about a parent's supposed obligation to stop parenting and the government taking over. There are three premises here asserted by the author: 1) the child's need for independence, 2) a parent's duty to stop parenting, and 3) the government stepping in. Number 1 is contrary to 3, and I don't agree with either 2 or 3. What do you think?

[croes]

The government isn’t stepping in, the government enforces checks by site owners like it enforces age checks in liquor stores.

The point is not if the access to the internet for children should be limited but how.

Given the number of cameras nowadays a zero knowledge age checks may be more privacy friendly than you personally buying something in a store