[dpark]

Protecting kids is well within the scope of the government.

This “it’s the parents job” is also reductionist. It is, but somehow we still have made it illegal for minors to buy hard liquor and pornography from physical stores in the United States and few argue that restriction is wrong.

[rootlocus]

And they still find ways to drink themselves to alcohol induced comas. There's no real substitute for education and parental nurturing only best effort band-aid solutions. Children with problems at home are more likely to be targeted by bullies or child predators.

I'm not saying the government shouldn't do anything, they should and it should probably involve legislature around social media that positively affects adults as well. But raising a child, teaching it what's dangerous and what's safe and developing a relationship of trust so you're aware when there's danger lurking, that's a parent's job. No amount of legislation will help neglected children. They're tiny, curious, ingenious humans who will find ways to get what they want.

[dpark]

Children drinking themselves into alcohol induced comas is fairly rare. Teenagers consuming large amounts of explicit pornography is not at all rare.

I agree nothing will replace parenting. The children who do drink themselves into comas are largely enabled by adults (who are also generally committing a crime). But there is harm reduction the government can and probably should do.

I have to say, as much as I think the article author here is naive, I also have to wonder if the net positives outweigh the net negatives. Uploading an id and face scan to a pornography site seems like the worst of all possible scenarios. Getting a government issue credential is better than that at least.

[jonhohle]

No one is saying it’s one or the other. It’s both. There are certain children who need protection from bad parenting and certain parents that need protection for their neurodivergent children.