It's also important to understand that this is not a binary situation. You will never keep 100% of the kids from 100% of the inappropriate material. So it should be a debate about levels, and trade-offs.
replyIMO, the approach of having the large / popular commercial OS platforms ask you the birthday of the primary user on install (and secure that so it can't be changed), and then reveal the age (bucketed to a range) to apps. If you don't have kids, or care what they see, just put Jan 1 1900 (or have an explicit opt-out, which puts you in the last bucket). After that it's up to parents to parent.
I saw porn when I was under 18, and I'd wager the majority of people also have going back to the 70s or 80s. We all ended up mostly normal
replyMillenials are the first generation that had massive, unrestricted access to porn online. I'd wager a good chunk were negatively affected. Overconsumption was not much of a risk, until it was. To say nothing about extreme content.
reply<<Looks around>>> You call this normal?!?
replyPrivacy is way more important than protecting kids from consuming content online. Kids already have more protection than it's worth, probably, this is moving in the wrong direction.
reply> there are way more adults in the world than kids
replyHow can that be? The world population has been growing for decades.
Yeah but kids that are online are perhaps ~5 to 17, while adults go from 18 to 80, 90 or more. Moreover, social media is usually also allowed for older teenagers, so it's not necessarily all people up to 18 that need filtering out.
reply