Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!panix!.POSTED.2602:f977:0:1::2!not-for-mail
From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
Newsgroups: comp.misc,nz.general,aus.computers
Subject: Re: Banning Social Media For Under-16s
Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 14:55:17 -0400 (EDT)
Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)
Message-ID: <100am2l$3la$1@panix2.panix.com>
References: <10044na$30sk8$1@dont-email.me> <1f7f2kl88kh74u5r8c1hs0cb9rnmhsq162@4ax.com> <100ao1q.t98.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
Injection-Info: reader1.panix.com; posting-host="2602:f977:0:1::2";
	logging-data="28585"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"

Frank Slootweg  <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:
>> 
>> It is up to parents to supervise their children's online activity, not
>> politicians.
>
>  Indeed. And the majority of parents are doing *such* a good job of it
>and know *exactly* what their children are (not) doing.

Which is why online controls won't work, because they won't have support
of many parents... and the parents who are willing to do the work to 
support them are the ones who won't need them.

When I was 16 I snuck into movie theatres to watch x-rated movies, which
is probably more harmful than watching them on one's phone and certainly
requires far more effort.  No matter what rules you put in place, kids 
will find a way around them.  

The only solution is to actually educate kids about sex rather than
telling them lies like I got when I was younger.
--scott
-- 
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."