I don't see how that's related to what we're talking about--except as an attempt to take an even more extreme set of cases to justify the need for regulating wh

I don't see how that's related to what we're talking about--except as an attempt to take an even more extreme set of cases to justify the need for regulating what everybody can and cannot read online. In the extremely rare cases where parents aren't able to take care of children, new guardians might be assigned by the government, but then they would take on the same responsibilities as the original parents, including not letting a kid starve himself to death because of an internet video. If you mean that the State is justified to intervene in some cases sure--but it depends how extreme these cases are. Certainly not what people post on the internet (on top of already existing laws that regulate dangerous behavior).