Speaking as an ed-tech advocate and practitioner, having written games and platforms for kids, worked in schools, have kids who program- I can't align with this

Speaking as an ed-tech advocate and practitioner, having written games and platforms for kids, worked in schools, have kids who program- I can't align with this perspective enough. We are biological/physical/chemical/etc embodied entities, with a spectrum of interactions, especially sub-teen- the range of which far exceeds present understanding. Children need literal human contact, on real-life modalities, to survive and thrive. A child raised by screens would die. For the later high school set, potential improvements within the limited screen modalities have some value, but still- this all reminds of early AI framings, where a machine playing chess was thought to be the sum total of human engagement capability. Those making the argument didn't even know how not-even-wrong they are.