> why can't you accept the fact that the societal benefit outweighs the potential risk? Because a shit technical solution (which opens the doors to other abuse

> why can't you accept the fact that the societal benefit outweighs the potential risk? Because a shit technical solution (which opens the doors to other abuses) isn’t the fix. Because Apple are not the government. A meaningful scheme to protect the children would need: - better sex ed in schools - better education for parents and people who would like to become parents as to the risks and signs - publicly announced meaningful support for people who self-identify with dangerous thoughts and seek help before their thoughts become behaviours - better support for people from abusive homes as they mature - (probably) two or three generations to pass through before you could measure statistically sound improvement