On the internet almost everyone wants to extract money from kids and their parents and they try to hook them up with different mechanisms. That is also true for

On the internet almost everyone wants to extract money from kids and their parents and they try to hook them up with different mechanisms. That is also true for Apple, although they appeal to protective instincts of their guardians. I get why a safe environment is appealing. Parents know that their kids get milked by virtual goods in games or social media and don't know how to protect them from that. I think states are indeed responsible to set sensible boundaries for the industry to protect minors. But this cannot lead to subject the whole net to it. Age verification is also not possible, so a protected environment is the way to go. The latter is difficult to advertise to developers because they also know about corporate ambitions to get their hands on market share. Google isn't even the worst actor, more aggressive corps like Amazon are far more destructive in this field, but there isn't a single corp that is guilty here, so legislation also needs to protect free spaces. While seemingly in contradiction, this is also extremely important for digital education of future generations, even more so than questionable content in my opinion. Most here might have been subjected to that as kids. Was it that bad as generally assumed? This is a threat that should not be overblown. Parents feeling guilty neglecting their kids are extremely vulnerable to this line of thinking, even if they don't neglect their kids at all. Many countries have rules against cartels, but there is a conflict of interest here. No country likes to split their most successful companies for nothing in an international market. So nobody does.