> poor kids are being somehow oppressed by...not having phones banned? I never used the word oppressed. Poor kids are stunted by device exposure compared to ri

> poor kids are being somehow oppressed by...not having phones banned? I never used the word oppressed. Poor kids are stunted by device exposure compared to rich kids. The iPad-kid effect is a depressingly-consistent class indicator in kids under ~10. > In what world is putting the onus on content providers to self-label content intrusive? It regulates all speech. Every content provider has to tag their content in that system. I’m just calling for social media companies to be regulated. > doesn't even require government interaction at all - if it's unrated the browser doesn't load it Obviously doesn’t work in practice given the massive collective-action requirement with no penalty for lying and no incentive for participating. > tired of parents pearl clutching away my civil liberties You think social media companies don’t know how old you are? This political will is being stupidly expressed in many jurisdictions, granted. Pushing age verification to the OS is overkill. But parents are calling their electeds. Civil-rights groups, to my knowledge, have been able to muster no similar civil response. So the bans will come into play however they may, and then hopefully they can be amended down the road. Given the political nihilism running rampant in tech circles, I’m grumpily okay with this.