Your Step 2 assumes complete idiot parents. Parents who hand their kids a new device without adding any parental controls (A) are already in the minority today

Your Step 2 assumes complete idiot parents. Parents who hand their kids a new device without adding any parental controls (A) are already in the minority today - I know a lot of parents and none of us would do that, and (B) can't be helped anyway under any scheme other than invasive identity "verification" (which this law isn't). > bypassed by anyone using open source operating systems You know what? If millions of tweens develop a keen interest in building Linux and Firefox from source just to get "the good TikTok" I'm fine with that. In reality 99% of them use iOS and Android nearly exclusively, so Linux is irrelevant to the conversation. > The service provider is responsible We tried that. That's the status quo. There are only two options I know for this, both stupid. 1. (the current model) Just trust the user. Talk about 'trivially bypassed'! 2. Invasive ID checks - with the camera, identity documents, and government databases. If parents want to go out of their way to irresponsibly give their kids unmonitored access to content that is bad for them that's on the parents. If you try to make service providers "responsible" for it, they WILL build invasive, corporate-controlled systems to cover their asses. Basically option 3 but controlled by shitty companies that get hacked, instead of even a theoretically accountable government that will get hacked. Note that I am not saying your option 3 would be acceptable, just that a private version of it would be even grosser.