Technology

This is something parents should decide. They should know what kinds of content their kids will be exposed to, and decide when they're ready. This isn't something we should expect platforms or governments to decide.

Some parents will make terrible choices, but I think that's less bad than what's necessary to enforce either a ban or content moderation. I see nothing good coming from that longer term.

I disagree with this point.

I used the internet extensively as a minor to socialize and find friends and to be exposed to viewpoints different from those of my peers. If I only had my peers to socialize with, things would have been much worse off for me. I found kind and supportive influences as a minor that kept me away from the hate/conservatism/fascism that many of my classmates descended into. I learned about the world and gained skills that made me a more well-rounded person. I even met up in person with thousands of strangers and had a grand time.

I see the gatekeeping of minors from internet spaces and worry about the impact that would have had on me and my development as a young person. If I hadn't been welcomed as a minor online, I would not have been welcomed anywhere.

That said, I stayed the hell away from corporate spyware like facebook and twitter that only serve to reinforce existing problematic systems, expose people to the toxic IRL social environments that they may otherwise be trying to escape, and amplify the kind of hatred and bigotry that I personally was evading.

I miss the old internet where kids were safe. I don't think that the solution is to ban kids; the solution is to ban platforms and profiteering incentive structures that create unsafe environments. The kids are the canaries in a coal mine. If the canary isn't doing well, you don't just ban it and keep digging: you get the hell out and find somewhere else to be.

That's a misreading of the headline. Pro-LGBT speech IS allowed, but often suppressed.