> A lot of the criticism is based on the concept that it won't be technically watertight

Those who do that, are not interested in this ban working, they are the individualists assaulting the community.

> a) normalising people uploading identification documents...

we have technical measures for which there is no need for the end user to upload anything. With oath you can basically have a simple age check; nothing more.

> (b) a small fraction of kids branching off into fringe networks that are off the radar and will take them to very dark places very quickly.

You can always minimize the fraction, but you can never make it go away.

> Because it's politically unattractive, I don't think enough attention has been given to the harms that will flow from these laws.

This was a politically bold move and there will be no harms that will come out of it; especially when compared to the status quo.

Those who feign concern about this usually have vested interests into stopping this bill; their "interest" is just another attempt in stopping it albeit with a more "nuanced" approach.