> I'd also argue it's clear and convincing if a kid changes their profile picture to a selfie of themselves, says they're 12, says they're in grade school, etc. Any reasonable person would take that at face value.

That's so fragile, and it's not like they're making those claims to the site, it's natural language posting.

And someone who knows what they're doing would never take "I'm twelve years old and what is this?" at face value.

▲

heavyset_go 12 hours ago | parent [-]

Would you be willing to send explicit content to someone who presents themselves as a child online? A reasonable person wouldn't.

No one is suggesting a meme should be taken literally.

▲

Dylan16807 11 hours ago | parent [-]

You've completely changed the scenario. A human doing a one on one examination and personally sending data is totally different from a website allowing an account to exist and browse.

▲

heavyset_go 5 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm using send as a synonym for serve, would you serve such content to someone who presents themselves as a child on your platform? No.

Like do you really think someone who presents themselves as a child on Pornhub will stay registered and not banned? They aren't going to serve porn to someone who presents themselves as a kid.

I think it's pretty clear and convincing when someone presents themselves as a child on your platform. I'd be convinced and wouldn't take that liability on.

	▲	hellojesus an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I agree with you, but then the implication becomes, "any platform that allows user content must scan all content posted or uploaded by the user to determine if any of it suggests they are a minor". I adds a bit of burden to all sites under the threat of civil penalties. Say I own a site that allows user posts like HN. If someone mentions they're in grade school in any post and later starts receiving links to adult sites in their DMs, now I'm liable.