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 10 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 7 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		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.
	▲	Dylan16807 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		"presents themselves" is too vague here. Presents to who? When you talk about a person instead of a webserver, that person is actually reading the profile, which makes a big difference. In the pornhub situation, someone who reads the comments will report them. The website doesn't need to throw machine learning at everything people type.