> no more feeds showing content from outside social connections

So, kill all news agencies and reporters I guess? or would there be a carve out for incumbents so they can cement their market share? who controls the approval list?

Ban infinite scroll? Sounds like a slippery slope and also hard to enforce. I don't even know how you would craft such a law.

> tuning their social media systems to create addiction

Except this has nothing to do with social media nor with children nor with addiction.

I love how every harm you listed, is a platform design problem, and your fix touches none of it. A kid bypassing VPN age checks can still doomscroll and Roblox all day on a school wifi with no VPN at all. The only thing you've actually accomplished is stripping privacy and security from every adult who isn't a child abuser, to feel like you did something about the ones who are.

Requiring ID (which is what age gating is) for VPNs is absurd. Given that SSH can act as a proxy service, are you going to require all ssh connections out of the country to be age verified?

Maybe they should get the pedos out of the government instead of a foolish attempt at restricting and harming everyone else? It's not ever going to protect or make children safer. It never was.

You want age checking, you want ids .

> But some inconvenience is a price worth considering.

You're trying to frame it as an "inconvenience" and not a blatant attack on the fundamental freedom of expression. I get that social media is bad, but sometimes (often) the cure is worse than the illness.

> Social media got worse.

Sure, whatever. Maybe in some ways.

> I personally know children who've posted too much, and children who've been solicited directly by adults, both to try and meet and for nudes.

... but not in that way.

I personally knew children who'd been solicited directly by adults before there was even an Internet. Including me, if you use the definition of "child" that seems to be popular in this sort of debate (and, by the way, it wasn't a big deal).

We did not shut down the world because of it.

More like the dumb people keep breeding and the magic rocks keep showing pretty colors

In terms of political power, programmers are more like yeomen than peasants. Yeomen have power due to their essential skills because if a good fraction of them stopped working the system would collapse. (Whereas if peasants stop working, they just starve.) If a sufficient number of programmers said "We're not going to implement or support privacy-invading systems" the government would have to back down.