Child-locked devices can already whitelist/blacklist sites and apps. The issue is not capability.
And before anyone blames the parents, parents will always be shitty. They are an impediment to children's health society must work around.
I wish we would just pull the plug on ad-based social media altogether. The incentives add up to destroying society.
I don't think passively assuming you'll end up on the relevant lists is going to do it for websites that need to keep kids out for whatever reason.
Regulating such a list seems like a very backwards and expensive way to do this when kids will just use their parents identity (or make up one wholesale). Surely this is really about trying to hold people liable for speech politicians and lobbyists don't like.
> And before anyone blames the parents, parents will always be shitty. They are an impediment to children's health society must work around.
...huh? This is completely backwards. We should be making laws that punish parents for failing to parent properly. Not laws that punish everyone.
If we pass a law that children under a certain age may not use social media, then giving your child a non-child-locked device should be treated the same way we treat giving your child alcohol or cigarettes.
"parents will always be shitty"
Maybe cut nontechnicals a little slack? Their adversaries have invested literally billions of dollars in R&D.
This isn't a question of technicality....