they stopped telling kids to protect their personal information because it was more convenient than actually preventing kids from using social media. they stopped telling parents to monitor their kids' usage of the internet because it's more convenient than dealing with angry parents or preventing kids from getting into stuff their parents don't like, and more profitable to be able to market to kids.
now, they're implementing automatic age registration and restriction, because this is apparently considered more convenient and more profitable than providing an actual solution for kids and their parents, and it's more profitable and convenient than any idea of a blanket ban of children from the internet.
in this way, things orient themselves such that they perfectly serve the interests of capital, and perfectly violate the interests of individuals they serve as much as possible.
in essence, capitalism is about:
a: making as much money as possible for one person on top
b: hurting the workers as much as is physically possible while not interfering with the first rule
c: perpetuating the existence of capitalism ad infinitum
so internet, a tool which from its inception has clearly, quickly, and unquestionably shaped the world for the better in many, many ways, is convenient, and ubiquitous, and effective for its goals, must inevitably be dulled. this is that concept of "enshitification" applied on mass scale, on a structural level.
the children are an available and valuable market, and you want to squeeze as much money out of them and their parents as is possible. personal information is an available and valuable market, and you want to squeeze as much money out of that and their providers as is possible.
when the internet was initially created, people were much more careful with it, and as time's gone on, things have gotten much more blase. but here's my main point:
the reason we're seeing such extensive problems with the way the internet and children intersect is because the interests of capital want it to be so. there are a million and one potential motivations for why rich, powerful people would want things to go a certain way with regard to the way the internet and the technology around it progresses, but the reason children in particular are such a sticking point is the same reason it's a sticking point in other issues: it's an easy way to draw up knee-jerk political animus, because people generally want to protect those most vulnerable in our society. it's a fundamentally reactionary position, so it's a lot easier to slip you into a shirt you don't agree with that you now have to defend. and in that way, there's a lot of "progress" made with the explicit goal of furthering the interests of capital, with the excuse given of "protecting children".
this is why all of the conversation and legislation and whatever surrounding children on the internet seems so ass backwards and unproductive: it's designed to be. it's designed not to solve these problems (sometimes they're explicitly designed to make them worse!)
we have solutions to all of these problems. there are solutions that can be developed that would be infinitely more reasonable, more achievable, and likely more effective. hell, just giving good net safety advice is a good solution!
the reason things are the way they are is because of the conscious decisions of a few very powerful people.
