Are We Really Protecting Children?

Are We Really Protecting Children?

A quick opinion on the recent push for “Child Safety”.

The debate around the Online Safety Act (and similar laws worldwide) often misses a key point. Giving parents strong tools is more effective than requiring broad surveillance that puts everyone’s sensitive data at risk.We’ve seen time and again what happens when massive datasets are created, billions of records exposed in breaches, identities stolen, and financial accounts drained. Adding intrusive age-verification systems and mass data collection in the name of “protecting children” simply multiplies those risks.

🔑 Parental control tools are powerful, practical, and still underestimated.

They allow families to make decisions about what their children can access online without forcing every internet user into invasive monitoring schemes. These laws, however, don’t go after the real perpetrators: the predators, exploiters, and organized groups that actually create unsafe online environments.Another concerning issue is the stigma around questioning these measures. Too often, raising objections to mass surveillance is equated with supporting illicit activity. In reality, it’s about protecting privacy, reducing systemic risk, and acknowledging that state-mandated surveillance has significant limitations.We live in a world where data = life. Every action we take, paying bills, visiting a hospital, driving a car, buying groceries, leaves digital traces. These traces can be used constructively, but they can also be exploited for censorship, manipulation, targeted propaganda, or malicious attacks. It’s not hard to imagine a near future where digital identity clones are used in fraud or illicit activities, making today’s privacy compromises tomorrow’s crises.It’s ironic: Western democracies often criticize China’s surveillance model, yet some policymakers seem eager to replicate parts of it under the banner of “safety.” But control over the masses is not safety, it’s vulnerability.The real solution lies in:

• Awareness & education (especially for parents and older generations navigating a digital world).
• Smart parental controls that put responsibility where it belongs: with families, not surveillance agencies.
• Targeted enforcement against actual criminals rather than blanket suspicion on every citizen.

The best protection for children is education. To educate them, parents must first be equipped and educated themselves.

UK Age Verification — What’s Actually Happening

New data from the UK’s age-verification rollout confirms what critics predicted: instead of protecting children, these laws may be driving users toward less regulated, potentially more dangerous sites. Techdirt

Some key findings:

• When sites comply (by demanding government IDs, face scans, etc.), their UK traffic collapses. Many users simply abandon those sites. Techdirt
• Meanwhile, non-compliant sites have experienced significant increases in UK users. One explicit site doubled its UK traffic since the law came into effect. Techdirt
• Because users want to avoid invasive verification, many are migrating to sketchier, less regulated alternatives — often ones that offer guidance on how to bypass restrictions (e.g., using VPNs, Tor, etc.). Techdirt

This isn’t just about inconvenience; it’s counterproductive. We’re creating privacy risks, driving legitimate users underground, and rewarding the least responsible actors. This is what everyone expected, and most privacy experts have tried to call on.

Why This Matters & What We Should Do

1. Parental tools over sweeping mandates
   Parental controls give families agency. They tailor protections to their values and needs without forcing everyone into surveillance or mandatory identity checks.
2. Designing regulation that doesn’t backfire
   If a law encourages mass migration to “sketchier” platforms, then the law has essentially failed in its purpose. Regulations must be tested for unintended consequences.
3. Transparency & proportionate enforcement
   Restrictions or verification requirements must be proportionate to the harm being addressed. Blanket data gathering in the name of protection is a slippery slope.
4. Education & public awareness
   Teach children, parents, caregivers, and even policymakers about digital hygiene, risk, and how to protect personal data. Legislation should support this, not replace it.
5. Targeting the real bad actors
   The real threats are exploiters, content outside legal/regulated domains, and malicious actors. Resources should focus on detection, attribution, and enforcement of harms, not mass suspicion or dragnet approaches.

The best protection for children isn’t in just passing more laws or building bigger verification walls. It’s in thoughtful design: tools that allow parental control, regulations that avoid perverse incentives, and educating everyone in the chain: kids, parents, society.

🔒 Privacy and safety can coexist, but only if we prioritize smart, targeted policies over blanket surveillance.