Pinned Tweet
Protecting Kids Online Launch Event xitter.cf/i/broadcasts/1RJjpbrYl…
Protecting Kids Online retweeted
These age verification law are not & never have been about protecting kids. That was/is the excuse. They’ve always been about identity.
The UK has spent years expanding online safety regulations. ⚠️ A new Ofcom review found that most children still report encountering "harmful content" online.
This is exactly the outcome many have been warning about.
Age verification mandates, identity checks, and expansive compliance regimes create new surveillance burdens, but they do not address the underlying causes of online harm.
As lawmakers across the United States are fast-tracking similar proposals, they should learn from the UK's experience and slow down before importing policies that have failed to deliver on their promises.
Parents need better tools, better education, and greater authority over their children's digital lives, not government mandates for data collection, surveillance, and digital ID.
Parents are the firewall.
#ProtectingKidsOnline #ParentsAreTheFirewall
The UK has spent years expanding online safety regulations. ⚠️ A new Ofcom review found that most children still report encountering "harmful content" online.
This is exactly the outcome many have been warning about.
Age verification mandates, identity checks, and expansive compliance regimes create new surveillance burdens, but they do not address the underlying causes of online harm.
As lawmakers across the United States are fast-tracking similar proposals, they should learn from the UK's experience and slow down before importing policies that have failed to deliver on their promises.
Parents need better tools, better education, and greater authority over their children's digital lives, not government mandates for data collection, surveillance, and digital ID.
Parents are the firewall.
#ProtectingKidsOnline #ParentsAreTheFirewall
Full article: yahoo.com/news/world/article…
Protecting Kids Online retweeted
Replying to @PKOproject
we need to make more cool spaces for kids to hang out IRL and bring back whimsy and play!
There is no amount of data collection, surveillance, or censorship that will get a child off a screen. Parents must be willing to set and enforce boundaries for their children.
We’re being forced to hand over our most sensitive data—PII (personally identifiable information)—to platform companies.
In cybersecurity, this is the data you’re supposed to protect at all costs. You don’t just give it out. You don’t hand it over casually. And when you do share it, it should be intentional, limited, and carefully safeguarded.
New legislation is now requiring us to set that discipline aside and release it to these platforms. They’ll use it for access controls and to enforce the rules… and then they’ll turn around and monetize the same private information that identifies you as an individual.
That’s the double-edged sword: enforcement on one side, the end of meaningful privacy on the other.
This is where privacy dies—not with a dramatic breach, but with a quiet mandate to hand over the keys.
Do you see this as necessary protection, or the moment personal privacy effectively ends?
.@mattinformed .@practivesecurity
Protecting Kids Online retweeted
We need parents to harness the power at their fingertips and their power as parents to protect children online, not more government.
Growing the government and inserting the government into our homes and families ≠ conservative values.
This week on The Fine Print podcast with Julie Barrett, .@VanceGinn joins to share why he’s concerned about government increasingly inserting itself into the parent-child relationship through "child safety" policies that involve age-verification mandates that function as digital IDs and expand surveillance.
Check out this clip 👇- full episode drops Sunday at 7PM ET.
youtu.be/DIe3LoCdcqs
Protecting Kids Online retweeted
Understand that none of what is being pushed here gives parents more control, it actually takes away control and gives it to government and big tech. It makes Apple and Google the gatekeepers of the internet, and forces digital ID and mass data collection on everyone.
Protecting Kids Online retweeted
If social media age verification was not enough to squash your liberty, they already claim to be expanding it to device level age verification.
Kids didn't get addicted without being handed an addictive device or being forced to use one in school.
'OUR KIDS ARE TOO IMPORTANT': @AGJamesUthmeier proposes binding phone manufacturers and app stores to parental consent laws, blasting tech giants for putting profits over kid safety
“They are fighting us in court to have 12-year-olds addicted to their applications."
Protecting Kids Online retweeted
I heard a dad say on CNN this week that we need social media platforms to age verify and surveil users because his children won't do their weekend chores - instead they are stuck on screens.
My response: parents, no amount of surveillance, data collection, or age verification can get your child to put the screen down and do their chores. You must set boundaries...you must step up and parent!
Protecting Kids Online retweeted
Florida's AG wants digital ID expanded in the 2027 legislative session with age verification at the App Store and OS levels.
“The app stores like Apple App Store, Google Play, other marketplaces. They also will be bound by law to ensure proper age verification,” he said. “Kids cannot access apps unless they get permission, explicit permission from their parents. These things are going to save lives.”
Requiring age verification, while all the in-app dangers persist, is not going to "save lives." If parents currently cannot be bothered to turn on parental controls that require their permission for app downloads, they aren't going to pay more attention when it's mandated. They'll go through the steps of providing their child's and their government ID and the documentation that shows they are, indeed, the parent or legal guardian of the child so that they can then click the "I approve" box for the child to download apps.
No one protects a child like an engaged parent who is willing to spend the time locking down the device, talking to their child about their online activity, and setting real boundaries around tech in the home.
This is "government as parent" - they are intentionally selling digital ID and government surveillance as "child safety".
This week on The Fine Print podcast with Julie Barrett, .@VanceGinn joins to share why he’s concerned about government increasingly inserting itself into the parent-child relationship through "child safety" policies that involve age-verification mandates that function as digital IDs and expand surveillance.
Check out this clip 👇- full episode drops Sunday at 7PM ET.
youtu.be/DIe3LoCdcqs
Protecting Kids Online retweeted
This seems to be sneaking by under the radar and a fast pace.
But this is what happens when people abdicate personal responsibility. Freedom without virtue is not good, and it seems we have lost virtue and so we are losing freedom. If we want to preserve liberty, we must commit ourselves to the truth and to a virtuous life and to personal responsibility. Because our government is stepping into the gap we have left, and we won’t like that.
If you want to know what’s next, look at what is being done in the name of “safety.”
They’re using “protect the kids” to pass 1984-style state surveillance policies.
Age verification, parent-child linking, device-level tracking, and government-mandated data collection — all required so platforms can enforce the rules. By the time most people realize what was actually built, the systems are already in place.
Watch the full breakdown & replay: youtube.com/live/WIWB-M0hWiE…
Protecting kids doesn’t require a digital ID.
They’re using “protect the kids” to pass 1984-style state surveillance policies.
Age verification, parent-child linking, device-level tracking, and government-mandated data collection — all required so platforms can enforce the rules. By the time most people realize what was actually built, the systems are already in place.
Watch the full breakdown & replay: youtube.com/live/WIWB-M0hWiE…
Protecting kids doesn’t require a digital ID.
One state. Two Meta orders.
New Mexico fined Meta $25 billion for deceptive data practices, then ordered the company to build age-estimation systems, demand proof of age, and open a school portal to flag kids.
The privacy judgment treats the data systems as the harm. The child-safety judgment treats expanded versions of them as the fix.
Full article: protectingkidsonline.substac…
Florida’s new Safe Screens Act proposal would require age verification, parent-child account linking, device-level restrictions, and ongoing monitoring to enforce time limits and design rules.
“Protect the kids” is becoming the excuse for tracking every account.
Read the full breakdown: vrl.link/bb
Safe Screens Act: Digital ID or Real Protection for Kids? xitter.cf/i/broadcasts/1pKkOXlnz…
“Online child safety laws are the most dangerous laws ever. They are not about protecting kids.”
.@GlennMeder argues that when you look at the individual pieces they may not seem alarming, but together they form a “digital control grid” of absolute tyranny. He says these laws are the starting point that undermines the American ideal of rights that come from God, personal freedom (as long as you don’t infringe on others), and free markets.
Listen to the full episode The Fine Print Podcast here: youtu.be/SfnLi6aMmpQ
“The government makes a terrible parent.”
Maureen Flatley has spent decades in child advocacy. In this conversation, she explains why outsourcing parental responsibility to the government — through bills like KOSA, age-verification mandates, and endless platform lawsuits — isn’t just ineffective. It’s actively dangerous.States have a long track record of failing the kids already in their care. Existing child-protection laws already hold parents responsible. And policies that give parents a false sense of security while ignoring actual predators make the problem worse, not better.
Parents are the firewall. The government is not.


















