The alternative to self-regulation isn’t to just give up (put it in the parents hands)
Putting it in the parents hands isn't "giving up". That's where the responsibility should be. There is no other entity capable of performing this task without undue invasion of privacy.
it’s to have a multi pillared approach
This isn't a case where throwing everything at the problem makes it better. It doesn't. Every effort we take is another invasion into our privacy; into the privacy of children. Everything we do makes the privacy problem worse, and most of what we can do will also make it easier to identify and target children for additional harm.
Again: removing consumer age-gating and replacing it with nothing is a bad idea.
We aren't "removing" anything. Consumer age gating does not exist. It has never existed. It never needs to exist. Age gating isn't just virtue signalling. Age gating is actively enabling harm.
The current model is primarily prohibition and nothing for the rest of us….that’s very dangerous.
The current model is not "prohibition". The current model is "parental supervision".
You’re arguing that if it’s possible for groomers to get the data
No. I'm arguing that groomers are now required to collect the data. We used to be able to prosecute suspicious people for needlessly invading the privacy of others. With the current crop of laws, we require them to identify children.
You can’t just call every company who collects data a groomer,
Strawman. I didn't claim that. What I claimed is that every groomer who happens to provide a web service to Californians will be required to collect children's age data as of January 1, 2027.
I don’t agree that returning the internet to an unregulated hellhole with only user tools is the answer.
Supplanting user tools with centralized regulation is exactly what made the internet a hellhole.