This is not a place for minors. Minors need to be regulated in public spaces. Its true on the streets, in the malls, in schools, in shops, and its true on the internet. Not because the internet is "private" but because children unsupervised and getting into mischeif should be guided back to their parents and denied access. Public spaces entering the home began with radio and television. We got used to allowing children to consume unfiltered content. Unfiltered by the parents, not the government. Corporations gained access to children through the radio, and programmed them with music, news and politics. This programmed them to be rebellious, immodest and over-sexualized. Listen to Elvis and the Beatles in the mind of a parent of the era. Much of it is sexually explicit, not crudely or visually, but the inuendo is very sexual. Parents wouldn't have chosen to purchase this content for their children. Businesses profited hansomely from the destruction of morals of teenagers of the early 60s. The first victims were girls. Television only amplified this broadcasting of romanticizing sex. They got the housewife hooked on sexual relationship drama, and when you infect the mother of the household with normalized immodesty, all morals go out the window for all of society. Now we have the internet. We have no moral compass for raising children and knowing what we should allow. Internet access was made universal by federal programs. Much like when the Romans built the roads, and societies collapsed as a result, not only from transient thieves and roaming raiders, but by making it easy for adults to evade responsibilities and commitments by just walking away. The city gates became untenable, crime and litigation needed to be handled in the city square and many parties being prosecuted weren't even from the town. Without roads, these societal vices were self-attenuating. With roads, "freedom" expanded, but policing became central to governance. The internet is roads with no police. Instead of government action protecting us after-the-fact, we bolt everything down and lock it in impenetrable safes (figuratively). Would you let your child roam freely in such a global and unregulated space? I do not. I was one of the earliest adopters of "the internet". I was on dial-up BBSs when the internet was primarily something used by universities and military. I was one of the first to use "wireless internet" over ham radio (AX.25) back when cell phones were still analog (yes, they were analog). I know what kind of mushrooms kids could get into back then, and what kind of brainwashing content they will seek out and find. This means I know precisely how to stop it, and how to allow in what is good. The government action against privacy exploits the fact that parents are at a disadvantage because they have been brainwashed to fear limiting access to information for their children. They fear it is being "too controlling" or "overprotective". Hogwash. These are the pleas of a helpless woman. Somehow we still regard psychobabble and justification of unparenting from working mothers as our moral anchor. This is the blind leading the blind. I know where the bear shits in the woods. Short answer, look into tools like FamilyLink and PearGuard, and limit access to ONLY websites you explicitly approve. Your children may bitch and moan, but they will not hate you for neglect, and will appreciate your guidance and protection.