Okay, in the specific upthread context;

* there are very few urban population clump on the planet that don't face the threat of child grooming and exploitation, both before and after the digital device explosion.

* that threat vector significantly increased and morphed with the spread of personal digital devices for children; the threat comes no longer from potentially any personal with contact in real life, it has now expanded to include potentially the entire digital world and now can be automated via groomGPT

* A simple "where were the parents" response on a per parent basis is unfair in the sense that spotting grooming in a digital device world is a difficult challenge .. even a simple constrained playground with stock babytalk language construction can be socially backdoored (See: "I want to stick my long-necked Giraffe up your fluffy white bunny" )

* Concerned parents will look for solutions, communities, at local, state, and federal levels should devote resources to providing solutions in informed contexts and graduated levels.

* Unaware parents will exist, and will likely dominate the demographics, or not?

* Is the correct _default_ social policy here (answer varies by country and culture) to shield the less cyber aware from the worst of the worst with filters ... that the better informed can bypass or deselect?

I guess where we diverge on PoV is where the perimeter of swiss cheese protection should extend to.