I just see it as an unnecessary hill to die on. Its not possible to win on those conditions so why spend energy on a failed outcome? I wish those who shared the sentiment found an effective method to achieve their goals, but online message board activism doesn't pass the sniff test.

To me it's a public health issue and shares the same, "you can do what you want, but I will not be forced into participating," that resulted in the invention of chin diapers. To an outsider both look like pathological demand avoidance[1].

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathological_demand_avoidance

It's a general principle but too simplistic to contribute to a solution.

I believe I should prevent you from starving, willfully or negligently harming (in a serious way), or denying significant education or medical care to your childern; I believe you shouldn't be able to take your children into some adult places like strip clubs.

The strip clubs also have an obligation to keep out your children and need a method to do so, in this case the online 'strip clubs'.

The question is, given other priorities such as privacy, what is the best method? I think it's parental tools in OSes, including the ability to setup accounts for minors.

so geographical region of birth dictates intelligence? how intriguing.

i would like to know if that child was fed well, provided with shelter and given a good education -- would it still be, in your words, "not possible" for them to break even 100IQ?

I think it is in fact not the case that high income people generally have significantly higher IQ than average. As for billionaires: when was the last billionaire IQ survey done?