I appreciate your views, but they do not align with my views. I think the risks of this software being misused (any use other than self-controlled use by the actual end user of the computer) by individuals to attempt to use software to control others is extremely high - it is the actual design objective.
The rest of your post was fairly offensive. I do not know how you arrived at a place where 'love' equals an unequal relationship where someone rules over you, but as someone who was once a child - I never wanted that, never accepted that, never tolerated that. Love is something you participate in, it's not something that is done to you. Using systems and structures to control someone else is a thing done to someone without their consent - it 'coming from a place of love' is irrelevant, except to make such a thing more hurtful -- at least an abusive person being purposefully abusive makes logical sense. Love is something you have the ability to refuse. Someone 'loving' someone else does not give them a right to impose your will on them - the other party has a right to refuse that.
Autonomy does not mean independence. It means having the final say. A different, better society could do better by the people in it. We could have a world where children had the primary voice in their own lives. Instead, we have a world where far too many parents/guardians see children as extensions of themselves and attempt to rule over them. The result is creating a distrust of adults and the motivations adults have with regard to the child in question. By attempting to impose your will in ways that do not matter (in this case, a browser/computer and how such things should work) creates distrust with regards to things that do matter (a high quality education and the importance of it).
You get more offensive (towards me/all decent people) later in your post. As any person with a shred of decency knows, all people gain autonomy fairly early in life - there are structures that prevent people from realizing that autonomy, but those structures are artificial. There is no relation between 'do not think of children as being beneath you' and the shower-thought level social analysis stuff that litters your post, like a damp towel tossed on a living room floor.
I will not engage much with the rest of your post, except to say that is is indicative of a despicable individual. I wouldn't tolerate someone who thinks/feels like that as a co-worker much less allow them into my personal life. You appear to have a warped, distorted view of the world. You view smaller people as people who are beneath you, subject to your rule. You essentially concede that in your post.
May those former children reward your past contempt for them by leaving you to age and pass away - alone. At that point - maybe - you will learn that it is not, in fact, your role to 'impose healthy emotional barriers between the child's world and the adult world' - that your role was limited to preventing someone from being physically hit by a car. That by the time someone has a sufficient grasp on language to be able to handle a web browser......your role had expired. Maybe you will learn that people are fundamentally equal and no one is meant to be ruled over by someone else. It would be a far too late realization, but it's better than never. I have my doubts - you hold truly wretched views. You are, simply put, unqualified to shape the world we live in - to participate in society on any level. This lovely little quote demonstrates why:
Agency and personhood are not the same thing: children develop agency through the process of growing up. A child being subject to adult relations is having their personhood violated and the development of their agency sabotaged. It is the parents' responsibility to define healthy emotional borders between their world and the adult world.
I'm going to ignore your second effort to imply that 'using a computer in the same way that everyone else does' is an analog to sexual abuse, except I guess I'm not ignoring it but noting that you did it and that you are contemptible for doing so. Your 'adult relations' line appears to be a sexual abuse dog whistle, much like your 'a very ugly place indeed' line.
If I pretend that you aren't trying to conflate computers with sexual abuse, but you instead define 'adult relations' as 'using a computer', I would respond to you as follows:
Agency and personhood are not the same thing: children develop agency through the process of growing up. A child being subject to adult relations is having their personhood violated and the development of their agency sabotaged. It is the parents' responsibility to define healthy emotional borders between their world and the adult world.
The person who has those thoughts - who genuinely believes that garbage - is a person that makes the society we live in coarser. A person oppositional to all that is decent in our world, actively working to make the lives of others worse. May you die alone - peacefully, but alone.
In light of Kagi's refusal to reverse course on building user hostile software, I have cancelled my Kagi subscription. I just can't stomach spending against my values any longer.
