I have no particular intention of locking down my 15-year old (in 13 years) with serious parental controls. But not all children are 15. Letting a 4-year-old run around loose on the Internet with no protection sounds like a bad idea to me. Which do you prefer, simply telling a 6-year-old "No internet access for you!", or drawing some boundaries but letting them roam within them freely?
"Someday, your children will need to be able to live without Mommy and Daddy saving them from everything!" is not an argument for throwing your 5-year-old out on the street.
To cover what I said: 1) I have remained in control of my "virtual" life my entire life. 2) I have never made a mistake of telling someone I don't know anything important about me 3) I believe if I can do it, others can too.
At best in this case, it's just everyone you know / email with. How many people you communicate with can be trusted online with all the information you give them? Most people use 2 or 3 passwords total! What if they lose control of their accounts? And when was the last time someone got in trouble for info they put on Facebook? Minutes ago? Seconds? The internet is arguably more dangerous than driving, though you're less likely to die, you instead just lose everything. I've had more viruses than car crashes (zero).
In a car you are entrusting your life to other drivers, but in sharing information about yourself, you are entrusting yourself.
I'm trying to say "You have no control over others, but you have control over yourself" which is why I view your point as incorrect- yet interesting.