You don't need LLM's or diffusion models to overwhelm "moderation at scale" because "moderation at scale" was a fantasy in the first place, and its cracks had already been exposed and widening.
Maybe you were hanging onto some optimism and needed the jostle of this new technology to see how doomed it all was already?
The later might as well been computer generated...
People are 99% nature, 1% nurture. We evolved to survive worse than witnessing pregnant Spider Man.
Not having children myself it's easy for me to say that everything on the internet should be treated as if it was 18+ and therefore children don't belong on the internet. Period. Especially not on their own. There are exceptions of course like websites that are highly geared towards the education of children but youtube (kids) in it's majority is not that.
People are born with some predisposition to certain behaviors, but that is far from being set in stone.
Good, attentive parenting is the difference maker.
There's not much you can do apart from providing a decent baseline and getting lucky. Which, on the one hand, is profoundly relaxing; on the other, it's pretty depressing and scary.
Social scientists are LARPing as actual scientists. There is no rigor. Most people in the hard sciences have little regard or respect for their work.
Arguing that parents play little/no role in the development of children is peak academic nonsense.
Studies like what you’re citing only give comfort to the parents who would rather live life looking at their phones than parent their children.