> Any of these beats becoming a rotbrain in front of YouTube kids for hours.

Technically, the jury is still out on this. I don't think anyone's done any kind of study of how childhood YouTube brainrot affects their long term outlook during adulthood, simply because YouTube brainrot is too new. For what it's worth, if I had to bet money, I'd agree with you that "socialized, bonded, explored, etc." is better than YouTube, but I don't think this has been proven yet. It's just a gut feeling.

Children growing up in pampered, protected, desocialised environments isn’t a new phenomenon never before seen in history though.

We’re also looking at strong survivor bias. My grandfather played in the fields after WW2 (Eastern Europe) and had friends who died or had limbs blown off by undetonated mines from the war (preschool/school age). You likely never heard their stories since they didn’t make it to present day.

There are definitely many benefits to socialization outside, but let’s not forget the tradeoffs. Mental health can be repaired (I.e. ozempic for the mind?), permanent injuries - much less so.

(I picked an extreme example to prove a point, I’m not suggesting the risks of playing outside today are equivalent. But the risks are real nonetheless)

There is no pill for a sheltered existence

> the risks of playing outside today are equivalent

In Ukraine they are / will be for many years.

What? I think the point here is not that minefields don't exist it's that there's a huge jump from wanting kids to play outside to having them play in a minefield. There's plenty of Ukraine left that ISN'T a minefield.

What about the rest of the world where there aren't land mines?

How many of these experiences included bullying, fighting and abusing each other? Kids are not kind.