The tone of this article is "just let kids be kids, okay?"<p>I agree with the tone.<p>The nagging part is the fact that "kids being kids" never included making media of their naked selves doing sexual stuff before. Media which can easily be distributed to millions, including some very sick people. Media which can last a lifetime (or longer)<p>Sure, we smoked pot when we were kids, and we read Playboys too. But nobody has videos of us doing all of that on YouTube. The electronic records problem here is extremely disturbing.<p>With the current FB conflict, I'm sure that most <i>adults</i> don't realize what kind of electronic record they're leaving all over the place, much less their kids. As a society, we've generally tried to protect kids from doing things that could have lifelong consequences. Do we want to give that up?<p>The underlying philosophy is a tricky-wicket. We don't necessarily allow kids to do stuff simply because "kids will be kids", i.e., it's natural for them to do it. So while I'm all with the emotion of the article, the underlying issues are a lot trickier than I think the author lets on. You can't just skim over the fact that 30 years from now when you're applying to be Supreme Court Justice that videos of your 14-year-old self doing stupid people sex tricks could be out there circulating. Fair or not, people aren't going to understand.