Children are going to be assaulted and taken advantage of by people they know who are in positions of power.
While this is true, the power isn't always obvious and actually the most common people to harm a child are family members. The second most common is people known to the family, not just the child - so yes priests or pastors are included, but aren't most common and this also includes friends of the family, coaches, babysitters, etc. People that the family trusts.
It's parents' job to protect their kids, not any site/game (and I say this as a parent). And it's infinitesimally easier to protect your kid from people you don't know on the internet than it is to protect them from someone that has gained your trust over years and that live with you, or that you let into your home, or that you let your kid into their home, or you trust to give your kid a ride home after practice. Really, I think that's why people are up in arms about this, and stranger danger in general - because it gives them something to focus on that they feel like they can control. Even though actually not talking to strangers isn't feasible (because everyone is a stranger until you get to know them - classmates, teachers, neighbors, doctors, cashiers at the store, the mailman that may ask you to sign for a package, heck family when you're first born), you can feel like you're doing something by preaching stranger danger, or by forcing Roblox to change. But it's not feasible (and wouldn't be mentally healthy for the kid) to actually protect a kid from the people most likely to harm them (you'd have to, just for a start, never let even the parents be alone with the kid; but even then, who could be the supervisor? Any family is just as much danger. You'd have to hire people and replace them often enough that the family doesn't get to know them, but even then predators could take the job...), so we have to live with the assumption that we can trust the people we trust.
If you have double check everything the Chat bot tells you, why bother with it in the first place? Seems like a way a stupid person would waste a lot of time.
Why indeed? You're right, that does seem stupid.
Asking the AI if the hardware store is open when the consequence of it being wrong is I drive a few extra miles to Lowe's and deal with the more limited selection of whatever there. Is a great use of AI. I have saved time trying to make a call waiting for someone to answer or not, or trying to find their website, trying to locate their hours on said website, so on. If I drive by and see the open sign isn't lit i don't even have to stop the car, the consequences for being wrong are low.
Or you could have saved even more time by just driving past and not asking AI at all. So yes, why bother wasting time with AI?
Thus spake the master programmer: "After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"