I read most parts of this thread and to me this is an interesting discussion without having an easy solution. You are most likely right when saying that “the fix for that is make sure the people/children get a good balanced education” but this is an ideal, a normative plan, a good plan, sure, but it doesn´t have to do anything with pragmatic behaviour in everyday life.
Let´s look at this scenario:
The SAFE network runs in a solid way. Several thousand people use it, which raises their privacy and gives them a better control over their data. State regulations don´t care for it, since it is pretty small and irrelevant (now that I am writing this, it really sounds like the internet in its early days). Applications are developed on top of SAFE, everyday Joes start using the system. Then, someone starts storing illegal pornography on the system and immediately there is a debate on whether this strange technology should be banned immediately, legilators get under presure and eventually ban the access. This, of course, doesn´t change the fact that the pornography will still be around, but a large part of the mainstream demographic would stop using the system because people would say: “ah, you are supporting this network that harms people”. Looking back in the close past, in a way this is what happened to Silk Road. Silk Road had an ethical code: there were no elements allowed that serve to harm other people. The hype came with the open drug store, the shitstorm started with alleged weapons that were sold over Silk Road. So, I wonder, is it really productive to have no measure at all to flag content to make some content less visible than others? While I don´t see a fair and proper implementation that wouldn´t be able to lead into mean censorship, this is a question the project will have to deal with over and over again once it receives more attention.