Those who stupidly "take responsibility" for their child's amusement/entertainment, and those who do not.

The former are bad parents. The latter are the good parents.

Without boredom, and letting kids learn to "amuse themselves" (take responsibility for their own occupation/entertainment) at the YOUNGEST POSSIBLE AGE, children will
A) forever be bored, a slave to Hollywood, video games, youtube, social media, vacations, etc. in a constant pursuit of exterior amusements to "amuse themselves" and "avoid boredom".
B) will never amount to anything. Will be failures in life. Or at least, will be FAR from anything resembling greatness, for any skill you can name.
C) will be generally boring/uninteresting people, with a skill learned in adulthood to eke out a living AT BEST.

Boredom is the seed of greatness. Boredom allows children to go DEEP into some study, skill, or training. Those childhood years -- thousands of hours of free time, with no responsibilities -- are irreplaceable and priceless.

Even time spent playing with other children, or watching birds in the backyard is SO beneficial in ways we can't understand -- compared with passively sitting in front of Youtube for hours, or scrolling TikTok on your phone.
Think of all the problem solving. Think of all the brain pathways formed and exercised.

Just look at children who grew up in the 70s or 80s. TONS of opportunity for boredom. No internet, limited TV. They did things like ride their bike to the newsstand to get the latest electronics or ham radio magazine, so they could ride home and read the whole thing cover to cover, and then build the stuff they read about (not talking about myself BTW, but I'm talking about *multiple* guys I know now). Imagine if these guys had the option of video games, or the Internet! There's no way they'd go so deep into self-taught electronic circuits. But these guys have accomplished much today. Some are electronics engineers and/or have very high-profile (and enough to live on) Youtube channels.

And even if they're not rich today, they're objectively "great" or famous based on what they've accomplished -- what they can do. If they're objectively great, that's good ENOUGH in my book, even if they're not rich or famous.

Also, this isn't about worldly success. I would hold up anyone who is objectively great in the spiritual sphere as well. Maybe a kid who knows how to serve, with knowledge that rivals a seminarian, etc. or who has mastered Church History and Apologetics. There is much you can do for God (build altars, deal with people, help souls, volunteer at your chapel, etc.) once you have objective skill(s) to offer the world. Think of all the things the Church needs done -- but you aren't much help if you're an objective loser. If you're a loser, all you can do is warm the pews and pray. It's much better to be able to contribute time and money, because you're not a loser.

Also keep in mind that God gives different gifts to different people. If He gave you the Ten Talents (rather than 5 or 1), he's going to expect something in return. Not 4 decades of indulging your curiosity watching one Youtube video after the other. You can fool yourself, but you'll never fool God. We're talking about the vice of Sloth here. Sloth is NOT defined as sitting on your ass all day. Sloth is doing something OTHER THAN what you should be doing, it's avoiding your duties of state. It's indulging in excessive recreation. It's habitually taking the "easy road" until that becomes a habit.

Will today's internet-addicted youth be remarkable in various skills (profitable or not) when they are in their 40s? Not a chance. 
They'll be lucky to be able to survive on their own without Mom & Dad (and their money) and/or the Government and its money.

Those who stupidly "take responsibility" for their child's amusement/entertainment, and those who do not.

The former are bad parents. The latter are the good parents.

Without boredom, and letting kids learn to "amuse themselves" (take responsibility for their own occupation/entertainment) at the YOUNGEST POSSIBLE AGE, children will
A) forever be bored, a slave to Hollywood, video games, youtube, social media, vacations, etc. in a constant pursuit of exterior amusements to "amuse themselves" and "avoid boredom".
B) will never amount to anything. Will be failures in life. Or at least, will be FAR from anything resembling greatness, for any skill you can name.
C) will be generally boring/uninteresting people, with a skill learned in adulthood to eke out a living AT BEST.

Boredom is the seed of greatness. Boredom allows children to go DEEP into some study, skill, or training. Those childhood years -- thousands of hours of free time, with no responsibilities -- are irreplaceable and priceless.

Even time spent playing with other children, or watching birds in the backyard is SO beneficial in ways we can't understand -- compared with passively sitting in front of Youtube for hours, or scrolling TikTok on your phone.
Think of all the problem solving. Think of all the brain pathways formed and exercised.

Just look at children who grew up in the 70s or 80s. TONS of opportunity for boredom. No internet, limited TV. They did things like ride their bike to the newsstand to get the latest electronics or ham radio magazine, so they could ride home and read the whole thing cover to cover, and then build the stuff they read about (not talking about myself BTW, but I'm talking about *multiple* guys I know now). Imagine if these guys had the option of video games, or the Internet! There's no way they'd go so deep into self-taught electronic circuits. But these guys have accomplished much today. Some are electronics engineers and/or have very high-profile (and enough to live on) Youtube channels.

And even if they're not rich today, they're objectively "great" or famous based on what they've accomplished -- what they can do. If they're objectively great, that's good ENOUGH in my book, even if they're not rich or famous.

Also, this isn't about worldly success. I would hold up anyone who is objectively great in the spiritual sphere as well. Maybe a kid who knows how to serve, with knowledge that rivals a seminarian, etc. or who has mastered Church History and Apologetics. There is much you can do for God (build altars, deal with people, help souls, volunteer at your chapel, etc.) once you have objective skill(s) to offer the world. Think of all the things the Church needs done -- but you aren't much help if you're an objective loser. If you're a loser, all you can do is warm the pews and pray. It's much better to be able to contribute time and money, because you're not a loser.

Also keep in mind that God gives different gifts to different people. If He gave you the Ten Talents (rather than 5 or 1), he's going to expect something in return. Not 4 decades of indulging your curiosity watching one Youtube video after the other. You can fool yourself, but you'll never fool God. We're talking about the vice of Sloth here. Sloth is NOT defined as sitting on your ass all day. Sloth is doing something OTHER THAN what you should be doing, it's avoiding your duties of state. It's indulging in excessive recreation. It's habitually taking the "easy road" until that becomes a habit.

Will today's internet-addicted youth be remarkable in various skills (profitable or not) when they are in their 40s? Not a chance. 
They'll be lucky to be able to survive on their own without Mom & Dad (and their money) and/or the Government and its money.

How would an older person go about finding their talents?

One thing I want to comment on here is how over-policed parents and childhoods are nowadays. There was a woman in Georgia who was arrested because her 10 year old son walked a mile to the nearest town to go to the shop. The child was not harmed in any way but was nevertheless collected by the police and returned home after they were called on him. Poor woman was then handcuffed, arrested, taken to the station, fingerprinted, and forced to change into prison clothes all over this.

Georgia mom arrested after her 10-year-old went on a walk alone

Imagine that! I was a child as recently as the '00s and the idea of someone calling the police because I was wandering around in the village was unimaginable. Every kid did it - how else could we get anywhere?

From what I gather, it's now "unconscionable" to let your child live any kind of life at all besides ferrying them between expensive clubs all week until they turn 18.

This as well. Depending on where you live it can be dangerous for anyone (not just children) to go out, even being in the house is dangerous due to home invasions (certain suburbs flooded by immigrants).

And modern technology has turned most parents into over bearing hawks. Now they can contact you at anytime, also tracking etc.

When my kids were growing up, our only real rule was that they couldn't play in the front yard lest some busybody see them and think there was a problem.  Even though we lived in a rural area, city folk still drove on the street on occasion.  We have five acres so they had plenty of room to play in the back field or down the hill and across the creek.  Frankly, they were all adults before I found out that they used to sled down the hill when there was snow on the ground and my oldest son would stand by the creek and stop the other kids before they went over the embankment.

When my uncle, who lived on a farm in his childhood, was a kid; he amused himself for hours batting rocks with a stick.