I don’t think it’s entirely a separate issue, because how a law is enforced is part of evaluating whether it makes sense in practice.

If a law can only be enforced by treating everyone as a minor until proven otherwise, that’s a strong signal that the law, or at least its scope, may be flawed.

I think the disagreement comes from treating “we have laws” as automatically meaning “we must enforce them everywhere at any cost.” The method matters. This approach flips the burden of proof by treating everyone as a minor unless they prove otherwise. That is a pretty extreme shift from how things normally work in the real world.

We also shouldn’t pretend this actually solves the problem. Kids got access to adult magazines before, and they will get access now through a parent’s phone, shared devices, or older friends. If that’s the target, this kind of system is mostly symbolic while adding friction and control for everyone else.

And more importantly, it normalizes something much bigger. Once you accept that accessing legal content requires proving attributes through some approved system, it becomes very easy to expand that logic. Today it’s age. Tomorrow it can be anything else.

So I don’t see this as a balanced compromise. It’s a disproportionate response to an enforcement gap, with long-term consequences that go way beyond the original problem.

What surprises me more is that someone feels the need to justify staying on Linux at all. That’s a conversation that shouldn’t even exist.

The question has almost always been the other way around: why use anything else?

I get why this sounds better than websites directly collecting IDs, but I think it still understates the problem. Even if the site only sees “18+”, the system still begins with strong identity proofing somewhere upstream. So this is not really anonymous access, it is identity-based access with a privacy layer on top.

The bigger issue is centralization. You still need trusted issuers, approved apps, approved standards, and authorities deciding who can participate. That means users are being asked to trust a centralized framework not to expand, not to abuse its power, and not to fail. History gives us no reason to be relaxed about that.

I am also skeptical of the privacy promises. These systems are always presented in their ideal form, but real-world implementations involve metadata, logging, renewal, compliance rules, vendors, and future policy changes. “The website does not know who you are” is only one small part of the privacy question.

So even in the best-case version, this is still dangerous because it normalizes the idea that access to lawful online content should depend on credentials issued inside a centrally governed identity ecosystem. Today it is age verification. Tomorrow it is broader permissioned access to the internet. That is why I do not see this as a decent compromise, but as infrastructure for future control.

we don’t know you enough to have an opinion, stop looking for validation

Seriously, like, actually seriously, I want to believe that this time everyone will leave Discord, and not just a small group of weirdos like us who “care about privacy” and ended up on Lemmy.

Brother HL-L2310D, super basic black-and-white laser. USB only, no Wi-Fi junk, no “phone app required” crap. Just stick it in, install drivers, and it spits out pages. Toner is cheap and it doesn’t freak out when you don’t use it for a week.

Brother HL-L2370DN, same deal but with wired LAN if you want to share it on a network. Still no Wi-Fi/Bluetooth nonsense. Nice solid little workhorse, prints fast, simple guts, cheap toner, none of that overhyped smart printer fluff.

No AI? Are they allowed to do that? Are you sure?

Most of what you describe isn’t politics, it’s wishful thinking. Real solutions require trade-offs, not just good intentions. Ideals are nice, but policies need to work in the real world. Free housing means someone has to pay for it, usually through higher taxes on those who already work. Open borders sound humane until welfare systems and housing markets collapse under the pressure. Banning weapons doesn’t erase crime; it just shifts who’s armed and who isn’t. Even here in Europe, where these ideas are often praised, we’re starting to see the strain of too many entitlements and too few taxpayers.

If you like one spy over another, be my guest. I think companies that spy are not worth it at all.

ExpressVPN is a Chinese govt aproved company… do all audits you want. You need trust. Audits doesn’t matter. They can change everything after. I trust IVPN and Mullvad

VPS VPN hides you from ISP but VPS IP still shows to peers → worst case: abuse email/suspension. Use WireGuard, not OpenVPN: faster, leaner, modern crypto. No compression, full-tunnel + DNS leak protection, firewall to block non-VPN traffic, minimal logs. If host’s fine with P2P, you’re set.

Sorry, I misunderstood then. I use Librewolf btw, great choice.

We vote with our browser. And you are voting Chromium. It’s ok, but you could do something about it.

This is a rebranding of Google Play Movies, or TV or whatever they call it.

VPN must be a human right at this point

If I travel to Japan (just for fun, not for this) I am not allowed to buy the Switch 2? Or is there any regional restriction?

Why gently?

Oh no, is the end of piracy!

Honestly, suing pirates is like kicking a tree to prove it’s still alive, it doesn’t change the game. Piracy isn’t the villain here; it’s practically part of the success story.