4 ms·

I understand your point and I would prefer not to have to do this. But I was thinking that we already are going down hill better we chose our path then have oth

I understand your point and I would prefer not to have to do this. But I was thinking that we already are going down hill better we chose our path then have others to do it. I would prefer to say prove my age to Canonical then have to send my proof to every website individually. As long as a majority of the users are protected I do not see some idiot religious politician complaining that children could root Android phones and watch porn or that children removed OSX to install Linux to get more freedom(probably a VM would work too). Since the big companies don't gain lot of money from this like they gain with DRM media and anti-repair I do not see the insentives to push thos ossue to extremes.

int_19h 5y ago
> Is long as a majority of the users are protected I do not see some idiot religious politician complaining that children could root Android phones and watch porn I totally do. All that would be needed for this to happen is one well-publicized case. The fundamental problem here is that by aiding and abetting the censorship, you're implicitly legitimizing the purported reasons for it. Thus strengthened, that reasoning will inevitably be extended, if only by chance - and you won't have any arguments to push back by then. Consider: if we've already decided that cracking down on porn justifies routine violations of privacy (that would be necessary in any pervasive age-ID scheme), and the majority of the society agreed with it, how would you convince them that F/OSS is valuable enough to not sacrifice on the same altar?