Post #1410569
2026-03-24 13:58 UTC
My uneducated opinion of this is: they couldnt write legislature that could define piracy in a way that makes it illegal for the public to use so why does eveyone think they will have comprehensive legislation defining age verification or liability for enforcing it?
When NY State wrote the original SAFE act regulating gun control, a topic that is almost common knowledge for most americnans, they fuckin excluded high capacity magazines because the politician's staff who write legislative frameworks thought magazines were "disposable" so they thought banning the sale of them would phase out the magazines that were already bought and owned. THE FUCKING FRAME WORK WAS BUILT AROUND THESE ASSHATS WATCHING 80'S AND 90'S ACTION FILMS AND SEEING PEOPLE THROW DOWN MAGAZINES FOR EVERY FUCKIN RELOAD!!!!
Replies (1)
-
@derpgon@programming.dev 2026-03-24 16:53
It really does not matter if they have comprehensive description of anything. It is always about defensibility. Sure, maybe you are technically not breaking the law, but maybe you also don't have the money to fight the other legal team, so you are basically fucked. If someone comes to the creator of said software, saying they'll get sued - I'd rather implement something that barely works than fight for year(s) in court. Not defending anything being merged, mind you. Glad we ended up with non mandatory field (that barely counts for the legislation) than full blown age verification. The moment it will be mandatory AND verified, I am gone.