Post #1436081

2026-03-22 13:45 UTC

@ammdias I thought the Colorado situation was ongoing. But that doesn't invalidate my point that some statutes are given rapid attention and others, which are designed to help minorities are not. Oh, and at the risk of being snarky, I note with amusement that a response to a point about accessibility is a youtube video. Honey, it is wasted on me.

Replies (2)

@ammdias@masto.pt 2026-03-22 14:36

@iaruffell I'm sorry for the YouTube link, I just didn't want to repeat an argument somebody else expressed a lot better than I ever could. Basically, the author argues that the anger towards free software developers for trying to implement law-conforming changes in their projects is misdirected -- it should be towards those passing those laws. Having been in a somewhat similar, although not as important, situation more than 10 years ago, I understand this point of view.

Open ##1436082
@Npars01@mstdn.social 2026-03-22 18:43

@iaruffell @ammdias These age-verification laws are getting promoted by Meta, in their ongoing efforts to evade culpability for content moderation & to eliminate privacy as a civil right. https://www.gadgetreview.com/reddit-user-uncovers-who-is-behind-metas-2b-lobbying-for-invasive-age-verification-tech https://fortune.com/2026/03/02/social-media-companies-age-verification-addiction-privacy-concerns/ https://thedeepdive.ca/who-pushes-age-verification-bills/ Meta never abided by child protection laws before. Why now? https://archive.is/ZyajL https://winbuzzer.com/2026/03/18/reddit-user-uncovers-meta-2b-lobbying-age-verification-xcxwbn/ They want to be able to sell ads adjacent to CSAM content for the Epstein Class & not face the type of repercussions ... 1/

Open ##1436088