Post #2087629
2026-03-10 15:56 UTC
Replies (3)
-
@RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 2026-03-10 17:20
Sure, but reddit (& Lemmy) hyperventilating about this as if the milktoast laws are the same as full retenal scanning verified by Palantir has completely destroyed any sort of sensible discussion around this. Personally I think doing nothing isn’t an option and so the unverified age API approach is the least bad solution i’ve seen. And much better than pushing the verification server side. The main argument I’ve seen against it is either: slippery nipples means that at some point a different worse law could be passed, which is possible, but worse laws have already been passed elsewhere so if that was the intent they could have gone for it in CA/CO Parents should watch their kids better, which is disingenuous as this is litterally adding a tool to help do that in a standard way, rather than some flakey survailance app.
-
@Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 2026-03-10 18:16
It’s a gray area. If you have nothing to “protect the kids”, the feds might force it on a “non-compliant” state right now considering the fascism permeating our highest governments. We’re starting to see desperate legislation more and more often. As a resident of CA, we had to vote FOR gerrymandering recently. It was disgusting, but it was direly needed to preserve democracy in the US.
-
@njordomir@lemmy.world 2026-03-12 03:34
It has to be a foot in the door. If all they do is say apps have to do this, it's ineffective at best. More than likely it's dangerous because now you have built the gate and whoever comes after you can just hire the bouncer to stand in front of it (or rather contract it out to the cheapest shittiest companies imaginable). I can't imagine this isn't part of their plan because if wasn't, you could still download an exe, MSI, deb, appimage, docker container, flatpack from anywhere and install it. Essentially the age game would do nothing except discourage use of the MS store, which is about the only good thing about it. :D