You sound like a bully in some 1980s comedy. Lol Keep telling me how mad you are. I love it.

well they all did add to the discussion! they gave me something to think about

But we need to protect children and get your ID….

which one would sell more I mean they would charge a lot of money for the stripped down one because it doesn't allow them to monetize it on the back end, and the vast majority would continue using the resource-slurping ad-riddled one.

What is the connection to technology here?

Yes. I can't use lynx for most of the sites I am used to go with it. They are all protecting themselves with captcha and other form of javascript computation. The net is dying. Fucking thank you AI-bullshitery...

Consider the possibility that you don't need to be doing anything wrong besides existing to be persecuted by a fascist regime.

You don’t understand. The tracking and spying is the entire point of the maneuver. The ‘children are accessing porn’ thing is just a Trojan horse to justify the spying. I understand what are you saying, I simply don't consider to check if a law is applied as a Trojan horse in itself. I would agree if the EU had said to these sites "give us all the the access log, a list of your subscriber, every data you gather and a list of every IP it ever connected to your site", and even this way does not imply that with only the IP you could know who the user is without even asking the telecom company for help. So, is it a Trojan horse ? Maybe, it heavily depend on how the EU want to do it. If they just ask "show me how you try to avoid that a minor access your material", which normally is the fist step, I don't see how it could be a Trojan horse. It could become, I agree on that. As you pointed out, it’s already illegal for them to access it, and parents are legally required to prevent their children from accessing it. No, parents are not legally required to prevent it. The seller (or provider) is legally required. It is a subtle but important difference. But you don’t lock down the entire population, or institute pre-crime surveillance policies, just because some parents are not going to follow the law. True. You simply impose laws that make mandatories for the provider to check if he can sell/serve something to someone. I mean asking that the cashier of mall check if I am an adult when I buy a bottle of wine is no different than asking to Pornhub to check if the viewer is an adult. I agree that in one case is really simple and in the other is really hard (and it is becoming harder by the day). You then charge the guilty parents after the offense. Ok, it would work, but then how do you caught the offendind parents if not checking what everyone do ? Is it not simpler to try to prevent it instead ?