The difference between you and I is that I don't want there to be any victims to care for. I want solutions for the root cause, not reactionary "solutions" which seems to be all you can imagine.

Why do you believe that? We used to believe that the only cure for "female" non-physical illnesses was hysterectomy.
How about we put some funding into figuring out why this happens and how we can stop it? If it saves just a few children from ever being assaulted, that would be a big plus in my book.

Trust me, I have plenty of sympathy for them. The greater the delusion and the greater damage it causes, the more tragic it is, and the more sympathy I have. Those who molest the minds of not just one or two, but entire generations of children are truly those I feel the most sorry for. Like child molester might believe in and justifies their actions with "child love", these sad individuals believe in "god love" and that it justifies crippling a child's mind (and often body) like they themselves were crippled.
It is tragic, and I would do anything to offer them help so this can stop.
Again, I think the best thing we can do is ask ourselves "why" - find the root cause for why people turn into monsters. What happens in people's brains, and how can we offer (not force, but offer) our assistance?

Note that I never said anything about forcing anyone to conform. That's all in your head, not mine. What I want to see is us being able to offer the best help and rehabilitation possible, not just revenge and de-facto life sentences.

True, but note that even if it was sent from his account, that does not necessarily mean that he did it.

Who else had, or could have access to his credentials? Would any of them have a motive for framing him?
A Google employee bypassing the authentication would be trivial.
And if on parole, there's also the possibility that the conditions required that he provide the user name and password to all online accounts. Which again would make it trivial for a number of people.
How about a landlord, or others with access to his computer, if passwords were saved or written down?
Not so trivial, but far from uncommon is someone getting access to the account through hacking (especially if he re-used his password from elsewhere) or through social engineering.

The key is to not jump to conclusions. Nor should we forget the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Why, exactly, is it good that pedophiles get hurt?

Pedophilia is a perverse sexual orientation, like zoophilia, coprophilia and many others, but does not imply that the afflicted has or will abuse children. There's a greater risk, but we do not wish to punish people for being a greater risk, do we? If so, it would be good if we hurt all male relatives, who by far pose the greatest risk for a child being molested.

If we want to stop child molestations, I think what we need to do is look at why some people do the heinous deeds, and figure out how to stop people from flipping over.
Somehow I get the feeling that many would be sad if that happened, because then they wouldn't have anyone to string up and exact revenge on.
But in my opinion, one child molested is one too many, and no matter how much you flog pedophiles, it won't reduce the problem.

If there's a Google employee or outside hacker with a wish to see this person go back to jail does not imply there has to be a conspiracy. That the person is formerly convicted would, I believe, make it more likely that the person is framed, not less. There are enough people who think anything less than life sentence is too mild, and some of those are more than willing to "do what it takes".

It's a good thing e-mail is securely linked to and absolutely controlled by individuals, so no-one can possibly send incriminating images to or from someone's mailbox.

Brand away. I do support child molestors. And murderers. And swindlers. And racists. And slavers. I do not support child molestation, murder, swindle, racism, or slavery. But that is no reason not to care about the people, and wishing that they can be rehabilitated and become productive and respected members of society for the rest of their lives.
If there is evil in a person, it's a mental illness that needs a cure, not a carte blanche to do evil to the person in return.
The Abrahamic religious nonsense about "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" needs to stop, or we'll never progress into a peaceful society.

I am more worried about the risk of this being used for framing someone. Perhaps especially those who have served their sentence and are in public registers.

A prior conviction for which a person has served the sentence should never be enough justification on its own to warrant a search, whether it's done by a person or by software. There must be probable cause, or we've made a farce out of the 4th amendment. What's next? Are algorithms listening in through your phone and PCs microphone okay?

And? I am sure there are people out there who would send child porn to registered sex offenders in order to frame them.

When corporations have abilities beyond what the government has, and act on behalf of the law, in a way that could not be foreseen by the lawmakers of the past, I think the only way to honor the intent of the constitution would be to apply the 4th amendment protections there too. Whether a search and seizure is committed by an algorithm or a person is irrelevant - if there was not enough suspicion to justify a search warrant, the evidence should be admissible. No matter how guilty the person is.
Remember: We are all guilty of something. Today they may go after possible child porn recipients, tomorrow they may go after speeders and use tax evaders, and one day after those who may oppose status quo. The opportunities for abuse are endless.
Give the devil a finger, and he takes the whole hand.

Everyone is a potential terrorist.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts, CIA director John Brennan, actress Julia Roberts, you and I are all potential terrorists. And potential child molesters too.

It shouldn't go without saying. That's groupthink.

What distinguishes a mensch from a barbarian is the ability to have sympathy for even those you despise the most. If someone is a child molester, I would think it highly likely that they suffer from a mental illness, and need our help. I don't think there are many who decided to become a child molester.

The more heinous the crime, the more important it is that we do not let base feelings take control. If we do, we are no better than the child molesters who let their base feelings take control of what they do.

That's not due to better design, but more use of cheaper and softer materials. They're not built to last anymore. Give me a 10 year old Lian-Li case and band-aids any day over today's cheap plastic.

If that's what you read, you need to practice your reading skills, cause they suck.
What I pointed out is that cgroups are separate from the init process, and can and do indeed run on sysv init systems too. cgroups has nothing to do with init, and runs separate from init no matter what you use for init.

When you brought up cgroups as an argument, it appeared to be from a false belief that systemd was needed for cgroups to work - in fact, it's the other way around!
And when systemd uses cgroups, it takes them over for its own purpose, which lessens the value of cgroups compared to systems where you are free to use cgroups from scratch. Freedom to choose - that's what makes Unix great. Poetterware takes away that freedom.