Sounds like maybe your children shouldn't have a device at all, or else a dumbphone that is literally just a phone without any access to app stores. That makes a lot more sense than requiring everyone else to present ID to do anything online. After all, IT IS ABOUT PROTECTING THE CHILDREN, RIGHT?

(e) (1) “Covered application store” means a publicly available internet website, software application, online service, or platform that distributes and facilitates the download of applications from third-party developers to users of a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing that can access a covered application store or can download an application.

No, you cannot. If you're distributing applications from third-party developers, you're covered. Also, just to head off the obvious: No, even if you're a first-party developer you're not off the hook because the bill still requires you to handle age signals.

In any case, no, it does not move "click here if you're over 18" to account creation with respect to an app or service, but to account creation with respect to a device. So mommy/daddy buys you a new iPhone 666 Buttplug (or whatever) and gets prompted how old you are and they set your age accordingly. If they're dumb enough to let their kid set up their device themselves that's a failure on their part and the rest of society shouldn't be made to pay for it. Likewise, expecting there to be some legal remedy that can stop a kid from grabbing an adult's device with an account already on it is asinine ... that's what passwords and keys are for.

Ultimately I wish parents would actually be parents to their children instead of expecting the rest of society to nerf itself... failing that, I'm going to start developing a lot of very pointed opinions about what you and your children are able to do on my internet, and you definitely won't like it.

I haven't read the actual bill yet; I'm just going by TFA's description of it.

You should probably try reading the actual bill. It's not that long.

All flights to and from Europe should be cancelled for the safety of european citizenry, and for the betterment of the environment. Yes, they really should lead by example. It's for the children... or something.

Alternatively, europeans can fuck off and stop trying to erode the quality of life of others on whatever dubious pretext crosses their minds.

Yes. End of story. Now, if you want to rewrite Section 230 so that companies that routinely act more like a publisher rather than a mere common carrier can be held liable for their acts of publishing, then by all means knock yourself out... but, of course, that's not what you or anyone else is saying, because this isn't about holding corporations liable for their actions, but silencing an unruly public that is no longer on board with your agenda.

Requiring maintenance does not mean that it cannot ever conform to its stated specification. Does the GNU Project have a formal specification so we can know when it's done? I mean, they haven't just been bilking people for forty years where we can never tell if they're making any tangible progress, RIGHT?

That software can always be improved does not mean it cannot be "done" in the sense of conforming to specification. Does the GNU Project HAVE a specification that we might know if and when it is done?

After 40 years, IS PROJECT GNU DONE YET?

At some point you have to ask whether giving these people more money and more effort is really worth it: Because if GNU is done, then what do they need it for? If GNU isn't done, why couldn't they get it done in FOURTY YEARS?

a type of chip called a field programmable gate array

chip that is not "ridiculously expensive."

In this glorious age of AI, the punchlines can write themselves.

...since Reddit's full of them.

After 40 years... is GNU finished? I mean, has GNU achieved feature completeness with Unix? If so, why do you continue to ask for more money? If not, why should anyone continue to give you money? This is one of those questions that would be easy to answer if GNU had a roadmap, a timeline, a formal specification... it has none of those things. It does, however, have an insistence on people donating time and money despite plenty of both having been given over the past 40 years despite glacial progress... why is that?

All is fair in love and mass corporate surveillance apparently.

Nobody likes a glasshole. Anyone who wears these more or less advertises themselves as a fucking narc who should be avoided at all costs.

...is it "bit-chat" or "bitch-at"?

The east side of the county. This is the same pack of pants-on-head retards who unilaterally declared they were going to build a new city on the east side of the county without bothering to stop and consider pesky things like, you know, whether or not the county zoning plan would let them do that. It went over like a lead balloon and went precisely nowhere. This is their Plan B.

It wouldn't be such a terrible idea if they accounted for the fact that being in eastern Solano County is effectively like being on the dark side of the moon. To be accessible they'd really need a bridge across the bay, but that's not going to happen.

The whole thing has about as much probability of happening as bubblegum being discovered as the secret to nuclear fusion.