I can’t speak to Germany’s system, but there’s no need for a site to tell the verification service its identity. If it just asks “is the current session authenticated to someone over 16” and gets an answer back. Identity of both parties remains secret.
And no real humour. I realize it’s in the eye of the beholder, but this stuff is just meh with tiddies.
I fucking love Shadowrun.
My group doesn’t like magic with their cyberpunk dystopias, so I’m stuck playing Cyberpunk RED. Which is fine. I’ve picked up a bunch of the fun non-magical stuff from SR, and borrowed a few of the megacorps.
We’re still having fun, but I still want metahumans and magic.
The lore and setting are perfect.
The decking/net-running problem is definitely a thing, tho. Doing it well requires the GM to build a really tight scenario, which is hard to do on a regular basis.
The identifying site doesn’t need to record IP or other identifying information. It just needs to answer “yes” or “no” when queried about the current user. It could use a similar handoff mechanism to oauth.
The cost of a hack turns into getting a list of people in the region, rather than people who use a given service. Arguably, that’s less problematic.
I’m still fucking amazed that I can just put my phone on a fancy circle and it sticks there until I pull it off. I’ve had that thing for like a year and it still feels like magic.
Also:
With a 70% non-compliance rate, that isn’t entirely surprising.
Platforms are even less likely to implement real reforms that the author alludes to.
The platforms aren’t complying with the law:
Of the parents who reported their child had an account on each platform prior to 10 December 2025, around 7 in 10 reported that their child still had an account on Facebook (63.6%), Instagram (69.1%), Snapchat (69.4%), and TikTok (69.3%). Around 3 in 10 reported that their child no longer had an account. One in two of these parents (48.5%) reported that their child still had an account on YouTube following the age restrictions coming into effect.
frustration stems from the site’s location on the outskirts of the city, far from transit, services and daily amenities. … “My cheque went from $1,400 down to $466 … I can’t justify that,”
Holy fuck that sucks. $115/week would barely cover food and clothing, let alone transit, Internet access, and fun.
No wonder he’s upset.
but we had a public inquiry!
Yeah. It’s shitty that we’ve deprioritized infrastructure, but I’ll take whatever shady, off brand justifications we need to get it.
I’m pretty sure that’s how the US justified building their interstate highway system.
I’ve heard the argument that we should include infrastructure in our military spending. Stuff like transportation infrastructure (mostly up north), an east/west electric grid, etc. Things that improve resilience and would (probably) improve our chances during an invasion.
It’s explicitly saying a decreasing number of whites is part of the decline of Canada. That seems pretty racist.
You’re right, that other stats talk about legit concerns (affordability, etc) but this one puts the poster’s motives into question.
I draw the line at dwarf trafficking.
Awesome! I hope he starts with bread and butter issues: affordability, housing, and healthcare. We’re gonna leave a generation of Canadians to the Conservatives if we can’t get movement on those.
If the verification service is structured like oauth, then the request could be passed through the browser as signed plaintext. You could verify that the requesting site is only passing a minimum age request to the service. That would be as straightforward as viewing the interaction in your browser’s debug tooling.
If you say that you don’t trust the signature, and that it could be used to smuggle identifying information across, there’s a couple of ways to deal with that: open source and audited provider governed by legislation; information theory that would show personally identifying information wouldn’t fit into a field of that size; and “personal auditing” where you can try throwing data at the service to see if you can trick it into accepting invalid input (that really goes with the previous point, because the only field you can usefully vary is the signature).