this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2026
540 points (99.5% liked)
Technology
88816 readers
3657 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
They can just pay to use someone else's identity.
So can you? I still fail to see the moat
No you can't, because you don't have the money.
Right? The rich have somehow even been blurred on Flock cameras
Still makes no sense to me. You’ve failed to make a convincing argument.
The argument itself is convincing, you're just not listening
I’m sure that’s it
You do realize that a significant amount of laws that apply to the population don't apply to politicians and the ultra wealthy, right?
It's currently one of the biggest societal issues on the planet.
The point of this comment thread is not about who can get away with it. That’s not up for debate.
The only point I have made is: the wealthy have no more power to hide their online activities than you or I do
Yes, it is. The statement was that they would be beholden to the same age verification requirements that we would.
What people have been trying to tell you is that your assumption isn't backed by precedent.
You can argue whatever you like, but that’s not what was being discussed. Maybe start a new thread?
Yea, it was what was being discussed. Your assertion is that it's impossible for the ruling class to have an exception. You seem to think a technical limitation exists where none does.
You're factually incorrect, and show neither an understanding of how networking/websites function, or understanding of how the ultra wealthy and the politicians they buy have a very long history of giving themselves loopholes so the rules don't apply to them.
Stop moving the goalposts
I never asserted anything over legality. Did you paste the wrong comment? You’re not making any sense. I asserted that wealth can’t buy you shielding today. What are you even on about?
Think for a minute about how providing your ID to access the internet would become a requirement.
I can also run over someone with my car. They can get away with it.
I’m not debating a straw man argument
It’s not about “getting away with it” - my point is I can mask my online activity as well or better than anyone with endless funds
It's not just about you.
For now. But we're not talking about the status quo; we're talking about a future with comprehensive age verification schemes that render all your current masking tactics impossible or illegal.
I’m talking about today. Illegality has no bearing on possibility, which is the only point I have argued for