you could but I think the inclusion of lasers would make for a better spy / cyberpunk movie. Most "hacking" in movies are not realistic and for show but it being plausible is just a bonus.
For anyone that wants to experience fidonet or bbses, I can recommend the Synchronet client and their BBS List. They are very up to date. https://www.synchro.net/sbbslist.html
BBSes with fidonet are still available to connect to today (see the Network column in the previously linked list).
Have you considered that even if unwanted material was only accessible in physical form with age restriction for buying. Like porn magazines, cigarettes or alcoholic drinks, kids can still access them and find a way around it. You can ask older generations. Perhaps you can't stop it by "going offline and raising them in a cabin in the woods".
Best is to assume they have access to it one way or another if they seek it. The discussion should not be about banning vs allowing, it should be focused around how to deal with situations that arise regardless.
Education about the subject and why kids shouldn't seek access is quite effective, additionally they will be informed once they are allowed access. Think about how the last decades saw a sharp decline in smoking and alcohol consumption.
I wonder (and don't hear anyone talking about it) if kids can't upload on social media and "publishing" platforms. Can they still host a website?
I know that my fascination with computers largely began with creating websites and messing about with HTML. Blog platforms can be considered social media I suppose but what if it is just a page of HTML or text?
Should I worry about having to verify my age/identity if I want to host a page on a vps in the future?
I feel like most politicians and people don't understand privacy and the impact of breaking it. Additionally seems the governments don't consider themselves a thread vector for privacy invasion.
> Should I worry about having to verify my age/identity if I want to host a page on a vps in the future?
Today I cannot get a VPS without verifying my identity. Can you?
> I feel like most politicians and people don't understand privacy and the impact of breaking it.
I feel like it doesn't start like this. Opponents to age verification assume "politicians are authoritarians, therefore politicians try to increase surveillance, therefore politicians try to introduce age verification". I think it goes the other way round: "society knows that social media are bad for children (and adults, to be fair), therefore people try to imagine ways to solve that problem, therefore politicians end up thinking about ways to prevent children from accessing social media".
Of course, most people (technical people included) don't understand whether or not it can be done in a "reasonable" way (e.g. in a privacy-preserving way). But the debate mostly doesn't revolve around that, and it is a pity. Ideally we would think about the best possible way to do it, and only then we would debate about whether or not we want it.
> Today I cannot get a VPS without verifying my identity. Can you?
I think it is at least possible to do so in a identity opaque way if you wanted to using obfuscated payment provider, free email and possibly fake name/address (illegal).
I meant more without scanning an actual ID or face.
> I feel like it doesn't start like this.
Of course the train of thought is not "how can we break privacy" usually the concerns/problems are valid (I agree that social media is bad for kids). But in a lot of debates I am a part of privacy concerns are easily dismissed, not taken seriously or not the priority. I'm not talking about if technically private implementations are possible yes or no. I am talking about the conceptual step before that, "what is the impact of this request" how are we limiting people that can't or don't want to comply with what we are asking.
I feel like privacy is one of the most fundamental rights since it is at the root of a lot of other rights required for democracy. For example freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to property and more. Privacy it is continually devalued, invaded and the right to it eroded.
That leads to undermining of the other rights as in this issue a lot of people are bringing up, in the article freedom to be anonymous is brought up but also the freedom of expression of young people.
The discussion should be the other way around, no options should be considered UNLESS it can be done in a private manner. The right to privacy is more important then the right not to be hurt by watching harmful content and therefore the responsibility of the government to protect privacy is of higher importance then their responsibility to not get you hurt.
I do believe that there exist ZKPs, but then it raises more questions, like:
- Do we ban VPNs? I don't think we should.
- What happens if the ZKP doesn't work? It's not okay to fall back to identity verification, but then does that mean that the services are blocked if the ZKP infrastructure doesn't work?
I don't have any answers or strong opinions yet, but I feel like the legal/societal conversation should focus on "actions taken via XYZ" rather than "technology underlying XYZ". Similar to how GDPR, etc. cover actions like collection/storage of personal information, not specific technologies like cookies (despite what many believe!).
In particular, your examples bring these things to mind, which might be worth considering alongside:
- Any machine can host a server, with no third-party required except an ISP (if we're being pedantic, even that's not needed if use a mesh network, etc.). The main barrier to connectivity IME is NAT, but there are ways around that (e.g. make it a .onion service). I played with all of the above as a teenager, so it's not unrealistic.
- "Hosting a website" covers a lot of things, some of which are already illegal (e.g. CSAM). Just because we can spin up something without jumping through social media sign-up hoops, doesn't mean it can't/shouldn't be subject to legal questions.
- Hosting a website/blog/etc. does not come with the same questionable baggage as social media (algorithmic feeds, PII, tracking, identity verification, communication, etc.). We might opt in to such things, e.g. by accepting comments on posts, but I'd distinguish such two-way, "user generated" activity from merely "hosting a website". Technologically, such things require some dynamic system (usually a self-hosted or third-party backend), rather than "just" a static HTML server.
- There is no technological difference between a blog used like a personal diary, and a blog used to post reviews of Lego. Is there a societal difference? What about if they include photos?
- Posting things on a personal website/blog has an implicit understanding that it's being published and shared with the world (that feels like the whole point of a blog). Social media has muddied those waters, by claiming things like "privacy settings", which can give the impression that posts are not being published and shared with the world.
- When it comes to activities like receiving comments, two-way communication, unsolicited messages from anonymous strangers, etc. the more relevant "basic tech" feels like running a server for email, IRC, Jabber, etc. rather than a web site; since those place such "dangerous" aspects front-and-centre. Email is the most obvious, but I mention the others since getting external systems to trust a self-hosted email server is notoriously tricky!
There is a huge first movers advantage on infrastructure.
Additionally until recently most political parties and people in the EU didn't see this as national security related infrastructure. That's why it was allowed to be privatized and handled by external companies. There is a lot more critical digital infrastructure that is being moved away from. Think Microsoft office suite, operating systems, cloud systems and more.
> non of the functionality that PayPal or other services give
What functionality are you looking for exactly?
I use paypal to transfer money to other accounts & pay for online shopping, possibly in other valuta. In my opinion Wero (earlier I used IDeal) is easier then paypal for this purpose
At the moment I don't see much improvement over an instant SEPA transaction. Since both parties will see each other's IBAN anyways with Wero I can just give out my IBAN.
Wero does introduce some sort of chargebacks and disputes, buy from reputable sellers and otherwise you are still free to use paypal for additional protection (but don't send money as "Friends & Family").
> Obfuscation of my banking data (IBAN)
IBAN is public facing and it is not a problem to share. It is the identifier of your account therefore required to make transfers. Money can't be charged with your IBAN. With paypal you share your e-mail.
> Having access to it with my bank
Your bank is the one that is providing the access to the Wero service, it will pull from or deposit into your bank account.
> Not needing to share my contact list
I don't see how this is required.
The strength of Wero is that it will be a unified friction less way of making digital transfers. It finds a similar place in the market that in the USA is filled by Venmo or Cash app however if you have a bank account you can use it.
I think it speaks volumes that no one within the Netherlands uses Paypal, but iDeal is the de-facto standard for all online payments there.
> IBAN is public facing and it is not a problem to share.
I would be careful. In practice, you can setup a SEPA collection with an IBAN without the owner even knowing or signing a mandate because the banks don't check.
Of course, you can revert the transactions made this way, ... if you notice them (you have 30 days).
> Your bank is the one that is providing the access to the Wero service, it will pull from or deposit into your bank account.
I mean my bank is not available in Wero. And A lot of other banks are the same. PayPal or Klarna just works.
> IBAN is public facing and it is not a problem to share. It is the identifier of your account therefore required to make transfers. Money can't be charged with your IBAN. With paypal you share your e-mail.
I know but a lot of people don't see it that way. Not me. But I know they are.
> Not needing to share my contact list
AFAIK you need to sync your contacts to them to send a person money. I am not sure though because I don't have access.
Please don't misunderstand me. I want something like Wero in Europe. I just hope that it's not the wrong thing and people will be disappointed and less likely to try something new.
Google is not flying over the area itself right? perhaps they where using source maps with some sort of license agreement and the license expired, or there was a dispute.
It seems to me that it is in the favor of Google to gather the most up-to date maps, even if they can offer them in a limited window.
I wonder if the same is true for Google Earth, since I believe that uses higher quality / different maps in a lot of area's. (don't have it so I can't check)
This was my first thought. The simplest explanation is that they lost access to the recent imagery. If you were going to build a system like this, you'd show the most recent imagery for an area that you have access to. If one of your license agreements ends, it might mean you end up showing less desirable data, but at least you're showing data.
> The simplest explanation is that they lost access to the recent imagery. I
Reasonable explanation, but they didn't, for example this is the Google Earth link [1] with satellite imagery of the area from back in September 2025, the most recent satellite imagery they seem to have from there. The fire damage can clearly be seen. So there must be some other reason behind it.
As the sibling comment noted, Earth is a different product. If your license pays out by tiles served, Earth is far cheaper to service. Maps is in phones, cars, website contact pages, third party apps, etc. Multiple orders of magnitude more exposure.
As I understand it Google earth and Google maps are two separate products. And Google earth is the more premium product (more data and features accessable), therefore perhaps the licenses are separately negotiated?
To be extra malicious, if you can infect a connected pc make it propagate the worm to any similar device plugged into the pc over usb in the future.
reply