You Can't Build Tcc From Nixpkgs If You Are in the UK

it should be unconstitutional because it's clearly a content-based restriction of speech, meaning that regulating it entails strict scrutiny. strict scrutiny requires Texas to use the least burdensome means possible to satisfy the state's legitimate interest in preventing minors from accessing obscene content - probably a home network filter appliance parents can opt into. this is what they held in Paxton v. NetChoice (iirc.)

instead, the Court contorted themselves into holding that adults have accessing content obscene to minors without furnishing their ID isn't protected speech. porn still is protected speech, but proving your age isn't protected speech. as a result, the law is content-neutral, not content-based.. somehow.

it was a low point for the Court - clear activist justices legislating morality from the bench.

Previously, these kinds of laws violated the 1st Amendment, but the changes in the composition of Supreme Court justices have led to different rulings.

I felt the GP was making that same point.

For the US, I'm referring to federal laws or more laws in more states.

As for other countries, the EU just delayed the vote for "Chat Control" as recently as yesterday!

I never once said we had to settle for this solution. I absolutely said that there is a real problem, and the people in the best position to make a real solution have absolutely no desire to do anything about it.

Remember that previous status quo was "I'd rather make money off of child abuse, because nobody is stopping us". This is the end result of self-regulation, so show me something better.

Polling for the question “websites that may contain pornographic material”

Which is my point. The OSA isn’t popular as a broad piece of legislation, but the “think of the children” aspect that something needs to be done to restrict access to pornography is popular.

Watch the YouTube link I sent to better understand my point.

Personally, I think even the pornography aspect is stupid. If the government couldn’t stop me accessing porn when I was a kid back before the web was invented, then they’re shit out of luck stopping kids these days. The problem isn’t the law, the problem is parents want a way to diminish their own responsibility. It’s the same tired bullshit we see time and time again of blaming everyone else rather than making ourselves accountable.

When you phrase the question in such a way where people presume it will only target pornographic sites.

If you asked them would they support the law if it happens to accidentally block useful sites that have ZERO pornography on them, I'm very sure, the results would be very different.