He didn’t comply, he collaborated. It won’t deter anyone but pro fascist programmers from developing for Linux. Your defence of the indefensible says a lot about you, too.

The option is not supposed to be there at all. Don’t comply with ANY part of it, especially in advance.

Downvote or not, what I said is true. Linux cannot force adobe to publish software for Linux. The problem is adobe. Now go downvote them somewhere while your voting finger is so click happy and maybe stop shooting the messenger.

You should re-read what you wrote and see why it applies.

Well, I’m not in a lynch mob. So there’s that.

I will. You keep showing sympathy for those you relate to.

You are the one talking violence.

Not uncritically at all. I’m just not a collaborator or one to defend collaborators. Zero tolerance for them.

He’s not an active danger to the code and community? He’s volunteering to help implement the tools of fascism. I consider that dangerous. There is no call to action. If you were worried he was in danger, you’d contact the authorities, not try to identify yourself with him so vehemently.

Compliance in advance is also a threat. Do not comply, do not begin to comply. It’s a fascist law. Any compliance is collaborating with fascists.

That is not the point and you know it.

Not boot licking, for starters?

It is not a hit piece. No call to action was stated.

Ah, but this time the government wants it to be able to be queried so that applications and web sites can decide what to do with you. That’s the difference.

Not true. Because the stated purpose of the laws at play is to enable that to be queried so that sites can decide what is appropriate for you to see.

Your argument is an informal fallacy called Whataboutism.

I invite you to educate yourself by reading about it on Wikipedia

Regardless of your thoughts on age verification, hunting down someone just for complying with the (currently) rather inoffensive law is nuts.

No one has been hunted down. I’ve not read an article anywhere showing that’s happened, have you? Also, this wasn’t complying, this was being complicit. The law IS offensive, both to ones sensibilities and in that it literally attacks Linux by attempting to criminalize it. No one is taking a life, but maybe educating those in charge of open source projects and employers who work closely with the open source community, that this person should not be granted contributor access to such projects.

What you are really asking is how far will people go to defend freedom? Look at history, my friend.

That would still be complying. Not okay.

Why, because they throw everything in there like a jello salad?