zlacker

> Today, someone can post a Telegram group message and make thousands of people rally to a town square. I see the dangers, and I see why governments think they are doing this to protect the people.

Don't play into their propaganda. Governments don't like it because they're protecting themselves and their power; making it harder for people to find each other and organize and rally is one of many ways governments do that. (There's a reason authoritarian governments regularly shut down cell networks.)

https://bsky.app/profile/tupped.bsky.social/post/3lwgcmswmy2...

> The U.K. Online Safety Act was (avowedly, as revealed in a recent High Court case) “not primarily aimed at protecting children” but at regulating “services that have a significant influence over public discourse.”

>>JoshTr+(OP)
You don't even have to go that far, in Europe, to use a large social network (50M users), and the definition is very broad (WhatsApp is a social network, Telegram, Signal, TEMU, Aliexpress, etc), all users will have to provide their ID to that they are not a minor, otherwise the website can be blocked or fined.

This is to protect minors of course. Did you think about the children ?

Telegram, whether it's true or not, claims they are not a large platform (so if this is a lie, it may really pay off).

https://sumsub.com/blog/age-verification-on-social-media/

"WhatsApp is now a Very Large platform in the EU, and will face tougher regulation"

https://www.theverge.com/news/614445/whatsapp-channels-very-...