Encrypting internet traffic is a completely obvious innovation once the internet and encryption were a thing. You’d be stupid for suggesting this because privacy destruction is absolutely in everyone in powers interest AND has countless legit benefits that people are going to care about more than the downsides.

Do we want to know who the pervert is who is harassing little suzy or sharing janes nudes or threatening the government? Why yes yes we do and the easiest way to ensure we do is to destroy everyone’s privacy. A thoughtful balance is so much harder and requires so much intelligence and forethought along with giving up some benefits of absolute transparency that the chance of it happening is basically zero.

We can have the current broken wild west or 1984 because both of these are easy and comprehensible.

So no country in the world has such a system that actually protects privacy in practice

Which country anywhere has ever implemented a zero knowledge proof of age rather than using a id or information trivially linkable to an id. The answer is none have none intend to and none will its a complete fabrication to cover actual reality.

Nor is it liable to be limited to outright porno.

The truth is out there is what people say about big foot, the flat earth, UFOs, and lizard people.

You have to pay monthly for devices that access the internet at all. It doesn’t seem unreasonable that YOU not everyone should have to pay for something that is safe for your 8 year old rather than just getting your 8 year old an Ipad and wifi. This forum isn’t safe for an 8 year old.

Regardless, you have made no comment on the idea that I want it done with zero knowledge proof.

Because there is no indication that that is ever going to happen. Either nothing with happen. A few hardcore porn sites will get age gating because they want to do legit business whilst others hosted in other countries will do nothing ensuring your teen still finds boobs when he searches OR we will go full on 1984 and this will mostly be used to suppress the entire free and open internet in the US.

Your fantasy that this will be done safely is just an indication that you are stupid.

You haven’t demonstrated what harm comes from googling naked girl and seeing boobs.

If you want devices with parental control you will need to pay for them.

Devices like school computers already have such. This won’t stop a determined person from borrowing their friends phone and googling naked girl but that is a reasonable trade off honestly.

I don’t want to turn the entire Internet into 1984 so your kids doesn’t see boobs until he’s 18

It’s your job to keep your kid from cruising porn on the devices you own

On steam I can click install and run and most games windows and Linux just work without further effort. This makes gog worthless to me. I could just use wine I don’t know why I’d bother.

Ad hominem isn’t when you insult people AND make an argument its when you insult people INSTEAD of making an argument.

User initially believes that this is only a Linux issue because its almost entirely discussed on forums frequented by technical people who often use Linux whereas forums full of Windows gamers are equally effected but ignorant of the topic.

It’s a much higher risk than average because games are often abandoned within one year of release and still run as long as 10-15 years later and connects to the internet and other randos on the internet. See the Call of Duty games that allow you to take over the computer of anyone who connects to your online match. It greatly degrades the security of its users.

Technically lots of things people call “malware” don’t actually do any of those things. For instance they may hijack your default search engine, pop up ads, or otherwise monetize your computer at your expense. The category that was invented by ass coverers is “possibly unwanted program” but outside of those who worry about being sued by scumbags people colloquially refer to both what you call malware AND PUPs as "malware the root of which is “bad” after all. Language being descriptive not prescriptive I think this broader definition of malware is fine.

Do you remember when Sony released cds that when inserted into Windows computer auto ran an installer that installed a rootkit that made it impossible for Windows to see any processes or files that started with a certain sequence of characters instantly turning any malware that named its files or processes similarly powerful rootkit. Oh and it installed a cd driver that made it impossible to copy their music.

Suggested removal was a full reinstall of windows.

If they change the deal they should have to offer refunds. This makes it an expensive choice after the fact.

No its common for anti-cheat on Windows to have full root permission to your entire system Windows users are just on average less intelligent, less concerned about privacy, and, more ignorant about technology. This doesn’t mean using Windows makes you stupid its just the OS of choice for the stupid and ignorant.

It’s interesting actually. There are both games with insane budgets that cost more that than triple A games in years past and incredible tooling and assets available for very modest amounts of money + incredibly powerful computers very little. It’s possible for some games to be made for less than ever before AND some to be made for more.

For practical purposes its capturing revenue from OEMs and users. Android being open source if they didn’t completely sabotage an actual open source market they could well find OEMs or third parties capturing those dollars or indeed those unearned dollars evaporating in a competitive market. Think the IBM PC and Microsoft.

SU software has been a thing for about as long as android about 20 years or about. Has otherwise legitimate su been a source of unattended exploiting?

The obvious risk factors are that users shall be tricked into granting inappropriate permissions to otherwise malicious or compromised software that they have deliberately installed. Outside of mobile platforms this is considered an acceptable risk that competent users can consistently successfully manage on their own hardware.

In fact if you look at actual users even those with very limited technical know how the primary thing that

The secondary risk is that users with no legit source of tools to root

if you use an exploit to gain SU what makes you think a malicious app can’t do the same

They can. 99% of computer security is still not installing malware or being tricked into taking actions that enable your own harm. That said often rooting methods involve physically pressing keys while booting to access the boot loader, ADB, running things with with expansive permissions. Malicious apps install via play store with reasonable permissions will generally have a much harder time breaking out of the sandbox.

Or better yet, find a new exploit in the SU management software you installed

Historically “sudo” tools haven’t been the source of many issues whereas a multitude of problems flowed from complex memory unsafe code.

As soon as you root, you can no longer guarantee root activities are not taking place unbeknownst to you

You can never guarantee this however if you are careful what you install you will remain safe same as it was before.

You can’t just peg things to an expensive thing people do rarely and say something people do commonly should be just as expensive while ignoring the cost of the device that runs the game.