this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2026
261 points (97.8% liked)

Europe

9927 readers
871 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
federalreverse@feddit.org
poVoq@slrpnk.net
anzo@programming.dev
EuroMod@feddit.org
261
Elon Musk calls Spanish PM a ‘tyrant’ over plan to ban under-16s from social media and curb hateful content (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by Luniio@lemmy.world to c/europe@feddit.org
45 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Chiqa@midwest.social -1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I would like for everyone to consider that 16 year olds arent children.

14 year old arent children

12 year olds are borderline children

But being a children is a personal trait and is subjective per person their personality and responsibility, not per age.

You can be a child even you are 30, and be a woman/man when you are 12.

And no, just because people forgot what words meand and how humans function and me reminding them of such does not make me q weirdo creep whatever.

10 year olds 100 or more years ago were pretty much as resonsible as 20 year olds today

[–] dellish@lemmy.world 2 points 47 minutes ago

12 year olds aren't children you say? You're exactly the sort of person Elon would like to hang out with.

[–] Shamber@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago

Shitting out of his mouth you mean?!

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

He's just angry he can't prey on them with the social media service he bought that creates pictures of naked children.

[–] Only_Slightly_Bent@lemmy.world 83 points 1 day ago

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 40 points 1 day ago (2 children)

he also said, “What day/night will be the wildest party on your island?”

[–] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

[–] FatVegan@leminal.space 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I still have to laugh every time i see that photo. I remember when i saw it for the first time and thought it's not okay to make fun of that disabled dude.

[–] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 5 points 15 hours ago

Raw sexual energy.

[–] bufalo1973@piefed.social 3 points 1 day ago

It's funny. Suddenly another photo comes to my mind... But in black and white.

[–] germanatlas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 92 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Man with child pornography machine is angry because people don’t want children to be on his platform

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 57 points 1 day ago

Elon didn't buy an entire social media platform and turn it into a pedo playground just to watch all the children leave.

[–] sircac@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Where is the ICE when you need it?

[–] thefluffiest@feddit.nl 35 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Wait, so this guy said something?

[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 1 points 1 hour ago

The Great riddle: Is it "takes one to know one" or "deflection by projection"? (I lean towards the latter)

[–] Novocirab@feddit.org 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Can we stop needlessly sharing Elmo's deranged utterances? The topic of social media policy (much as anything else) is too important than to concern ourselves with his weird tweets.

[–] foodandart@lemmy.zip 26 points 1 day ago

Elon Musk is a cunt who needs to fuck off back to Pretoria.

[–] hornedfiend@piefed.social 11 points 1 day ago

He's right, we should outright ban X entirely in EU. Besides some right wing extremists, no one will care.

[–] Binturong@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago

Who cares what a delusional midwit mass social criminal says or thinks? Let him scratch it on his cell wall in supermax.

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org 5 points 1 day ago

Huh, I was actually unsure weather I liked this law but now I am sure, that I like it.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If teens and preteens aren't on social media, how will the pedo-rape crew that hung out with Jefferey Epstein groom them online? Someone please think of the poor, downtrodden richest man on earth, for ONCE PLEASE.

[–] BigShammy80@feddit.org 1 points 1 day ago

This comes to mind

[–] rumschlumpel@feddit.org 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

Broken clock is right, but for the wrong reasons (i.e. like a broken clock).

age-gating social media = obligatory ID verification for social media access

Do you trust your government to handle your ID data safely and in a way that law enforcement etc. can't access without proper cause? This is definitely going to get used to do police raids and years-long device seizures on people who call dick politicians dicks - the process is the punishment.

If you actually want to protect children, force operating system manufacturers or home internet hardware manufacturers to implement child filters that work reliably.

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Do you trust your government to handle your ID data safely and in a way that law enforcement etc. can’t access without proper cause? This is definitely going to get used to do police raids and years-long device seizures on people who call dick politicians dicks - the process is the punishment.

The government **already **handle your ID data.
It has your document id number, SSN equivalent (in Italy Codice Fiscale), the number of your driver license, the number of your passport, know where you live, know where you work and know any other information about you that allow it to identify you, they issued most of them, they know them.

If you actually want to protect children, force operating system manufacturers or home internet hardware manufacturers to implement child filters that work reliably.

It was proven times and again that filters are useless.
Man, they where useless back at the time where the filter at the newsstand was a person that could check you id before selling you pornographic journals and they are useless today where you need to be 18 to buy alcohol.
The only real solution is to educate the children, which require educated parents.

[–] rumschlumpel@feddit.org 1 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

they are useless today where you need to be 18 to buy alcohol.

[citation needed]

It's certainly possible to circumvent it, but where I live most people don't become regular drinkers at 15. It makes it harder to access, and many people actually do want to follow the law. IMO a social media ban is going to work the same way - many will circumvent it, but many others won't bother.

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children) 
they are useless today where you need to be 18 to buy alcohol.

[citation needed]

Never seen the group of underage boys waiting outside the shop for the 18 old friend to buy beer (or any other liqueur) for everyone ?

It’s certainly possible to circumvent it, but where I live most people don’t become regular drinkers at 15. It makes it harder to access, and many people actually do want to follow the law. IMO a social media ban is going to work the same way - many will circumvent it, but many others won’t bother.

Neither where I live boys became drinkers at 15 (oh well, some do) but the point is that if a "filter" or ban where you need to be present and there is a person to check is easily circumvented, the classic example of the older friend who buy beers for everyone, I have no faith that a ban based on something virtual has any chance of success. True, it would be harder than the old "are you old enough to access the site" version, but you understimate 15 year old boys (and girls obviously). There are ways to make the ban work but I have the feeling that these solutions would be considered intrusive and against privacy.

For example, the social network can ask for the SSN (or equivalent) and check against the entity responsible to assign the number to check if is valid and of legal age and then keep the number to avoid to be used by someone else (like they keep the email).
But a solution like this is too easy to abuse: the social network has a SSN that they know it is true and valid and the state know a certain person has an account on a certain social network, now imagine the state that ask also the nickname you used on the social network to validate your SSN...

[–] rumschlumpel@feddit.org 1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

I never said that it's impossible to circumvent. It's just harder than if there were no restriction at all, and that does make a difference. And buying alcohol for your 1-year-younger friend is one thing, but buying alcohol for a 15yo is quite another. When I was that age, few people regularly hung out with people that much younger.

I agree that this type of social media ban shouldn't be made at all, though. What I do want is filters that can be activated by parents that are relatively difficult to circumvent, but don't require anyone to submit their ID data. You can still fine the parents if it becomes known, though obviously that's less likely than if every single user had to submit their ID.

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I never said that it’s impossible to circumvent. It’s just harder than if there were no restriction at all, and that does make a difference. And buying alcohol for your 1-year-younger friend is one thing, but buying alcohol for a 15yo is quite another. When I was that age, few people regularly hung out with people that much younger.

Back at the time yes, it was uncommon to have a friends group with more than 1 or 2 years difference between the younger and the older, but today it don't seems to be so.

I agree that this type of social media ban shouldn’t be made at all, though. What I do want is filters that can be activated by parents that are relatively difficult to circumvent, but don’t require anyone to submit their ID data. You can still fine the parents if it becomes known, though obviously that’s less likely than if every single user had to submit their ID.

As I said, filters are alread really hard to make to work, having them also difficult to elude make them even harder. Not considering the fact that you need to create some sort of infrastructure to keep them updated, which make them even harder to implement.

[–] rumschlumpel@feddit.org 1 points 1 hour ago

As I said, filters are alread really hard to make to work, having them also difficult to elude make them even harder. Not considering the fact that you need to create some sort of infrastructure to keep them updated, which make them even harder to implement.

Which is why they're currently not very good, yes. Mandating them by law would probably speed up development, and either way, you're trying to thwart most kids/teenagers, not professional hackers. It doesn't really matter if a couple of kids can circumvent it if the methods are too difficult for the type of kids who barely even know how to use a PC, which seems to be most of them nowadays. Plus, many kids aren't actually willing to break the law just to access TikTok.

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Spaniard here. It was long ago, but never ever had issues on supermarkets. On clubs it was a hit or miss, but just knowing someone who knew someone who knew the bouncer and was good to go. If they still refused, just go to the next one.

There was no night ever were I wanted to get wasted and I couldn't.

The problem with social media id is not those who circumvent it, is that the rest need to link our ID with our profiles, even if we are old.

[–] rumschlumpel@feddit.org 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I grew up in Germany, where I live supermarkets (and most other places) generally don't let underage people drink. Supermarket cashiers only fully stopped carding me when I grew a full beard in my late twenties. Might be different in some rural places or different corners of the country, though.

IMO "just need to know someone" can be a pretty big barrier if you don't know many people (and specifically people who would let underage people drink) or just aren't that popular.

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago

Sure different counties had different situations. I'm the UK I had to show my id while being 24 very commonly, the year before I lived on NL and was never asked. A year after UK, it was asked without fail in the US even for a beer during lunch.

My favorite was in Ireland, while being 16, couldn't get anybody to get me drinks from a store. I just thought "fuck it" and went to a Spar to buy vodka, handing my id immediately to the cashier. He looked at it and turned out multiple times. It was in Spanish and he wasn't familiar with it. Either he didn't care, or war ashamed to ask, but just handed back and let me buy.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

I trust Microsoft even less with ID and tracking information.

[–] ChristerMLB@piefed.social 10 points 1 day ago

Child filters isn't nearly enough. It's the addictive nature of the apps, created by algorithms that are cooked up by psychiatrists, behavioral scientists, and experimentally and iteratively "improved" by AI - algorithms that could potentially be used for other things than just making an app "sticky"

You're right about the privacy concerns, but the conclusion should be to have rules so strict that it is practically banning X, Meta, TikTok, et.c.

[–] teeaa@piefed.social 5 points 1 day ago

Your government likely already has your ID data that law enforcement can see. I much rather trust the government (or banking systems like in Finland) to handle the age verification than some private enterprises that can be hacked and the information stolen, like already happened with Discord.

[–] Klimaschutz@feddit.org 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

His daughter says, he's wrong.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 4 points 1 day ago

His son punched him in the face and gave him a black eye.

[–] DandomRude@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Has the guy finally realized he's still a visionary? After all, you're usually on the right track if you do the exact opposite of what this jerk says. So maybe that's the best approach here.

I'm not a fan of this proposal, because it can only be implemented with age verification, which we all know what that entails, but if he's against it, you almost have to be for it.

Nah, better not. The right thing to do is ignore all his pronouncements and make sure everyone finally leaves his goddamn self-aggrandizing platform - and that he spends his twilight years deservedly in prison.

In any case: Fuck this pedophile piece of shit.

[–] Absinthe3858@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Yeah, I bet he did

[–] Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Does that mean that PSOE is.. The good one?

[–] bufalo1973@piefed.social 0 points 1 day ago

On this one, yes. On other things...

[–] abbadon420@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

This wouldn't be the first time Spain has fallen for nazi politics. Now the nazi scum are trying to do it again. Luckily the current PM knows better than to listen to the nazis.

[–] EverXIII@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

¡Arriba España!

[–] bufalo1973@piefed.social 4 points 1 day ago

No, "arriba" no. Viva.