>That simply means certain evidence can't be introduced in court

that's correct but only a fraction of the story.
They don't have power/authority over a man, only over the person with which the man identifies, or not. If the man knows how to be a man, legally he is free

> If you are anonymous on the platform, they legally can't do shit.

That simply means certain evidence can't be introduced in court (courts with compromised judges/prosecutors), but the intelligence doesn't disappear. 

"Show me the man i'll show you the crime", if they know the man the legality doesn't matter. They'll use the extra-legal means to find a legal means if deemed necessary.

justin_shocknet

They're already trapped, so why put up billboards saying its a trap?

Because it's how law works. If you are anonymous on the platform, they legally can't do shit. If you KYC, you accept the person's t&c, all your actions on the platform are now in a jurisdiction where there's no freedom. Control is trivial/automatic at this point

Politics_And_Law

Zuckerberg’s “Fix” for Child Safety Could End Anonymous Internet Access for All

Scoresby

>they already have full control

imo, that's the error in framing

>They're already trapped, so why put up billboards saying its a trap?

Because it's how law works. If you are anonymous on the platform, they legally can't do shit. If you KYC, you accept the person's t&c, all your actions on the platform are now in a jurisdiction where there's no freedom. Control is trivial/automatic at this point