I just like video games, anime, and manga. I love fanservice and I am anti-censorship. Nobeta from Little Witch Nobeta is my wife, and I love her dearly.

With Nobeta.
Joined June 2023
JastSolar retweeted
2745376924th time's the charm...
11
110
4
294
2,112
Discord told users it doesn’t look at their messages, calls, or other content when sorting accounts by age. Florida is now suing Discord because it doesn’t look at their messages, calls, or other content. The complaint objects that Discord’s filters only scan images and videos and leave text, voice, and calls untouched. It lists voice and video channels as an unfair practice. It wants ID checks before users can be seen or share anything. The state is seeking up to $150,000 per violation and a court order to make it happen. Florida calls this child safety but it's a demand that nobody on Discord gets to have a private conversation again.
164
434
65
2,185
107,966
These guys are for sure the most based indie developers in world. Also I think Nobeta and I prefer night mode as it's for breeding her.
37
【📑Dev Notes】 Werewolf Attack Animation Showcase🐺 #FlameWitchFran #フレイムウィッチフラン
3
7
107
2,040
Lol at the people celebrating the erasure of their rights. Censorship is always evil. This is about controlling the population and making thoughts and fiction equivalent to crime which is insane. We're heading ever closer to minority report's dystopia future. Fight back.
9
29
214
2,440
Important Notice to our Customers
77
428
84
2,650
195,785
2026 October Fanbox&Patreon T3 reward 🎞️Fran Environment Interaction Animation 🔗witchnobeta.fanbox.cc 🔗patreon.com/littlewitchnobet… #FlameWitchFran #LittleWitchNobeta #リトルウィッチノベタ
2
5
63
1,798
Wobble, wobble~ 🍒
2
23
317
2,665
It's been 10 years since the release of Mary Skelter: Nightmares! Honestly, my role as director doesn't matter right now. What I really want to say is a massive thank you to all the fans who continue to support the series to this day. Thank you so much! compileheart.com/mary-skelte…
17
76
3
422
6,620
2026 October Fanbox Reward part2 ⛓️Nobeta in the Dungeon➊ 🔗witchnobeta.fanbox.cc #LittleWitchNobeta #リトルウィッチノベタ
1
36
1
635
4,599
JastSolar retweeted
Nobody IRL gives a shit if someone watches a cartoon with a pervert MC. Literally Nobody. You moralfags are so unbearably insufferable.
Replying to @SheiSketch
A todos los perturbados que vienen a defender esta serie en los comentarios, os propongo un ejercicio. Poned el primer capítulo y miradlo con vuestros padres, con vuestros hermanos que tengan hijos y amigos. A ver qué piensan. O quizá es que no lo quieres hacer porque sabes que está mal pero internet es tu refugio para tus gustos ilegales y peligrosos para la sociedad. Os aplaudís entre vosotros, nadie os ve normales porque no lo sois.
18
55
697
5,861
Fate/kaleid liner prisma Illya official art, by Silver Link.
2
18
165
1,231
Opsec level: not fucking knowing what the fuck the word opsec means and calling loli "csam" How does it feel to fuck things up for real children?
This Post is from a suspended account. Learn more
10
2
86
1,363
JastSolar retweeted
There is no such thing as a social media ban for children. There is only an identity database for everyone.
7
42
1
173
4,840
Can't countries in the US and Europe treat this issue with greater concern? There are individuals with extreme views who impose the idea that having a preference for "loli" imagery—or anything that merely resembles it—is a crime, regardless of whether it is real or fictional. This stance causes global distress to creators and users and unjustly infringes upon the freedom that is a fundamental human right! It goes beyond a failure to distinguish fantasy from reality; it fosters discrimination based on body type—even affecting real-life subjects, a terrifying development that has already come to light. This issue demands widespread condemnation; before you dismiss speaking out as futile, please first consider whether you are truly willing to accept a situation where things continue to get worse and worse!!!
なんか最近のゲーム「貧乳にしすぎると児童認定されるから巨乳にしないといけない」みたいなのよく見るけどさ…一人のド貧乳成人女として存在を否定された気分になり涙 勿論二次元限定の話だし現実の話じゃないのは分かるんだけど  二次元オタクとしてもスレンダー好きなので非常に涙涙の風潮ですよ
22
138
5
591
22,668
JastSolar retweeted
This is a global blueprint being used by governments around the world for digital surveillance and mass population control by getting people to censor themselves. This needs to be shared far and wide. Here’s the playbook: 1. Ban social media for children 2. Tech companies need to know who's over 13/16 3. To know that, they need proof of age 4. Governments say age estimation isn’t good enough 5. ID verification for everyone is therefore necessary 6. Being banned from a social network = banned for life 7. Your identity is blacklisted and can't be verified again 8. Online anonymity is outlawed 9. Some people censor themselves to avoid bans, investigations or arrests 10. Some people use VPNs to avoid surveillance 11. VPNs are restricted in the name of national security 12. The World Wide Web becomes the Dark Web 13. Regular people start using the "Dark Web" for regular communication and online activity More than 25 countries are simultaneously treating online child safety as one of the most urgent legislative priorities in the world. That's while we live in turbulent times. Given current geopolitics, it’s understandable that governments would want the ability to control and manipulate what people can read, write and share online. It makes sense that they would want greater control over how people spend money, where and when they travel, and who they communicate and organise with. Apple, Google, Microsoft, Meta, OpenAI and Anthropic have already built and rolled out tech updates and services that make identity verification possible before governments publicly demanded it. Between them, these companies control or influence mobile devices, operating systems, email, social media, messaging, location, AI, and most of the infrastructure people use every day. Rolling out identity verification globally only required coordination among a small number of governments and tech CEOs. G7 meetings provide an obvious forum for that coordination. Governments gain greater control and big tech gain regulatory certainty, access to government contracts and infrastructure that makes persistent identity the foundation for generating more revenue through targeted ads and seamless one-tap payment. They fight publicly about child safety, addictive design, and dangerous AI, but we see political leaders and tech executives smiling together in meetings, photographs and interviews while their representatives argue through the media. COVID showed political and tech leaders that digital identity could be deployed across entire populations quickly. It also showed how quickly people could become accustomed to proving something about themselves digitally before being permitted to work, travel, or enter particular places. Some people even fought their family and friends when they didn't agree to government mandates. Everything that enables surveillance is being politicised so citizens argue in favour of it. You’re either for masks or against them. You’re either for child safety or against it. The technical consequences disappear because the debate gets reduced to a moral binary. Governments are now adding fraud, antisemitism, democracy itself, misinformation, disinformation and other categories of speech to the reasons people can be investigated, restricted, banned online, or even arrested without committing a crime. In the UK, around 30 people a day have been arrested in connection with communications offences involving online posts and messages. Ireland’s media regulator, Coimisiún na Meán, has appointed the Jewish Representative Council of Ireland to help identify online material considered illegal antisemitic content across Ireland and the EU. Once your verified identity is tied to Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, LinkedIn, X, Discord or another service, a ban no longer means losing one profile. You can’t simply create another account because the next account resolves back to the same identity. If an authority flags your posts and the platform removes your account, identity verification turns a temporary platform sanction into permanent identity based exclusion. That's one of the most important consequences of outlawing online anonymity. We need to defend everyone’s right to privacy. Share my post below because it explains the blueprint that governments around the world are following and includes my simple, technical analysis showing how the Australian eSafety Commissioner is intentionally misleading the public about what these systems actually require. The same pattern is appearing across the EU, Ireland, France, UK, Canada, New Zealand, UAE and many other countries at the same time - right now. The fastest way to expose the contradiction is also the easiest. Every smartphone already contains parental controls that allow parents to block apps, block websites, restrict content, control downloads and purchases, limit communications, and impose screen time limits and curfews. I demonstrated on BBC Newsnight as I keep saying, 14 years ago to demonstrate how bad parental controls were. Today, smartphone controls are almost as good as you could technically want. They're excellent. Millions of parents and countless schools already use these controls successfully. If those controls already achieve the stated child safety objective, why are governments forcing every adult to verify their identity instead of putting the same effort into teaching parents how to use the tools already sitting in their hands? That’s the question the media should keep asking. It’s also the question smart policy makers should be asking colleagues they disagree with. Some politicians already see where this is heading and are saying publicly that their own colleagues are building surveillance systems under the language of safety. That includes policy makers inside the EU. Why is the government forcing everyone to verify their identity in the name of child safety when smartphones already have built in parental controls that work extremely well and cannot simply be bypassed by the child? If a politician responds by saying, "We don’t want to verify everyone’s identity, we only need to verify their age," the answer is the same. Why do you need to verify everyone’s age if parents can already control what their own children can access? You don’t even need to debate the technical impossibility of separating adults from children without identifying them because governments have already rejected age estimation as inadequate. Once age estimation is declared unreliable, identity verification is the only technical means to enforce any kind of digital service for a person of any age. The UK is already admitting that it's in favour a society inspired by 1984 and Animal Farm by proposing the use of passports and other official identity credentials before people are given permission to access the Internet and digital services. They're even saying it's in everyone's best interest because by collecting everyone's identity, they can protect them from identity theft. The technical chain is simple. Parental controls already solve the stated child safety problem.
Australia's eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, made statements about digital surveillance legislation that are incorrect and disingenuous to technical experts. I’ve broken down her statements to explain why each one is wrong and designed to misdirect the media and public. 🇦🇺 "The government is listening to all kinds of feedback from stakeholders” 💡 This is untrue. The government listens to organizations that supports its narrative; child safety charities, NGOs, think tanks, parents, and behavioral psychologists. They’re not technical experts in online child safety. 🇦🇺 “So I think, you know, perhaps things will evolve” 💡 No. The legislation either achieves its stated objective or it doesn’t. Saying the system will evolve provides an excuse for ongoing technical failures. 🇦🇺 “I think there’s been a real misreading and a misinterpretation about what the Digital Duty of Care legislation is meant to do” 💡 This is also untrue. I understand the legislation and other technical experts understand it. Some of us understand the legislation and technical consequences better than the people designing and implementing it. Disagreement is presented as misunderstanding. 🇦🇺 “It’s meant to put proactive obligations on these technology companies, like we do with car manufacturers or medicines or medical devices” That analogy fails. When people can’t argue their point, they fall back on physical world analogies. When that fails, they fall back on ideology because nobody argues against protecting children. 🇦🇺 “I’m sure there will be lots of negotiation, but I think the Digital Duty of Care is the only way we can get ahead of these harms rather than just responding to them after” 💡 There was and still is no negotiation. The Commissioner either intends to ban children from social networks, or she wants companies like Meta to make sites like Facebook safe for them. Asking Meta to make Facebook safe for kids is like asking Marlboro to make cigarettes safe for children. Either way, both approaches demand the same technical requirement: verify everyone’s identity so tech companies know who’s a child and who’s an adult. 💡 The Commissioner already acknowledged age estimation isn't robust enough. Once age estimation is rejected, the only fault-proof approach is identity verification or collecting enough personally identifiable information to amount to the same thing. That means every adult in Australia must be verified before receiving permission to read, write, or share content and opinions online. 💡I demonstrated to the Commissioner that smartphones already contain parental controls letting parents block apps, block websites, restrict content, limit communications, and impose curfews for their children. 💡 If parents already have the ability to protect their children, the government has no legitimate reason to strip their right to choose what’s right for them. 14 years ago, I was interviewed by BBC Newsnight while advising the British government during the first Parliamentary inquiry into online child safety. At the time, I demonstrated how poor parental controls were. Today they are excellent. There is no technical justification for forcing the entire population through identity verification. 💡 The Australian government’s end game is to outlaw online anonymity so people censor themselves. There’s no other plausible reason when looking at all the evidence. 💡 Once every person must connect what they read, write, share, and who they communicate with to their real identity, online anonymity is gone and people will censor themselves. 🇬🇧 In the UK, 30 people are arrested every day for what they say online. The UK government says it’s forcing a national digital identity mandate to protect citizens from identity theft. 🌎 At least 25 countries are coordinating identity verification mandates under the pretext of child safety right now.
11
231
27
425
14,908