Jeremy Soller 🦀Feb 27
These are my personal opinions about the operating system age bracket law passed in California (and coming to Colorado): https://www.reddit.com/r/pop_os/comments/1rfqyf8/comment/o7q34wu/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Show threadjoostruis
@soller So distros should implement this in the installer, e.g. Calamares. ( Not that I agree, but technically, that is what is required to be compliant )
Feb 27 at 6:42pmWeb
Show threadelleFeb 27
@joostruis @soller it's completely unenforceable scare-ware. I would recommend hard-forking any distro attempting "compliance".
Show threadJeremy Soller 🦀Feb 27
@elle @joostruis Why do you believe it to be unenforceable other than wanting it not to be?
Show threadelleFeb 27
@soller @joostruis outside of proprietary OSes, how do imagine it is enforceable? they going to force backdoors into every Linux / BSD install? you going to add this spyware into Redox?
Show threadjoostruisFeb 27
@elle @soller Ok you completely lost me there. Backdoors? I am trying to understand the implications and what is required IF any distro wanted to implement what is asked in that bill. As I read it, and I do not personally agree with such bill, there needs to be some check in the installer asking if the user is at a certain age criteria when living in a certain area / state. Just a checkbox.
Show threadelleFeb 27
@joostruis @soller what I'm saying is how are they possibly going to verify that every distro contains a check in the installer? what about distros which don't have an installer, like source-built distros (where removing such a check would be trivial)? they would literally have to compromise, and/or control every distro maintainer. what about maintainers / distros outside their jurisdiction? it's unenforceable outside of those who wanted to do this anyway
Show threadjoostruisFeb 27
@elle @soller A check in installer is just my interpretation. At the moment I am a bit clueless about what really would be required. Good that it is brought to our attention though. Now it is up to the FOSS community to deal with it.
Show threadJeremy Soller 🦀Feb 27
@elle @joostruis Read my reddit comment in full first.
Show threadjoostruisFeb 27
@soller huh I did. What did I not understand?
Show threadJeremy Soller 🦀Feb 27
@joostruis I was replying to Elle's reply to you, not to you.
Show threadelleFeb 27
@soller @joostruis I'm not visiting that cesspool, tl;dr please?
Show threadJeremy Soller 🦀Feb 27
@elle @joostruis You are asking me to restate things I have already stated. I don't care to.
Show threadelleFeb 27
@soller @joostruis that's fine, you are asking me to visit a website I don't care to.
Show threadJeremy Soller 🦀Feb 27
@elle @joostruis You are replying on a thread where it is important context. I would appreciate due diligence before doing so.
Show threadelleFeb 27

@soller @joostruis

"Pop and many other Open source operating systems should Sue, and quickly."

> "Under what grounds? With what legal funds?"

You absolutely should sue with whatever funds System76 can provide, potentially in a class action suit coordinated with EFF. I imagine RHEL/Redhat, Canonical would also have sizeable warchests to fight this, if they want to.

It's not like you're some lone developer, PopOS literally has a whole-ass company behind it. Get together and fight!

Show threadJeremy Soller 🦀Feb 27
@elle @joostruis Age restrictions are legal. They are already used in software. I don't see we have any legal argument to make.
Show threadelleFeb 27

@soller @joostruis I'm not a lawyer, but why are you giving up without even trying?

for example, this isn't just another "age restriction" on an 18-and-over service, this is an age restriction on general computing. for example, the law seems to force the age input, along with an API to serve that "Signal" to whatever software interacts with the OS. that is forcing spyware, and seems to be an encroachment on the 4th amendment. there is no "opt-out" option. don't comply? don't use computer

Show threadJeremy Soller 🦀Feb 27
@elle @joostruis The bill only requires an OS to ask the user to specify an unverified age bracket which it then presents to applications. I don't see any way that would be unconstitutional. Similar requirements have been around for social media for a long time.