AmoxtliCalifornia introduces age verification law for all operating systems, including Linux and SteamOS — user age verified during OS account setup
TropicalDingdongColorado Dems pushing a similar law rn.
Fucking idiots.
Do you know if any organizations are coming out against it? I’ve been looking for a place to plug in. These people aren’t my representatives, but I know people in their districts and I’m curious why now? Who asked them to do this? Why did they think during the unprecedented expansion of the surveillance state was an appropriate time to propose something like this. There are only two sponsors. I looked through other legislation they cosponsored and some of it was good, some of it was garbage, but this was among the worst. I’ll try calling their numbers and send an email.
🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 Because it’s not that crazy or authoritarian and is basically what most websites already do to “verify” you age (which is to say nothing but asking you your age). But the onus is now being put on OS makers, with an additional clause to build an API for other developers to access so they also can “know” a user’s age.
The law does not require photo ID uploads or facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age
swab148It always ALWAYS comes step by step!
First they will introduce age “non-real-check”, then they will enforce the check: you have accepted the principle, so what’s the big deal if we actually check it?
How do you catch a wild pig? (i dont remember the source)
It’s more than that. Go read the bill, particularly section 1798.501.b, 1798.502.a and b. Every developer of every application that can be downloaded from every package system MUST request your age bracket every time it is downloaded. And possibly every time it is launched. Basic utilities like ‘ls’ and ‘cat’, that pong example I pushed as a test, everything.
It’s been that way for a very long time.
gedaliyahThis kinda seems like a roundabout way of avoiding government /corporate age verification laws? Like it doesn’t require ID verification or biometrics and runs a local api to verify age.
Can someone smarter than me please explain if this is a good thing or not?
I’m not saying I’m smarter than you but to me it looks like “Hey yeah we require age verification. So, anyway…”
A token easily bypassed “verification” law to set and forget. It’s basically the same level of security corrently keeping teenage boys off of PornHub.
It’s not really easily bypassed though, if only the administrator can set the date of birth for an account. if the parent does not use the admin account for daily usage (and they shouldn’t for other reasons), then the majority of the children won’t be able to change it
I meant that the law is easily bypassed, for example by not implementing what you described. Good point nonetheless.
California leading the way? Have you been under a rock? It even says this in the article…
The law does not require photo ID uploads or facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age, setting AB 1043 apart from similar laws passed in Texas and Utah that require “commercially reasonable” verification methods
Get people used to a mild form of age verification. Next step, full ID upload.
Simple solution. From now on Linux distros should ship with a big message “NOT FOR USE IN CALIFORNIA”.
You want to force age verification? No server in all of California will run. Period.
Ah, the Glock solution.
“My name is Microsoft, and I approved this message.”
Microsoft’s own servers run Linux. An in-house build IIRC named Azure Linux.
And there’s nothing keeping them from adding it themselves for their own in-house use & profit.
What does that have to do with anything?
If the only server OS legally capable of running in CA is Microsoft’s - be it Windows, or their particular spin of Linux - guess who’s gonna sop up all that government contract money?
And why would this particular law exempt Azure Linux only and specifically?
Wow, I’ve really got to spell it out for you, huh? Azure Linux will not be exempt - Microsoft will add the required routines to it, and if they are the only ones to do so, then they soak up the server market in CA.
ETA: I doubt that will wind up being the case as other commercial vendors will not want to be left behind, but we were discussing the theoretics.
So you literally got mad at a made-up scenario in your head?
Please point out where I got “mad.”
When you acted exasperated at having to explain something, for example. Or now, asking for proof that you were mad. These things are not done in normal, polite conversation.
Well, you’re obviously either not terribly well-grounded in reality considering how many times I was patient enough to answer what was effectively the same question - never mind that it’s perfectly reasonable to ask for proof when accused of something, or more likely you’re a poor excuse for a troll. Either way, I’ve got better things to do than feed whatever your neurotic issue is, so I’ll be blocking you. Good luck with finding the mental health assistance you obviously are in need of.
Have a nice day.
Because these scumbag companies are essentially running business like mafia thugs. Every OS is just linux with DRM if you dig deep enough.
“We’re every datacenter in Canada and we collectively and politely agreed it’s a good move.”
Yeah… It says just that in the article. You did read the article, right? I mean you didn’t just read the title and then rush in here to make a comment?
fernandofigWhere, pray tell? Out of curiosity I went there to check it out, and the “article” is just 3 paragraphs that just barely expand on the title. Maybe uBlock is triggering some invisible paywall there for me?
Keep scrolling there is more, mine has a odd empty ad break too
I did scroll down all the way to the comments section, and nothing.
Disabled uBlock, and sure enough, more of the article showed up.
_you can click those?_
Supposedly the age verification thing that’s needed is the equivalent to a porn site verification. Just enter a birthday that’s in the 1800s, and you’re set. This is still a bad direction to go towards though, as it’ll set precedent for future bullshit.
There is nothing that’s “needed”. Its an OS not some demonic construct. It should also be noted that teens will be impacted in it as well - all minors. All this age gating, discriminatory behaviour is eating us alive. Age verification should not exist at all.
Exactly. Today you can enter Jan 1 1800 and it will take it. That’s not the problem.
The real problem is the precedence it sets. An asinine rule gets passed and companies adhere to it, meaning they are enforcers.
Tomorrow when laws require real verification, like ID scan then they’ve already agreed to be the gate keeper for said asinine laws. It’s harder to back out at that point.
It’s all surveillance and it should be stopped.
Technically, Linux is not an operating system, just a kernel, so I’m not sure how this would be implemented.
See, here’s the big open secret. All these politicians, who make all theze rules? They don’t have a clue what they’re talking about. They think a kernel is something that gets stuck in your teeth whrn you eat corn.
SamsyBut they do have a clue how laws work, and the element of fuzziness in who’s guilty is a beneficial effect.
Linux being a kernel is hardly relevant though. The law lies the responsibility at the “operating system providers”, looking at the definition in the article that would be the developers/organisation behind the individual distributions. Politicians don’t care if each distro comes up with their own solution or gets built-in to the kernel.
But personally I think they all just give this law the finger, put a ‘not for use in California’ in their licenses and forget about this brainfart.
Enforcement against Linux distributions, however, is likely to be problematic. Distros like Arch, Ubuntu, Debian, and Gentoo have no centralized account infrastructure, with users downloading ISOs from mirrors worldwide, and can modify source code freely. These small distros lack legal teams or resources to implement the required API, so a more realistic outcome for non-compliant distros is a disclaimer that the software is not intended for use in California.
That’s what MidnightBSD did.
California residents are not authorized to use MidnightBSD for desktop use in the state of California effective January 1, 2027. California law CA AB1043 requires a complex age verification system implemented for operating systems with no exceptions for small open source projects. At this time, we don’t have development time or a plan in place for this.
Fascinating.
They, eh, want for every local user account to be tied to some central database?
In general this is going out of hand, age verification is parents’ responsibility.