when Intel introduced a cpuid instruction, around 1998 or so

there was a debate on the Linux kernel mailing list as to whether Linux should provide a way to call that instruction

you know, because of its potential uses for surveillance and how that was sharply at odds with the idea of computers being owned by their users

the resolution, at least for a while, was that Linux would implement an interface for programs to invoke the instruction, but would also add an interface that allows the user to instruct the kernel to lie and return a user-specified identifier instead
that was a reasonable approach, though it was only possible because cpuid did not have the force of law. that's how you resist surveillance through technology, when you have to.
we haven't followed up on it since then. we kind of suspect everyone forgot about cpui and some DRM patch in the 2010s quietly made it a "real" surveillance feature and nobody noticed, but ... who knows, you know?

at any rate, it's really startling to us to see people complying in advance with this current wave of surveillance stuff

many of them are people we have ideological differences with, but we would have at least hoped that libertarians (in the modern, US-centric sense, not the historical one) would understand when someone is seeking to control them, and resist it

like, if you're not based in California, and are willing to say "people in California are prohibited from using this", this current law does not apply to you

and that would be the correct form of resistance, for the record

@ireneista Not everyone can afford to take the risk, but I applaud those who can and then do.

https://agelesslinux.org/

Ageless Linux — Software for Humans of Indeterminate Age

@xgranade @ireneista thank you for bringing this to my attention