CassandrichI want someone (a real collaborator, not one of y'all as a joke) to try submitting a patch to musl adding a pw_dob field to struct passwd. I will roast and reject.
Ariadne Conill 🐰
@dalias I don't even want to figure that law out right now
@dalias my personal view is that most of fedi is rejecting a boogeyman created by lunduke
the california law is clearly intended for consumer OS with cloud services and app stores.
but importantly it has quite a few features that seem desirable
- the assured age bucket is configurable by the device owner
- it is not verified with third party services like persona
- app developers have to accept it as a valid age verification unless they have direct knowledge that the age verification is invalid (!)
the latter seems actually to be good, as there is less personal data processing happening. it makes it illegal for app developers to demand ID, they have to accept the attested signal.
I don't even know what shape, if any, compliance for a distro would look like, but most likely that information wouldnt be stored in /etc/passwd anyway.
most likely we would just have a daemon that generates attestations based on a configured age bracket. no libc changes needed 😵💫
Jacqueline@dalias @burnoutqueen my points are
- the law is not targeted (as in intention) at FOSS projects
- a compliant OS can simply generate any signal it wants and remain compliant with the law
- people are vigorously debating the law as represented by Bryan Lunduke, a known chud
I see this law in the same light as the DMCA, KOSA and the Patriot act. I believe that giving *any concession* to the corporate surveillance state *in any context* *under any pretext* is unacceptable.
Because every inch that is given can and will be used to oppress working class people, enrich the bourgeoisie, and build up the tools required for Trump's henchmen to police online speech. The amount of inches I am willing to give is zero. Because every inch is going to be used to silence criticism of the government, prevent vulnerable people from getting help in abusive situations, and strengthen the oppressive grip of the Republican party over US society and culture.
I don't think it's targeted at foss, I don't listen to Lunduke (I blocked him, in fact). I just see the writing on the wall, and I'm acting accordingly.
yes, I get that. I also am transgender and have been smeared by Lunduke in an episode of his podcast that he dedicated talking about how I am a transgender rabbit therian and thus it could not possibly be xlibre's own community behavior that makes people not want to deal with them.
anyway I hear a lot of talking about the law and I am also autistic as fuck so pattern recognition is something I lock into very easily.
so I notice the talking points about the law are as described by Lunduke and how his misinformation has diffused around fedi, and much less debate about what is actually in it. people copy, paste and react to talking points all day on fedi.
my point is that the aspects of the law that I bring up, nobody knows about them because none of the journalists have talked about what is actually in the law and are instead turning it into a boogeyman for clicks like Lunduke did. he just did it before everyone else.
internally in alpine we have been debating what, if anything, to do about this law for almost a month now, so it is possible that things look differently to me :)
so anyway:
1. i would put money on Linux distributions with package managers being left alone. I just don't see the risk. if anything the risk is as you say, that we are complying in advance without even being confronted.
2. some distributions which have actual app stores (e.g. elementaryOS) probably will have to comply with this somehow because they have more of the right shape. i don't think that makes them evil, to any more extent than participation in capitalism is evil by default. i would rather the trans woman running the indie distro keep her income.
3. in general I think people should calm down just a little bit and engage with these legislation attempts to protect our interests as distribution maintainers. this way we aren't caught off guard. it was surprising to see that this was not on anyone's radar. I seriously wonder where LF was here, for example.
jane400 - 628.4 fan@ariadne @dalias @burnoutqueen I'm a lot more pessimistic than you on point one. App store seems to be a applied more and more as an umbrella term, e.g. I fear some lawyer will describe apt as an app-store without the pictures/text based. Flathub and snap describe themselves as app stores.
But I'm definitely on the supporting point three. Nobody cares or knows about the Linux Desktop.