@rcombs yeah i really don't get it

@rcombs everyone knows young people will lie about their age. this enables them to lie about their age very easily. why the fuck would you put up a fuss about it

@whitequark @rcombs I think there are two aspects here. One is the matter of unknown and untrusted folks inserting themselves into projects eagar to comply in advance. This expresses a disempowerment of communities and a surrender of editorial control to a fascist government. From this perspective, it's the statement of values that matters more than any practical effect.

@dalias @rcombs how is it "in advance" if there are laws about it today?

@whitequark @rcombs Is that a serious question? There is no law that says that we as the authors of a program have to modify it to behave in a certain way. If there is, it's unconstitutional. Even if it weren't, we wouldn't comply. It's complying in advance if nobody is holding a gun to your head or putting handcuffs on your wrists. Governments do not decide what we can write.

@whitequark @rcombs Even as a Linux business not up for civil disobedience, it's complying in advance if you don't go to court, either waiting for the state to take you to court, or preemptively suing to block enforcement. You wait until a court rules that you have to comply to do it (and then you deal with the fact that the upstream FOSS projects won't comply, so you have to maintain your own patches to comply, and you can use that hardship to help your case in court) rather than just agreeing to do it to begin with.

@dalias @whitequark it is absolutely absurd to demand this course of action (at great expense and risk) of a business whose lawyers say "yes this is most likely constitutional, yes you're required to comply"

@rcombs @dalias @whitequark where are these businesses related to desktop Linux that are going to be sued by the California AG and in which the AG can prove with a preponderance of the evidence the number of children affected by negligent violations? The fine depends on that.