OK this is a stupid question, but why have Linux projects (apparently) fallen over themselves to comply with an age-recording statute in a single US state (albeit a large one), when those projects have been failing for decades to respect national and even international law regarding disability?
#accessibility #disability #linux #FreeSoftware #fascism #AgeVerification #infantilism
Because it's not a single state, not even a single country. I think this video about systemd is elucidating:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5AcreFk40U
Watch until the end, because the last message is important.
I thought the Colorado situation was ongoing. But that doesn't invalidate my point that some statutes are given rapid attention and others, which are designed to help minorities are not.
Oh, and at the risk of being snarky, I note with amusement that a response to a point about accessibility is a youtube video. Honey, it is wasted on me.
I'm sorry for the YouTube link, I just didn't want to repeat an argument somebody else expressed a lot better than I ever could. Basically, the author argues that the anger towards free software developers for trying to implement law-conforming changes in their projects is misdirected -- it should be towards those passing those laws.
Having been in a somewhat similar, although not as important, situation more than 10 years ago, I understand this point of view.
@ammdias @iaruffell The problem is, they aren't being made to comply with laws in one or two areas, they're falling over themselves, ignoring dissenting voices in their rush to implement this in a thing that shouldn't even have anything to do with it anyway. Systemd just supposed to handle startup and services, not keeping records of the users.
The thing is, the laws aren't even binding them yet. Most don't even apply to them since they aren't centralized in those two states. The laws aren't even really finalized yet and implementations now may not even comply with the final laws...
And implementing those laws globally also tends to violate laws elsewhere. They're picking complying in advance with area laws that aren't even 100% legal over complying now with global laws that are.
@ammdias @iaruffell I do want to be clear: collecting user data to be submitted to applications outside of the user's control is non-compliant with a lot of privacy laws elsewhere. I'm no lawyer, but I'm willing to bet it's non-compliant with privacy laws even in California, as limited as those are... (Yeah, the law itself is pretty contradictory.)
They don't have to do this. Systemd is not California (or Colorado) based. It's global and it's implemented globally, which means it absolutely is violating laws elsewhere.
They could have spoken to lawyers. The EFF would have been glad to take this up I have absolutely no doubt. They even could have listened to the voices of people saying "hey, this may not even be legal."
But it's being rushed through in a hurry instead.
Isabel Ruffell
António Manuel Dias
Nazo