Mastodawn

stravanasu 2d ago

Birthdate field under discussion also in Arch Linux

https://lemmy.ca/post/62271746

Birthdate field under discussion also in Arch Linux - Lemmy.ca

> Add a required birth date prompt (YYYY-MM-DD) to the user creation flow, stored as a systemd userdb JSON drop-in at /etc/userdb/<user>.user on the target system. > > Motivation > > Recent age verification laws in California (AB-1043), Colorado (SB26-051), Brazil (Lei 15.211/2025), etc. require platforms to verify user age. Collecting birth date at install time ensures Arch Linux is compliant with these regulations. The pull-request discussion thread has been locked, just like it happened for the similar thread in Systemd, owing to the amount of negative comments…

spectrums_coherence 2d ago

This dude need to chill, he also pushed the systemd change, and in his blog he seems to believe android “advance flow” for sideloading protects users.

The one they are targeting is California’s AB-1043, which still have three quarters of a year before it comes into effect…

I think this dude might get too excited for his new subscription of claude code or whatever, and decided to spam every project with these request. Some of these are reasonable, some are compliance in advance.

Also this dude writes two freaking blog every week with LLM. If I were him, I would try to find some joy in my personal life…

ExoticCherryPigeon 2d ago

I fully expect this person to not be even real and instead just another ai bot to push agenda for corporate scum

He’s the third highest contributor to archinstall.

https://github.com/dylanmtaylor

Still a dipshit but probably not a bot.

dylanmtaylor - Overview

I consider myself a technology enthusiast, and I have been interested in coding from a very young age. I find that it's always exciting to work on new projects. - dylanmtaylor

GitHub

underscores 1d ago

it’s so strange to me that he tried to add age verification scripting changes in archinstall. isn’t that the wrong place systemd makes sense but I’m puzzled by the archinstall pr

GreenKnight23 1d ago

fascist cocks won’t suck themselves.

JackbyDev 1d ago

The thing that’s frustrating is that if the age verification laws weren’t there and they wanted to add a birthday field it wouldn’t seem bad. Details about the human using the account like first and last name are already stored. All you really need is username. But because it’s explicitly in reaction to age verification laws we have to be skeptical about adding it.

Khleedril 1d ago

@JackbyDev @underscores Yes we do, because it is an erosion of our freedom.

JackbyDev 1d ago

You’re saying that in a post age verification world though, my whole point is that if this were there before it wouldn’t seem bad. I’m not saying we should add it now because it would’ve been fine before.

Avicenna 22h ago

The timing makes me even more suspicious. Of all the times one could added this field, this is probably singularly the worst one. Right after discussions of mandatory age check? Seriously?

JackbyDev 22h ago

You don’t need to be suspicious, they’re explicitly adding it because of that. They said as much. Look at what they wrote under “Motivation.”

Avicenna 21h ago

I sort of get the feeling of something more than just complying with the possible age verification law. I feel like it has intent do damage and distrupt the community.

JackbyDev 21h ago

I feel this law has the intent to damage and disrupt things in general, yes. Parental controls have existed for ages but lawmakers don’t seem interested in them. For example, all the porn bans, rather than forcing sites to use some sort of self tagging system that parental controls could easily see (like some response header) they just want them to take IDs. All of it is a push to forcing people to always be online transparently with their real identity well known.

Avicenna 9h ago

The law yes, it is also I think is a response to rising anger against billionaires. They want to make sure that they have the necessary systems in place when anger actually turns into action.

But I was talking about this person in particular. It feels like no one without a ulterior motive would try to get such a thing passed preemptively and so much like a coup. Even if this law passed in all states you could probably drag any requests to add such a verification for years and years without any actual sanctions. So why the rush to comply without exploring any other options?

KubeRoot 10h ago

Not the wrong place if you want to comply with the law, as he explains in the PR comments, the law requires the installer to prompt for age when creating users.

ExoticCherryPigeon 1d ago

Fair enough that’s pretty surprising, so even Arch is not safe from lunatics… That is disappointing. As a Manjaro user, I am likely to pick up their changes via both systemd and since Manjaro is Arch based… Sad and disappointed by useful morons who have no fucking clue.