RE: https://hostux.social/@rfc1036/116279298917087751
Ignoring the "fascist" angle for a second (I saw no proof in the blog post of this being 'orchestrated', be that by fascists or anyone else).
I think both things can be true at the same time โ governments around the world are fast-tracking laws to verify the identity of Internet users online under the guise of "protecting children", with suspicious level of speed and coordination.
But also, systemd adding an optional 'date of birth' field is not the same as "systemd introducing age verification".
Is it possible that this field will be used in the future to require users to verify their age? Yes, just like the existing 'Location' field may be used in the future to require the user to verify their home address, and the realName field may be used to require the user to specify their full legal name.
That being said, we can't ignore the timing and the explicit justification for the PRs as stated by the author. Quote: "Stores the user's birth date for age verification, as required by recent laws..."
And yes, there are already Medium posts making the rounds that paint the author to be some kind of a sleeper agent who "came out of nowhere" and got his PRs approved by "Microsoft employees".
Being a fan of Hanlon's razor, I think the author simply seized the opportunity, and decided to do a bunch of drive-by PRs to big Linux-adjacent projects, in order to be able to put "systemd contributor" on his CV.
Is this stupid and akin to using COVID shortages to scalp toilet paper? Yes. Is it a malicious plot by Microsoft to sneak age verification into Linux? Probably not, they don't care about Linux on the desktop enough, and if they did, they wouldn't need to be subtle or design elaborate plots to propose adding age verification to it.





