they arent saying that windows is excluded, they are saying that windows will offer the option to enter age, linux wont and hence linux wont be an option for schools etc.
they arent saying that windows is excluded, they are saying that windows will offer the option to enter age, linux wont and hence linux wont be an option for schools etc.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 16 hours ago
Even if Linux offers the option, school districts won’t use it. The district itself will be considered the “OS Provider” under this law, if they choose to use a FOSS OS. They have complete and total control over the OS. That makes them liable, rather than leaving that liability with Microsoft or Google.
This sort of regulation violates the first amendment right to speech, the first amendment right to free association, antitrust, and a whole shitload of really good law.
Crozekiel@lemmy.zip 14 hours ago
Nothing about it specifically changes if it is Windows or Linux. By the definitions in the bill, they are just as much the “OS Provider” under Windows as they are Linux.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 8 hours ago
A windows sysadmin does not need to be granted the authority to alter or disable the binary blob that performs the age verification. Microsoft can restrict that access and maintain control over that aspect of the OS. As they will be held liable for allowing it to be disabled, they are not likely to do so.
Canonical cannot compel a similar restriction in its users and sysadmins, due to the FOSS-ness of the software. They cannot be held responsible for what that sysadmin does with their software. The sysadmin, then, becomes the OS Provider.
some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
I honestly don’t even think the lawmakers thought this far, after reading the bill myself. I’m cautiously optimistic that this will end up in the courts, hopefully dying there.
texture@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
makes sense