So now when I spin up a VM at my sysadmin job I have to tell the server I’m an adult? Does anyone actually know what the fuck we are doing here? What an absolute clown show.
California introduces age verification law for all operating systems, including Linux and SteamOS — user age verified during OS account setup
Submitted 3 weeks ago by Amoxtli@thelemmy.club to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.tomshardware.com/software/operating-systems/california-introduces-age-verification-law
Comments
aReallyCrunchyLeaf@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
zewm@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
This is what happens when boomers never die and stay in office for a lifetime. They don’t understand technology but are allowed to make the laws that govern their use.
a4ng3l@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Nha boomers are not the cause for this shit. Smart ass marketeers and tech bro pushing for more precise target identification and thus more reach for them are to blame. And those I stumble upon are definitely on the younger side.
MyNameIsIgglePiggle@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
When can just change the laws when they leave
0x0@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
They don’t understand technology
Considering most said technology was built by boomers… yeah sure, buddy.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Does anyone actually know what the fuck we are doing here?
Obviously not, no.
You’re a sysadmin… you should know this.
poopsmith@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
Other people get paid to make decisions, not think about them.
And ofc they don’t suffer any consequences for making bad decisions.
RobotToaster@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
How will this affect embedded os like freertos or vxworks? There are lightbulbs that have operating systems these days, am I going to have to show ID to turn on my light?
themurphy@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
My guess would be these OS’s just wont do it and stop doing business in that state.
Lucky for you, you can just download them anyway.
My guess is also that these lawmakers dont care nor considered other OS’s than Windows, MacOS, iOS and Android.
pulsewidth@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
As those are not general purpose computing devices, and additionally have no app store - no, and no.
From the law text:
© “Application” means a software application that may be run or directed by a user on a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device that can access a covered application store or download an application.
lime@feddit.nu 3 weeks ago
cool, then neither is my desktop pc. i get all my software on 5 1/4" floppies.
dondelelcaro@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The law defines a public webpage as a covered app store. Anything that can run doom and view a webpage is potentially covered.
It’s way overbroad and unclear how it could be implemented, and likely to be challenged in court if it even gets that far.
Attacker94@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
It all but makes the law useless, but the law characterizes viable age verification as being self reported, so the Id wouldn’t be necessary.
JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Our president is fucking children, and you’re telling me I gotta verify my date of birth to run Linux?
Get the fuck outta here.
dellish@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
They’ve gotta know if you’re fuckable.
Paranoidfactoid@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
You’re antifa if you run Linux anyway.
Ontopourmama@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I would like to think I’m antifa no matter what I run.
Ranulph@thelemmy.club 3 weeks ago
What are you if you run Mac Os then? Dyslexic Autistic Vegan Attack Helicopter.
CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Despite signing it, Newsom issued a statement urging the legislature to amend the law before its effective date, citing concerns from streaming services and game developers about “complexities such as multi-user accounts shared by a family member and user profiles utilized across multiple devices.”
Then why the fuck did you sign it if it wasn’t ready and needed amendments? Is this what you’re going to do as president too?
Rhetorical, of course. Note how he doesn’t say he disagrees with the bill, just that it needed to consider family devices.
Willoughby@piefed.world 3 weeks ago
You know, bankroll the bribe money, settle the details out later. Politics 101
VicksVaporBBQrub@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Yup. This. I’m in California and this is not even a topic. This is not even in the local news. It’s as quiet as: the bullet train project, the gigantic water pipeline for the south project, the drought solution, the power grid solutions, etc. But, boy, the amounts of money that it blew thru.
Sundiata@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
because he is a conservative dumbfucking cunt.
judge: the jury finds the defendant guilty of 9 counts of child negligence, and will serve 5 months in prison with a fine of $10,000 in damages.
prisoner: what you here for? what did you do?
father: I allowed my child to create his own account on Debian Trixie 13.3 with KDE Plasma interface.
prisoner: chuckles
tidderuuf@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Wow California leading the way to fascism, who woulda thunk?
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Colorado Dems pushing a similar law rn.
Fucking idiots.
njordomir@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Do you know if any organizations are coming out against it? I’ve been looking for a place to plug in. These people aren’t my representatives, but I know people in their districts and I’m curious why now? Who asked them to do this? Why did they think during the unprecedented expansion of the surveillance state was an appropriate time to propose something like this. There are only two sponsors. I looked through other legislation they cosponsored and some of it was good, some of it was garbage, but this was among the worst. I’ll try calling their numbers and send an email.
Kolanaki@pawb.social 3 weeks ago
Because it’s not that crazy, authoritarian and is basically what most websites do to “verify” you age (which is to say nothing but asking you your age).
The law does not require photo ID uploads or facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age
cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
The photo ID requirements are what will come next.
matlag@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
It always ALWAYS comes step by step!
First they will introduce age “non-real-check”, then they will enforce the check: you have accepted the principle, so what’s the big deal if we actually check it?
BartyDeCanter@lemmy.sdf.org 2 weeks ago
It’s more than that. Go read the bill, particularly section 1798.501.b, 1798.502.a and b. Every developer of every application that can be downloaded from every package system MUST request your age bracket every time it is downloaded. And possibly every time it is launched. Basic utilities like ‘ls’ and ‘cat’, that pong example I pushed as a test, everything.
gedaliyah@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
This kinda seems like a roundabout way of avoiding government /corporate age verification laws? Like it doesn’t require ID verification or biometrics and runs a local api to verify age.
Can someone smarter than me please explain if this is a good thing or not?
Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
I’m not saying I’m smarter than you but to me it looks like “Hey yeah we require age verification. So, anyway…”
A token easily bypassed “verification” law to set and forget. It’s basically the same level of security corrently keeping teenage boys off of PornHub.
FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
It’s been that way for a very long time.
kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
California leading the way? Have you been under a rock? It even says this in the article…
The law does not require photo ID uploads or facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age, setting AB 1043 apart from similar laws passed in Texas and Utah that require “commercially reasonable” verification methods
RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Get people used to a mild form of age verification. Next step, full ID upload.
mechoman444@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
You guys are asking the wrong questions.
How is Linux going to do this? There’s no server for the os to send the information to report the age of its users, no way of forcing its user base to comply and no single person or entity to fine, arrest or otherwise force into compliance.
They made a law they cannot enforce.
hector@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
Which is why we all should aspire to join linux, and reject newsome and other greasy california politicians cynically playing us for the billionaires.
dev_null@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
How is Linux going to do this? There’s no server for the os to send the information to report the age of its users
The law doesn’t require sending the data anywhere, so that’s not a problem.
no way of forcing its user base to comply and no single person or entity to fine, arrest or otherwise force into compliance.
The law doesn’t require anything of users, it requires something of OS providers. OS providers have addresses and entities to fine.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 2 weeks ago
The law doesn’t require anything of users, it requires something of OS providers.
For a FOSS OS, any user with root access would be considered an “OS Provider” under the definitions provided in this law. With FOSS, there is no real distinction between “user” and “developer”.
BartyDeCanter@lemmy.sdf.org 2 weeks ago
Yes it fucking does. Go read the bill, particularly section 1798.501.b, 1798.502.a and b. Every developer of every application that can be downloaded from every package system MUST request your age bracket every time it is downloaded. And possibly every time it is launched. Basic utilities like ‘ls’ and ‘cat’, that pong example I pushed as a test, everything.
Digit@lemmy.wtf 2 weeks ago
No addresses or entities tied to the distro respins I’ve made.
That was not a requirement in the software license.
Spesknight@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
What if banning Linux is part of the Agenda? And what will they do for the servers? I am declaring my pc a server as of right now…
yabbadabaddon@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
How do you want to do this? Linux is a kernel the world relies on. It powers your car, your fridge, your satellite, your phone, the entire Internet, the army, etc. Nothing comes close to Linux in market share. The distros are built upon the kernel. System76 may have to comply, but the other maintainers don’t give a flying fuck. They could even write a small line somewhere on their repo that says “this distro is not allowed in California” and call it a day.
Digit@lemmy.wtf 2 weeks ago
Or they made a law to attempt to ban operating systems with free software licenses.
mechoman444@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
But that’s the thing you can’t ban them.
It’s just software that’s freely available. There’s no one corporate entity that controls Linux. Anybody can literally make a distro for it make notation for it illegal for California and be done with it.
Liketearsinrain@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
From what I understood, it’s a requirement for a local API (for apps to use) and could be implemented during user creation.
It will be a slippery slope and IANAL, just my interpretation.
lightnsfw@reddthat.com 3 weeks ago
Why not parents responsible for their own goddamn kids? Stop interfering with the rest of our privacy for this bullshit. Parental controls have existed for decades. Fucking use them.
btsax@reddthat.com 3 weeks ago
Because this isn’t about parenting or children, it’s about a creeping surveillance state
FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The new California republic seems to be the only people who see this coming
Archr@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
… That is literally what this law does.
When a parent creates the account for their child they specify the age. If the parent decides to lie or circumvent the system and it affects their child then they would be fined.
Just to be clear the law itself says absolutely nothing about actually verifying the age.
lightnsfw@reddthat.com 2 weeks ago
It also makes it mandatory to include this feature in every OS. It means you’ll be sending telemetry about who you are to anyone that wants it and you don’t have a choice. Fuck that. I don’t have kids, there’s no reason I should have to use an OS with this shit.
StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
Enforcement against Linux distributions, however, is likely to be problematic. Distros like Arch, Ubuntu, Debian, and Gentoo have no centralized account infrastructure, with users downloading ISOs from mirrors worldwide, and can modify source code freely. These small distros lack legal teams or resources to implement the required API, so a more realistic outcome for non-compliant distros is a disclaimer that the software is not intended for use in California.
cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
That’s what MidnightBSD did.
California residents are not authorized to use MidnightBSD for desktop use in the state of California effective January 1, 2027. California law CA AB1043 requires a complex age verification system implemented for operating systems with no exceptions for small open source projects. At this time, we don’t have development time or a plan in place for this.
brbposting@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Fascinating.
vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
They, eh, want for every local user account to be tied to some central database?
In general this is going out of hand, age verification is parents’ responsibility.
GreenShimada@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
For everyone trying to figure out how this would be enforced, it’s not about being proactively enforced. (and data collection is 99% of it)
It’s about adding a double-tap “Well, these people also violated our age verification law, so they have to pay a fine,” added to any incident where it’s convenient to add this in. If a minor sends another minor a snap that would trigger CP laws, and one of the phones isn’t age verified correctly, fine to the parents and hands up in the air “We tried!” A minor is involved in torrenting movies? “Look, kids using illegal OS! Fine to the parents!”
This is how laws work across a lot of corrupt developing countries. There’s laws for everything, but they only get applied selectively as authorities find they fit the situation. It’s hard to actually be 100% above board and do everything legally because of a few little things meant to be impossible to actually do bureaucratically. So in every situation, any set of authorities start in with the endemic leverage of “Well, we have suspicion of you selling ketamine out of your apartment. Did you do age verification on your laptop? No? Then we can seize that as a crime and see what’s on there. OR you can give up your supplier.”
noxypaws@pawb.social 3 weeks ago
Despite signing it, Newsom issued a statement urging the legislature to amend the law before its effective date, citing concerns from streaming services and game developers about “complexities such as multi-user accounts shared by a family member and user profiles utilized across multiple devices.”
then why did you fucking sign it in the first place??
words cannot describe the depths of my seething hatred for the complete, museum grade, massive piece of shit that is Gavin Newsom
BranBucket@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Because it’s a metric, a bullet point, and campaign speech fodder. Newsome thinks of his position in terms of a career rather than an office, his job isn’t to lead a nation towards what’s right or wrong, it’s to pander so that he can be re-elected or elected to higher office.
The bullshit way that lobbying groups conduct polling and market research means they he’s chronically out of touch and that his focus is on perpetuating his time in office so he can continue to “represent the people”, making a calling out of bowing to the desires of the mis-informed, outraged, panicked mob he believes his electorate to be instead of actually having a spine and exercising good judgement.
The consequences of shoddy legislation take second place to being able to declare he did something to “keep kids safe”. It doesn’t even have to work, all that matters is having something to wave around and back up that claim. Something to placate the plebeians and let him continue to do what he does best… listen to lobbyist who are lying about what people think.
Why? Because that’s what gets people elected these days. Despite being on a foundation of pure bullshit, somehow it works. So he goes along with it, encourages it, and remains in office as a result.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
People already hate him this much, and he wants to run for president. Because Democrats didn’t lose badly enough last time.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Considering the massive number of servers running Linux used in the industry, this sounds like a good way to kill the Tech Industry in California.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
This is a gift to Microsoft.
This law only applies to computers used by children. The law explicitly defines “users” as minors. It does not apply to machines used solely/primarily by adults. It does not apply to servers, or other machines with no local users. It won’t affect the tech industry directly.
This law effectively prohibits your children from (legally) using anything but Microsoft/Google products until they are 18.
With this law, Linux cannot be installed on a school computer. With a FOSS OS, the local systems administrator would be considered the OS provider, and would be liable under this idiot law.
wuffah@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The law does not require photo ID uploads or facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age, setting AB 1043 apart from similar laws passed in Texas and Utah that require “commercially reasonable” verification methods, such as government-issued ID checks.
What even is the point of this then? To make shitty parents feel better?
baller_w@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
The law does not require photo ID uploadsor facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age, setting AB 1043 apart from similar laws passed in Texas and Utah that require “commercially reasonable” verification methods, such as government-issued ID checks. Seems toothless. Good.
Reygle@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
OK Newsom, you’ve lost me. I enjoyed your chaotic responses to the drumpf but you’ve officially lost me.
sol6_vi@lemmy.makearmy.io 3 weeks ago
Did you guys know I was born January 1st 1901?
Exeous@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
What if no internet? How set up?
phutatorius@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
User age required to be entered. There is no verification.
pulsewidth@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Many people here are going off on wild tangents over this. You should just read the law, it’s only a couple thousand words of quite plain English.
Many here have taken completely incorrect assumptions from the title. **This law is for developers, not users. **
Summary:
- Requires OS devs ask for DOB, age, or both at account creation time.
- Requires an API that allows app store devs to request this age data for the account. At minimum this must specify the account is a member of one of these categories: ‘user under 13, user over 13 and under 16, user is over 16 and under 18, user is over 18’.
gasp
- Explicitly bars OS devs from sending more data than explicitly necessary to meet 1 (hint: photo ID, facial recognition).
- Explicitly bars app devs recieving the data from requesting more data from the OS nor the App store.
- Bars app stores from using the data for any other reason and specifically calls out anticompetitive practices.
- Bars app store and OS devs from sharing this data with any third party for any other reason than to comply with this law.
- Has injunctions and civil penalties of $2500 (max per user) affected by negligent violations (eg a child account is served adult content), and $7500 (max per user) affected by intentional violations.
The only problem I have with this is that it should only apply to commercial software (app stores and OS). Libre/FOS software should not have to police ages on their app stores, due to their far reduced budgets (often zero), developer time, and the nature of the software being generally anti-centralized and anti-surveillance-capitalism. Though I’d be fine with it for FOSS software distributed via commercial app stores, as long as they gave a longer lead time to implement (EG a couple of years).
aurelar@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
Technically, Linux is not an operating system, just a kernel, so I’m not sure how this would be implemented.
sbbq@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Are children not allowed to use computers now?
Inucune@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
No way this is enforceable
BioDriver@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
How the hell are they going to enforce this?
StarryPhoenix97@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
My birthday is 1.1.0001
super_user_do@feddit.it 3 weeks ago
This is a whole new level for system level fingerprinting
carpelbridgesyndrome@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Since people aren’t reading the article and the headline is misleading. The law requires:
- The OS ask the user their date of birth on account creation (kinda like the Steam date of birth prompts)
- The OS provide an API that returns which of four age brackets the user fits in
- Companies notified by the OS that the user is under age may be liable
It was explicitly written by the authors not to mandate ID or facial recognition checks. You can lie about your date of birth. This basically creates a standard set of parental controls for parents configuring kids devices.
I think that this might actually help with the whole discord facial recognition issue in places other than the UK by allowing them to offload the issue to parents setting up devices rather than collecting kids biometrics.
pkjqpg1h@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Why lawmakers are so stupid at understanding technology
arc99@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
That would be a completely unworkable law since devices may not even have internet connectivity, or a user interface. And even if they did, it would have a chilling effect on software development in California.
7101334@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The law does not require photo ID uploads or facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age, setting AB 1043 apart from similar laws passed in Texas and Utah that require “commercially reasonable” verification methods, such as government-issued ID checks.
I hate Newsom but this seems like a non-issue.
Gork@sopuli.xyz 3 weeks ago
I’ve always input my age as 1900-01-01 and I can’t change that now because that’ll show an inconsistency and we can’t have that now can we.
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Simple solution. From now on Linux distros should ship with a big message “NOT FOR USE IN CALIFORNIA”.
You want to force age verification? No server in all of California will run. Period.
FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Ah, the Glock solution.
Rinox@feddit.it 3 weeks ago
Enlighten me pls
SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world 3 weeks ago
“My name is Microsoft, and I approved this message.”
Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Microsoft’s own servers run Linux. An in-house build IIRC named Azure Linux.
Willoughby@piefed.world 3 weeks ago
“We’re every datacenter in Canada and we collectively and politely agreed it’s a good move.”
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
Yeah… It says just that in the article. You did read the article, right? I mean you didn’t just read the title and then rush in here to make a comment?
Bakkoda@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
How people farm internet points is serious business
fernandofig@reddthat.com 3 weeks ago
Where, pray tell? Out of curiosity I went there to check it out, and the “article” is just 3 paragraphs that just barely expand on the title. Maybe uBlock is triggering some invisible paywall there for me?
Willoughby@piefed.world 3 weeks ago
_you can click those?_
JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
Whose age do they want on the server? The admins? Lol. Sure. Jan 1 1970.
Gigasser@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Supposedly the age verification thing that’s needed is the equivalent to a porn site verification. Just enter a birthday that’s in the 1800s, and you’re set. This is still a bad direction to go towards though, as it’ll set precedent for future bullshit.
Broken@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
Exactly. Today you can enter Jan 1 1800 and it will take it. That’s not the problem.
The real problem is the precedence it sets. An asinine rule gets passed and companies adhere to it, meaning they are enforcers.
Tomorrow when laws require real verification, like ID scan then they’ve already agreed to be the gate keeper for said asinine laws. It’s harder to back out at that point.
It’s all surveillance and it should be stopped.
Virtvirt588@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
There is nothing that’s “needed”. Its an OS not some demonic construct. It should also be noted that teens will be impacted in it as well - all minors. All this age gating, discriminatory behaviour is eating us alive. Age verification should not exist at all.