17 ms·
A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification
- tamimio 7mo agoGood luck enforcing that in linux, simply because open source community agreed to never agree on anything. The strength of anything is also its weakness, always.
- blurbleblurble 7mo agoI hope the headline is just ragebait cause I feel infuriated
- glenstein 7mo agoAs noted at the end of the article, I suspect the impact for many OS's is going to be that they add a line in the fine print somewhere saying not for use in California.
- kgwxd 7mo agoYou're assuming they don't want this just as much as the government. Still feel fine about self-installed Linux, but every OS and device we don't have control over, even ones powered by Linux, will be very happy to include it, assuming it's not too difficult to add.
- BirAdam 7mo agoAlready the case for MidnightBSD.
- buu700 7mo agoConfirmed: https://lunduke.substack.com/p/midnightbsd-responds-to-californias https://lunduke.substack.com/p/midnightbsd-responds-to-calif...
- prmoustache 7mo agoThey could just comply by prompting the age of the account user in a text file. File that the user is free to edit.
- dpoloncsak 7mo agoI'm under the impression anyone doing nefarious things online are probably more-than tech savvy enough to not install an OS that rats them out...right? Isnt that literally one of the first rules of the DNM Bible?
- taraindara 7mo agoWill kids raised on it not know anything different? Seems a path to reduce computer literacy. Then again, being blocked from doing something I wanted is what lead me to find ways around said block. But I already had unrestricted access to the system to bend it to my will. Seems like these kinds of systems won’t allow for the user to learn how to works at all. It’s a mystery box.
- hnav 7mo agoOne thing that's happening is that attestation is being plumbed into the web itself. CloudFlare and Apple have a collab where Safari will inject tokens that let CF know that the request is coming from a blessed device. In a world where all websites are being crushed by bot traffic, expect that Goog pushes on their own integrity initiative in Chrome in the next year or two.
- Muromec 7mo agoI guess, if you can install the OS yourself, that's adult enough to see whatever adults are doing online.
- wasmainiac 7mo agoDoes not require verification, no biggie, this is essentially a parental control system.
- gustavus 7mo agoNo but then the next step is "well we need a way to enforce it because people are just lying about their age". I guess let me show a slope I found over here, just past the boiling frogs, watch your footing though, it's recently been greased and is quite steep.
- wasmainiac 7mo agoI agree, I don’t like it as much as you do. I’m just saying nothing short of a mandated TPM will actually enforce this. I think they know that. I think this is mostly for show to stay relevant wrt. What is happening in the courts. This is the Same play as it always been for registration “are you over the age of 13?”
- Mountain_Skies 7mo agoWhich begs the question if Microsoft's stubborn insistence on TPM 2.0 for Windows 11 to operate was something planned out in advance of this law being proposed.
- FMecha 7mo agoI read a FUD somewhere about Cinavia (the sound-muting DRM) being implemented on OS level by implementing it on SGX enclave level. That obviously didn't happen, but imagine if TPM was used for that too (or similar DRM).
- gizmo686 7mo agoHow does a TPM stop people from lying about their age?
- kgwxd 7mo agoI was just at some .gov site from another HN post. It asked are you Over 18, I clicked No out of curiosity. Showed Access Denied, but the buttons stayed. I clicked Yes, and got in. I don't attribute to stupidity that which is clear malice. They'd don't actually give a flying fuck about what "kids" can get to, they only care about controlling everyone, of every age, as much as they possibly can.
- phendrenad2 7mo agoSure, I'll ask where the user is located, and if they choose California, I'll ask them for their age. And if they choose over 21 I'll scold them for voting for Gavin.
- uniq7 7mo agoYou know the non-governmental organization "Save the Children"? Maybe it's time to create a new one called "Fuck the Children" to defend people from these laws designed to mine privacy under the pretense of protecting minors.
- theandrewbailey 7mo agoI was thinking "Save the freedom", but your idea works too.
- calgoo 7mo agoWell, you might actually get support from the Epsteinian class ruling the US.
- Mountain_Skies 7mo agoAnd their MAP allies.
- rolph 7mo agoliterally. when you force someone to signal status as a minor, you are forcing them to wear a target, hostiles will not have so much work to find minors, now they only have to contact, groom, and offend. this proposed law actually endangers minors.
- autoexec 7mo agoThe fact that bill breaks kids down by specific age groups makes it seem even creepier. Want to target 13-16 year olds? Prefer kids under the age of 13? California is helping predators by making sure they can tell which group every child's username falls under!
- netsharc 7mo agoGhislaine Maxwell asks where to send her CV in, she's going to be available for work soon...
- boznz 7mo ago
- jrmg 7mo agoThe actual bill: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm... Bill text (it’s longer, but the rest is mostly definitions of the terms used here): 1798.501. (a) An operating system provider shall do all of the following: (1) Provide an accessible interface at account setup that requires an account holder to indicate the birth date, age, or both, of the user of that device for the purpose of providing a signal regarding the user’s age bracket to applications available in a covered application store. (2) Provide a developer who has requested a signal with respect to a particular user with a digital signal via a reasonably consistent real-time application programming interface that identifies, at a minimum, which of the following categories pertains to the user: (A) Under 13 years of age. (B) At least 13 years of age and under 16 years of age. (C) At least 16 years of age and under 18 years of age. (D) At least 18 years of age. (3) Send only the minimum amount of information necessary to comply with this title and shall not share the digital signal information with a third party for a purpose not required by this title. (b) (1) A developer shall request a signal with respect to a particular user from an operating system provider or a covered application store when the application is downloaded and launched. (2) (A) A developer that receives a signal pursuant to this title shall be deemed to have actual knowledge of the age range of the user to whom that signal pertains across all platforms of the application and points of access of the application even if the developer willfully disregards the signal. (B) A developer shall not willfully disregard internal clear and convincing information otherwise available to the developer that indicates that a user’s age is different than the age bracket data indicated by a signal provided by an operating system provider or a covered application store. (3) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), a developer shall treat a signal received pursuant to this title as the primary indicator of a user’s age range for purposes of determining the user’s age. (B) If a developer has internal clear and convincing information that a user’s age is different than the age indicated by a signal received pursuant to this title, the developer shall use that information as the primary indicator of the user’s age. (4) A developer that receives a signal pursuant to this title shall use that signal to comply with applicable law but shall not do either of the following: (A) Request more information from an operating system provider or a covered application store than the minimum amount of information necessary to comply with this title. (B) Share the signal with a third party for a purpose not required by this title.
- cjs_ac 7mo agoIgnoring all the tedious 'no, you're a bad person for having different priorities and beliefs to me' comments that this will inevitably inspire, I have to ask: why does the operating system need to be involved in this? The intended target of the regulation seems to be app stores. Someone has fallen victim to Politician's Logic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vidzkYnaf6Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vidzkYnaf6Y
- fuzzy2 7mo agoIt's not just local apps that are potential consumers of this information. Websites would also be interested. The "why" is also clear: deflecting/shifting responsibility.
- perching_aix 7mo agoBecause that's the first layer that deals with user accounts, and subsequent layers commonly base off of identity information stored in there. Just like how and why every other shared interface exists.
- davorak 7mo ago> why does the operating system need to be involved in this? The goal in my mind is to have an account a parent can setup for their child. This account is set up by an account with more permissions access. Then the app store depends on that OS level feature to tell what apps are can be offered to the account. Let say the the age questions happen when you install the app store. That means if you can install the app store while logged in as the child account the child can answer whatever they want and get access to apps out side of their age range. The law could require the app to be installable and configurable from a different account then given access or installed on the child account, however at a glance that seem a larger hurdle than an os/account level parental control features. The headline calls this age verification, but the quote in the article "(2) Provide a developer who...years of age." Make it sound way different and much more reasonable than what discord is doing. I would much rather have OSs be mandated with parental control features than what discord is currently doing. I am going to read the bill later but here is how discord age verification could work under this law. During account creation discord access a browser level api and verifies it server side. discord no knows if the OS account is label as for someone under 13 years, over 13 and under 16, over 16 and under 18, or over 18. Then sets their discord account with the appropriate access. No face scan, no third party, and no government ID required.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 7mo agoExtremely stupid that this will fall on the OS. Accomplishes three things: Demonizes age verification, big tech gets to dodge it, cedes more control of your PC.
- egorfine 7mo agoAh, so this is what Lennart Poettering has been cooking? [1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46784572 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46784572
- 982307932084 7mo ago[dead]
- AnimalMuppet 7mo agoI'm thinking that I should grab a current Linux distro image while I can...
- Bender 7mo agoA new California law says all operating systems, including Linux, need to have some form of age verification at account setup Curious how they plan to do this. Maybe digital rights management tied to TPM. If so it will take 3 ... 2 ... 1 .... cracked ... spoofed. DVD's were cracked with Perl. Curious what language this will be cracked in.
- TJSomething 7mo agoIs this a weird attempt at device verification?
- sandworm101 7mo agoOk. No more linux in california. Forget silicon valley. Forget all the supercomputers at research establishments. Forget all the smart TVs. Forget all the cars with in-dash computers. Let's see how long california can keep its lights on without embedded linux. In all seriousness, rather than comply, linux distros should enforce this law. Any linux install that detects itself being in california should automatically shutdown with a loud error message. I give it a week before a madmax situation develops.
- charcircuit 7mo agoHow expensive do you expect such an API to cost to make? It's pretty simple.
- dismalaf 7mo agoConsidering the law requires every app to do it, pretty expensive.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- sandworm101 7mo agoCompliance is always easier than resistance. Want to keep software free? Freedom has costs.
- charcircuit 7mo agoFree software doesn't mean that it can or should break the law. That is entirely tangential.
- wakawaka28 7mo agoIt would have to be done at the license level and with litigation. Anything relying on code to be added, would be removed. And probably, trying to do the license thing would force some people to fork the software.
- Mars008 7mo agoNext step will be reporting potentially unlawful activities.
- crumpled 7mo agoIs Github an application store? Is npm? apt? yum? If not, why not? You need age verification before you even create an account.
- beej71 7mo agoIs `ls` an application? Is `cat`? This thing is so broadly-written, the only thing saving you from needing to give you age to your toaster is that it's not a "general-purpose" computing device. Never mind that it can run DOOM...
- rhinoceraptor 7mo agoHow wouldn't this also apply to things like useradd(8) or simply automated user account setup, e.g. like cups, sshd, etc? Do we need to add this to vi for use in vipw on UNIX?
- boznz 7mo ago..or "browse as guest" on a chromebook?
- beej71 7mo agoAll good questions the legislators had no idea even existed.
- ewzimm 7mo agouseradd has the Other category at setup. Could you argue that anything which allows arbitrary text information to be input into a user account that could be passed on to other applications technically fulfills the requirement, as the user could indicate age on the account?
- hedora 7mo agoWorse. Google has to add this to all the machines in their data centers? Imagine the expansion of DevOps BS this will enable: Vendors will need support stuff like "account holder is 12msec old, and can access adult content". They can even create a special certification for it.
- singron 7mo ago
- OutOfHere 7mo agoIt's getting to be time for tech firms to leave California.
- platevoltage 7mo agoTo which freedom loving state should they go?
- anikom15 7mo agoNew Hampshire
- platevoltage 7mo agohttps://www.thecentersquare.com/new_hampshire/article_a5689364-bbdd-44fe-b077-5d4f46c1655b.html https://www.thecentersquare.com/new_hampshire/article_a56893... Putting "Live Free or Die" on your license plates doesn't make it true.
- anikom15 7mo agoWhat does this have to do with software distribution?
- throw03172019 7mo agoAre lawmakers bored? Who is asking for this? Not the tax paying citizens.
- tonymet 7mo agoLobbyists for intelligence agencies. It’s part of de-anonymization so you can be punished for speech online. See UK , Germany and Australia
- NitpickLawyer 7mo ago> Lobbyists for intelligence agencies. I think it's one peg below intel agencies. It's the local gov agencies that want that power. The 3 letter peeps can already tell who writes what, both at scale and targeted.
- tonymet 7mo agoI mean the entire public and private industry . And you’re right this will empower local law enforcement
- goalieblocksv1 7mo ago[dead]
- tzs 7mo agoInteresting theory considering that this California approach does not de-anonymize you, and the approach Germany is working on, as part of an EU wide effort, also does not de-anonymize you.
- tonymet 7mo agobaby steps
- SoftTalker 7mo agoParents who are fed up with social media and tech companies taking no social responsibility. These companies have fewer ethics than a minimum-wage liquor store clerk when it comes to caring about the age of their users.
- TomMasz 7mo agoThis sounds like one of those laws that get used not so much to force compliance, but to punish noncompliance as part of a larger case.
- dathinab 7mo ago> [..] requires an account holder to _indicate_ [..] i.e. this doesn't require age verification at all just a user profile age property > [..] interface that identifies, at a minimum, which of the following _categories_ pertains to the user [..] so you have to give apps and similar a 13+,16+,18+,21+ hint (for US) if combined with parent controls and reasonably implemented this can archive pretty much anything you need "causal" age verification for - without any identification of the person, its just an age setting and parent controls do allow parents to make sure it's correct - without face scans or similar AI - without device attestation/non open operating systems/hardware like any such things, it should have some added constraints (e.g. "for products sold with preinstalled operating system", "personal OS only" etc.) but this gets surprisingly close to allowing "good enough privacy respecting" age verification the main risk I see is that - I might have missed some bad parts parts - companies like MS, Google, Apple have interest in pushing malicious "industry" standards which are over-enginered, involve stuff like device attestation and IRL-persona identification to create an artificial moat/lock out of any "open/cost free" OS competition (i.e. Linux Desktop, people installing their own OS etc.). --- "causal" age verification == for games, porn etc. not for opening a bank account, taking a loan etc. But all of that need full IRL person identification anyway so we can ignore it's use case for any child protection age verification law ---- it's still not perfect, by asking every day daily used software can find the birthdate. But vendors could take additional steps to reduce this risk in various ways, through never perfect. But nothing is perfekt. --- Enforcement is also easy: Any company _selling_ in California has to comply, any other case is a niche product and for now doesn't matter anyway in the large picture.
- timhh 7mo ago> i.e. this doesn't require age verification at all, just a user profile age property This is usually how they do it though. First make a dumb law with poor enforcement. People don't push back about it because it obviously won't be enforced. Wait a bit, then say "people are flagrantly violating this law, we need better enforcement". At that point it's a lot harder to say "it shouldn't be a law at all!" because nobody complained when it was brought into law.
- 7mo ago
- monday_ 7mo agoOne could cope that this regulation can not apply to Linux or other OSS operating systems. But this is only true unless the bootloaders on consumer devices are mandated to be closed next. We already have Secure Boot, the infrastructure is in place. It is currently optional, but a law like this can change that.
- maemre 7mo agoThe law is written so broadly, I think it applies to them already: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm... > (c) “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. This is basically any program. > (e) (1) “Covered application store” means a publicly available internet website, software application, online service, or platform that distributes and facilitates the download of applications from third-party developers to users of a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing that can access a covered application store or can download an application. This would include any package manager like dnf/apt/pacman/etc. They facilitate download of applications from third parties. > (g) “Operating system provider” means a person or entity that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system software on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device. This sounds to me like it would include distro maintainers. They develop and/or control the OS. Also, would this include the kernel devs? How would they be responsible for the myriad of package managers. The overall law reeks of politicians not knowing what they're legislating.
- boznz 7mo agoHow will this work with the numerous "Hobby" Operating Systems out there ?
- bananamogul 7mo agoYou have to ask yourself, I guess. "Self, are you 18 years old?" "Why, yes I am." "OK, self, please fill out a 27B stroke 6 form in your head." "I've completed it." "OK, self, I've validated it." useradd...
- bananamogul 7mo agoI really hate this new world where one jurisdiction - California, Europe, wherever - makes a law and suddenly every other jurisdiction has to comply because the law-making jurisdiction is big enough that tech companies can't abandon it. And since it doesn't make sense to have dozens of different versions of their apps, they write to the strictest jurisdiction's laws. If everyone has the power to make laws that apply to everyone...it's chaos.
- bitwize 7mo agoBeige PCs. Made to comply with German workplace-equipment laws. Yes, the Bundestag legislated the color of office equipment. That has always been the way of fhe world.
- rpdillon 7mo agoWow, TIL. Thanks for mentioning this. I ran across this as I was researching the background: > The "beige box" era was largely the result of strict German workplace ergonomics standards (specifically the TUV and DIN standards) that became the de facto rules for the entire global industry. The law didn't explicitly say "thou shalt use beige," but the regulations were so specific about light reflectivity and eye strain that beige (or "computer gray") was essentially the only compliant option.
- bitwize 7mo agoIBM prepared some light-gray ThinkPad prototypes but were really committed to the black design. They negotiated with the German workplace ergonomics agency who allowed them to sell black ThinkPads but with a "not for office use" label. I wonder if something similar could be done for California's restrictions?
- rzerowan 7mo agoHmm i think at te moment its only Linux that has by default local only accounts except if being used in some sort of SSO environment . Microsoft has been pushing aggressively to deprecate the local and funnel everyone to Microsoft online accounts , while Android and macOS/iOS are already in such a state by default. Coupled with the same accounts being used for online login, looks like a feature creep panopticon in the making. With Linux lucking out be default.
- rzerowan 7mo agowhy the downvotes on this?
- fangpenlin 7mo agoThere's an obvious theme with lawmakers in California—they pass laws to regulate things they have zero clue about, add them to their achievement page, cheer for themselves, and declare, "There! I've made the world a better place." There are just too many examples. For instance: - Microstamping requirements for guns—printing a unique barcode on every bullet casing (Glock gen3 cannot be retired, thus, the auto-mode switch bug cannot be patched...) - 3D printers should have a magical algorithm to recognize all gun parts in their tiny embedded systems - Now, you need to verify your age... on your microwave? At this rate, California should just go back to the Stone Age. Modern technology is simply not compatible with clueless politicians who are more eager to virtue-signal than to solve any actual problems or even borther to study the subject about the law they are going to pass. There will be more and more technology restrictions (or outright bans on use) in California because it's becoming impossible to operate anything here without getting sued or running afoul of some overreaching regulation.
- burnt-resistor 7mo agoNot just 3D printers but all subtractive CNC machines too.
- lazide 7mo agoFrankly, look at how hard it was to make a sten. Even just a lathe and a welder is likely sufficient.
- 9x39 7mo agoI’m more curious in the genesis of these laws, whether their sponsors received written suggestions or ghostwritten bills, etc. as a form of parallel construction. It seems all at once, everywhere that many groups that have a vested interest in forcing precedent and compliance of non-anonymous access across the computer world. It smacks of something less-than-organic.
- almosthere 7mo agoDeath threats mainly. Personally I think it would be easier if they just made it so that platforms ran a tiny LLM against the content that will be posted - determined if it is a death threat, then require them to be identified before it's posted, then it would solve a lot of these problems. TLDR: Evil people be doxxed internally not everyone.
- bell-cot 7mo ago"The road to hell is paved with good intentions." - unknown
- autoexec 7mo agoI doubt good intentions had anything to do with this.
- gradientsrneat 7mo ago> (g) This title does not impose liability on an operating system provider, a covered application store, or a developer that arises from the use of a device or application by a person who is not the user to whom a signal pertains. So, this makes desktop Linux illegal, but all the software-as-a-service like Microsoft Azure and OpenAI get off scott-free? Fantastic.
- matheusmoreira 7mo agoFree computers are too subversive. If left unchecked, they can wipe out entire sectors of the economy, and with cryptography they can defeat police, judges, spies, militaries. They absolutely want to make it illegal.
- simoncion 7mo agoNo? The sentence you quoted says that folks who are required to comply with the law are not also required to ensure that the person currently using the device or application is the same one who entered their age or birth date into the OS's "how old are you?" database. [0] It is true that this law is as bad as the recent Oklahoma one for small, non-corporate Linux distros... but that sentence you quoted has nothing to do with that problem. [0] If we were speaking in person, I'd love to have you walk me through that sentence and explain to me, piece by piece, how you came to the conclusion that you did. Doing it remotely like this would be too tedious.
- wredcoll 7mo agoLiterally no, thats not what that sentence says.
- k310 7mo agoSounds to me that this is how kids learn to spin their own operating systems (a la LFS, Gentoo)and apps. This is how people bought personal computers when the mainframe priesthood banned them. It appears that very soon, young people will "de facto" need to have this level of competence in order to survive and thrive in a world of "in loco parentis" operating systems and apps. The latin reveals my age, but one thing about my age: People my age did exactly that. We built our own hardware when there was none. We compiled (or copied) operating systems and apps. A couple of my friends wrote an operating system and a C compiler. "My generation" created this entire internet thingy, installed and web-based apps. Indeed, dumb-asses are going to level up young people.
- bitwize 7mo agoI'm sure Xers and millennials are totally going to be okay with a visit from the school cop when their little one is caught with an illegal operating system and looking at charges that could ruin their college and job prospects.
- casey2 7mo agoThe cheap money will run out long before then, the cop will leave, the school abandoned. There will be forever protests and skirmishes on the long march through collapse.
- nancyminusone 7mo agoMaybe kids won't be doing this because they won't know of a world where this isn't the case.
- kgwxd 7mo agoIt wasn't illegal when we did it. They're working on that too.
- pessimizer 7mo agoMeanwhile, all available hardware will only allow attested operating systems that conform to regulations. All hardware that does not conform will be illegal. Before they do this, it will be easy to lock the internet to only allow attested operating systems online.
- kkfx 7mo agoAha... Interesting, I'm the sysadmin of myself so I verify myself that I'm entitled to be root on my iron. Sometimes politicians reveal themselves in their future program dreaming things like mandatory online accounts on corporatocracty-controlled servers for all...
- cs702 7mo agoThese lawmakers are not even wrong. To be wrong, one must understand what one is talking about. Sigh.
- ReptileMan 7mo agoTrump - making heroic efforts to give Newsom the presidency in 2028. Newsom valiantly resisting those efforts.
- platevoltage 7mo agoNewsom really is a royal embarrassment. I'm glad people are finally realizing it.
- croes 7mo ago> That's likely no big deal for Windows, which already requires you to enter your date of birth during the Microsoft Account setup procedure That isn’t age verification at all
- Muromec 7mo agoThe actual age verification is being able to install windows yourself and being allowed to do so by parents. So the next thing is TPM to make sure you can't get the silly idea to reisntall it and set a different date
- tonymet 7mo agoHow will this work with ephemeral VMs? If you spin up a few hundred a day, will each one prompt you for birthday ? And whose birthday ? The CEO?
- ta9000 7mo agoMany of you commenting haven't read the legislation and it shows.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- conradfr 7mo agoNext it will be all devices able to run Doom.
- rkagerer 7mo agoWas there HN discussion at the time the bill was introduced / passed?
- senfiaj 7mo agoI guess California will release California OS with age verification.
- Animats 7mo agoIt's not clear that this applies where the "operating system provider" does not have "accounts". Linux should be OK, but "Ubuntu One" might have problems. It's a good reason not to put cloud dependencies into things.
- aspbee555 7mo agothis is why I am building a communications software that has no concept of accounts, devices can connect and keys are generated on device and blind to relaying/directing server/network. people can only connect directly with other people/devices. there is no concept of lists of people/devices to connect to, you need to know someone/have access to the device to connect. no accounts to compromise. no passwords to remember. end point devices control their connectivity. no vpn needed to connect, no intermediary to see all traffic and peer traffic is specifically what is needed/allowed/requested, not a wide open network connection/accounts to be compromised
- singron 7mo agoThe bill doesn't define "accounts", so it's entirely possible local users that a human signs into would count. The saving grace is that obviously they have no idea what a Linux distribution is, and only the Attorney General can bring action, so there isn't much risk of the AG suing Debian.
- CWuestefeld 7mo agoIt's not stated here, but is it implied that app platforms that, themselves, have an "app store", would be required to read this datum and pass it to their app store? For example, I've got a map application on my phone that lets me download maps, widgets, POI lists, etc. from their app store. It seems like enabling that age signal through this exchange is exactly what the politicians are looking for.
- jimt1234 7mo agoSo now I have to prove who I am just to use something I purchased? Am I gonna have to prove my age/identity to my new laundry machine (it runs on OS)?
- jeffbee 7mo agoBuffy Wicks obviously should not be legislating APIs. But I think it's funny how badly this misinterprets the situation. The local user account on a computer has never been less relevant than it is today.
- ywhsrbsgn 7mo agoApparently the redacted politicians that were caught raping and murdering little boys and girls in the Epstein files are entitled to a higher level of privacy than either you or me.
- userbinator 7mo agoRichard Stallman's "Right to Read" is disturbingly prescient, as usual.
- boxedemp 7mo agoAs time goes on RMS is only proven more and more correct
- cess11 7mo agoAbout some things.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- warkdarrior 7mo agoIt's almost as if he is giving them ideas.
- matheusmoreira 7mo agoStallman has always been right. It's mind boggling just how right he was about everything. The narratives are changing. All these locks and controls used to be about curbing copyright infringement. Now that AI has more or less rendered copyright irrelevant it's turned into a straight up attempt to control the population. They're barely even making excuses anymore.
- sealeck 7mo ago> Stallman has always been right. It's mind boggling just how right he was about everything. Mind boggling right about not allowing GCC to be used as a library, his comments on Jeffrey Esptein, a refusal to in any way compromise (e.g. the GNU/Linux meme), etc... Oh and a recognition that free software, while nice, does not in any way solve the underlying issues he claims it does. Similarly to how letting everyone walk around their local water treatment facility and perform chemical tests doesn't really work and instead the state regulates and hires experts to monitor the water supply...
- Brian_K_White 7mo agoMaybe this is just an unsuspectedly astute way to get Microsoft to reenable local accounts?
- radium3d 7mo agoYikes, these government folks just sign without even thinking or having a single clue about how the rule will work. They are completely irresponsible.
- newsoftheday 7mo agoCalifornia is a confusing state, age verification for operating systems while almost releasing this monster on the public: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-02-26/serial-child-molester-rearrested-day-hes-set-to-be-freed https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-02-26/serial-c...
- monero-xmr 7mo agoThey also created an open air market for child prostitutes with their latest anti-arrest law, as observed by the NYT last November https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/19/insider/sex-trafficking-minors-figueroa-street.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/19/insider/sex-trafficking-m...
- wredcoll 7mo agoIt's like it's a big place with more than one thing happening at the same time.
- cm2187 7mo agoso my smart microwave will require some age verification?
- ceayo 7mo agoOf course! Think of the dangers of an unsupervised child... (SHOCK WARNING) cooking... A gasp MEAL!
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- rickcarlino 7mo agoWho is actively lobbying against the “war on root access”? Which are the NGOs/PACs/non-profits with the best track record of getting results here? FSF and EFF come to mind, but I can’t think of others and don’t know of track records for any of them.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- hosh 7mo agoWhat about: - servers living in datacenters - realtime operating systems in embedded devices - the Intel Management Engine - the OS on every smart chip in credit cards and debit cards - wireless cameras, roombas, smart TVs, smart fridges - cars. Those automotive systems have OSes too right? - all those IoT devices, including California’s traffic cameras What age signals should those devices send out? Is there an exclusionary clause?
- kogasa240p 7mo agoThey will be "exempt" probably.
- noosphr 7mo agoYou assume far too much competence.
- jatari 7mo agoThe law is targetting consumer operating systems, not linux servers/iot devices.
- mistercheph 7mo agoDoes the law state that? What if children find out about the exception and start installing Alpine Linux to circumvent the law?
- cbsmith 7mo agoYes. I'd recommend reading the bill if you have concerns.
- lysace 7mo agohttps://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm... I think mistercheph is right to be concerned. This bill applies to all "operating system providers", defined thusly: (g) “Operating system provider” means a person or entity that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system software on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device. Regarding penalities: 1798.503. (a) A person that violates this title shall be subject to an injunction and liable for a civil penalty of not more than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) per affected child for each negligent violation or not more than seven thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500) per affected child for each intentional violation, which shall be assessed and recovered only in a civil action brought in the name of the people of the State of California by the Attorney General.
- pipeline_peak 7mo agoYou hear that, NetBSD!
- matheusmoreira 7mo agoI miss the days when politicians just generally ignored computers and left us alone.
- eleventyseven 7mo agoHeadline is wrong. There is no verification requirement. All this does is require the user to select a non-verified age bracket on first boot. You can lie, just like porn sites today. I thought HNers wanted parents to govern their children's use of technology with these kinds of mechanisms.
- Spivak 7mo agoIt seems to come down to whether you expect the next law to be taking the enforcement mechanism away from the parent. If the law was, "major operating systems must ship parental controls that actually work" I doubt you would see much pushback. Parental controls is an oft cited reason to give your kids Apple devices. Expanding that everywhere would be great. But I don't want to have to present my government ID to use my own computer.
- JodieBenitez 7mo ago> You can lie, just like porn sites today. In the US maybe, but where I am you can't fap in peace without using a VPN or have some kind of age verification. Some of them being baroque. Example: "We analyze your email’s digital footprint (history and reputation) against trusted databases. This is often enough to confirm that you're of legal age."
- eleventyseven 7mo agoThis is an article about California.
- JodieBenitez 7mo agoSure, I just give you an example about what could come to California.
- gorjusborg 7mo agoShh, don't give them more stupid ideas ;)
- p0w3n3d 7mo agoPeople who cannot tell what is an operating system and what is not are writing laws
- wormius 7mo agoLol no.
- noosphr 7mo agoCalifornian seems like a state with a golden goose they keep trying to kill in ever more idiocitally inventive ways.
- bhewes 7mo agoFun to watch my generation who was raised by helicopter parents turn into tank parents using scorched earth techniques.
- iamnothere 7mo agoIt follows that the next generation will be infantry parents. (Likely literally.)
- Perenti 7mo agoWill this only apply to an OS with human user accounts? I wonder how autonomous agents that are operating systems running on bare hardware are defined under this strange law. Not all OS are for humans. Consider many uni-kernel applications.
- bsaul 7mo agoWhy can't we have normal politicians anymore, anywhere on the spectrum ? They're all racing for stupidity, it's simply terrifying.
- nlitsme 7mo agoI will start making a list for linux then. rm - ok for all ages. grep - 18+, you can obviously use this to search for porn. find - 18+, see grep. reboot - ok for all ages. echo - ok for all ages. cat - 18+, prints the porn you found directly to your terminal. sudo - 18+, obviously. kill - ok for all ages. This is the US, right. ps - 18+, no peeping at other processes.
- hansvm 7mo agorm - between -i and -r this is just a less efficient way to search for porn reboot - you never know what the sysadmin might have loading on boot, unsafe as it could load porn echo - ASCII art would like to have a word kill - I know the US will have mixed feelings, but communicating with other processes might allow them to send you porn
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- Mordisquitos 7mo ago> echo - ok for all ages. > cat - 18+, prints the porn you found directly to your terminal. Sound good in theory, until you realise that any teenager knows perfectly well how to trivially get around the lack of `cat` to read their terminal smut: $ while read -r LINE; do echo $LINE; done <my_porn_file.sext
- upmind 7mo agoWhat is the point of this?
- Crontab 7mo agoAhh, new stupidity inbound.
- syntaxing 7mo agoI don’t think the title is correct? All OS must have age profiles that external sources can query. There’s nothing explicit that checks the age itself in the law?
- brooke2k 7mo agoclearly there's something I don't understand (or is the law just really this stupid?) - but what would this even look like for linux? every user account requires an associated age? but users don't have a 1:1 mapping to the people that log into them. linux users that aren't used by any particular person, but by a particular _service_ are common. so are linux users that could be logged into by any number of people, and which have no specific single owner.
- jeremy_su 7mo agoChina did this 15 year ago..Fuck yeah, America
- bmitch3020 7mo agoReaction 1: how would this even work with embedded systems that have no UI to input this data? Reaction 2: it's open source, make the lawmakers do submit the changes. Reaction 3: how would this ever be enforced? Would they outlaw downloading distributions, or even older versions of distributions? When there's no exchange of money, a law like this is seems like it would be suppression of free speech. Reaction 4: Someone needs to maliciously comply, in advance, on all California government systems. Shutdown the phones, the Wi-Fi, the building access systems, their Web servers, data centers, alarm systems, payroll, stop lights, everything running any operating system. Get everyone to do it on the same day as an OS boycott. And don't turn things back on until the law is repealed.
- jatari 7mo agoIt would just be unenforced for all platforms except windows, apple and android. I doubt the california legislature knows what a Linux even is.
- trhway 7mo ago>I doubt the california legislature knows what a Linux even is. they would never need to know it once they learn what SecureBoot is. Any device with 1+ Gflop must have SecureBoot, and goodbye general computing.
- cbdevidal 7mo agoIt’s political theater. “See? We did something. Vote for us again.”
- BuddyPickett 7mo ago[flagged]
- 7e 7mo agoIt’s clear you last poked your head out of a hole in the ground 30 years ago. Check out the iPhone and the Internet while you’re up here, they will blow your mind.
- lacoolj 7mo agoFeels like they're trying to implement a new wide-reaching protocol/spec by requiring it by law first, then expecting someone to magically develop something, and god forbid it's a different standard than anyone else's. By next January there will be 30 different methods of age input signalling between OS and application. And then by 2030 we might have the top 3 adopted as established defacto standards. somewhat related-ish https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/ :)
- Bender 7mo agoFeel free to call me paranoid for seeing patterns where there are none but this to me looks like just one phase of a preparation for a very large event entirely unrelated to every age verification reason given thus far. I won't guess any further. "I'm a good boy."
- mistercheph 7mo agoShut up and keep your head on straight, bender, you didn't see or hear anything.
- Bender 7mo agoGood point. Back to playin' the distractin' vidya games.
- MangoCoffee 7mo agoIt's funny that more and more Chinese style laws are being passed in the West. What's next? Chinese style social credit? You’ll need 800 points to run a sudo command? Free society? Mass surveillance. The West is becoming more of a nanny state like China every year.
- ipnon 7mo agoCalifornia is becoming more like a nanny state. I don’t think a law like this would pass in North Dakota or Texas in a thousand years.
- EarlKing 7mo agoThere are already "App Store Accountability Act"s present in Texas and Utah. I believe South Dakota is the other state that has one in their House right now. So no, this isn't California being a nanny state. Actually, California's is a lot better than the ones found in other states since literally you're allowed self-attestation of your age bracket (i.e. you don't have to supply an ID or some other such mechanism for independent verification). It's literally the equivalent of what they used to do with porn sites back in the day when they would ask you if you were over 18 -- and if you said yes, well, we tried! (Gold stars for everybody!) In all seriousness, though, this is the only way where politicians get to pretend they did something and the rest of us get to avoid getting royally screwed. If parents were given dumbed-down versions of the tools that already exist to manage corporate-owned cell phones and laptops then there'd be a lot less for people to complain about (not that it would stop perpetually incompetent parents from pointing the finger at everyone but themselves for their own failings, of course, but at least the vast majority who AREN'T those people would be satisfied).
- cvhc 7mo agoNo. Age verification law is not a partisan or ideological thing. It's a global trend. This law is sponsored by both parties: https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260ab1043 https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260ab... , and Texas has a newer law (App Store Accountability Act) that requires app stores to verify user ages and obtain parental consent for minors.
- fnordfnordfnord 7mo agoThere’s a concerted global effort to push this legislation. It’s also been proposed in Colorado and, some version of it’s been passed in the UK and Australia.
- defrost 7mo ago> some version of it’s been passed in the UK and Australia. Really? Can you expand on the version of Australian legislation that requires an OS to have age verification? The AU legislation I'm aware of requires various social media sites to verify that users of those sites are not under some age, 16 or so. That is not a constraint on the OS or on potential users, that's a legal requirement for Social Service providers.
- fnordfnordfnord 7mo agoI'm just catching up on the subject myself but, here's a news article: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-search-engines/105516256 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-sear... It appears that the Australian and UK versions don't go as far as what seems to have been proposed in the US.
- defrost 7mo agoAustralia's put the onus on vendors; you can't supply cigarettes to minors, you can't supply alcohol to minors, you can't social platform minors. It's useful to get a feel on the policies and differences being rolled out before going over the skies and extrapolating from misconceptions.
- lacoolj 7mo ago10/13/25 Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 675, Statutes of 2025. 10/13/25 Approved by the Governor. 09/24/25 Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m. Why is this "news" today? Am I missing something?
- aichen_dev 7mo ago[dead]
- Brian_K_White 7mo agoI thought the lefties were supposed to be the smart ones.
- rm30 7mo agoThis law perfectly demonstrates the constraint problem: regulators assumed age verification is a simple checkbox at account setup. Right now I'm on an ESP32 with free RTOS, will I need to add a keyboard and display just for age verification?
- cbsmith 7mo agoI think it mostly demonstrates that people don't read laws before criticizing them.
- bobmcnamara 7mo agoAre there even accounts?
- BLKNSLVR 7mo agoI seem to be doing more and more illegal things as time passes, whilst not changing my behavior at all. Curious.
- JodieBenitez 7mo agoI couldn't have said it better myself. My loved ones don't share my opinion, which makes me wonder if I'm sane or if they're not exercising their freedom.
- hafthor 7mo agoWhat about embedded RTOS, like WindRiver or Zephyr? What if I write a memory manager and flash storage file manager for a really barebones MCU like a PIC? It didn't even define what an operating system is. What constitutes an update? If a security patch to DOS 6 came out, would it suddenly be required to have this tech? Is z/OS going to have this tech? Overall, I think don't think it's a bad idea for devices to be able to host an age verification system that offers requestable boolean proof of age, like if porn site demands over 18 to view, the user, regardless of age, is prompted and if they accept, it returns either a positive cryptographic claim or a cancel signal if not of age. If they don't accept the prompt, the same cancel signal goes back. The idea that this feature would need a mandate of law is dumb.
- Lanzaa 7mo ago> apply the privacy and data protections afforded to children to all consumers and prohibits an online service, product, or feature from, among other things, using dark patterns to lead or encourage children to provide personal information beyond what is reasonably expected to provide that online service, product, or feature or to forego privacy protections My question, is if "the children" are worth protecting, why not adults? I would like to opt into not having to deal with dark patterns. Why not a age independent system, which a user can opt into and which "children" are automatically optd into.
- cantalopes 7mo agoHow did we get so dystopian all of a sudden
- dbg31415 7mo agoBoo.
- dbg31415 7mo agoMy car has some sort of operating system, right? My TV, my fridge, my 30 year-old TI-82, my sprinkler system… my mom’s pacemaker. And will I have to verify again when I switch to command line? =P What a joke.
- locococo 7mo agoWhat is the reason fir this law, what problem does it try to solve. It's not clear to me what age gas to do with using an operating system. They should also require background checks for gun safes.
- jamesgill 7mo agoSince Linux is a kernel, not an operating system, it's unaffected by this law.
- LowLevelKernel 7mo agoWaiting for BSD community maintainers reactions
- wolvoleo 7mo agoI don't think they will even bother to react. With a 0.01% marketshare nobody will target us to make a point (I'm one of those 0.01% yes) But anyway I'm not in California nor the US so this doesn't apply to me in any way.
- richard_chase 7mo agoSo if you write your own operating system without age verification you're not allowed to use it?
- hk1337 7mo agoI figured California would have been against the age verification on the adult sites like Texas and some other states are doing but then they go and 1UP them and decide to require age verification on the whole OS
- tstrimple 7mo agoThis is a weak read of the situation. I’d sure as fuck rather enter a date of birth or age profile on my computer than send my photo id to random websites to verify my age. One is clearly better from a privacy standpoint.
- hk1337 7mo agoWhat’s doing the actual verification? Just entering date of birth as verification is pointless and just adds complexity. The original idea was stupid enough, no need to add more stupid to it.
- Glyptodon 7mo agoAre things like calculators excluded because they don't have proper app stores?
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- cc-d 7mo agoThey should just outsource these types of things to our ethics API
- sophrosyne42 7mo agoNext they'll try to ban sexps without age verification.
- belviewreview 7mo agoA few thoughts: Won't kids just lie about their age, like they do to sign up with social media? What if more than one person uses the pc? What if it is sold? If the OS is open source, then the user could remove the software code to collect the data. This is protect-young-people theater. If
- medi8r 7mo agoSounds like a box checker. "Enter a four digit number lower than 2011 to use this computer properly". Ok then...
- charonn0 7mo agoSkimming the actual text of the law[1], I don't see anything particularly objectionable. Basically it requires a toggle when creating/editing a local user account that signals "this user is/is not a child". Applications could then tailor their content for child/not child audiences. Which isn't to suggest that it's a good law, just not really "age verification". [1]: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...
- safety1st 7mo agoMy first reaction is that this is an insanely bad law: * The signal has to be made available to both apps and websites * So if you dutifully input valid ages for your computer users, now any groomer with a website or an app can find out who's a kid and who isn't. You just put a target on your kid's back. * A fair share of parents will realize this, and in order to protect their children, will willfully noncomply. So now we'll have a bunch of kids surfing the net with a flag saying they're an adult and it's okay to show them adult content. * Some apps/websites will end up relying on this signal instead of some real age verification, which means that in places like porn sites where there's a decent argument for blocking access from kids, it'll get harder. Or your kid will get random porn ads on websites or something. So basically unless this thing is thrown out by the courts, California lawmakers have just increased the number of kids who get groomed and the number of kids who get shown porn. Mind boggling that something this bad passed.
- Buttons840 7mo agoInstead, websites should voluntarily put content ratings on their own stuff--most would because either they don't intend to harm children, or from societal pressure. Then, software on the user's computer can filter without revealing any information about the user.
- nomel 7mo agoI'm not sure what the solution is, but to steel man a bit, the alternative is kids have access to all the adult spaces, where they will be groomed. A website/app serving grooming content to a kid is just so incredibly unlikely compared to a kid being groomed as the result of having unrestricted access. Since I do not see a solution, and you see identifying children as a risk, what do you see as a solution for kids being in the same spaces as adults? Do you see a reasonable implementation to separate them, that doesn't have the "we know which accounts are children" problem? Maybe there's something in between? Also, I think it's important to understand the life of a modern child, who's in front of a screen 7.5 hours a day on average [1], with that increasingly being social media, half having unrestricted access to the internet [2]. I hate government control/nanny state, but I think 5 year olds watching gore websites, watching other children die for fun, is probably not ok (I saw this at the dentist). People are really stupid, and many parents are really shitty. What do you do? Maybe nothing is the answer? [1] https://www.aacap.org/AACAP/Families_and_Youth/Facts_for_Families/FFF-Guide/Children-And-Watching-TV-054.aspx https://www.aacap.org/AACAP/Families_and_Youth/Facts_for_Fam... [2] https://fosi.org/parental-controls-for-online-safety-are-underutilized-new-study-finds/ https://fosi.org/parental-controls-for-online-safety-are-und...
- flossposse 7mo agoAlcohol is harmful, and you want to prevent minors from obtaining it without parental supervision. Do you pass a law requiring every car to log the age of every occupant in case the driver drives to an establishment that sells alcohol? No, that's stupid. You require the person providing the alcohol to check age only when they are about to hand over the alcohol. Until someone actually attempt to access alcohol, they should not be asked their age. Now exchange "car" for "OS" and "alcohol" for "age-sensitive content"
- al_borland 7mo agoLetting someone look at a date on an ID to 2 seconds is a lot lower stakes than handing over a scan of your license, face, and who knows what else, to hundreds of companies that will do god knows what with it. To your point, a user shouldn’t be forced to put in age details just to use an OS. That said, if an OS can send a simple Boolean to an app/site if the user is over 18 or not, I’m guessing more people would rather opt into that system vs handing over extensive details to each and every vendor who asks. As a person in my 40s, with no kids in my house, I find all of this absurd. Let parents install some nanny software if they want, don’t force it on everyone and use “protecting children” as the scapegoat.
- stopbulying 7mo agoIsn't it possible to jam and deny with any remote auth dependency? Recently after we spent hours getting a Chromebook set up after a "Power Wash" due to remote auth failure, it wanted the old password and there was no option but to wipe the device. They held our homedir hostage with required remote auth. We were not able to log into our computer and lost all of our data because of remote auth. Secure critical systems must not have a centralized remote auth dependency that can be denied.
- bl_valance 7mo agoNot sure if California is EU-lite or it has surpassed them, it sucks sometimes here, they are on a path to regulate and ruin everything.
- twocommits 7mo ago[flagged]
- djha-skin 7mo agoIf you're a Mac or Windows user, I mean, fine. This is just not going to be a thing on Linux. Are there app stores on Linux? Yes, that's what FlatHub and Snap supposed to be. So what, should Canonical just block Ubuntu downloads to anyone in the state of California? No security researcher is going to download an operating system that asks them their age for example. I feel like it draws a red line for me also. This law is so completely insane. It sounds like it was written by some Apple fanboy to whom there is no other operating system other than Apple. The very state that spawned GNU and BSD is the same state that is not only demanding your data but enshrining its use in spyware in law.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- ddtaylor 7mo agoLinux doesn't care. We've already been down this road with media codecs and patents. Let every other OS continue their path to enshittifcation.
- seany 7mo agoThis is basically the end of the Internet as it was. It's actually quite terrifying.
- wjessup 7mo agowhat about the laws that say crossing the border is illegal?
- cvhc 7mo agoI know this sounds absurd. But let me try not to be cynical and explain how we got here, according to what I understand: First, let's admit the push for age verification laws isn't a partisan or ideological thing. It's a global trend. This California law has bipartisan sponsorship and only major org opponent is the evil G [1]. While age verification is unpopular in tech community, I imagine a lot of average adult voters agree that limiting children's access to wilder parts of the Internet is a good thing. On this premise, the discussion is then who should be responsible for age verification. The traditional model is to require app developers / website owners to gatekeep -- like the Texas and Ohio laws that require PornHub to verify users' IDs. But such model put too much burden on small developers, and it's a privacy nightmare to have to share your PII with random apps. This is why we see this new model. States start to believe it seems more viable to dump the responsibility on big tech / platforms. A newer Texas law is adopt this model (on top the traditional model) to require app stores to verify user age (but was recently blocked by court) [2]. And this California law pretty much also takes this model -- the OS (thinking as iOS / Android / Windows with app store) shall obtain the user age and provide "a signal regarding the users age bracket to applications available in a covered application store". While many people here are concerning open-source OSes, and the language do cover all OSes -- my intuition is no lawmaker had ever think about them and they were not the target. [1] https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260ab1043 https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260ab... [2] https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/05/big-tech-won-in-texas-but-the-age-verification-fight-is-just-getting-started-00709160 https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/05/big-tech-won-in-tex...
- m3kw9 7mo agoI thought Europe would do this type of stuff
- Ylpertnodi 7mo agoNo need. EU cookie banners seem to have won the day by pushing the US actually on to the slippery slope of whataboutism. we're not far behind.
- angry_octet 7mo agoIt's also completely pointless because users routinely use shared accounts. It was thus on the WinXP machine at home, and still is today on iPads and android tablets. Yes, Apple has made it dysfunctional so that rich people will get one iPad per person, but many children use games and social media apps via their parents accounts. Who is going to set up an AppleID for their 8 year old? (Well I did, but normal people?) The people who wrote this law work for Microsoft and think people have individual laptops and phones with a cellular plan. They care nothing for user privacy, in fact they want persistent digital identifies for advertising.
- v_chip_saves 7mo agoRemember in that South Park episode where Cartman had a V-Chip[0] installed in his head and he would get shocked if he said big floppy donkey dick? In all honesty the V-Chip was meant to protect children. Age verification and identity assurance[1] is meant to reduce online banking fraud and combat terrorism/espionage. Whats next outlawing encryption with Clipper Chip[2] 2.0 and saying its to save the whales? I guess we have QUIC and other DRM tech to ruin our day so it doesn't even matter. I would prefer we drop the think of the children[3] charade and act like adults and get serious about online crime/fraud/terrorism and maximizing online banking. The biggest problem with this thought domain is that the internet is global and we are thinking at regional, national, and state levels. For so many years everyone has heard complaints about the great firewall of China only to build our own? I guess we have no other choice since bad apples spoil the bunch[4]. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-chip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-chip [1]https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-3/sp800-63-3.html https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-3/sp800-63-3.html [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip [3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children [4]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_apples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_apples
- juris 7mo agoLittle bit picking at straws but I sure would love to find some way to punt this law. Medtronic has an insulin delivery solution which involves the distribution of a custom Android phone with a closed source app. Other fields in medicine do this as well as a matter of course, so that they can guarantee clinical operation on that particular device (rather than risk app operation on Android device fragmentation) and get OK’d by the FDA. The FDA testing process can take upwards of 4 years, and is usually cleared for -specific- operating system versions (which, by the end of testing, can be very old). I wonder: since that operating system needs to attest and (vaguely) eventually report an age and other identifiers to a government API and app developers, will that report violate HIPAA?
- K0balt 7mo agolol. The best kind of legislation (rated by entertainment value) is always written by people with no real understanding of the subject being governed.
- ingohelpinger 7mo agomake Califonia computerless. stupid politcians passing stupid laws. imagine this guy becoming president.
- SilentM68 7mo agoMr. AI analyzed the wording in the link and said: California Assembly Bill 1043 requires OS providers (including Linux) to add age verification at account setup, prompting users for birth date/age to signal age brackets to apps in covered stores. It may violate privacy by enabling data collection/misuse beyond age checks, similar to UK/Discord issues; no explicit civil rights violations noted, but could restrict access for adults/minors if misapplied. Benefits: Enables age-appropriate app content, protecting minors. Drawbacks: Privacy risks, enforcement hurdles (e.g., Linux disclaimers like "not for California use"), aligns with global trends amplifying concerns. An updated deep dive by Mr. AI returned the following analysis: Official link: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm... Revised pros: Enhances child safety via non-PII age brackets for app compliance; data minimization limits info shared; anticompetitive prohibitions prevent misuse; good faith shields from liability. Revised cons: Setup requires age input, risking misuse despite safeguards; enforcement challenges for open-source OS like Linux; increased developer liability for signals; potential access restrictions from errors or misreports. No clear privacy/civil rights violations for adults/minors, but implementation costs and global trend concerns persist. My thoughts: California lawmakers keep turning the screw more and more to the left with AB 1043 being introduced by Democrat Buffy Wicks. Though it has bipartisan co-authors (8 Democrats, 3 Republicans) and passed the Assembly unanimously (58-0), it still feels a bit authoritarian to me. The California Assembly political divide is very left leaning with Democrats controlling 60 seats and Republicans 20 for a total of 80 with Democrats controlling a supermajority. What's to stop someone from building their own Distro using LinuxFromScratch to bypass this new restriction? Nothing, in my view! Which I had money cause, Florida looking good about now.
- csense 7mo agoI've taken trips to California in the past for both personal and professional reasons. I'm seriously reconsidering whether I'll do that again in the future. What happens if I bring a laptop with an "illegal" OS without this unwanted "feature" into the state? Will I be denied access to public wifi in hotels and restaurants? Or will it grant me access, but snitch on me -- make a call to the state police to come deal with someone with an illegal laptop? Will I be forced to install a different OS while a police officer watches? Will my laptop be confiscated and destroyed as contraband? Will I be thrown in a California prison? I don't want to take a risk and find out.
- HWR_14 7mo agoThis law only applies to people distributing an operating system. It has nothing to do with what you personally use.
- jmholla 7mo agoIt also applies to application providers. The law requires them to have their applications ask the OS how old the user is whenever it is downloaded and launched.
- wtallis 7mo agoAll of those worries you list are extreme and unreasonable and ruled out by spending two minutes reading the bill: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm... The only remedies listed are: > 1798.503. (a) A person that violates this title shall be subject to an injunction and liable for a civil penalty of not more than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) per affected child for each negligent violation or not more than seven thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500) per affected child for each intentional violation, which shall be assessed and recovered only in a civil action brought in the name of the people of the State of California by the Attorney General. And there are several other provisions that further narrow the circumstances under which this law could be enforced. If your personal computer is not being used by a child, and you're not distributing software to children or devices used by children, then there are no circumstances under which your actions could violate this law.
- Brian_K_White 7mo agoCant't wait to see how Intel adds this feature to the minix built into the cpu.
- erlkonig 7mo agoThis is happening in Colorado too, meaning it could be part of a national push: Colorado Senate Bill "26-051" The actual bill and links to its two sponsors Matt Ball and Amy Paschal. https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/SB26-051 https://leg.colorado.gov/legislators/matt-ball https://leg.colorado.gov/legislators/amy-paschal It puts the infrastructure in place to do all of those things if a future(?), authoritarian regime wants to. * It also reveals that visitors to any site are children, compromising their privacy and opening them up to targeted advertising * The data will undoubtedly be added to the accumulated, traded databases so many services use * The bill makes onerous demands of developers to consider other items that may suggest the user is actually in a different age bracket, like doing websearches for "toys" (child) or "toys" (adult) - which works what percentage of the time, exactly? * And it's totally ineffective, since kids can look at porn anywhere they want, or internationally, regards of useless bill like this The most egregious part of this bill is that: * It legislates that if kids connect to a website, that website can query their age brackets (an "age signal"). This means their approximate age is revealed for kids-specific advertising, manipulation, or even sold to a pedophile group. A DEVELOPER SHALL REQUEST AN AGE SIGNAL WITH RESPECT TO A PARTICULAR USER FROM AN OPERATING SYSTEM PROVIDER OR A COVERED APPLICATION STORE WHEN THE DEVELOPER'S APPLICATION IS DOWNLOADED AND LAUNCHED. Basically SB 26-051 creates a mechanism that can be used to harvest the data that certain users are kids and then sell that data to anyone who will pay for it. Data like this is traded internationally, which makes it tragic that elected lawmakers would waste time pushing a bill whose only mid-term effect would be making Colorado less attractive to developers and software companies. The irony is that normally your kids would have been protected, by standard practices, from having their age exposed. This bill reverses that, putting your children at more risk. The bill also would force many devices to provide age bracket data that are surprising to most people, because this part: "DEVICE" MEANS ANY GENERAL-PURPOSE COMPUTING DEVICE THAT CAN ACCESS A COVERED APPLICATION STORE OR DOWNLOAD AN APPLICATION. ... means anything with Internet access and storage. This includes smart televisions, thermostats, tablets, smartphones, smart watches, some fitness tracking devices, some smart toilets, and so on, all potentially reporting your activity on demand, even if that back-end service has nothing to do with porn. The bill is also poorly structured. Clearly it's intended to focus on services like app stores (Android, Apple), but by attempting to integrate support for this into operating systems, makes it available to hostile actors for any purpose worldwide. Further, it requires developers to guess whether other available information on a user might mean they're really in a different age bracket, exposing them to fines of $2500 to $7500 per minor "affected" (note: "affected" is not defined in the bill). The exemptions give blanket protection to developers working on for-internal-use software, but give no exemptions to recreational programmers. non-profit personal software, university projects, and so on, casting a chilling effect across software engineering generally. Lastly, the bill is ineffective. Most of the web runs on Linux, a coöperative international effort, nominally controlled by one man in Finland. There is no chance of this bill's mechanism being implemented in this context. Nor will other developers be especially interested in rewriting software for this Colorado-specific bill. Further, the kids supposedly being protected from all the Colorado native porn sites would just web-browse to nearly any porn site and be outside of Colorado anyway, if not outside the US entirely. These sponsors aren't alone. Most elected lawmakers are equally bad at technology and protecting democracy from the threats that come from chipping away at privacy protection. Bills like this appear in other states all the time, despite being toothless, easily circumvented by kids (who trivially circumvent even face photo hurdles), or radically compromising the privacy of adults (like this one). There's also the long game, where these sometimes Democrat-led bills in various states could eventually see a much deeper-reaching federal one, where, instead of a "age signal", the user's computer must send an "ID signal", allowing all personal interactions with the Internet to be tracked, analyzed for political and other biases, and used by backbone firewalls to control exactly what people are allowed to read. Very handy for a dictator who might want to block off "fake news". This is only a hypothesis, but one has to wonder whether sponsors to such bills even care if the bills work or pass, since either way they still get to claim they Protected the Children! even though the bills themselves violate privacy for everyone, often cause websites about breast cancer to be censored, or pave the way for authoritarian control - something this one stands out for. The only thing really surprising is that this bill wasn't sponsored by MAGA Republicans deliberately to add another paving stone to the road to national censorship. I urge everyone to get in touch with other Colorado representatives to call for a fight against this travesty of a bill. Further, I would excoriate the two sponsors by email and phone, and tell them now that you will not reward this sort of juvenile lawmaking with your vote. Lastly, tell other people about how Matt and Amy plan to strip away their privacy in a way that puts children more at risk than doing nothing.
- vasco 7mo agoCan't wait to have to prove to AWS I'm 18 before launching a server. And I'll have to give a fake ID to our automated CI pipelines, I guess.
- Leno1225 7mo agoIt’s a shit law, but it’s publisher- and distributor-targeted, so the overly-dramatic armchair-rebels in the forum can calm themselves; nobody’s coming after the person with a Linux machine bc it’s not compliant. Because it’s a state law, Cali will have geo-fenced app stores and this’ll just accelerate the breakout from manufacturer-maintained app stores. Websites that host downloads will just have a user attestation that they’re not Californians and be hosted abroad. There’s also no verification method; it’s literally just a requirement that account creation asks for an age - something websites do all the time and is not remotely burdensome, just ask all the ones convinced my DoB is a year and 4 months after my actual.
- motbus3 7mo agoThere is sudden concern with teenager's safety
- vincnetas 7mo agothis looks like law created for age or identity verification providers (persona etc). No one would build it from scratch. It will be passed to these providers.
- with 7mo agoOur lawmakers have zero idea how software works. "useradd bob" is an "account setup". does that need age verification too? haha
- jeffreygoesto 7mo agoHow about you go after the guys that actually do harm to children and let the rest of us live in peace?
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- gethly 7mo agoMake California the first society that goes back into a pre-technology era.
- meindnoch 7mo agoDefine operating system.
- znpy 7mo agoI wonder if that applies to the minix-derived operating system that’s running inside the intel management engine on intel cpus. (I’m being sarcastic of course)
- dragonwriter 7mo agoIt doesn't require age verification, only age attestation. More significantly, it does require all applications (from "covered application stores", but which has a definition for that which seems to include not only what you would normally call an app store, but any website or other source from which an app can be downloaded) to check the age signal provided by the OS when the application is "downloaded and launched". While it is poorly drafted, circular, and self-contradictory on some definitions and other points, it arguably seems to prohibit age verification within the scope of apps it covers, in that: (1) It requires all OS's to have an age attestation feature, (2) It requires all applications to use the age attestation feature, (3) It requires developers of applications to rely on the info from the age attestation feature as the "primary indicator of a users age range for determining the user's age", with the only exception being if the developer has internal (not external) information which is "clear and convincing information" that the user's age is different from what is signalled by the OS.
- edg5000 7mo agoTo what extend is this real? What is the probability this will enter law fully? Is it just a proposal?
- rockskon 7mo agoIf age attestation in the OS becomes law, there's much less friction afterwards to pass another law to have age verification as well. It should not be humored under the mistaken belief that "it's just age attestation in the OS - nothing invasive about that".
- edg5000 7mo agoDutch disease. Govt. just needs to keep the cash cows happy. Everybody else is irrelevant; just critters roaming the land.
- ZiiS 7mo agoAll the law asks is that 'adduser' asks for their birthday; and and age restricted software checks this on installation. Given we already have software it is illegal to sell to children this seems like an easy win? (Obviously it is still down to the parents to ensure the account is setup correctly)
- canbus 7mo agoWhat a great plot for a Black Mirror episode. Oh wait, it’s real life.
- dankobgd 7mo agowe will own nothing, eat le bugs and be happy
- somat 7mo agoWhat a ridiculous law, smells of some sort of frog boiling scheme to me. step1: "lets see if we can get away with imposing a small easy requirement, you know 'think of the children'" step2: "now that we have a foot in the door, lets see if we can get some real tracking in place, for the children of course" Anyhow: as far as I can tell compliance on linux would be as simple as echo $YEAR_BORN > ~/.config/ca_ab_1043 It's an accessible interface(it is the same user interface many linux programs use), applications can use a well known api to access the data.(using the common unix filesystem interface) and it only presents the minimum needed information to the application.
- ThatPlayer 7mo agoThe requested info is age range, not actual year born. So that's actually giving too much info, and could be breaking the law. Especially because 18+ is a completely valid range.
- rm30 7mo agoGovernments that require age verification for operating systems to protect children also drop bombs on civilian neighborhoods, fight wars that orphan millions and tolerate child labor, exploitation, poverty. History teaches us governments are the best at protecting children.
- windowliker 7mo agoCrazy idea, bear with me on this, but perhaps it's time to stop giving children smartphones.
- miroljub 7mo agoUsing any software made in California should be treated as a privacy and security threat.
- Havoc 7mo agoStuff like this just makes the anti-woke gang look more reasonable. Not enjoying this verification can future
- nottorp 7mo agoIs this the end of "smart" washing machines and refrigerators? I can imagine Samsung asking for the user's age every time you want to grab a snack and refusing to unlock the door otherwise. Or perhaps... they could add a camera to the fridge and send a stream 24/7 to their servers so they can identify the age of whoever opens the door. For complying with the laws of California, honestly!
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- kgkgllvlldm 7mo agoRIP freedos
- everdrive 7mo agoThis is a really strong example of how both the left and the right have been moving away from liberalism (ie, "classical liberalism," the general belief that people should be free to make their own choices and pursue their own interests) for the past 16 years or so. A bill like this could have just as easily come from Texas. Practically, I think this is tough. How does a business verify their 20k Linux servers in AWS? What prevents Linux users from simply modifying their code such that they no longer do age verification? I think it's easy to imagine circumventing this one law, but this is another brick in the wall. Maybe your bank stops working on Linux. Maybe major websites stop working unless they get your citizen ID and age verification data from your OS. Maybe no one makes a browser that doesn't try to grab that information. Not joking; stock up on books and keep a collection of media that you own personally. Perhaps your linux computer will start looking a lot like your PC from the early 90s: not connected to the internet, just used for word processing, some installed games, and media.
- kittikitti 7mo agoThis is Big Tech manipulating us to be against regulations on their platforms including preventing pedophilia on Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, etc. I'm still very much so in favor of regulating them. This smokescreen of a policy isn't going to confuse me.
- xtiansimon 7mo ago> "That's likely no big deal for Windows, which already requires you to enter your date of birth during the Microsoft Account setup procedure." I've been working around the Microsoft user-creation requirement for years. Looks like they were ahead of the game. CA is marching towards private-business surveillance. What could go wrong?
- therealdeal2020 7mo agowow that is messed up. Goodbye freedom
- Someone 7mo agoI don’t see anything in that bill (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...) that requires age verification. It says users, on account creation, must indicate their age or birth year (or both) and that programs must have access to that info, but I don’t see any requirement about checking whether what the user enters is correct. What does make it weird is that it requires account holders to enter that data at account creation, and it defines an account holder as ”an individual who is at least 18 years of age or a parent or legal guardian of a user who is under 18 years of age in the state” So, kids are allowed to create an account, but then, an account holder has to enter their age or birth year. To top it of “a parent or legal guardian who is not associated with a user’s device” is not an account holder, so let’s say a 15-year old buys a laptop or smartphone and wants to set it up. There’s nobody associated with the device, so there are no account holders. Who should enter that age info? On many smartphones, having a grown-up create an account first won’t work, as there’s no way to set up a second account.
- freeaifreedom 7mo ago[dead]
- gib444 7mo agoI can't keep up with all these attacks on personal computing/libre software/the web. - AI causing RAM/disk price shocks and shortages - Google attempting to lock down Android - The EeYou codifying the Google-Apple duopoly into age-verification legislation - Age verification requirements spreading rapidly - AI scraping meaning many sites have WAF rules set to 'max'. It's getting extremely hard to browse the internet with a VPN + privacy features such as WebGL blocking etc. Geoblocking seems to be on the rise too (eg Trenitalia, Aegean Air). - Governments wanting backdoors on devices - Broadband price increases (10-25% rises are being baked into annual contracts here in the UK) It seems in 2026 they've really gone full speed ahead. What is the future going to look like? A Government-approved Apple OR Google spying device for the things you need to exist as a citizen... and a bunch of paper books/library cards/porn mags?
- BarbaryCoast 7mo ago"For the purpose of....covered application stores." I'd like to see that definition. My OS doesn't have an "application store", so I doubt it's impacted by this law.
- sloum 7mo agoI believe that if you have a network stack and can download files from the internet--which would include software--that it counts. I don't want to re-read to find the part, but they seemed to imply that any system where you could download software from the internet and then run it.
- sloum 7mo agoFound it: > “Covered application store” means a publicly available internet website, software application, online service, or platform that distributes and facilitates the download of applications from third-party developers to users of a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing that can access a covered application store or can download an application. To whittle down the the important part: > “Covered application store” means > any [...] general purpose computing that can access a covered application store or can download an application If you have a network stack, you can 100% connect to a "covered application store" and thus the OS falls under the scope of the law.
- BarbaryCoast 7mo agoOK, so way at the bottom it says this: "This title does not impose liability on an operating system provider, a covered application store, or a developer that arises from the use of a device or application by a person who is not the user to whom a signal pertains." This is obviously a law so poorly written that it'll never pass a court challenge. Assuming anyone brings one.
- Twisell 7mo agoAlthough it appear stupid, maybe an OS level endorsement of user age is actually a more reasonable middle ground than delegating mandatory age verification to data brokers... It still parents that usually buy the computers and set up the différents user accounts. So the responsibilities would be put back in their hands as machine owners to correctly tag kid's accounts. OS vendors would then only be responsible to accurately transmit this declarative information to requesting App/services. Of course some smart kids are gonna find a way to bypass that (as any other mesure you can imagine, because kids are smart). But nonetheless we could have a good enough OS level declarative age for 95% uses cases and send to the trashbin all the age verification creep that is the current trend.
- dmix 7mo agoTheres already parental controls on Mac, iPhone, android, and I’m assuming windows. Those were voluntary
- senfiaj 7mo agoThis can seriously harm open source software (overall it's a toll on software developers). This law is really poorly thought out without even resorting to conspiracy theories: https://waspdev.com/articles/2026-03-07/my-thoughts-on-os-level-age-verification#the_implications_for_open_source_oses_and_apps https://waspdev.com/articles/2026-03-07/my-thoughts-on-os-le...
- VoodooJuJu 7mo ago[dead]
- ChicagoDave 7mo agoI’d lay odds this is a free speech issue. Someone will sue.
- rglover 7mo agoOur leaders are lost people.
- cogman10 7mo agoBill text appears to be a copy/paste from a similar Colorado bill that just made the rounds. Methinks there's a special interest group trying to ram this garbage through a bunch of state legislatures.
- ok123456 7mo agoALEC
- potatosalad99 7mo agoIt’s to stop 14 year olds compiling the Linux kernel.
- BatteryMountain 7mo agoAmerica is losing the plot.
- smallmouth 7mo agoI'm a law and order kind of guy, but this nonsense should probably be ignored.
- giantg2 7mo ago"That's likely no big deal for Windows, which already requires you to enter your date of birth during the Microsoft Account setup procedure." Not exactly true as you can do local account installs. I wonder if you can get around the law by just having people build their own image from the source.
- alkonaut 7mo agoHow is this an OS concern? Shouldn't age verification be a government concern to implement a system which does a privacy preserving verification? And until such a system exists, there should be no laws about online verification at all?
- coldtea 7mo agoWhy would a government be interested in "privacy preserving"? Their goal is the exact opposite.
- alkonaut 7mo agoBecause a government represents the interests of the voters or else we get rid of it. The risk is that voters care about other issues more and get policy that they don't agree with in the package. That's always a risk. But if enough voters care about a particular issue then so does government. (Local variations can exist)
- j45 7mo agoThis seems bizarre.
- bluescrn 7mo agoThat would make retro computing illegal :( They’re trying to destroy all the best nerdy hobbies. First drones, then 3D printing, now even my precious Amiga!
- kjkjadksj 7mo agoAll the best nerdy hobbies can be weaponized
- remy_boutonnet 7mo agoThis is all very discussed in concrete terms of what exactly the terms of the law are, how this will be possibly implemented..etc. But what about your outrage you all at the moral and ethical implications of this?
- easeout 7mo ago> …requires an account holder to indicate the birth date, age, or both, of the user of that device… The way I read that, you just have to ask for an indication of age. Like when I'm not logged in to Steam and I want to look at a game with blood, it asks for a birth year and I pretend to be 109. That's not exactly "age verification." Am I missing something?
- jppope 7mo agoSo silly question, in theory this is like brewing beer... what if a kid wants to make an operating system?
- VladVladikoff 7mo agoJust when you thought windows couldn’t possibly get any shittier.
- shevy-java 7mo agoThey want to spy on everyone. This is against freedom. I would not know why the operating system I use would need to sniff on me - or yield that information to anyone else. This is clearly fascism.
- egorfine 7mo agoCan I wash my laundry without an ID? Because my washing machine can connect to wifi, supports different user's profiles, etc, thus it has an OS.
- siliconc0w 7mo agoI actually prefer an OS-level API for Age verification rather than treating everyone as a child-by-default unless they upload their personal information to some random vendor. BUT this is obviously not the right way to implement this.
- guywithahat 7mo ago> Assembly Bill No. 1043 was approved by California governor Gavin Newsom in October of last year, and becomes active on January 1, 2027 It was already approved? This seems wildly invasive, and CA can't even pretend they're doing it to stop porn. CA is just monitoring citizens for the love of the game
- exabrial 7mo agoRemember when you leave California, please leave the dumb ideas there
- trinsic2 7mo agoLOL whats the enforcement scenario and who is going to be targeted for punishment if it doesn't happen? This is truly stupid.
- interludead 7mo agoThis will be implemented as a dropdown asking for your birthdate, which anyone can lie on, and everyone will move on
- Bender 7mo agoA better law would have been to require the apps look for an RTA header. [1] If detected trigger parental control password prompt which would only be enabled if a parent enabled parental controls. Server operators could add this header to anything adult or that may contain user-contibuted content in their sleep. App developers could add a snippet of code to look for the header in their sleep. Then have a law that requires parents with small children under 10 must enable parental controls on devices used by their children. Why under 10? No confrontation with teens. The small children will grow into the process. No PII shared. No asking for ID. No sharing ID. Not on the OS, not on a third party website. I don't like green eggs and ham, I don't like them Sam I am. We all know that once this law has been complied to they will extend it to require ID be uploaded to whatever company gives the most kick-backs to Gavin and an API key will have to be saved on the OS per account. This data will be leaked in 3 ... 2 ... [1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46152074 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46152074
- MeanEYE 7mo agoAnother clueless politician coming up with a law that makes him feel as if he did something right.
- phendrenad2 7mo agoPay close attention to which Linux distros trip on their shoelaces in their rush to implement this. Those are the people who will lick boots right up until we're not allowed to use PCs anymore, and turn you in for illegal assembly code.
- aubanel 7mo agoRegulating something they visibly had no clue about, just because they had idle time and paper: Is California trying to speedrun the innovation no man's land of EU?