4 ms·
They seem to be ready for this: > Q: What if the AG actually fines you? > Then we will have accomplished something no amount of mailing list discussion could:
by aniviacat 7mo ago
They seem to be ready for this:
> Q: What if the AG actually fines you?
> Then we will have accomplished something no amount of mailing list discussion could: a court record establishing what AB 1043 actually means when applied to the real world. Does "operating system provider" cover a bash script? Does "general purpose computing device" cover a Raspberry Pi Pico? Can you fine someone "per affected child" when no mechanism exists to count affected children? These are questions the legislature left unanswered. We'd like answers. A fine would be the fastest way to get them.
- dataflow 7mo agoI have a feeling they're going to be very disappointed with the actual answers they'll receive to these questions.
- Telaneo 7mo agoOn the one hand, I'd love a judge to respond 'yes' to all of these, if only to confirm how ridiculous they are and that a reasonable implementation is impossible. On the other hand, I'd hate for a judge to respond 'yes', because then the enforcement of said ridiculousness becomes vindicated.
- dataflow 7mo agoThese aren't all yes/no questions. And what I'm saying is I think anyone who thinks there's some sort of paradox in answering these will be in for a rude awakening. E.g., "How do you fine someone per child affected?" Idk, maybe the parents that become aware of their children being affected would join a lawsuit, and others would not be parties to the suit?
- akdev1l 7mo agoso many people start asking random questions like these acting as if judges are drooling baboons or something “What’s even an operating system will this apply to my toaster?” - probably not, a judge would ultimately decide.
- bee_rider 7mo agoThat seems pretty annoying for people who sell computing appliances like smart toasters, routers, and televisions, and videogame consoles—do they preemptively start implementing in case a judge decides they are covered? Why not write an easy-to-interpret law in the first place?
- dataflow 7mo agoExactly which part of AB 1043 makes you think a "smart toaster" could reasonably fall under it?
- bee_rider 7mo agoI was responding to the scenario set out in the comment I responded to. > “What’s even an operating system will this apply to my toaster?” - probably not, a judge would ultimately decide.
- enoint 7mo agoThe GE smart wall oven could meet the definition. I’m genuinely unsure which way a judge would rule. For ovens which do not provide an App Store, I cannot tell what the intent of AB 1043 should be.
- enoint 7mo agoFor example, if GE assumes some risk and issues an OS update, then the oven will ask the users age. GE would at that point be capable of limiting functionality based on age. But the bill is not enforced against GE, but the OS maintainer.
- dataflow 7mo ago> The GE smart wall oven could meet the definition. I’m genuinely unsure which way a judge would rule. > or ovens which do not provide an App Store, I cannot tell what the intent of AB 1043 should be. - Does the oven have an "account setup" process? - Does the phrase "the user of that device" make sense for this oven? - Does "the purpose of providing a signal regarding the user’s age bracket to applications available in a covered application store" make sense for this oven? - Does "to provide a developer, as defined, who has requested a signal" seem relevant to this oven?
- taneq 7mo agoYep, the goal of civil disobedience is literally to get sued/charged/arrested in order to force the issue to be (hopefully) properly and publicly resolved.