4 ms·

Exactly which part of AB 1043 makes you think a "smart toaster" could reasonably fall under it?

bee_rider 7mo ago
I 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 ago
The 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 ago
  For 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?
  - enoint 7mo ago
    Since there are no exceptions, I’m not sure if a judge will ask those. One judge might look at an appliance with no screen or input and “nope” it quickly. Another might decide that these OS designers should show more caution. And just because their distro supports ovens, it also supports Amazon Echo.
fc417fc802 7mo ago
I assume you're aware that many "smart" devices these days have a full blown OS, a web browser, and an app store. But then some are missing or have only partial functionality here or there. If the law doesn't unambiguously specify what it applies to it puts anyone in the grey area in a difficult position. While we're at it, does fdroid count as the sort of app store that this law cares about? Because an end user can install that for themselves.
- enoint 7mo ago
  I expect a smart toaster could have a legally-compliant rump Toaster App Store which simply echo “I am a toaster” regardless of user age policy. F-Droid is more abusable, unfortunately.

I 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 ago

The 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 ago
For 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?
- enoint 7mo ago
  Since there are no exceptions, I’m not sure if a judge will ask those. One judge might look at an appliance with no screen or input and “nope” it quickly. Another might decide that these OS designers should show more caution. And just because their distro supports ovens, it also supports Amazon Echo.

fc417fc802 7mo ago

I assume you're aware that many "smart" devices these days have a full blown OS, a web browser, and an app store. But then some are missing or have only partial functionality here or there. If the law doesn't unambiguously specify what it applies to it puts anyone in the grey area in a difficult position. While we're at it, does fdroid count as the sort of app store that this law cares about? Because an end user can install that for themselves.

enoint 7mo ago
I expect a smart toaster could have a legally-compliant rump Toaster App Store which simply echo “I am a toaster” regardless of user age policy. F-Droid is more abusable, unfortunately.