- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.zip
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.zip
You must log in or register to comment.
Fucking raise hell and cause chaos. Age checks are bullshit. All while our government is filled with corruption and pedophiles. Maybe stop listening to such an immoral entity.
PopOS best distro (?)
It’s been a solid one for a long time. I haven’t tried their new Cosmic based one recently, but it was always good.
no but you can use it anyway if you want
I’m so glad someone who can fight it is fighting it. They usually listen to companies more than people.
I’m saddened Democrats are pushing this before the midterms. They’re going to fumble this if they keep on this track.
California, Colorado and New York now.
Honestly is getting insane.
Given how many states are pushing legislation like this and how quickly they’re doing it, there’s effectively no way to push back against it…
I do hope that they stop this bullshit though.
Add Illinois to the list.
Sometimes it freaks me out if I put my tinfoil hat on and start thinking that both sides are working together to move toward fascism.
I really don’t understand what the value they see in putting age checks on operating systems. Like where is this coming from? Who whispered in their ear that OS age checks are something that need to be done?
From what I can tell, the ‘age’ part is misdirection. They want to restrict computer use to the “good” people, to make it “safer”.
Using age restrictions first allows legislation to be passed “for the children” using the idea of potential harm to theoretical children. However, in practice, legislators expect the implementation of the age check to be capable of checking anything else they want to about your identity, as a prerequisite for access. Probably using a combination of face scans and ID scans.
I don’t even understand what good this is. what does this do for them? The government has a database of identities and now it’s going to have a database of identities with computers? for what? Steven uses Windows, Susie uses Linux.
if you’re using internet at home or on a cell phone, they’ve already got your online identity or whatever. what is it that I’m missing
You arent going deep enough. Its about building a web of all of your online identities to crush dissent and influence public opinion. Susie frequents anarchist.nexus under the user the_cloaked and there she seems to interact with another user, lilanarkiddy, a lot. Steven’s windows computer also reported that he frequents the site, under the user lilarnarkiddy. And you see where that will lead to.
The whole law is dumb. They need to create a standard universal method first. So when does this protection get applied? Can’t somebody just boot a thumb drive?
Can’t somebody just boot a thumb drive?
This has gotten me especially curious about Tails.
when major websites start doing this weird browser or os based signature verification, tails isn’t going to work very well on them anymore. using the internet without your signature will probably be about as fun as it is to browse with tor right now
That’s what I was afraid of, and that sucks because using Tails could mean avoiding prison or worse for journalists doing certain work.
It’s a solution that seems so divorced from reality… I don’t quite understand how the expectation is reasonable, unless the goal is to force complaints to surface from the OS developers so that they can refine future versions of the law with more accuracy.
Because Linux distributions can be created free-willy. Just check out Linux From Scratch, Gentoo, etc. Same with live boot from USB, same with stripped down server distros like Alpine — you have the same issue.
Linux isn’t a product in the same way that other products can be regulated. It would make more sense if they defined clearly who this law actually targets, being something that is actually enforceable; something like this:
- Any general-purpose computing device sold to consumers that includes an operating system capable of executing third-party applications…
- All systems built after <xyz> date must include a MINIX subos that reproduces this API…
- All browsers with GUI must support integration with the API, if they also want to support viewing of sensitive content
- All porn distributors must validate age range via the API exposed via the browser, or refuse serving content
That at least makes some sense. In a way, it only targets PC distributors and porn distributors. The end user could still do whatever they want, but porn distributors may not serve content to them without the functionality described.
Because Linux distributions can be created free-willy. Just check out Linux From Scratch, Gentoo, etc. Same with live boot from USB, same with stripped down server distros like Alpine — you have the same issue.
I don’t want to be “that person”, but here’s how it could play out…
The “free-willy” distros would not fulfill the “trust” requirements needed to pass the “certification process”. You can still use them, but think of it like running custom firmware on your cellphone: you’re not going to be able to access your bank, but somethings will still work.
Larger distros (Red Hat, Ubuntu, etc) would pay to pass the “certification process”, but this would come by making certain concessions:
- The kernel would not be allowed to be tainted. Which means you can only use official kernel modules provided by your vendor (no self-compiling)
- Certain kernel modules would needed to be removed (or nerfed). For example the Fuse filesystem.
- You could probably keep root access or at least a nerfed version of it.
Then with theses concessions, your PC world be deemed “reliable” to perform the necessary age verification and have this confirmation passed through your browser to your favor porn site.
Damn, that sounds like gunk. I’ve been so exciting about the day and age when phones reach the same level of customizability as a PC. Little did I know, they want to phoneify the PCs instead.
Lmao does the register really cite Reddit as a source? it was a cesspool off missinformation on the CA bill, I doubt it’s any better on the CO one.
Why not link to the actual bill like it does for other states?
It’s also wildly disingenuous to lump the bills that require verification and those that just require an OS store an unverified age and return it, but that’s what I’d expect from reddit.
I don’t want either. And it’s a slippery slope to the next stage, and the next. Eventually we will have no control over what we own and zero privacy.
A local API is slippery nipples to a survailance state who knew.
Why use a computer at all, it’s the first step towards mass surveillance, better go back to the abacus!
Your “sarcasm” is closer to the truth than what any of us can conceive, unfortunately.
There’s still valid concern about this being a foot in the door tactic. Once an OS complies with this request what will the next one be? Why should this even be allowed?
Either way though, the reddit citation is a bit unnerving.
It’s a gray area. If you have nothing to “protect the kids”, the feds might force it on a “non-compliant” state right now considering the fascism permeating our highest governments.
We’re starting to see desperate legislation more and more often. As a resident of CA, we had to vote FOR gerrymandering recently. It was disgusting, but it was direly needed to preserve democracy in the US.
Sure, but reddit (& Lemmy) hyperventilating about this as if the milktoast laws are the same as full retenal scanning verified by Palantir has completely destroyed any sort of sensible discussion around this.
Personally I think doing nothing isn’t an option and so the unverified age API approach is the least bad solution i’ve seen.
And much better than pushing the verification server side. The main argument I’ve seen against it is either:
-
slippery nipples means that at some point a different worse law could be passed, which is possible, but worse laws have already been passed elsewhere so if that was the intent they could have gone for it in CA/CO
-
Parents should watch their kids better, which is disingenuous as this is litterally adding a tool to help do that in a standard way, rather than some flakey survailance app.
To your second point, make it a tool that can be enabled by a parent then, don’t make it a legal requirement for everyone. This is exactly like the latest Ring camera pet tracking debacle. Everyone saw the slippery slope threat and then reports came out that it was indeed planned for expansion. This is the same but worse, because ring cameras are optional.
Parents should parent and the government should keep their greedy data compiling fingers out of our person tech. They’ve proven time and time again that they can’t be trusted to do the right thing.
The CA/CO approach doesn’t give the government any data, this is what I mean about reddit induced paranoia making sensible discussion impossible.
This is nowhere near as bad as Ring, I don’t get to control if Amazon are survailing me through my neighbors cameras, but I do get to decide what age input into my account setup screen, again trying to make storing my age sound worse than actual survailance tech linked to Palantir is insane!
Then I will refer to you first point. CA/CO now, full Id tomorrow. It’s completely unnecessary. If you can’t parent your child, don’t have a child. It’s not some paranoid delusion, it’s how the government operates.
What is your reason for why this should be required instead of an optional tool that users can enable?
Another example is how if you setup an MS live account when setting of a new computer, your bitlocker key is saved on MS’s servers. They recently turned some of those codes to the government to unlock user’s devices. It’s not exactly the same, but it just takes one update for an OS to send that stored information instead of just an API response.
Again you going of on tangents about MS, really doesn’t make your argument seem grounded in reality.
Sure it could be an optional tool all OSes must support, instead of a mandatory local API, but neither of them are the same as MS uploading encryption keys.
Why not? It’s exactly the same. You store creds on your computer, then they take them. The info has to be stored somewhere, and a windows update can take it. The point is that they have proved in the recent past to take user’s private information to give to the government. If they can do it with bitlocker, they can do it with stored info.
But regardless of all of that, it shouldn’t be mandatory anyway. It’s never been about children, it’s always about collecting data. If they are so hard on child safety, then give an optional tool to adults, and let them parent their children. Anything else is an overreach.
Even if this is all fear mongering, it’s still a dumb idea that has no place in personal electronics.
-
Are we talking about biological age or mental age which means that most adults are still just honey teens with just a tad better impulse control?
So you are advocating for Leasure Suit Larry age verification questions.
Can I just type ‘roxorz boxorz’ and be done with it.
Honey teens sounds like a twister variant invented on Epstein island
