You must log in or # to comment.
I was wondering when I would see this headline. I wonder if any other big names will make similar statements.
I also wonder whether or not grapheneos, or open source Linux OSs in general, will face any repercussions for failing to comply to these regulations due to the relatively low user count.
Hate to say it but systemd, the init system of most Linux distros, already has PRs with maintainer backing to implement DoB recording.
Some people can’t kneel fast enough.
Which already has a revert commit https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/41179
The self-important creator of Systemd has personally blocked that PR, if I’m hearing correctly, which would suggest he or his employer Microsoft is all in on it.
It’s an optional field in the userdb JSON object. It’s not a policy engine, not an API for apps. We just define the field, so that it’s standardized iff people want to store the date there, but it’s entirely optional.
“I’m not picking a side” and “this future proofs standardization” is of little comfort, that is seriously suspect. I ought to look to alternatives to SystemD(odge the issue failed).
Maybe https://agelesslinux.org/ or systemd free distro https://without-systemd.org/wiki/index_php/Linux_distributions_without_systemd/
So in other words, “Sure we built the people-crushing machines, but we didn’t wire them up or turn them on.”
IBM, is that you?
That’s just systemd adding a birthdate field to their userdb. Doesn’t require that it be filled out or accurate, and especially doesn’t require it to be validated against a government database. I don’t see it as fundamentally any different from adding a userdb field for favorite color, phone number, or blood type.
Without 3rd party validation, I really don’t see the privacy issue with an age field. Without verification, it is, at worst, one more byte available to hash into a unique identifier, but you can feed that field from /dev/random at every query and poison even that hypothetical.
Why the ever loving fuck does an init system even need a user database?
Honest to God, if FIFA were giving out a World “Understanding UNIX” Prize, Poettering would be the inaugural, and only, winner. Never in the field of operating systems has one man driven so much enshittification through sheer force of cluelessness coupled with supreme arrogance. And in a world that Steve Ballmer still occupies, that’s one hell of an accolade.
Linux Distros (so far) Refusing Age Verification
EDIT
I recommend going to Ageless Linux’s site and reading up on their take on the whole issue. They clearly illustrate how poorly thought out the California law is.- Ageless Linux - https://agelesslinux.org/index.html
- Omarchy Linux - https://omarchy.org/
- Adenix GNU/Linux - https://www.adenixgnulinux.org/
- Artix Linux - https://artixlinux.org/
Linux Distros (so far) Refusing Age Verification
The systemd dude, ever so flexible as long as the request does not come from actual users, is already working on adding this into core components, though.
Systemd is open source so it can be forked to have features removed.
Good luck building a distro that play nice with your fork, then. Systemd is embedded deep in most distro, replacing it without breaking things is not an easy task.
The systemd mod is not a gateway. It’s just a date field.
Damn. It’s only being talked about and people have already folded.
It’s only a date field. Then it’ll only be an API for other service integration. Then it’ll only be an optional plug into a remote service. Then it’ll only be an optional, but strongly recommended, dependency in other software. Then it’ll only be a digitally signed third-party value that’s mandatory. Then it’ll only be something most installer won’t proceed without.
We’ve been jumping from slippery slopes to slippery slopes over the past few years. It’s tiring. And the coincidental timing of all this is not helping.
this is why its a poggers operating system
CA’s law is “per child”. I guarantee lawyers are foaming at the mouth to claim every child in CA was hurt so they can line their pockets. CA’s public protection laws seem to be for the purposes of enriching lawyers. I’d love to see how many class action suits would get filed if lawyer fees were put under a hard cap.
“lawyers” can’t bring charges for this law. Only the AG. If people don’t like what the AG is doing then they can just start a recall election.
