Technology

Simple solution. From now on Linux distros should ship with a big message "NOT FOR USE IN CALIFORNIA".

You want to force age verification? No server in all of California will run. Period.

How will this affect embedded os like freertos or vxworks? There are lightbulbs that have operating systems these days, am I going to have to show ID to turn on my light?

uhhh. So would I need to get everyone who uses the household pc to verify age? Whats stopping a child from using the family pc that was age verified by an adult?

Despite signing it, Newsom issued a statement urging the legislature to amend the law before its effective date, citing concerns from streaming services and game developers about "complexities such as multi-user accounts shared by a family member and user profiles utilized across multiple devices."

Then why the fuck did you sign it if it wasn't ready and needed amendments? Is this what you're going to do as president too?

Rhetorical, of course. Note how he doesn't say he disagrees with the bill, just that it needed to consider family devices.

If this is who wins the primary, we are done. We're basically already done, for sure, but him winning the primary would be the final nail in the coffin.

Our president is fucking children, and you're telling me I gotta verify my date of birth to run Linux, in the name of "Protecting the Children"?

Get the fuck outta here.

Why not parents responsible for their own goddamn kids? Stop interfering with the rest of our privacy for this bullshit. Parental controls have existed for decades. Fucking use them.

Wow California leading the way to fascism, who woulda thunk?

Enforcement against Linux distributions, however, is likely to be problematic. Distros like Arch, Ubuntu, Debian, and Gentoo have no centralized account infrastructure, with users downloading ISOs from mirrors worldwide, and can modify source code freely. These small distros lack legal teams or resources to implement the required API, so a more realistic outcome for non-compliant distros is a disclaimer that the software is not intended for use in California.

You guys are asking the wrong questions.

How is Linux going to do this? There's no server for the os to send the information to report the age of its users, no way of forcing its user base to comply and no single person or entity to fine, arrest or otherwise force into compliance.

They made a law they cannot enforce.

For everyone trying to figure out how this would be enforced, it's not about being proactively enforced. (and data collection is 99% of it)

It's about adding a double-tap "Well, these people also violated our age verification law, so they have to pay a fine," added to any incident where it's convenient to add this in. If a minor sends another minor a snap that would trigger CP laws, and one of the phones isn't age verified correctly, fine to the parents and hands up in the air "We tried!" A minor is involved in torrenting movies? "Look, kids using illegal OS! Fine to the parents!"

This is how laws work across a lot of corrupt developing countries. There's laws for everything, but they only get applied selectively as authorities find they fit the situation. It's hard to actually be 100% above board and do everything legally because of a few little things meant to be impossible to actually do bureaucratically. So in every situation, any set of authorities start in with the endemic leverage of "Well, we have suspicion of you selling ketamine out of your apartment. Did you do age verification on your laptop? No? Then we can seize that as a crime and see what's on there. OR you can give up your supplier."

Despite signing it, Newsom issued a statement urging the legislature to amend the law before its effective date, citing concerns from streaming services and game developers about "complexities such as multi-user accounts shared by a family member and user profiles utilized across multiple devices."

then why did you fucking sign it in the first place??

words cannot describe the depths of my seething hatred for the complete, museum grade, massive piece of shit that is Gavin Newsom

Considering the massive number of servers running Linux used in the industry, this sounds like a good way to kill the Tech Industry in California.

The law does not require photo ID uploads or facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age, setting AB 1043 apart from similar laws passed in Texas and Utah that require "commercially reasonable" verification methods, such as government-issued ID checks.

What even is the point of this then? To make shitty parents feel better?

The law does not require photo ID uploadsor facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age, setting AB 1043 apart from similar laws passed in Texas and Utah that require "commercially reasonable" verification methods, such as government-issued ID checks.

Seems toothless. Good.

OK Newsom, you've lost me. I enjoyed your chaotic responses to the drumpf but you've officially lost me.

Did you guys know I was born January 1st 1901?

What if no internet? How set up?

User age required to be entered. There is no verification.

Are children not allowed to use computers now?

No way this is enforceable

How the hell are they going to enforce this?

My birthday is 01.01.0001

This is a whole new level for system level fingerprinting

I've always input my age as 1900-01-01 and I can't change that now because that'll show an inconsistency and we can't have that now can we.

Luckily this dogshit is completely unenforceable. It doesn't excuse the people who introduced this law, of course.

Since people aren't reading the article and the headline is misleading. The law requires:

• The OS ask the user their date of birth on account creation (kinda like the Steam date of birth prompts)
• The OS provide an API that returns which of four age brackets the user fits in
• Companies notified by the OS that the user is under age may be liable

It was explicitly written by the authors not to mandate ID or facial recognition checks. You can lie about your date of birth. This basically creates a standard set of parental controls for parents configuring kids devices.

I think that this might actually help with the whole discord facial recognition issue in places other than the UK by allowing them to offload the issue to parents setting up devices rather than collecting kids biometrics.

No biggie. I got ready for this in minutes after hearing about it.

#!/usr/bin/env fish
read -P "Are you old enough?  (yes/no)  " input
if test "$input" = "yes" -o "$input" = "Yes"
echo "Proceeding..."
else
echo "You are not old enough.  Exiting." 
exit 1
end

... What? ... Why are you all looking at me like that?

That would be a completely unworkable law since devices may not even have internet connectivity, or a user interface. And even if they did, it would have a chilling effect on software development in California.

Many people here are going off on wild tangents over this. You should just read the law, it's only a couple thousand words of quite plain English.

Many here have taken completely incorrect assumptions from the title. This law is for developers, not users.

Summary:

1. Requires OS devs ask for DOB, age, or both at account creation time.
2. Requires an API that allows app store devs to request this age data for the account. At minimum this API must signal that the account is a member of one of these categories: 'user under 13, user over 13 and under 16, user is over 16 and under 18, user is over 18'.
3. Explicitly bars OS devs from sending more data than explicitly necessary to meet 1 (hint: photo ID, facial recognition).
4. Explicitly bars app devs recieving the data from requesting more data from the OS nor the App store.
5. Bars app stores from using the data for any other reason and specifically calls out anticompetitive practices.
6. Bars app store and OS devs from sharing this data with any third party for any other reason than to comply with this law.
7. Has injunctions and civil penalties of $2500 (max per user) affected by negligent violations (eg a child account is served adult content), and $7500 (max per user) affected by intentional violations.

The only problem I have with this is that it should only apply to commercial software (app stores and OS). Libre/FOS software should not have to police ages on their app stores, due to their far reduced budgets (often zero), developer time, and the nature of the software being generally anti-centralized and anti-surveillance-capitalism. Though I'd be fine with it for FOSS software distributed via commercial app stores, as long as they gave a longer lead time to implement (EG a couple of years).