this post was submitted on 26 May 2026
432 points (99.5% liked)

Technology

85043 readers
1657 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Other open source software gets similar treatment, with Colorado going as far as explicitly excluding code repositories and container platforms.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 124 points 5 days ago

Its not enough. Eradicate the bills.

[–] dance_ninja@lemmy.world 102 points 5 days ago (2 children)

It's not really a win though. It just means Linux will get blocked by platforms.

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 65 points 5 days ago (6 children)

The fun part of open source is that someone smarter than me will inevitably just update the existing spoofing tools to include whatever checks those platforms are using.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 16 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Hopefully it is as easy as saying the user is an adult without storing anything. It won't be, but that would be nice.

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 17 points 5 days ago

Gonna be a whole lot of people born on Jan 1, 1970

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

A number of VPNs have tools to let you spoof browser IDs. It's useful if you want to access YouTube and pretend you're on Chrome to get better performance.

[–] ohshit604@sh.itjust.works 8 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

You don’t need a VPN to spoof the user agent of a web-browser. Quite literally type User Agent Switcher in the Mozilla plugin page and you’ll have a plethora to choose from.

The problem with this is Chromium based browsers work outside the standards for web-development, they implement features/protocols that Firefox or non-chromium based browsers do not comply with as it does not meet the specifications laid out, this is where you get people saying “Use Chrome if Firefox doesn’t work” but ultimately that’s a load of bull shit.

Follow the standards and specifications and your website will work on literally every browser out there, well, except those that are heavily outdated.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 23 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Fuck the platforms. We'll make our own.

We're literally on one "we" made on our own right now. So yeah, exactly, we'll make our own. With blackjack... and hookers. In fact forget the platforms.

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Except banking-apps. Which are not onlyandatory nowadays but also unavoidable 🤢

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 2 points 4 days ago (7 children)

You know what? I have a branch of my credit union within biking distance. I'm fine with needing to physically go there occasionally.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] USSEthernet@startrek.website 6 points 5 days ago

With Blackjack and Hookers

[–] pwxd@lemmy.zip 15 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

We actually "won"? They're not gonna do something suspicious at all? (͡•_ ͡• )

Although this treatment is still not enough, we need the bill to evaporate from the surface of earth

[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

Its unenforcoble in the first placr

[–] chrash0@lemmy.world 70 points 5 days ago (1 children)

oh wow gee thank you for not… [checks notes]… forcing open source developers to write state mandated spyware without compensation

[–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 31 points 5 days ago

"Thank you for not forcing me to participate in your getting-kicked-in-the-balls program... But perhaps just don't?"

[–] No1@aussie.zone 43 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Waiting for....

403 Unauthorized

We're sorry, your browser has not provided us with age verification, and so we are unable to show you our cat videos.

Reason:
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/148.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36

[–] Noja@sopuli.xyz 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Why are you waiting for this? This is already the reality; example: fansly uses the ID verification service ondato, which only works on chrome browsers and tries to detect "tampered camera feeds", ofc it doesn't work on Linux.

[–] TotalCourage007@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

Call it Surveillance ID, don't give in to control freaks.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 21 points 5 days ago (2 children)

So what's the point in the bill then? They're prepared to accept that open source solutions don't have to implement it then they have to accept that the whole idea is daft anyway.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 15 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Not exactly. They can always take this one step further and make it more difficult to use anything but closed OSs for fundamental applications, like banking. It could come via an ID requirement where authentication goes through some complicated process with proprietary hardware and drivers. That could also come in phases, such as mandating all desktop/laptop distributors require it prior to distribution. Then the tech giants can market it like, “never require a password again, if you have…” effectively marketing back the convenience they helped take. Sooner or later, it’s a piece of shit system that banks and jobs rely on, everybody ends up accepting it while complaining that it makes a terrible password for obvious reasons (ref: your Social Security card).

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

These laws should hopefully be struck down as unconstitutional because of their invasion of privacy(a violation of the 3rd and 4th amendments) and a general violation of the first amendment.

[–] Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 days ago

In a perfect world this means that closed ecosystem operating systems. Like windows, Mac and android. Who have an unfair amount of control and power over their customer base. Will be held to a higher standard by the law.

Since the potential for abuse is higher with windows or android then say arch or fedora.

That increased control should come at a downside of increased responsibility. There's nothing stopping Microsoft or Google from releasing control and becoming more transparent in theory.

So if everything was in magical fairy land. This sort of enforced liability would push software towards more open standards with less burden of responsibility on the creators and more responsibility on the user.

Since really that's where the responsibility should mostly be. It should be the user or parents of the user who decide how a system is used. And it should be the users responsibility to ensure they are adhering to laws and regulations.

[–] godsammitdam@lemmy.zip 6 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I imagine that, while good on the surface, the apps that will then require the age information called from the OS will just reject any platform that doesn't provide it, essentially segregating the internet.

Which, adding more and more friction makes it more likely that users will just give up and submit to giving up their privacy.

[–] quips@slrpnk.net 4 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

But that isn’t mandated in the laws

Regardless they can destroy the clearnet and we’ll make our own internet with blackjack and hookers

[–] godsammitdam@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Yet.

But it doesn't need to be once the data exists, corporations can build their websites however they like once the data is mandated to exist. Think about how your browser, if not chrome, will often break/slow down on YouTube because google wants you to use chrome/have ads play on YouTube. Or how captcha will just sometimes break and force you to use a chrome browser (which exposes a bunch of data)...cause google again. None of that is mandated by law.

Don't forget the legislation is funded by Meta. They want that delicious, scrumptious data that will help them legally avoid COPPA and target/collect data on child accounts and get them addicted while young.

And I know we will. We're cool like that.

[–] Colonel_Panic_@eviltoast.org 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

It's back to the same question from the early days of the Internet. "How do you know the person you are talking to isn't a cat?". How can you know they aren't a cat or maybe a clever monkey taking a break from typing Shakespeare, or how old they are, or who they even are?

You can't.

You can implement every security measure available and anyone can simply lie or bypass it.

If by some miracle they actually implemented some age verification tech for OS and websites and the Internet as a whole, it will just pop up an underground market of "fake IDs" or hacks to get past it.

[–] godsammitdam@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Absolutely we would, we're paying attention. Most people aren't.

What I worry about is the longterm effects. Look at children who have grown up with iphones. Most of them don't know that other apps exist outside of their locked down appstore.

What scares me is the normalization through the generations of the surveillance state. Remember what we used to call spyware? I'd hazard a guess that basically every corporate application could be classified as spyware given the amount of data they collect on a user. But we've largely stopped using the term.

Chrome is spyware, but if you called it that you'd be met with "bro, what? It's a browser" or even worse "so? I need it to access the internet"

[–] Colonel_Panic_@eviltoast.org 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Same with Flock and Ring and all the smartphone apps with location access we carry around all day.

We've slowly given away every last shred of privacy and have no increased security or happiness from it. In fact I believe our safety and security is FAR worse under mass surveillance than if we simply "did nothing". Surveillance and police and punishment do not really stop crime or help protect anyone, it just opens up dozens of other avenues for harm.

Also, I don't know about you guys, but I feel icky being out in public now. I'm so painfully aware that I'm being filmed from 15 different angles as I walk or drive or do anything, I feel like I'm being stalked and it's creepy.

[–] godsammitdam@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

This is why my glasses now have an IR blocking coating to interrupt facial recognition somewhat.

Not that they don't have gait tracking or other methods 🙃

Time to start a new fashion trend. Algorithm scrambling cloaks and trench coats lol. Welcome to the bladerunner/cyberpunk era.

[–] Colonel_Panic_@eviltoast.org 2 points 2 days ago

Even better idea for a new fashion trend. Cans of black spray paint and paintball gun accessories, with a cute little strap. And if a few cameras get accidentally blinded well that's just the price we are willing to pay to slay.

[–] SaneMartigan@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

I expect I'll need a phone that I turn on from time to time that's got all my details logged so I can access things like banking and tax.

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago (4 children)

My inbox is flooded with doomsayers and fear mongering about how they're going to kill Linux because of this and no matter how hard I tried to convince them that it would be physically impossible to enforce such a law/rule on open source software they just wouldn't listen.

Looks like the blokes in calif had to eat a lot of truth to come to this decision.

O, before you comment I am fully expecting more doomsayers. So please enlighten me.

[–] Colonel_Panic_@eviltoast.org 4 points 3 days ago

A future Linux install prompt: "Which state do you live?"

Everyone: Why, "California", of course. Glad you asked.

There's no way to enforce age verification, like on websites or closed software, in even normal circumstances, but if it's open source or offline how could you even begin to attempt it? It's so silly.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 days ago

People often give into FUD extremely easily for some reason.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Miller@lemmy.world 12 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I would not accuse the legislators of any decency of thought only that open source would be far harder to police due to its more nebulous and intermingled path to the client with far less money at the end of it.

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

There may have also been some big money lobbyists from companies like Google, Amazon, etc, that pointed out how much money it would have cost their poor shareholders to implement.

[–] Miller@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago

The entire dynamic is off somehow, so age verification is for the safety of children but won't be implemented on some platforms for reasons that are by extension more pressing than child safety, as if such reasons might exist. It is almost like age verification is actually nothing to do with child safety.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] goatinspace@feddit.org 8 points 5 days ago
[–] njordomir@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I haven't heard anyone saying they want to take this to a referendum in Colorado. If we collect enough signatures, the bill has to go on the November ballot and we can collectively vote it down as a state. Even if we lose, it might buy us time.

Why is no one talking about this? Why is there no info about anyone doing anything right now? All I see are daily threads about how we should do something.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›