Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
1–10 of 227 posts
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#2We have got to do something about the bad powerful people!
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#3I think it’s more that they have no idea that Linux exists, or headless operating systems used on servers and embedded devices. They are trying to legislate based on the experience of having an iPhone.
FOSS (and frankly all systems that don’t use walled garden commercial app stores) should be exempted from this, at a minimum.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#4This headline is misleading. The California law requires that the OS store and provide the age bracket. It does not require that any verification take place.
I am not arguing that this is a good idea, but it is simply false that the law requires that Linux 'check kids' IDs before booting'.
The New York law is worse, and should be opposed, but the article only mentions it at the end - and even then, we actually don't know what the verification mechanism would be. I've heard a proposal that "age verification passes" be sold at liqour stores and porno shops, for example, who already seem to do an acceptable job of checking ID without destroying people's privacy.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#5I think it’s more that they have no idea that Linux exists, or headless operating systems used on servers and embedded devices. They are trying to legislate based on the experience of having an iPhone. FOSS (and frankly all systems that don’t use walled garden commercial app stores) should be exempted from this, at a minimum.
Or maybe the likes of MS lobbied for this because it suits them.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#6This headline is misleading. The California law requires that the OS store and provide the age bracket. It does not require that any verification take place. I am not arguing that this is a good idea, but it is simply false that the law requires that Linux 'check kids' IDs before booting'. The New York law is worse, and should be opposed, but the article only mentions it at the end - and even then, we actually don't…
Sure the headline is misleading.
But anyone from 10 miles away could see what's going to happen next.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#7I think it’s more that they have no idea that Linux exists, or headless operating systems used on servers and embedded devices. They are trying to legislate based on the experience of having an iPhone. FOSS (and frankly all systems that don’t use walled garden commercial app stores) should be exempted from this, at a minimum.
Or maybe the likes of MS lobbied for this because it suits them.
If it’s like the Illinois one, all of tech are probably behind them, because these shift age verification away from service providers to a self-reported age bracket at the OS level.
It’s much safer than what some idiotic states are doing (like upload your photo id to services where it gets stolen).
The idea is a parent or guardian is probably setting up a device. They make a user account for their kid and specify a user age. The OS then can supply one of four age brackets to service providers.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#8This headline is misleading. The California law requires that the OS store and provide the age bracket. It does not require that any verification take place. I am not arguing that this is a good idea, but it is simply false that the law requires that Linux 'check kids' IDs before booting'. The New York law is worse, and should be opposed, but the article only mentions it at the end - and even then, we actually don't…
There is no limit to the power grab. The only acceptable thing to do is to dig the trenches before it gets worse.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#9> The real problem is this hodgepodge of laws; it's the growth of the surveillance state. From voting rights in the United States, facing Trump's Orwellian-named SAVE America Act, to Ring's doggie tracking system that can also be used to follow people, to Trump booting Anthropic to the side for refusing to allow its AI tools to be used for mass surveillance, privacy is on the decline.
I understand it is popular to pick on the current administration, and there are plenty of rightful reasons to, but let's not forget this has been happening way before either of Trump's terms (see: KYC laws). The only difference between then and now is that current administration has essentially taken a mask-off approach, so we get to see this discussion finally brought up by mainstream media outlets.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#10This headline is misleading. The California law requires that the OS store and provide the age bracket. It does not require that any verification take place. I am not arguing that this is a good idea, but it is simply false that the law requires that Linux 'check kids' IDs before booting'. The New York law is worse, and should be opposed, but the article only mentions it at the end - and even then, we actually don't…
When we are installing docker repositories on my Rockylinux installation on 100 nodes at once, should we need to manually put an age of the person who is running the script somewhere in the process? Will docker be forced to prevent me from downloading its packages if I do not transmit the age in a header?