Live data from Hacker News

Ageless Linux – Software for humans of indeterminate age

agelesslinux.org

141–150 of 671 posts

Re: Ageless Linux – Software for humans of indeterminate age

#142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Controlling what children do online is a solved problem: Parenting and parental control applications. This is absolutely not true. Here in the UK schools are swarming with ipads and shit like that. They're given to primary school children because they're "more engaging". Children are supposed to practice their reading and even handwriting[1] on ipads. Naturally they're on youtube instead. It's really bad. As far as…

>> > Controlling what children do online is a solved problem: Parenting and parental control applications. > This is absolutely not true.Here in the UK schools are swarming with ipads and shit like that. They're given to primary school children because they're "more engaging". Children are supposed to practice their reading and even handwriting on ipads. Naturally they're on youtube instead. It's really bad. And how…

> Those school ipads could also have YouTube locked or restricted to a whitelist of channels.

There's so much wrong here.

A) there's ways around that stuff that any child can figure out.

B) schools aren't in fact obligated to enable those, and some don't.

C) who decides on what channels are allowed? The school does. But teachers are basically people off the street that did some basic training and (from my experience) have zero critical thinking. This are not the best and brightest.

D) big tech will tell you "this is age appropriate" and the only thing that means is that you probably won't see porn. Anything else, including gambling ads on youtube, you do see.

You see, you're trying to discuss the specifics which in this case is a losing approach if your goal is to protect your chidlren from being victimized by the attention economy. The reason is that those benefiting from the attention economy have more lawyers and more engineers to deploy than any individual parent.

Re: Ageless Linux – Software for humans of indeterminate age

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They argue that they are a coverd application store. 'Definition: "Covered Application Store" '"Covered application store" means a publicly available internet website, software application, online service, or platform that distributes and facilitates the download of applications from third-party developers to users of a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device that can access a covered…

Yes, I know that. I'm saying this is utterly futile and if they really wanted to accomplish something they'd structure themselves as I described above. If their goal is to highlight the absurdity of the law... they won't actually accomplish anything. The Attorney General is not going to magically decide this was a terrible idea and reverse course. If they want to change the law then this isn't the way to do it either…

Generally the point is for these things to go to court to be struck down or otherwise limited. This is a valid and regularly used means to change the law. You seem to think that you are aware of how the legislations definition will be applied, but that is not known until these things are taken to court.

Re: Ageless Linux – Software for humans of indeterminate age

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Milei is a libertarian, and would be very opposed to such a thing.

Running as a libertarian, and governing as a libertarian, are two entirely different things.

He has been doing pretty well so far.

Re: Ageless Linux – Software for humans of indeterminate age

#145

There is no way that this will happen on any Linux box that I use. And this is why I'm an enemy of device attestation and the requirement to register operating systems in the first place, no matter whether it is Apple or Microsoft.

Once the new Poettering startup took off you won't get any choice. SCNR.

Re: Ageless Linux – Software for humans of indeterminate age

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> > Controlling what children do online is a solved problem: Parenting and parental control applications. > This is absolutely not true.Here in the UK schools are swarming with ipads and shit like that. They're given to primary school children because they're "more engaging". Children are supposed to practice their reading and even handwriting on ipads. Naturally they're on youtube instead. It's really bad. And how…

> Those school ipads could also have YouTube locked or restricted to a whitelist of channels. There's so much wrong here. A) there's ways around that stuff that any child can figure out. B) schools aren't in fact obligated to enable those, and some don't. C) who decides on what channels are allowed? The school does. But teachers are basically people off the street that did some basic training and (from my experience)…

>A) there's ways around that stuff that any child can figure out.

No, there are not for hardware locked devices with the proper controls (what apps, websites, etc to allow).

>B) schools aren't in fact obligated to enable those, and some don't.

The technical problem is solved, if they don't want to implement the solution that's on them.

>C) who decides on what channels are allowed? The school does. But teachers are basically people off the street that did some basic training and (from my experience) have zero critical thinking. This are not the best and brightest.

Again, irrelevant. A common policy can be created (e.g. by ministry of education experts) and shared with schools.

Re: Ageless Linux – Software for humans of indeterminate age

#147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I am just saying what policy will allow the legislators to achieve their goals. So if your goal is for the state to decide what is good or bad for children, then yes, giving parents fines when their children access 18+ content will motivate those parents to parent their children. That will be an effective way to achieve your goal. Other policies have issues with externalities (ignoring the inherent externalities…

> ...giving parents fines when their children access 18+ content will motivate those parents to parent their children. And, like most such policies, will disproportionately impact the working poor.

All regulations, because they cause increased costs, will affect the poor the most, since an increased cost will cause the marginal consumer/producer to become submarginal. That is the choice that is made when regulation is enacted, whether the regulatora recognize this fact or not.

Re: Ageless Linux – Software for humans of indeterminate age

#148
post #14

Something remarkable and unsettling is how the age verification debate has popped up almost simultaneously in the US, UK, and EU. With the same logical fallacies. Pretty telling about how transnational lobbies and their interests work. Controlling what children do online is a solved problem: Parenting and parental control applications.

Not sure when exactly that happen but decade years ago or so, people were sharing this spoofed infographic in which the Internet was a cable tv-like service where you'd pick big media sites you'd subscribe to, IPTV/streaming, optional secondary sites - all of this curated and safe, free of any dangers. No lewd content whatsoever.

And honestly, I can't get rid of the feeling that this is where we're heading into. These are last years of the wild Internet and its next iteration will be passive and probably in 99% generated corporate safe slop.

Re: Ageless Linux – Software for humans of indeterminate age

#149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not if you’ve paid attention to political trends for the last 15 years. Everything is happening at the same time in every country. It’s clearly being coordinated.

The simpler explanation is that we live in a world that is more connected than ever so politicians, campaigners and the rest can get policy ideas almost instantly. There is no grand conspiracy, just a smaller world.

More than one thing can be true.

Re: Ageless Linux – Software for humans of indeterminate age

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Average Joe is happy to give away a photo of his ID. I don't think this is actually true. Discord walked back its implementation of global age verification for now because it was protested so heavily. Governments can get away with mandating ID for porn sites and Average Joe will not make a ruckus about it because it's a shameful/embarrassing topic they would rather sweep under the rug, but I don't think Average Joe…

Discord's still doing it, they just delayed it and will supposedly be offering other verification options. They still amount to identity verification, and the noose will be tightened over time.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN