Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 525 posts

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#211

Post by thesmtsolver2 »

Aurornis wrote: post #179
thesmtsolver2 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation for this claim? Searching lands on this page without any citations and seems AI generated slop: https://captaincompliance.com/education/meta-is-spending-2-b...

There was an AI generated slop report posted to Reddit that went viral. It even got some news coverage before anyone stopped to read the files and discover that it was gibberish. I still get downvoted for pointing it out and trying to ground the conversation in facts. As you noticed the story continues to thrive on bad news sites and social media.

> I still get downvoted for pointing it out and trying to ground the conversation in facts.

That seems right for current-day HN lol. I got downvoted for pointing out obvious inaccuracies in another comment.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#212

Post by jonathantf2 »

lazyasciiart wrote: post #60
Bender wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google and others can adapt. RTA header? Added to potential adult or user-contributed category.

Right, no news sites for kids.

There are news sites tailored for kids, like BBC Newsround (https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround)

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#213

Post by mmooss »

tangotaylor wrote: post #197
trollbridge wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kind of interesting - basically exempts any OS that’s under an MIT or GPL licence… … doesn’t that excuse Android and possibly XNU, too?

This is a potential loophole. Companies could have an "open source" OS but restrict installations like Tivo did in the 2000s (i.e. "Tivoization"). Or they could allow installation of modified software but restrict functionality like the way the Google Play Integrity API can nerf apps running on custom builds of Android. Or, they can have a license like the Business Source License where you can copy, redistribute, and…

That's great, thank you.

> copy, redistribute, and modify the software

Shouldn't that specify the code not or not only the software? For example, the corporate Windows license allows the corporation to copy, redistribute (internally), and modify (via group policy, APIs, or development on the Windows platform) the software. The big difference between that and Linux is licensees can't access the code. FOSS requires free access to, use of, modification of, and redistribution of the code.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#214

Post by mmooss »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #113

Parental controls should be a client side option set by the user. Sure, make it easy for users to do so, but it's a users choice. Kids don't buy phones or computers, their parents do, and during initial setup, parents could choose "this pc is used by a child" option, input some override password to disable this in the future, and the phone could block whatever needs to be blocked.

> Kids don't buy phones or computers, their parents do

It wouldn't take much for a kid to buy a phone or computer.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#215

Post by sometimelurker »

oceansky wrote: post #111
neilv wrote: post #32

Who is actually writing this very concerning California Internet legislation, which will ultimately affect the entire nation and world? Did someone write California Internet legislation without consulting any California Internet companies? Did some California Internet companies write California Internet legislation? Did some other party write California Internet legislation?

Meta alone spent 2 billion dollars lobbying for this worldwide, and it was a massive success, it's passing everywhere unanimously.

give source

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#216

Post by gsich »

lxe wrote: post #183
Bender wrote: post #3

The only device mandates that should be taking place is for the default installations of web clients should be checking to see if parental controls are enabled. This only impacts the major browsers. An intern at each browser company could add this check in minutes. If they are enabled and the person logged in is on a regular account (not admin or power user of sorts) then the base installation of web clients must che…

Bold of you to assume that lawmakers have any common sense when it comes to technology legislation. It could have taken 3 interns 3 hours at each browser company to implement a cookie consent standard 15 years ago, yet here we are in cookie banner hell.

DNT exists, not even that is honored by websites. There is no need for a cookie banner for technical cookies.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#217

Post by burnte »

throwawayqqq11 wrote: post #150
burnte wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is correct. It is not the government's job to raise our children. The more we ask the gov't to do that we should do, the less power we actually have. Some will say this ship has sailed, well, I say it's not too late to sink it.

I am sick of these "government bad" takes. They lack constructive suggestions, like your "sink it" nugget, they lack decent problem descriptions, as if anything after the sinking (likely private governance, aka feudalism) is immune to the ills of big-gov, and on top perpetuate reductivist arguments as if any kind of restrictions of freedom is by definition bad. This broad rejection without good reasons is borderline…

I am categorically not a "government bad" person. There are things that only government can do to help society and it's an important institution. However government shouldn't take over things in your household. I feel for the government to do a thing it should have to demonstrate that the state has an defensible interest. Gay marriage? Gov't has no business in marriage. Gov't demanding age checks in apps or in electronics? No, gov't doesn't need that.

> like your "sink it" nugget, they lack decent problem descriptions

Let me be clearer then: The legislation has passed but it is 100% possible to repeal that law. And it should be repealed, and we need to not let up pressure on California until it is rescinded. It was a bad law that was not thought out at all and fails to solve any problems.

I'm not worries about corporate feudalism and app age checks.

I'm not sociopathic, you're just making broad assumptions.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#218

Post by grim_io »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #98
grim_io wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you can't. Like no past generation could stop their kids.

> no past generation could stop their kids Past generations absolutely protected their kids from cigarettes and alcohol. A gate doesn’t have to be 100% effective to have net benefits.

I'm not saying parents shouldn't try.

But like your examples, it's not guaranteed to work.

Install a DNS filter. Firefox circumvented that? Smart kid :)

Censorship circumvention might be a good skill to have in the near future.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#219

Post by lokar »

xoa wrote: post #168
codedokode wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the header/metatag is designed poorly. The RTA proposal is that every operator of every site must verify the content and add the header to mark the site as "safe" or "unsafe". This is unnecessary burden that they have to bear if this proposal is given a green light and this is wrong. Instead, the default should be, that if there is no header or it cannot be parsed, then the content is unsafe. And if there is…

Yes, exactly, this should be really simple as a foundation: by default the Internet is for adults. All of it. Where it's desirable for things to be available for kids, create the economic incentive and easy tools for parents to use and run on a white list, not a black list. I'd actually go somewhat further though and ask whether it's a good idea to even do this via web pages at all. We have a great potential system f…

I think it really needs to be per-page.

And, if we are going to do this the “design” should be global and anticipate a range of cultures.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#220

Post by lokar »

codedokode wrote: post #138
Bender wrote: post #3

The only device mandates that should be taking place is for the default installations of web clients should be checking to see if parental controls are enabled. This only impacts the major browsers. An intern at each browser company could add this check in minutes. If they are enabled and the person logged in is on a regular account (not admin or power user of sorts) then the base installation of web clients must che…

I think the header/metatag is designed poorly. The RTA proposal is that every operator of every site must verify the content and add the header to mark the site as "safe" or "unsafe". This is unnecessary burden that they have to bear if this proposal is given a green light and this is wrong. Instead, the default should be, that if there is no header or it cannot be parsed, then the content is unsafe. And if there is…

The page having a simple rating assumes there can be one mapping from content to rating for the whole world. I doubt we can even have one for North America and Europe.
Post reply on HN