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

311–320 of 525 posts

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

#311

Post by iamnothere »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #294
iamnothere wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should books require an age rating? What about spoken words? What makes online speech different, from the perspective of the Constitution that limits the power of the state?

The difference is one of redressing a concrete dysfunction. Libraries or the local bookstore or whoever aren't trying to sneak into your home, onto your child's school bus, into your child's classroom, while pushing various extremist publications purely for their own profit (ie "engagement"). We do in fact have zoning laws - I can't inadvertently encounter a strip club in a quiet residential area. Meanwhile it's comm…

Impressums cannot be required in the US, once again thanks to that pesky First Amendment. You may be mixing us up with Germany.

Mandates on how speech must be structured are a violation of freedom of speech, Constitutionally speaking.

“Redressing a concrete dysfunction” does not appear in the Constitution as an exemption to guaranteed rights, as far as I am aware. The proper remedy for this kind of problem is an Amendment, assuming you can get enough people to agree with your assessment.

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

#312

Post by kelnos »

iamalizard wrote: post #152
infinitezest wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't there laws against selling tobacco to minors? And advertising to them? Your analogy is supporting the opposite conclusion.

In some countries they scan you ID and likely keep it some database when you buy drugs or enter bars or clubs. In others they just look at your ID card if you don't look old enough. The first example is bad, the second is tolerable. But the reason most kids don't smoke is that the parents and the teachers instilled in them that it was bad. If a kid wants to smoke or drink, they can surely get an older friend or a fri…

> But the reason most kids don't smoke is that the parents and the teachers instilled in them that it was bad.

Big honking "citation needed" there. I think it's far more likely that laws against advertising to minors, and tightening enforcement of prohibiting the sale to minors, is what did it.

On top of it all, smoking has decreased among adults too. Part of that is certainly cutting off a big chunk of the teen-to-adult smoking pipeline, but part of it is also just that adults don't think it's so cool anymore (and "going out for a smoke" is no longer a social or even professional activity), and are more aware of the health risks.

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

#313

Post by stouset »

dpkirchner wrote: post #283
stouset wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody here disagrees. What should be the case is that sites are broadly required to flag what kind of content they serve so parents can choose to exercise their own level of desired control.

Surely parents can look at the sites and decide for themselves whether or not they are suitable.

I am certain that with even two minutes of thought you can understand why this makes zero sense.

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

#314

Post by paulddraper »

iamnothere wrote: post #287
fc417fc802 wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with your proposal is that it's already the status quo. Various whitelists exist but service operators don't generally bother with these things. What you end up with is a largely unusable experience if you enable whitelist filtering. The core problem is the lack of buy in. Unfortunately that likely needs to be forced. I think it's not unreasonable to legally require people to make a claim about the nature…

Should books require an age rating? What about spoken words? What makes online speech different, from the perspective of the Constitution that limits the power of the state?

You are correct.

Also, FWIW, 18 U.S.C. § 2257 applies to printed books as well as online content.

But pure text literature (physical or online) isn't as regulated as visual media.

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

#315

Post by daemin »

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.

Cookie banners exist because it is a dark pattern companies use to get you to opt into marketing cookies by making the easiest thing the worst choice.

This could all be handled by settings in the browser, only if the sites themselves listened to the users' browser preferences.

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

#316

Post by kqp »

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.

This is misinformation stemming from disinformation propagated by organized industry retaliation to the law. Cookie banners are not and never have been required by law, they are intentional harassment designed to make users oppose laws that actually just say “you may not track users without their consent”. A good faith implementation would be simply nothing, because no explicit consent is required when you’re actually using cookies for honest purposes.

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

#317

Post by lokar »

l72 wrote: post #266
lokar wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That’s like saying movies should have to rate every scene so a 7 year old can watch the “safe” parts of an R movie? If a site is really mixing so much content (like Reddit) then they should really be separating their sites into different subdomains.

For every different counties rating system? What about Wikipedia?

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

#318

Post by CJefferson »

echelon wrote: post #171
codedokode wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it seems that many parents do not bother to do anything to raise their children properly, including setting up parental controls.

Let me be very explicit so we're not dancing around the topic: The potentially all-powerful government shouldn't know: - what vices a person has - what religion a person has or doesn't have - what porn you watch - what alcohol and drugs you buy PERIOD. All of these things can be exploited. To control jobs, to control finances, to extort influence, to shape ideology, etc. The government shouldn't be able to catalog th…

Should a government control the porn a child can walk into a shop and buy? The alcohol and drugs they can work into a shop and buy?

Are you suggesting we remove current laws making it illegal for children to purchase these things?

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

#320

Post by wtallis »

pwg wrote: post #45
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?

If you go take a read through the CA bill text that "became law", you'll quickly realize that whomever did write it must live in a very narrow bubble where the only "computers" that exist in the world are tablet style cell phones, the only OS'es that exist in the world are Android and iOS, and the only way anyone installs any software on the only computers that exist is via an "app store". Meanwhile, while the overal…

> every computer, even the tiny embedded CPU in your microwave oven, might just need to ask your age before it allows you to do anything.

Why do I keep seeing this bullshit exaggeration? It doesn't help anything to make such ridiculous statements. Nobody's microwave oven has an app store.

Post reply on HN