171–180 of 416 posts
My gut reaction to this is that there is something seriously wrong if special clauses are required. Why should open source get special treatment, to me that just highlights that the law is utterly ridiculous.
Why shouldn't open source get special treatment? Public laws should recognize and incentivize public goods.
I'm confused. If I was a kid, I can still get my cigarettes at the Linux store? (By analogy with eastern Europe where age checks are lax.) Or is the idea that the Linux store is not allowed to sell cigarettes anymore?
To use your metaphor, this is saying that a store needs to limit you to the kids section if it is told you are a kid at the door. The exemption here is because a park doesn't have doors to perform this check onto. (PS. I'd hope we were past trying to hamfist physical metaphors to describe the digital landscape. But alas).
Are the gore websites gonna have to ask for ID now? What about 4chan? Or is the whole point to get rid of all that stuff and just get everyone using Facebook instead? (They're the ones who pushed these laws right?)
I'm honestly trying to understand what the big picture is here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, if everyone did everything correctly every time in perpetuity, we wouldn’t need laws. Very astute observation. Unfortunately, things haven’t worked out that way so far.
Oh no, some people are terrible at cooking. Better ban cooking without a license. Giving your neighbor a home baked pie is now a crime unless you're a licensed pastry chef.
Even that might be too much. As you’ve insightfully illustrated, 1 law is a slippery slope to infinite laws. Next thing you know we need a license to toast bread in our own damn toasters.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Precisely. Courts will find that the situation where Linux users are exempt from the law, whereas Windows users have to submit their ID and any other personal data, can not be maintained, so Linux users will also be forced to give up their ID before being able to access the internet. This will also first come via commercial distributions (perhaps it can not be enforced by independent linux users, but the law need not…
Totally agree. After the next big cyber attack, ganna have to kyc to access internet. It will be “for our safety”. Luckily now with ai the world doesn’t need me as a programmer so I’m just ganna stop using computers if they go full facist
So is anyone going to revert the commits that jumped the gun on this? E.g. systemd's birthdate field https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/40954
So is anyone going to revert the commits that jumped the gun on this? E.g. systemd's birthdate field https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/40954
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> now its an internally contradictory horrible law because apparently it isn't important enough to consistently enforce Law is not an abstract code, but an incremental sometimes futile approach to shape society. They only want a way to hold big corporations accountable to exploiting children. They don't actually intend the effects on the consumer, so they tried to fix on easily changeable effect: "Don't worsen the pr…
So what makes kid users on linux so special that they don't need nanny state protection? Are the Californian legislators just throwing them to the wolves? Or are the protections being put in place here not actually important? Seriously, what is the message here supposed to be about the kids using linux? And why are they so different from kids using Windows or Mac? Are there other safety features we can exempt kid lin…
There is a sysadmin (likely the parent), whose responsibility is that already.