Live data from Hacker News

GrapheneOS refuses to comply with new age verification laws for operating system

tomshardware.com

101–110 of 171 posts

Re: GrapheneOS refuses to comply with new age verification laws for operating system

#101
post #25

In the meantime systemd already added handling for Age to the system bus. Next step is to add your race, then income, then who you voted for...

Nit: introducing a user account field is not the same as the system bus. It’s in ~/.identity and might be absent altogether.

Re: GrapheneOS refuses to comply with new age verification laws for operating system

#102
post #54

Age verification at the OS level makes no sense to me. Most households aren't going to have a separate device for every family member and so you will end up with a tablet or computer set up by one of the parents (and thus having their age stored) that will be used by both parents and children. Likewise, people generally won't create a separate account for every potential user.

What are you talking about, most households give personal phones to their children, especially teenagers. Laptops aren't rare either.

Most CA households may be, but obviously not everywhere

Re: GrapheneOS refuses to comply with new age verification laws for operating system

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apps requesting an age is not extraneous and there are many legal and safety reasons why an app may collect this information. If the operating system doesn't do it you run into the cookie banner situation where every individual site has to implement a dialog box asking the user instead of there being a standardized way to do it.

Except the cookie banners are also optional, unless you're using third-party services to collect that data. Don't blame the cookie banner, blame the dozens or hundreds of "partners" that site is using to "process" your data, blame the site owner for building such a travesty of a page that they have so many "partners" in the mix harvesting extraneous info unnecessary for basic functionality instead of building a bette…

So is an app needing the age of the user. That doesn't mean there are not a bunch of people who will collect the information. It's like saying washing your hands before cooking food is optional and that people should blame restaurants for serving food. It's not a serious suggestion. Restaurants will continue with the business model of exchanging food for money and websites will continue with the business model of showing ads. These kinds of businesses will exist forever.

Re: GrapheneOS refuses to comply with new age verification laws for operating system

#107

Age verification at the OS level makes no sense to me. Most households aren't going to have a separate device for every family member and so you will end up with a tablet or computer set up by one of the parents (and thus having their age stored) that will be used by both parents and children. Likewise, people generally won't create a separate account for every potential user.

> Age verification at the OS level makes no sense to me. it's the only form of "age verification" which can be done in a somewhat privacy respecting way (as in at most leak the age) the idea is to "bounce back" the "is old enough" decision to parent controls and let the parent choose (the Californian law doesn't quite do that perfectly, but goes into that direction) and if you sell what is more or less a general purp…

Or just not have it at all? What is wrong with parental controls AND parenting? What real issue does this solve?

Re: GrapheneOS refuses to comply with new age verification laws for operating system

#108

Age verification at the OS level makes no sense to me. Most households aren't going to have a separate device for every family member and so you will end up with a tablet or computer set up by one of the parents (and thus having their age stored) that will be used by both parents and children. Likewise, people generally won't create a separate account for every potential user.

> Age verification at the OS level makes no sense to me. it's the only form of "age verification" which can be done in a somewhat privacy respecting way (as in at most leak the age) the idea is to "bounce back" the "is old enough" decision to parent controls and let the parent choose (the Californian law doesn't quite do that perfectly, but goes into that direction) and if you sell what is more or less a general purp…

That's why Meta paid for these os-based age identification laws[1], shifting the responsibility from itself onto the app stores. I agree it's probably preferable to do it on device instead of every website implementing an id check through shady as fuck[2] third parties like Persona. This whole thing is just such a mess though, people rightfully distrust everybody involved, all these bought and paid-for politicians. All of a sudden we have the same laws popping up all over the place, US, UK, Australia, Brazil, ... Nobody, not a single person involved gives a fuck about child safety. It's different billion dollar lobbies fighting amongst each other, each with different monetary incentives.

You know what they should do? They should scrap it all, no more "child safety" laws until we kicked money out of politics. Western liberal democracy is in a corruption and legitimacy crisis, this is just it's latest symptom.

[1] https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/reddit-user-uncovers-beh...

[2] https://cybernews.com/privacy/persona-leak-exposes-global-su...

Re: GrapheneOS refuses to comply with new age verification laws for operating system

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Age verification at the OS level makes no sense to me. it's the only form of "age verification" which can be done in a somewhat privacy respecting way (as in at most leak the age) the idea is to "bounce back" the "is old enough" decision to parent controls and let the parent choose (the Californian law doesn't quite do that perfectly, but goes into that direction) and if you sell what is more or less a general purp…

Or just not have it at all? What is wrong with parental controls AND parenting? What real issue does this solve?

What is wrong with parental controls AND parenting?

Nothing. This has never been about protection of children. It is tracking real identity from every source to every destination otherwise known as user-tracking. If this was about protecting children they would require an RTA header on all adult and user-generated content sites and require the most common user agents to look for that header if parental controls are enabled. No tracking, no uploading anything. [1] Sufficient for small children which is more than we have now or will ever have thanks to corporate greed and lobbying.

[1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46152074

Re: GrapheneOS refuses to comply with new age verification laws for operating system

#110

Age verification at the OS level makes no sense to me. Most households aren't going to have a separate device for every family member and so you will end up with a tablet or computer set up by one of the parents (and thus having their age stored) that will be used by both parents and children. Likewise, people generally won't create a separate account for every potential user.

Every semi competent os has suppoert for multiple users
Post reply on HN