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

Illinois just passed a law that puts Linux on the hook for age verification

linuxstans.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 569 posts

Re: Illinois just passed a law that puts Linux on the hook for age verification

#181

Post by marak830 »

xp84 wrote: post #161
graceful6800 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're actually designed quite well for the intended purpose: mass surveillance and suppression of speech. Don't ever for one second pretend this is about anything else.

Why then did this completely leave out verification? Parents want and accept the out-of-box declaration idea. It requires no ID, no face scans, no "ID dot ME" or whatever. As parents we are more than able to open the box before giving our kids a laptop or phone and entering their DOB, and also able to see with our own eyes if the kid suddenly turns up with a second cell phone that they bought and configured as an adu…

I would argue the reason is so people can make arguments like yours.

Step 1: get easily passed, simple looking laws passed to 'protect the children' Step 2: 'oh look at all these people bypassing the law. It's so simple for a child to watch porn with this.' Step 3: increase the requirements bit by bit on the verification

By letting something simple pass, they can claim it's not thst bad, and anyone who argues against it is being hyperbolic.

Re: Illinois just passed a law that puts Linux on the hook for age verification

#182

Post by JoshTriplett »

terribleperson wrote: post #153
mosura wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a technical ratchet. Once you accept part of the implementation it will never be undone, more will be added.

I don't think this is a safe assumption. As a counter, actual age verification is being rolled out in other places. I really don't think we're in a position of choosing between no age-based access mechanism, and age-based access mechanism. Between the anti-porn types and public demand for some kind of regulations on social media, regulation of some kind is inevitable. Our actual choice may only be what type of restri…

> I really don't think we're in a position of choosing between no age-based access mechanism, and age-based access mechanism.

It is impossible to win a battle you stop fighting.

Re: Illinois just passed a law that puts Linux on the hook for age verification

#183

Post by RealWed5 »

TL;DR: learn how to live without computers.

This will end Linux as end user OS, it will stay only in Cloud and containers. Arguably, the goal here is to destroy home PC altogether. maximum we will be allowed is a laptop with endpoint verification and mandatory touch ID, locked boot and non-replaceable hardware. If you think Linux is the end of it – think again. The same crap will be implemented in BIOS/UEFI, on "HW management" level. Essentially, your bare HW only laptop will not even start without you touching fingerprint sensor and allowing it to "validate your age" against – of course government approved – HW manufacturer.

Same with smart phones – it's already here, if you tried to activate iPhone.

And projects like Open/Free BSDs? Government will sure their leaders happily retire and ... well, the community will just "die" naturally.

Re: Illinois just passed a law that puts Linux on the hook for age verification

#184

Post by otterley »

cogman10 wrote: post #159
otterley wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's constitutional case law that there's an implicit right to privacy in the constitution. Constitutional scholar here! I mean, yes, that's true in a very general sense, but no court has held that age verification to gain access to a service, or even a device, is unlawful in practice.

Novice, but I'd argue that Dobbs has seriously eroded that case law. The right to privacy used to be pretty settled law, but now the foundation of that settled law is on sandy ground.

It was never really all that settled, IMO. Roe v. Wade (which is now dead) was built on a pretty shaky foundation that was inspired by emanations of privacy rights like the Fifth Amendment, in the absence of clear Constitutional language that made a privacy right explicit.

Re: Illinois just passed a law that puts Linux on the hook for age verification

#185

Post by throw0101d »

kej wrote: post #58

I feel like all of these laws are being designed backwards. Content providers, like MPAA films, should have to identify what sort of content they are providing. Then I can give my kids a device configured to allow some or all of that at my discretion. Requiring my kids' devices to advertise their age (or their age "bucket", as if that was a meaningful difference) to protect them is not doing me or my kids any favors.

> I feel like all of these laws are being designed backwards. Content providers, like MPAA films, should have to identify what sort of content they are providing. Then I can give my kids a device configured to allow some or all of that at my discretion.

This was tried in the past:

* https://www.w3.org/2007/powder/

* https://www.w3.org/PICS/

Re: Illinois just passed a law that puts Linux on the hook for age verification

#186

Post by username135 »

lrvick wrote: post #89

Linux distro founder here (stagex) I will never be compelled to implement this, and would never merge it. Every release requires quorum signatures by an international maintainer team, and the distro is designed to work offline-first, with some variants not even supporting network drivers in the kernel, so Illinois legislators can eat shit.

i like the cut of your jib

Re: Illinois just passed a law that puts Linux on the hook for age verification

#187

Post by wtallis »

spullara wrote: post #85
delecti wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any choice of what content to display is an algorithm. Maybe they want a simple or easily explainable algorithm? Phrases can have meanings beyond just a naive combination of the words in them. And indeed "algorithmic feed" in the bill means what what we all understand that term to mean when we aren't paralyzed by pedantry. > Under the law, [...] these users will only be shown content they request or search for or t…

Algorithmic feeds are just search algorithms based on what the user is asking to see with their behavior.

I think it's pretty obvious that your explanation cannot be complete or accurate. Algorithmic feeds usually have a strong influence of what they want to show you, commonly pushing stuff you aren't interested in, or anything that will keep you on their app/site longer so they have more opportunities to show you ads. There are strong conflicts of interest here.

Re: Illinois just passed a law that puts Linux on the hook for age verification

#188

Post by otterley »

blurbleblurble wrote: post #174
otterley wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of remedies available to a court with respect to a recalcitrant party, ranging from an injunction to remove your product from the market to fines and imprisonment. Again, speak with your attorney. Do not try to "hack the law" yourself; many who have tried have regretted it later.

Or maybe we're at the point where we'll go to prison because of unjust laws.

You first!

Re: Illinois just passed a law that puts Linux on the hook for age verification

#190

Post by quotemstr »

xp84 wrote: post #151
kej wrote: post #58

I feel like all of these laws are being designed backwards. Content providers, like MPAA films, should have to identify what sort of content they are providing. Then I can give my kids a device configured to allow some or all of that at my discretion. Requiring my kids' devices to advertise their age (or their age "bucket", as if that was a meaningful difference) to protect them is not doing me or my kids any favors.

Did you read the law? It actually imposes very (in my humble opinion) good rules on the content providers, specifically social media. We know why social media is addictive - the personalized feeds are highly optimized to extend usage time, with no amount of time being "good enough." Social media sites would be banned from using this type of feed, limiting it to feeds of content you've subscribed to or requested only.…

Controlling my information consumption is not a legitimate function of the state. If algorithmic feeds get a lot of use, it's because people like them. Is that so hard to comprehend? That your preferences are not universal? And that you shouldn't use the government to bludgeon people into accepting the kind of information feed you, personally, would prefer for them? What gives you the right to do so?

What you calling "addictive" is just revealed preferences of the populace.

Post reply on HN