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

321–330 of 525 posts

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

#321

Post by idiotsecant »

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…

You make the mistake of solving the stated problem, and not the actual problem. This was never about children, or a solution like what you describe would be trivial.

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

#322

Post by soraminazuki »

forgetfreeman wrote: post #173
Aerroon wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

Enabling government spying under the guise of "protecting children" doesn't put private industry in check one bit.

It's like saying we should install Flock cameras everywhere so that we can protect consumers from buying harmful products. Corruption and mass-violation of human rights is all that's ever going to come out of it.

If the goal is to stop predatory companies, why not do so? Oh right, because that was never the goal.

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

#323

Post by pibaker »

givemeethekeys wrote: post #52

Okay, let's flip it: why would Apple, Microsoft, etc.. agree with such a law? What would the trickle down be for browser makers and website creators?

It's a classic case of regulatory capture. Only the biggest players can get away with fully implementing age verification — if Microsoft requires age verification to use its OS, most people will oblige. If HN starts doing that most people will probably just log off forever.

What is maddening is how often people think such laws are about limiting the influence of "big tech." Big tech isn't going anywhere because of these laws, you are.

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

#324

Post by inetknght »

wtallis wrote: post #320
pwg wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 .

> Nobody's microwave oven has an app store.

Meanwhile, Samsung refrigerators can have an app store.

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

#325

Post by coryrc »

in_cahoots wrote: post #269
coryrc wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have that backward. The home-educated typically score 15 to 25 percentile points above public-school students on standardized academic achievement tests. -- https://nheri.org/research-facts-on-homeschooling/#Academic

I read one of those papers. Only between 10% and 25% of homeschool families completed the test. And that's of families that could be located because they had previously interacted with major homeschool testing companies; there isn't a national list of homeschooled kids and many parents homeschool precisely to avoid standardized testing. Plus in many cases the parents were the proctors. This is hardly a robust finding…

Thanks for investigating deeper than I did. I don't know where else to look. However, unlike the post I originally replied to, every homeschooled adult I know is doing better than average, but anecdote vs anecdote isn't helping.

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

#326

Post by unparagoned »

jwitthuhn wrote: post #128
anigbrowl wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LEarn to take a win as a win. People who are unable to look at anything without seeing themselves being scammed are clinically paranoid.

It is an admission from the writers that this law is unrelated to safety and people should very loudly and frequently point that out. If OSes that don't verify the age of their users are a genuinely unsafe for children, why should they be allowed just because they are open source? That doesn't seem to mitigate dangers associated with age in any away I can identify.

I think it just means that people using those OS simply won’t be able to access adult content.

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

#327

Post by thesmtsolver2 »

oceansky wrote: post #227
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...

https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rshc1f/i_traced_2_b...

The link doesn't show what you think it shows.

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

#329

Post by pkphilip »

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…

However, this is not about age verification or protecting children. That is just the excuse they are using.

If Meta, Google etc could easily have algorithms in place for determining the age of the person seeing the video - apart from having the override capability via a parental login as you have stated.. but these platforms have consistently refused to limit the type of content they are showing to children.

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

#330

Post by SoftTalker »

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.

Tech companies could have headed off this legislation 15 years ago by just solving the problem as Bender suggested. But they wanted to pretend they had no social responsibility to not deliver filth to children, and so now the legislators are involved and they get to deal with that. I have no sympathy.
Post reply on HN