I started using Linux when I was in high school. I got my first job years later because I knew my way around Linux much better than other candidates. My OS never tried to track my age to prevent me doing what I wanted. I used to live in one of these places where OSs should report user’s age and I am glad my kid will grow up in one that doesn’t (yet?).
Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
41–50 of 227 posts
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW, there are vanishingly few problems with improper voting in the US, and the extremely unusual occurrences are mostly PartyB voters trying to "counteract" the imaginary PartyA violations. Anyone who tells you differently is lying or ignorant.
If there's no problem w/ improper voting, then why would anyone object to measures intended to verify that the proprieties involved are being followed?
If it were out of genuine concern for verification, those supporting it would want to ensure that all citizens are able to easily, quickly, and cheaply get ID. That is not the case, however.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#43This headline is misleading. The California law requires that the OS store and provide the age bracket. It does not require that any verification take place. I am not arguing that this is a good idea, but it is simply false that the law requires that Linux 'check kids' IDs before booting'. The New York law is worse, and should be opposed, but the article only mentions it at the end - and even then, we actually don't…
When we are installing docker repositories on my Rockylinux installation on 100 nodes at once, should we need to manually put an age of the person who is running the script somewhere in the process? Will docker be forced to prevent me from downloading its packages if I do not transmit the age in a header?
Server sends age rating, and client checks it.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW, there are vanishingly few problems with improper voting in the US, and the extremely unusual occurrences are mostly PartyB voters trying to "counteract" the imaginary PartyA violations. Anyone who tells you differently is lying or ignorant.
If there's no problem w/ improper voting, then why would anyone object to measures intended to verify that the proprieties involved are being followed?
Because 10% of US citizens (legitimate voters) do not have the forms of ID required in these proposed laws, and it can be expensive and time-consuming to get those forms of ID which are not otherwise required for their lives (QED), and they might not do so strictly for voting.
Some people think disenfranchisement is bad. Others see it as useful.
Specifically, PartyB thinks those people with inadequate ID skew toward PartyA voters. This has been the accepted wisdom for decades. So they are incentivized to make it harder for them to vote.
Interestingly though, PartyB might be wrong about the current population. PartyA, and those against disenfranchisement and imaginary crises in general (I count myself in this third group), do not want to blow up centuries of precedent especially if the consequences are likely to be undemocratic and unfair.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
When we are installing docker repositories on my Rockylinux installation on 100 nodes at once, should we need to manually put an age of the person who is running the script somewhere in the process? Will docker be forced to prevent me from downloading its packages if I do not transmit the age in a header?
The California law only stipulates that there's an "accessible interface at account setup" to set the birthday or age at account setup, and an interface to query the age bracket. Plus the crap for "application stores" I don't think it's a very well thought-out law. But realistically this will end up as setting some env variable for your docker containers to assure them that you are 99 years old. And yes, maybe transm…
Gavin said he's open to amending the law. I hope someone's taking him up on that..
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Linux is the kernel, it has nothing to do with this. The law apparently seems to target the packager/distributor of the distribution. Many small distros are hobby distros! > The US is a federal system. It's part of our checks and balances. Nonsensical answer. Different states are passing different requirements that often contradict each other. This is going to be a nightmare. > No one. This is why organizations with…
> Many small distros are hobby distros... Then region lock. You don't have to support California or NY or ... > Different states are passing different requirements that often contradict each other. This is going to be a nightmare Create regional feature flags or region lock. It's a solved problem. > So you’re saying that we should expect those laws too They already de facto exist contractually speaking. > Because bef…
I think it would be better to create a parallel economy of underground unrestricted distributions while encouraging everyone to openly flaunt the law, and simultaneously fighting via lawfare and media. But maybe that’s just me!
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
The California law only stipulates that there's an "accessible interface at account setup" to set the birthday or age at account setup, and an interface to query the age bracket. Plus the crap for "application stores" I don't think it's a very well thought-out law. But realistically this will end up as setting some env variable for your docker containers to assure them that you are 99 years old. And yes, maybe transm…
So once my application is running I can just keep querying an age bracket until it flips and then I've successfully determined a date of birth.
This is a neat attack (in that it is obvious and a big flaw but also it makes sense that the lawmakers wouldn’t have thought of it), but it would only affect users who have an age-bucket transition while your application is running, right?
Edit: as folks have pointed out, the attacking application doesn’t actually have to be running while the age-transition takes place. The attacker just has to have logs from before and after the age transition, and then they can narrow the birth-date down.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#48This headline is misleading. The California law requires that the OS store and provide the age bracket. It does not require that any verification take place. I am not arguing that this is a good idea, but it is simply false that the law requires that Linux 'check kids' IDs before booting'. The New York law is worse, and should be opposed, but the article only mentions it at the end - and even then, we actually don't…
Have you heard of the slippery slope? A cornerstone of American political philosophy? Arguments like this one are why the authoritarian ratchet continues to turn unimpeded over time.
What "arguments like this one"? It isn't an argument at all, it's just pointing out some actual facts.
If your slippery slope argument can't withstand a simple statement that something is at the top of the slope, it's not much good.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW, there are vanishingly few problems with improper voting in the US, and the extremely unusual occurrences are mostly PartyB voters trying to "counteract" the imaginary PartyA violations. Anyone who tells you differently is lying or ignorant.
If there's no problem w/ improper voting, then why would anyone object to measures intended to verify that the proprieties involved are being followed?
Because that's not the intent.
Re: Nanny state discovers Linux, demands it check kids' IDs before booting
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
When we are installing docker repositories on my Rockylinux installation on 100 nodes at once, should we need to manually put an age of the person who is running the script somewhere in the process? Will docker be forced to prevent me from downloading its packages if I do not transmit the age in a header?
The California law only stipulates that there's an "accessible interface at account setup" to set the birthday or age at account setup, and an interface to query the age bracket. Plus the crap for "application stores" I don't think it's a very well thought-out law. But realistically this will end up as setting some env variable for your docker containers to assure them that you are 99 years old. And yes, maybe transm…
We'll call the query tool jackboot.