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

51–60 of 537 posts

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

#51

Post by shevy-java »

bnjms wrote: post #27

So in red states porn is being used, and in blue states TikTok and Instagram are being used. Is anyone tracking who is behind the concerted efforts here? For example, which organizations, executives, lobbyists and politicians are valid and responsible parties?

You raise an interesting point in the first sentence. It might be that age sniffing could actually violate the US constitution.

As for lobbyists: I think we can probably determine the key lobbyists, e. g. if we map the data and names. And ideally also the money given to them. Ultimately they are faceless though, because corruption is easily exchangeable. The issue here is systemic though. The US "democracy" no longer exists due to that corruption. It is not rule by the people but rule by bribery.

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

#52

Post by twothreeone »

skinfaxi wrote: post #40
bnjms wrote: post #27

So in red states porn is being used, and in blue states TikTok and Instagram are being used. Is anyone tracking who is behind the concerted efforts here? For example, which organizations, executives, lobbyists and politicians are valid and responsible parties?

This seems to have more information. https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rshc1f/i_traced_2_b...

TL;DR: They claim it's Meta (which yeah it would make a lot of sense).

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

#53

Post by mosura »

Aurornis wrote: post #24

Not that I'm condoning it, but this law requires self-declaration, not verification. It might sound pedantic but the practical difference is huge. Self-declaration means that the system asks the user to declare if they are a minor. Nothing is verified. Age verification typically means a system which checks ID or has other enforcement measures to try to verify age.

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

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

#54

Post by Marsymars »

LPisGood wrote: post #2

What does that mean, practically? The person who installed linux on that particular device is liable? >no algorithmic feeds for minors by default Any choice of what content to display is an algorithm. Maybe they want a simple or easily explainable algorithm?

> Any choice of what content to display is an algorithm.

You could argue about the language and the meaning of "algorithm", but for practical purposes I'd consider a manually-curated feed to be non-algorithmic.

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

#55

Post by AnimalMuppet »

mosura wrote: post #53
Aurornis wrote: post #24

Not that I'm condoning it, but this law requires self-declaration, not verification. It might sound pedantic but the practical difference is huge. Self-declaration means that the system asks the user to declare if they are a minor. Nothing is verified. Age verification typically means a system which checks ID or has other enforcement measures to try to verify age.

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

Stronger: Once you accept their right to ask, then you open the door to their right to a truthful answer, and thus to a verified answer.

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

#56

Post by robgibbons »

largehotcoffee wrote: post #29

Unpopular opinion, but this is objectively better than having to upload your ID to every random website that requires an age check (if that's what the end result is).

You can personally avoid those websites, if you philosophically disagree with those terms. Good luck avoiding the operating system.

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

#57

Post by bryanlarsen »

weaksauce wrote: post #28
Aurornis wrote: post #24

Not that I'm condoning it, but this law requires self-declaration, not verification. It might sound pedantic but the practical difference is huge. Self-declaration means that the system asks the user to declare if they are a minor. Nothing is verified. Age verification typically means a system which checks ID or has other enforcement measures to try to verify age.

that is the start of a lot of bills like this... they really only ever increase in scope and invasiveness.

On the contrary in my experience once a legislature passes a bill to "fix" a particular problem they consider it fixed and don't update it for at least 20 years.

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

#58

Post by kej »

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.

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

#59

Post by singpolyma3 »

mosura wrote: post #53
Aurornis wrote: post #24

Not that I'm condoning it, but this law requires self-declaration, not verification. It might sound pedantic but the practical difference is huge. Self-declaration means that the system asks the user to declare if they are a minor. Nothing is verified. Age verification typically means a system which checks ID or has other enforcement measures to try to verify age.

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

Literally a slippery slope argument

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

#60

Post by zamadatix »

xboxnolifes wrote: post #50
shevy-java wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the argument here. You can easily adjust the law to force verification. You seem to assume that "this is now final, nothing will change after that". Why would you assume this to be the case?

The slope is only slippery if the change in question makes it easier for future changes to be bad. Otherwise you're only arguing for no changes to ever be made. Does this law make forced verification easier than if this law didn't exist?

Seems so - it builds in the verification infrastructure requirement, making it dead simple to change whether it is opt in or opt out at any time.

It's actually pretty hard not to have a change be part of a slippery slope. It requires including blocks for further behavior as any subset implementation is hard to sell as not being a slippery slope path otherwise.

Post reply on HN