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

A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification

pcgamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 768 posts

Re: A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification

#551

Post by echoangle »

Quarrel wrote: post #530
whateverboat wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is a repository on a linux machine an app store? Are custom repositories app stores? Does this mean that now most automated deployments are now not automated? If they can be automated, does that mean that having the automation by default makes sense?

Android systems use Linux as their operating system, and the law applies to operating systems. Android has associated app stores, therefore Linux must follow this at account setup .. (I'm mostly hoping I'm just jesting here, that they'd surely not enforce it in this way, plus, who "provides" my Linux OS?) In any event, it does seem like a very silly overreaching law, that should be highlighted, pointed out, and laugh…

Linux isn’t really an operating system but more the kernel of the OS. In this case, Android would be the OS.

Do you remember this copypasta?

https://www.reddit.com/r/copypasta/s/3nonwfDeyX

Re: A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification

#552

Post by dragonwriter »

vineyardmike wrote: post #408
bmitch3020 wrote: post #290

Reaction 1: how would this even work with embedded systems that have no UI to input this data? Reaction 2: it's open source, make the lawmakers do submit the changes. Reaction 3: how would this ever be enforced? Would they outlaw downloading distributions, or even older versions of distributions? When there's no exchange of money, a law like this is seems like it would be suppression of free speech. Reaction 4: Someo…

While there are some enforcement questions here, especially around non commercial OSes, most of your reactions are clearly based on the headline alone. It defines operating system in the law. This wouldn’t apply to embedded systems and WiFi routers and traffic lights and all those things. It applies to operating systems that work with associated app stores on general purpose computers or mobile phones or game console…

> It defines operating system in the law.

No, it doesn't.

It defines the following terms: "account holder", "age bracket data", "application", "child", "covered application store", "developer", "operating system provider", "signal", and "user".

> This wouldn’t apply to embedded systems and WiFi routers and traffic lights and all those things. It applies to operating systems that work with associated app stores on general purpose computers or mobile phones or game consoles.

Presumably, this based on reading the language that in the definition of "operating system developer", and then for some reason adding in "game consoles" (the actual language in both of those includes "a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing [device".

(I've also rarely seen such a poorly-crafted set of definitions; the definitions in the law are in several places logically inconsistent with the provisions in which they are applied, and in other places circular on their own or by way of mutual reference to other terms defined in the law, such that you cannot actually identify what the definitions include without first starting with knowledge of what they include.)

Re: A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification

#553

Post by dongguanxianhao »

fangpenlin wrote: post #67

There's an obvious theme with lawmakers in California—they pass laws to regulate things they have zero clue about, add them to their achievement page, cheer for themselves, and declare, "There! I've made the world a better place." There are just too many examples. For instance: - Microstamping requirements for guns—printing a unique barcode on every bullet casing (Glock gen3 cannot be retired, thus, the auto-mode swi…

The printer spyware has an interesting backstory.

A Spanish venture-backed firm is developing some vaporware called Print&Go and has convinced the NY DA's office that it'll permanently solve the Luigi problem.

The best part? This company is drooling at the possibility of getting a permanent rent-seeking license for printers they didn't design, for nonexistent vaporware software that reduces its capabilities.

They frame it as "enhancing 3D printer capabilities," the way a slaveowner would frame putting chains on a slave's wrists as an "employee retention innovation."

Is everyone involved with promoting this software and these laws lying? Of course.

https://blog.adafruit.com/2026/02/08/any-user-who-has-a-3d-p...

Re: A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification

#554

Post by dragonwriter »

It doesn't require age verification, only age attestation.

More significantly, it does require all applications (from "covered application stores", but which has a definition for that which seems to include not only what you would normally call an app store, but any website or other source from which an app can be downloaded) to check the age signal provided by the OS when the application is "downloaded and launched".

While it is poorly drafted, circular, and self-contradictory on some definitions and other points, it arguably seems to prohibit age verification within the scope of apps it covers, in that:

(1) It requires all OS's to have an age attestation feature, (2) It requires all applications to use the age attestation feature, (3) It requires developers of applications to rely on the info from the age attestation feature as the "primary indicator of a users age range for determining the user's age", with the only exception being if the developer has internal (not external) information which is "clear and convincing information" that the user's age is different from what is signalled by the OS.

Re: A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification

#555

Post by wafriedemann »

bmitch3020 wrote: post #290

Reaction 1: how would this even work with embedded systems that have no UI to input this data? Reaction 2: it's open source, make the lawmakers do submit the changes. Reaction 3: how would this ever be enforced? Would they outlaw downloading distributions, or even older versions of distributions? When there's no exchange of money, a law like this is seems like it would be suppression of free speech. Reaction 4: Someo…

i see you're a problem solver

Re: A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification

#556

Post by pyb »

wtallis wrote: post #529
csense wrote: post #521

I've taken trips to California in the past for both personal and professional reasons. I'm seriously reconsidering whether I'll do that again in the future. What happens if I bring a laptop with an "illegal" OS without this unwanted "feature" into the state? Will I be denied access to public wifi in hotels and restaurants? Or will it grant me access, but snitch on me -- make a call to the state police to come deal wi…

All of those worries you list are extreme and unreasonable and ruled out by spending two minutes reading the bill: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm... The only remedies listed are: > 1798.503. (a) A person that violates this title shall be subject to an injunction and liable for a civil penalty of not more than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) per affected child for each negligen…

Those worries are ruled out... for now. Laws can be amended.

Re: A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification

#558

Post by rockskon »

If age attestation in the OS becomes law, there's much less friction afterwards to pass another law to have age verification as well. It should not be humored under the mistaken belief that "it's just age attestation in the OS - nothing invasive about that".

Re: A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification

#559

Post by FMecha »

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #31
wasmainiac wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, I don’t like it as much as you do. I’m just saying nothing short of a mandated TPM will actually enforce this. I think they know that. I think this is mostly for show to stay relevant wrt. What is happening in the courts. This is the Same play as it always been for registration “are you over the age of 13?”

Which begs the question if Microsoft's stubborn insistence on TPM 2.0 for Windows 11 to operate was something planned out in advance of this law being proposed.

I read a FUD somewhere about Cinavia (the sound-muting DRM) being implemented on OS level by implementing it on SGX enclave level. That obviously didn't happen, but imagine if TPM was used for that too (or similar DRM).

Re: A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification

#560

Post by FMecha »

jrmg wrote: post #12

The actual bill: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm... Bill text (it’s longer, but the rest is mostly definitions of the terms used here): 1798.501. (a) An operating system provider shall do all of the following: (1) Provide an accessible interface at account setup that requires an account holder to indicate the birth date, age, or both, of the user of that device for the purpose of providin…

How long until they add a 21+ category to this bill, though? Insofar the use of it would be for gambling and CA doesn't even have mobile sports betting.
Post reply on HN