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

601–610 of 768 posts

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

#601

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

nomel wrote: post #584
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #577

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the problem is adults trying to groom kids, the answer is robust detection and enforcement of the current anti-grooming laws. It's ironic that people supposedly care about this when there's also a child rapist/murderer being kept safe as President without being held accountable for his crimes. I suppose this law could be used as a defense against getting caught grooming minors - "I thought they were adult as surel…

> robust detection and enforcement How, exactly, does one accomplish "robust detection of a child"? I assume your answer would include complete surveillance of all internet communication? Could you expand on your idea of the implementation?

Sorry if I wasn't clear - I am proposing that the adults face the robust detection and enforcement of anti-grooming laws. One method is to set up honey-pots with law enforcement officers playing the part of an innocent child (i.e. avoiding entrapment) and then throwing the full weight of the law behind any adult showing predatory behaviour.

What I propose is rather than putting all the effort into preventing children from entering dangerous adult spaces, it's better to put the effort into ensuring that sex criminals are prosecuted and trying to make adult spaces less dangerous.

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

#602

Post by heavyset_go »

solid_fuel wrote: post #598
heavyset_go wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (Also it’s not age verification really, it’s just a prompt that asks for your age to share as a system API for apps from above app store, no verification required) It's not enough to adhere to the age signal: > (3) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), a developer shall treat a signal received pursuant to this title as the primary indicator of a user’s age range for purposes of determining the user’s age. > (…

> Developers are still burdened with additional liability if they have reason to believe users are underage, even if their age flag says otherwise. This is true, but > The only way to mitigate this liability is to confirm your users are of age with facial and ID scans, This doesn’t follow. It says “if” the developer has clear reason, it doesn’t obligate the developer to collect additional information or build a profi…

That would have to be litigated in court, and the easiest and cheapest way to avoid litigation is to do what all platforms currently do: make sure the person using their system is who they say they are via face scans and ID checks.

As a developer, that is not the kind of liability I want to take on when I can just plug ID.me, or whatever, into my app and not worry if someone writes "im 12 lol" in a comment on my platform.

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

#603

Post by sk5t »

Mordisquitos wrote: post #286
nlitsme wrote: post #249

I will start making a list for linux then. rm - ok for all ages. grep - 18+, you can obviously use this to search for porn. find - 18+, see grep. reboot - ok for all ages. echo - ok for all ages. cat - 18+, prints the porn you found directly to your terminal. sudo - 18+, obviously. kill - ok for all ages. This is the US, right. ps - 18+, no peeping at other processes.

> echo - ok for all ages. > cat - 18+, prints the porn you found directly to your terminal. Sound good in theory, until you realise that any teenager knows perfectly well how to trivially get around the lack of `cat` to read their terminal smut: $ while read -r LINE; do echo $LINE; done

Simply require per-use parental consent for fopen.

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

#604

Post by Someone »

I don’t see anything in that bill (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...) that requires age verification.

It says users, on account creation, must indicate their age or birth year (or both) and that programs must have access to that info, but I don’t see any requirement about checking whether what the user enters is correct.

What does make it weird is that it requires account holders to enter that data at account creation, and it defines an account holder as ”an individual who is at least 18 years of age or a parent or legal guardian of a user who is under 18 years of age in the state”

So, kids are allowed to create an account, but then, an account holder has to enter their age or birth year.

To top it of “a parent or legal guardian who is not associated with a user’s device” is not an account holder, so let’s say a 15-year old buys a laptop or smartphone and wants to set it up. There’s nobody associated with the device, so there are no account holders. Who should enter that age info?

On many smartphones, having a grown-up create an account first won’t work, as there’s no way to set up a second account.

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

#605

Post by gib444 »

I can't keep up with all these attacks on personal computing/libre software/the web.

- AI causing RAM/disk price shocks and shortages

- Google attempting to lock down Android

- The EeYou codifying the Google-Apple duopoly into age-verification legislation

- Age verification requirements spreading rapidly

- AI scraping meaning many sites have WAF rules set to 'max'. It's getting extremely hard to browse the internet with a VPN + privacy features such as WebGL blocking etc. Geoblocking seems to be on the rise too (eg Trenitalia, Aegean Air).

- Governments wanting backdoors on devices

- Broadband price increases (10-25% rises are being baked into annual contracts here in the UK)

It seems in 2026 they've really gone full speed ahead.

What is the future going to look like? A Government-approved Apple OR Google spying device for the things you need to exist as a citizen... and a bunch of paper books/library cards/porn mags?

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

#607

Post by terminalshort »

6510 wrote: post #426
mh- wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an interesting idea. Would be curious to hear from someone who thinks this is a bad idea (why). edit: I see the "term limits are anti-democratic" takes elsewhere in the comments, so I guess let me narrow the above ask to "someone who isn't opposed to term limits, but thinks this idea is flawed."

Fill the arena with HR ladies and have them do a battle royal to produce a half decent set of interview questions. Put the electables in isolation cells fromwhere they one by one end up on the Tee Vee, give voters an app with AYE, NEY and Uhh? The questions are red by the winning HR lady but also appear on the app. The applicant writes the fizzbuzz etc etc Then, after the job interview, we give the job to the most sa…

Fill the arena with all the HR ladies, and then feed the winner to a lion. After that you might actually find someone capable of interviewing an applicant.

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

#608

Post by BarbaryCoast »

OK, so way at the bottom it says this:

"This title does not impose liability on an operating system provider, a covered application store, or a developer that arises from the use of a device or application by a person who is not the user to whom a signal pertains."

This is obviously a law so poorly written that it'll never pass a court challenge. Assuming anyone brings one.

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

#609

Post by cucumber3732842 »

alistairSH wrote: post #592
cucumber3732842 wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever called the DMV? In my state it's worse than Comcast. 45min wait time when the lines open in the morning, only increasing from there. I "owe" Comcast $200. They say I didn't cancel at an old apartment. I say I did. I have the email. They insist. They've sent me a letter once a year for a decade. About 2yr in it went to collections. They're still trying. Imagine the consequences if I did that with governm…

I have! I made an 8am appt (that’s when they open). They let me in the door at 7:58. I was back in my car driving home by 8:12.

And I have gone to rural DMVs and they were nice and helpful and polite. Absolutely not what most people experience just due to where population is located and how the more urban DMVs tend to be.

Listen, I'm sure if all you do is straight down the middle of whatever the DMV thinks a median peasant does, then I'm sure it works fine.

But on that same note, if all you do is sign up and then just keep paying them money forever, Comcast works fine too.

Neither of these organizations works worth a shit outside the default path. But only one of them will threaten to really screw up your life over it.

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

#610

Post by twocommits »

api wrote: post #485
hliyan wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Continually surprised by politicians wanting an OS to do what a parent should be doing. Why not just mandate that all devices with access control capabilities implement parental controls, and then mandate that all adults enable controls before handing a device to a minor? For devices that are incapable of user access control, the same rules as a knife, chainsaw or gun apply.

Only wealthy parents (upper middle class or better) have the time or energy to do anything other than work, put food on the table, and do basic child care. Most parents lack the technical expertise to police digital devices.

[dead]
Post reply on HN