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

671–680 of 768 posts

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

#671

Post by hedora »

sloum wrote: post #670
dragonwriter wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 gen…

From the bill: > "Covered application store” does not mean an online service or platform that distributes extensions, plug-ins, add-ons, or other software applications that run exclusively within a separate host application There is a reasonable argument that a linux distribution is, itself, a host application. This is clearly an argument against their intention... but makes perfect sense to me. With this argument, t…

No operating system (including windows, which uses a translation layer in userspace — “host application”?) provides a windows-compatible kernel API.

So I guess that excludes all windows apps and app stores.

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

#672

Post by hedora »

caseysoftware wrote: post #667
nostrademons wrote: post #626

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In typical jury trials, the jury is instructed that any terms not defined in the relevant statutes are to have their common-sense, ordinary meanings as understood by the jury. The jury is usually also selected to be full of reasonable, moderate people, and folks who are overly pedantic usually get excused during voir dire. Do you really think a pool of 12 people off the street is going to consider an embedded system,…

MOST cases don't make it to jury. They're more likely to be resolved via motions and countermotions and the decisions of a jduge. To dumb down "operating system" for normies, they're probably going to say something along the lines of "the software that makes your computer work.. like Windows." If it stays at that level, we'll have a specific, discrete definition in play. A broader, equally correct definition could be…

Defendants can always opt for a judge to rule on the case.

At that point, what the law actually says matters a lot (unless the judge is corrupt, which is becoming more common in the US, but with corrupt judges, it doesn’t really matter how good or bad the laws is).

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

#673

Post by hedora »

igregoryca wrote: post #612
jmward01 wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" It applies to operating systems that work with associated app stores on general purpose computers or mobile phones or game consoles. That’s it" Everything is a general purpose computer. Just look at how many things have been made to run doom. I haven't read the law specifically but if it actually does say this then that language is useless and means practically everything.

Wood is edible when processed correctly, but it's not legally considered "food" because there are a bunch of nontrivial steps to get it into that state. Likewise, any reasonable interpretation of "general purpose computer" in this context by a judge would not include your microwave oven just because someone with skill and finesse could transform it into a cursed Doom arcade machine. Laws are interpreted by people tra…

They exempt applications that run inside another “host application” though, which is ~ everything in any modern app store.

I guess Linux native games on GoG might be covered. All windows and wsl programs run in userspace compat layers. iOS might be covered. Snap, probably not (containers), AppImage? Maybe?

Nix, and brew? Probably not.

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

#674

Post by juris »

filleduchaos wrote: post #617
juris wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not to be flippant, i am answering your question with the seriousness it deserves: it is because any government regulation over user identifiers in an operating system (and left to grow and fester according to political wont) will chill free speech (code, data) and assembly (the ability to share code and data with others unsupervised).

That's nice but doesn't actually answer the question that I asked, which is how this (i.e. requiring local user accounts to specify an age range on creation) is bad for a free society. Simply stating something you apparently see as self-evidently true in the abstract doesn't really make much of a point. Especially when said something is unironically just "but the slippery slope!"

since you’re lost (now I’m being flippant to match your tone):

age is an identifier as part of a ‘digital fingerprint’. a fingerprint is used to track you. your fingerprints are attached to the things you criticize online. you must temper your criticisms. end of story.

your ‘o noes another slippery slope arg’ falls flat on its ass when you look outside at what your government is patently and evidently doing. you paying any attention to the anthropic ‘mass surveillance’ canary? how about the ice app? threats to legally prosecute protesters of ice? no? god, you really need to be led to water huh.

maybe look up how the persona company aggregates data for the government and get back to me as to whether you think that has a chilling effect on speech and assembly (when droves of people are leaving discord)

ah maybe too “abstract” for you. How about this:

a/s/l? :3 don’t worry, im just a dev, i won’t bite. unless of course, you disagree with me o3o

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

#675

Post by hedora »

giantg2 wrote: post #640
kimixa wrote: post #566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All laws are vague and interpreted, and in common law (as in the UK and US) interpreted based on precedent rather than the specific text of the original law. If people with power over you want to "selectively punish you" they don't need new laws. And if you want perfectly proscriptive, defined laws in all situations with no "human interpretation" you're in the wrong universe, and may as well be shouting at clouds. Th…

"All laws are vague" There are degrees of vagueness, but laws generally attempt to avoid being vague with many definitions and strict construction. If a law is sufficiently vague it may be invalidated, or it is at least required to be interpreted to the benefit of the defendant under lenity.

That’s where selective enforcement comes in.

Make it unambiguous that 100% of people are criminals, and all you have to do is control the prosecutor’s office.

This law seems to be in that category.

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

#676

Post by ActorNightly »

AceJohnny2 wrote: post #87
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…

> There's an obvious theme with lawmakers in California You can remove the in California

The California part is partially to highlight the fact that its a very liberal state and this is the kind of laws that liberals pass, but people fail to realize that all of these laws come from Republican lawmakers, as there are plenty of right wing people in California.

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

#678

Post by shevy-java »

rib3ye wrote: post #325
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…

It's not a coincidence the equally clueless citizens are asking for these laws. Like in business, sometimes it's better to do "some thing" when you're not smart enough to do the right thing. Maybe you get there, maybe you don't, but inaction is not looked upon kindly.

I've not met anyone privately who would be in support of this.

There is a layer of indirection at work here. Fake-democracy.

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

#680

Post by shevy-java »

hintymad wrote: post #330
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…

So essentially California is becoming more and more like EU? It's curious to see how it pans out. Maybe EU's model turns out to be better than a more laissez-faire world like the US. Who knows. What's even more curious is that the California voters seem not care at all. As long as the government can collect more taxes with more altruistic slogans, the voters will stay happy.

Which EU law mandates age verification on my personal computer at home exactly?
Post reply on HN