More liberal fascism? No surprise.
This is actually incredible.
- Buy all the RAM and video cards. RAM and video cards become too expensive for the average person to purchase.
- Push AI for everything until dependency develops.
- Sell remote access to computing power. (AI, Streaming video games, remote desktop, etc.)
- As the “Operating System Provider,” collect all of the personal information necessary to validate that each user is telling the truth about their age.
Result: Zero Individual Privacy- Everything you compute is processed by a computer owned by a big corporation with a backdoor built-in for your authoritarian government (which is owned by billionaires) to surveil.
Republicans: Full of pedophiles and pedophiles protectors. Hated by every sane person with any kind of conscience.
Democrats: Not on my watch! I can be an asshole too!
Republicans: Full of pedophiles and pedophiles protectors.
Imagine believing this is just republicans. smh.
Pretty sure they’re 100% zionist though (with the possible exception of chomsky).
Read the legislation. It’s not just operating systems, its applications as well! All applications, there are no exceptions. Everything from GIMP to the EHR your Doctor uses to a custom Open Claude bot on Github. ALL of them.
Good thing this will be unenforceable for open source software, or at least things can be forked if they are maintained by bigger companies that need to comply.
i was going to say, this has MICROSOFT stink all over it, or at least palintir.
Gavin Newsom should drop out of politics and stick to shitposting about trump. He’s much better at that.
gavin newsom was never effective out of local elections, hes well known for that, HES EVEn worst than biden and kamala.
His intern is, at least.
Literally
standing on a San Francisco street corner, opening my trench coat revealing 40 USB sticks
Hey kid, wanna buy illegal Linux?
It doesn’t matter if you’re, say, Debian, because they’ll just put up some symbolic “not intended for use in state X” and then continue doing whatever they were doing, but if you’re Red Hat and actually selling something like Red Hat Enterprise Linux to companies in the state, stuff like this is actually a pain in the ass.
And to reiterate a previous comment, the Democrats have a trifecta in both California and Colorado, and the legislation here is something that they are squarely to blame for. I’d really rather that they knock this kind of horseshit off so that I can go back to being upset with the Republican Party.
It makes me wonder if RHEL will get (or at least lobby for) some kind of carveout, since their intended customers are corporations. It would be really impractical at vest to try to make some headless server try to verify its age.
deleted by creator
Good luck trying to strongarm foss. Forks and backups included. Also making all linux servers illegal. This will totally not be circumvented. Get lost with your law. Let the parents do the parenting instead of overreaching on mass surveillance and trying to end any form of online anonymity.
My Steam account is 21 years old and can now buy alcohol. Does that count?
They don’t care. They want your face, retina, fingerprints, DNA. All for their LLMs and so they can sell you something else.
Also to blackmail you later if they think they can or just feel like it… because they will put all that shit on an insecure server and some 13 year old hacker in Turkmenistan will leak it and make a killing (literally and figuratively) with it.
wrose yet blackmail you with their ai created child pron.
FYI, I am not a lawyer.
Have you actually read the bill itself? Nowhere in it does it mention any of the things that you mentioned. It doesn’t even mention ID cards at all.
What it does say is operating system providers shall “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”. What we should look out for is that the law does not forbid OS providers from requiring IDs.
It does however require that OS providers “Send only the minimum amount of information necessary to comply with this title and shall not share the digital signal information with a third party for a purpose not required by this title.” (emphasis mine)
I wonder how much this is news outlets overreacting to a proposed bill that is not actually that bad, or if this is some marketing against the bill by some Corp.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043
I’ve only skimmed but:
provide an accessible interface at account setup
They don’t even define “account.” They have a definition of “account holder” that makes no sense.
Are all devices required to have user accounts? There was a time when home computers did not have such things.
No, it is bad.
Suppose it’s used to verify your age when visiting Pornhub. How is Pornhub going to trust the user’s computer didn’t lie about the user’s age? A “just trust me bro” sent by the browser isn’t going to suffice; teenagers would find a way around that.
Thr attestation will have to be cryptographically signed by some trusted party—and that’s either going to be the government, or the operating system vendor.
If it’s the government holding the signing keys: the website can now verify that you’re a resident of $state in $country and use that for fingerprinting and targeted advertising. And what if your country doesn’t participate, or if Pornhub doesn’t trust the signing keys used by the government of Estonia? Tough shit, no porn for you! It would be impractical to manage all those keys, though, so why not instead leave it up to the operating system vendor?
If it is left the operating system vendor, it’s going to end up being exactly the same as Google Play Service’s SafetyNet “feature”. If you’re not using an approved operating system (a.k.a. Windows, MacOS, stock Android, iOS) you’re not visiting Pornhub. Or a banking app. Or applying for jobs. Etc.
This bill is a poison pill for device ownership and FOSS operating systems being handed to corporations on a silver platter.
It does however require that OS providers “Send only the minimum amount of information necessary to comply with this title and shall not share the digital signal information with a third party for a purpose not required by this title.” (emphasis mine)
I wonder how much this is news outlets overreacting to a proposed bill that is not actually that bad
What do you mean, that’s horrible on its own. None of this information should be necessary to run a computer. The computer shouldn’t have to process this locally, let alone be mandated to upload it to someone’s server.
Age verification is identity collection.
So everyone’s windows OS will be registered to Mike Hunt born 1/1/1970. Gotcha
What it does say is operating system providers shall “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”.
How about “fuck off.”
This will immediately get struck down in court even if it passes, though everyone should make their voices heard in saying this is complete nonsense.
Yet another case of antiquated politicians not understanding technology whatsoever.
This will immediately get struck down in court even if it passes
According to you?
No doubt the law is hopeful and leaves out many details in regards to how such a system could/would/might be implemented.
But I am not seeing anything in the law that would be unconstitutional. But I’m not a lawyer so what do I know.
Not a lawyer, but deeply involved in the law from the tech side for many years at various deeper levels from the engineering side and bridge to product and so forth.
It doesn’t need to be unconstitutional to be struck down as the constitution doesn’t cover all laws, especially not state and local laws. All you need to do is prove that the language or intent of the law is either:
- impossible to enforce (ex: software processes cannot be patented or controlled/patrolled)
- the language is too broad (ex: What is an OS exactly?)
- it violates a prexisting law or creates a verifiable conundrum (ex: this would violate California’s own data privacy laws)
- it creates an undue tax or burden on existing technology (ex: devices out in the wild can’t be retrofitted to comply, which sort of fits with #1)
- it DOES actually violate a constitutional right (ex: 4th amendment)
Being on my side of things, the legal team would most likely start a case with something like “So you say the OS needs to be locked with age verification. Does that mean every TV, router, public computer, tablet…blah blah blah”, so it’s very likely to get tossed on #1 quite easily because these folks have no idea what an OS actually is, and that every piece of technology you interact with on a daily basis has an OS. The lack of specificity alone would get this tossed in a heartbeat.
If that failed, they’d argue there is no way to police or enforce this law because sites who rely on this rule existing are putting themselves in legal jeopardy by simply allowing any traffic from California to access their services. What if someone from another state or country is in California and wants to watch porn in their hotel, or play a game with friends on Discord? Police have zero right to verify that any device entering California complies with the law, so the provider of the service would have to be on the hook to do the verification, which means they would just block any device from California that doesn’t meet whatever flag is sent to say it safe. THEN you have the infrastructure that is required to ensure those devices…blah blah blah.
It’s just a stupid idea by dumbass technically illiterate people. It won’t go anywhere.
As soon as these idiots figure out what an OS is, this is dead in the water because of the above.
the legal team
What legal team? The people with money are supporting this. They’ll continue to do what they like as always.
Even if this particular law doesn’t pass, they’ll continue to waste resources on more and more violent control. That’s how we got here.
Linux, Gimp, etc. aren’t going to assemble and afford a legal team AFAIK.
Appreciate your explanation!
My first thought was maybe this will work for us. Can you imagine how many of these ancient fuckheads who vote for shit like this are going to die every day because they can’t figure out how to log in to their pacemakers and verify their age?
You’re right. I had the same thought about the definition of “account”.
Lol, get rekt
