this post was submitted on 23 May 2026
30 points (89.5% liked)

Linux

17581 readers
88 users here now

Welcome to c/linux!

Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!

Rules:

  1. Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.

  2. Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.

  3. Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.

  4. No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.

  5. No NSFW adult content

  6. Follow general lemmy guidelines.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/65292654

For those interested on the question of age verification and GNU/Linux: be aware that Systemd v261-rc1 was recently released. It now implements an optional birth date field in the JSON user database (see second item under "Other changes").

The implementation of this field was prompted by age-verification or -attestation laws.

(Age-verification status of Open Source Operating Systems.)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 30p87@feddit.org 4 points 22 hours ago

Yeah, with GECOS introducing the GECOS field, they normalized name verification, phone number verification, email address verification as well as location verification. So soon we should see those becoming mandatory and controlled.

Oh wait, that was 64 years ago, so by now we should already be in literally 1984, actually?! Or is it that no one actually gives a fuck about a handful of programs trying to read user data that no one set, and if they set it, set it to a nonsencial/false value without any component verifying anything?

The problem isn't libraries adding more optional field to their capabilites, but management systems (such as a distros installer) making them mandatory against user will. That is what users should actually object to. No installer or component I know actually sets the location field. However, some are already planing to require the birth of date field, which is the actual start to pushing any boundaries. So start protesting there.

Or, if you actually think that simple standards for how user data is stored is already malicious verification, your only option is probably, unironically, TempleOS, as even DOS stores user information, Country + TZ, available for other programs to fetch.