this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2026
654 points (97.1% liked)

Technology

82361 readers
5415 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 92 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

Our president is fucking children, and you're telling me I gotta verify my date of birth to run Linux, in the name of "Protecting the Children"?

Get the fuck outta here.

[–] dellish@lemmy.world 24 points 5 days ago

They've gotta know if you're fuckable.

[–] Paranoidfactoid@lemmy.world 22 points 5 days ago (3 children)

You're antifa if you run Linux anyway.

[–] Ontopourmama@lemmy.world 20 points 5 days ago

I would like to think I'm antifa no matter what I run.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 65 points 5 days ago (22 children)

You guys are asking the wrong questions.

How is Linux going to do this? There's no server for the os to send the information to report the age of its users, no way of forcing its user base to comply and no single person or entity to fine, arrest or otherwise force into compliance.

They made a law they cannot enforce.

[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 10 points 4 days ago (7 children)

Or they made a law to attempt to ban operating systems with free software licenses.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (21 replies)
[–] carpelbridgesyndrome@sh.itjust.works 21 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Since people aren't reading the article and the headline is misleading. The law requires:

  • The OS ask the user their date of birth on account creation (kinda like the Steam date of birth prompts)
  • The OS provide an API that returns which of four age brackets the user fits in
  • Companies notified by the OS that the user is under age may be liable

It was explicitly written by the authors not to mandate ID or facial recognition checks. You can lie about your date of birth. This basically creates a standard set of parental controls for parents configuring kids devices.

I think that this might actually help with the whole discord facial recognition issue in places other than the UK by allowing them to offload the issue to parents setting up devices rather than collecting kids biometrics.

[–] BartyDeCanter 4 points 3 days ago

Furthermore, what is this law actually going to accomplish? What is the threat model that this protects from? How does it accomplish that? How is it better than something less invasive? Not some vague pearl clutching bullshit, but an actual threat protection model.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] aReallyCrunchyLeaf@lemmy.ml 228 points 6 days ago (5 children)

So now when I spin up a VM at my sysadmin job I have to tell the server I'm an adult? Does anyone actually know what the fuck we are doing here? What an absolute clown show.

[–] zewm@lemmy.world 155 points 6 days ago (7 children)

This is what happens when boomers never die and stay in office for a lifetime. They don’t understand technology but are allowed to make the laws that govern their use.

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 51 points 5 days ago

Nha boomers are not the cause for this shit. Smart ass marketeers and tech bro pushing for more precise target identification and thus more reach for them are to blame. And those I stumble upon are definitely on the younger side.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 267 points 6 days ago (25 children)

Simple solution. From now on Linux distros should ship with a big message "NOT FOR USE IN CALIFORNIA".

You want to force age verification? No server in all of California will run. Period.

[–] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 73 points 6 days ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (24 replies)
[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 20 points 4 days ago

No biggie. I got ready for this in minutes after hearing about it.

#!/usr/bin/env fish
read -P "Are you old enough?  (yes/no)  " input
if test "$input" = "yes" -o "$input" = "Yes"
echo "Proceeding..."
else
echo "You are not old enough.  Exiting." 
exit 1
end

... What? ... Why are you all looking at me like that?

[–] arc99@lemmy.world 20 points 4 days ago (2 children)

That would be a completely unworkable law since devices may not even have internet connectivity, or a user interface. And even if they did, it would have a chilling effect on software development in California.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 70 points 5 days ago (6 children)

Why not parents responsible for their own goddamn kids? Stop interfering with the rest of our privacy for this bullshit. Parental controls have existed for decades. Fucking use them.

[–] btsax@reddthat.com 52 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Because this isn't about parenting or children, it's about a creeping surveillance state

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] motruck@lemmy.zip 15 points 4 days ago

No matter how hard they try, you can't legislate parenting.

[–] noxypaws@pawb.social 57 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Despite signing it, Newsom issued a statement urging the legislature to amend the law before its effective date, citing concerns from streaming services and game developers about "complexities such as multi-user accounts shared by a family member and user profiles utilized across multiple devices."

then why did you fucking sign it in the first place??

words cannot describe the depths of my seething hatred for the complete, museum grade, massive piece of shit that is Gavin Newsom

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 96 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

Despite signing it, Newsom issued a statement urging the legislature to amend the law before its effective date, citing concerns from streaming services and game developers about "complexities such as multi-user accounts shared by a family member and user profiles utilized across multiple devices."

Then why the fuck did you sign it if it wasn't ready and needed amendments? Is this what you're going to do as president too?

Rhetorical, of course. Note how he doesn't say he disagrees with the bill, just that it needed to consider family devices.

If this is who wins the primary, we are done. We're basically already done, for sure, but him winning the primary would be the final nail in the coffin.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] wuffah@lemmy.world 46 points 5 days ago (16 children)

The law does not require photo ID uploads or facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age, setting AB 1043 apart from similar laws passed in Texas and Utah that require "commercially reasonable" verification methods, such as government-issued ID checks.

What even is the point of this then? To make shitty parents feel better?

It's so next year when they expand the requirements the infrastructure is already in place.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] super_user_do@feddit.it 25 points 5 days ago (9 children)

This is a whole new level for system level fingerprinting

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 107 points 6 days ago (9 children)

How will this affect embedded os like freertos or vxworks? There are lightbulbs that have operating systems these days, am I going to have to show ID to turn on my light?

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] BioDriver@lemmy.world 33 points 5 days ago (5 children)

How the hell are they going to enforce this?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Reygle@lemmy.world 40 points 5 days ago (3 children)

OK Newsom, you've lost me. I enjoyed your chaotic responses to the drumpf but you've officially lost me.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 42 points 5 days ago (15 children)

Realize, this has always been him. He is NOT a liberal. He is a conservative who calls himself a democrat.

load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ZoDoneRightNow@kbin.earth 97 points 6 days ago (5 children)

uhhh. So would I need to get everyone who uses the household pc to verify age? Whats stopping a child from using the family pc that was age verified by an adult?

[–] loie@lemmy.world 83 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Believe it or not, straight to jail

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 49 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Considering the massive number of servers running Linux used in the industry, this sounds like a good way to kill the Tech Industry in California.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 49 points 5 days ago (23 children)

This is a gift to Microsoft.

This law only applies to computers used by children. The law explicitly defines "users" as minors. It does not apply to machines used solely/primarily by adults. It does not apply to servers, or other machines with no local users. It won't affect the tech industry directly.

This law effectively prohibits your children from (legally) using anything but Microsoft/Google products until they are 18.

With this law, Linux cannot be installed on a school computer. With a FOSS OS, the local systems administrator would be considered the OS provider, and would be liable under this idiot law.

load more comments (23 replies)
[–] StarryPhoenix97@lemmy.world 29 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)
[–] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 24 points 5 days ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] emmy67@lemmy.world 18 points 5 days ago (1 children)

No doubt in response to Europe making its choice for software open source. Expect targeted attacks on FOSS to increase

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sol6_vi@lemmy.makearmy.io 42 points 5 days ago (12 children)

Did you guys know I was born January 1st 1901?

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 71 points 6 days ago (17 children)

Wow California leading the way to fascism, who woulda thunk?

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 66 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Colorado Dems pushing a similar law rn.

Fucking idiots.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
[–] GreenShimada@lemmy.world 63 points 6 days ago

For everyone trying to figure out how this would be enforced, it's not about being proactively enforced. (and data collection is 99% of it)

It's about adding a double-tap "Well, these people also violated our age verification law, so they have to pay a fine," added to any incident where it's convenient to add this in. If a minor sends another minor a snap that would trigger CP laws, and one of the phones isn't age verified correctly, fine to the parents and hands up in the air "We tried!" A minor is involved in torrenting movies? "Look, kids using illegal OS! Fine to the parents!"

This is how laws work across a lot of corrupt developing countries. There's laws for everything, but they only get applied selectively as authorities find they fit the situation. It's hard to actually be 100% above board and do everything legally because of a few little things meant to be impossible to actually do bureaucratically. So in every situation, any set of authorities start in with the endemic leverage of "Well, we have suspicion of you selling ketamine out of your apartment. Did you do age verification on your laptop? No? Then we can seize that as a crime and see what's on there. OR you can give up your supplier."

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 37 points 5 days ago (1 children)

User age required to be entered. There is no verification.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] StrawberryPigtails 67 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Enforcement against Linux distributions, however, is likely to be problematic. Distros like Arch, Ubuntu, Debian, and Gentoo have no centralized account infrastructure, with users downloading ISOs from mirrors worldwide, and can modify source code freely. These small distros lack legal teams or resources to implement the required API, so a more realistic outcome for non-compliant distros is a disclaimer that the software is not intended for use in California.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Inucune@lemmy.world 34 points 5 days ago

No way this is enforceable

[–] sbbq@lemmy.zip 36 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Are children not allowed to use computers now?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›