This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
I think a birthday field in Pam or passwd would be fine. It'd be cool to have a happy birthday motd on login.
But it doesn't belong in what should be an init system. Much of the scope of systemd beyond an init system is the real issue. Resolved for example. Fuck poettering.
The change was to systemd-userdb (and systemd-homed but that one most distros don't use) which is optional. You can use the init system without it. IIRC You only need it if some apps want to use user records beyond the default NSS ones.
Don't like systemd-resolve? Fine. I get that plenty of implementation details are incomplete, suck or have caused friction with other software. On the other hand it's a really useful tool for dynamic split dns handling, which is why I like using it. You can disable it, I've done so on some workstations and servers, because of poor choices in internal domain names leading to mDNS issues, knock yourself out.
Don't think it should be part of an init system? It really isn't. I wouldn't call systemd just an init system to begin with, though that was the initial project goal. Most of its parts are reasonably well separated or at least highly configurable for a service layer. I genuinely think it's completely insane to have DNS resolution in libc, but people have gotten used to that. Systemd-resolved is completely inoffensive in comparison imho.
Don't like systemd as a whole? Use a distro without it. It really is that simple. Everything has been discussed - at length. Wars have been fought. At this point, change will only come if the complainers actually sit down, shut up and do some work towards their goals.
Sorry this turned into such a rant, most of this isn't even directed at you, this situation just annoys me. Especially this poor guy getting death threats on GitHub because someone riled up all the asshats in the community who have no idea how any of this works. Maybe they should focus their energy on the political forces pushing the California legislation that started this whole mess? I've been tired of this stupid debate for years now. I feel like it's mostly carried by people who have no idea what they are talking about these days.
Right now, we’re considering implementing something akin to the date pickers that were ubiquitous when signing up for internet services in the early 2000s where it’s just an honor system.
If you implement that, I switch to a fork that removes it.
The only ID verification that works is when a legal entity that has liability for misuse verifies IDs. I want to live in a world where kids install linux on a pi and thus have root to set whatever settings they want. IF you need to verify ID for some reason, then you need to verify with something that the kids don't control - that everyone else can trust (good luck)
How about I'd there is no verification at all and it's just a local value?
The whole point is to 'protect' people for things they shouldn't do but are legal for others. Porn is the common example where many (but not all) object and want to keep thair kids away. which is why an id is needed - otherwise any kid will give a false age.
It's not just porn though.
A lot of countries want to restrict children's access to social media - not just Facebook, etc., but also in games like Minecraft, Roblox and so on, as these also serve as social platforms.
Which is actually fine and I agree with the restriction - kids shouldn't be on Facebook, Snapchat, or even Roblox without supervision. Emphasis on supervision. Why? Because paedos are proven to be using these platforms as hunting grounds for grooming. Look at Roblox - even if you manage to set up parental controls (which is almost like if it's intentionally made hard to do so), paedos can get around it by using items like signs, that allow free text entry, to communicate with kids. Rule #1: kids (and paedos) will always try to find a way around restrictions, so you want those to be as transparent (read: invisible) as possible.
The problem is, these platforms are intentionally making it impossible for parents to supervise their children's activities. Most parental controls are done in a "we had to do it so we did the bare minimum work and implemented every possible malicious tactic to deter people from using it" manner instead of actual parental protection being in mind.
Then these very same companies go to governments and plead that the current methods aren't working, parents aren't using the tools, and you can't push this level of moderation onto them - Meta execs literally admit in internal memos that at this point, they just have to accept that children will be hurt, because doing anything would affect bottom lines. Their solution?
Make everyone identify themselves. But that's not actually for protecting children - it's to continue mining even more data, because simply said, data miners have already gotten everything from everyone they could, and the only way this can be tied together even more is by adding your real identity to all that data. Oh and all your adult related browsing too, of course.
And the sentiment won't change until one of these "super duper secure, totally unhackable, totally not collecting your PII with all the rest of your data" companies gets hacked, exposed for data mining to extremes, all through dumping a bunch of politicians' and powerful people's porn habits. You think Noem's husband being revealed as a crossdresser was damaging? Imagine top politicians - especially conservatives - being outed as trans- or bestiality porn watching "degenerates" (putting it in quotes because in my opinion only the latter is problematic, but to conservacucks...), or that they're a prolific CSAM fanfic writer, and so on.
In my opinion, everyone should have the privacy to browse the kind of (legal) porn they want, without it being shouted out to the world. Or abused by corporations. Privacy is a key element of our lives, and it should be up to each person to decide how much they reveal to anyone. This entire ID enforcement can only end badly. Kids will find a way around it - they already do in the UK, I mean a simple VPN gets around it, and luckily not all governments want to implement this crap - and all it does is expose those who abide by the law, to even more data breaches and such.
The only way to do this that protects privacy is to accept that, but also parents of young children can just not give them root.
dinit
