Skavau

I lost half my subscribers due to some bizarre federation/piefed bug.

I think these are good ideas speaking broadly, but are quite extensive in terms of implementation and getting them right.

Organization would be mutual. Moderators of each have to approve to join and remain in the hierarchy, though the “initial structure” of the community could be set up by admins I suppose. The sub community inherits “global” rules from their parent communities, but can have their own rules as well.

What do you mean by this part? That if I as a mod of television@piefed.social incorporated another community into this hierarchy they'd essentially be a feeder community and I'd effectively be a mod of that community?

It's not karma farming there in many cases, it's just trying to support the Fediverse.

What are your ideas?

We may have some problems here. @rimu@piefed.social None of the posts I've posted to !television@piefed.social have federated.

I’d like you to realize that “the USA who is the least likely country to implement these laws” is literally the opposite of current reality.

In comparison to Europe/UK/AUS which is far further along this road (and implemented social media age requirements), absolutely. Also, apparently it's just a checkbox as far as this particular California law goes.

It is a concern, I just don't know how it's meaningfully enforceable at scale. Just like OSA. What do you want me to do about it personally?

I never supported the idea.

Is your argument really “this won’t affect linux, so it doesn’t matter” ? At the very least, FOSS development by anyone in California will be a problem, as the law quite literally names “persons” as potentially liable.

I'm taking the position that this is largely unenforceable at a software and OS level beyond larger players that come from California or specifically do a lot of trade in California.

The reality remains, the US is the most thirsty for this kind of thing. Not the least.

This specifically is quite different to most other efforts. Not sure if it might get constitutionally tested.

Windows, and any other OS will be illegal in California unless it implements this.

Right, as I said - I just don't see how this is meaningfully enforceable. It's a complete farce. It's on the level of the Online Safety Act it being enforceable.

Apple, for one, is headquartered in California.

Oh, I forgot Apple. Sure.

But there are many other OS. How on earth can they credibly enforce this?

Did you not read my comment? Anyone writing software for an OS that implements this, can be sued (in California) if it ignores the API signals from the OS and allows access to age-restricted content.

Yeah, this is just not meaningfully enforceable. Big companies will follow, but it would mostly be ignored by everyone else.

Yes, but if the OS was not designed in California and you are not based in California (you're not Windows, basically) - I fail to see how they can meaningfully compel anyone to follow this. Moreover, even if an OS somehow could know the users age - that doesn't automatically mean all other software that exists automatically reads it and responds to it as necessary.

Does the law compel anyone making software to recognise this?

Whether they do so optionally is a different thing entirely, to be fair.

I'm not even sure how that is remotely enforceable, although this also is a somewhat different thing to what this thread is about.