Ageless Linux — Software for Humans of Indeterminate Age
agelesslinux.org
  • ulterno@programming.devEnglish
    0·
    9 hours ago

    The actual effects of the law are multi-staged, though.
    Even if FOSS ends up managing to get this load off it, this still remains a scapegoat for Apple, Google and other players in this game, which enables them to collect as much extra data as they feel like.

  • stravanasu@lemmy.ca
    15·
    2 days ago

    The Cudgel

    A law that the largest companies in the world already comply with, and that hundreds of small projects cannot comply with, is not a child safety law. It is a compliance moat. It raises the regulatory cost of providing an operating system just enough that only well-resourced corporations can afford to do it.

    The enforcement mechanism is the point. AB 1043 does not need to result in a single fine to achieve its purpose. The mere existence of potential liability — $7,500 per affected child, enforced at the sole discretion of the Attorney General — creates legal risk for anyone distributing an operating system without the resources to build an age verification infrastructure. Most of these projects will respond by adding a disclaimer that their software is “not intended for use in California.” Some will simply stop distributing.

    The law does not need to be enforced to work. It works by existing. It works by making small developers afraid. It works because the cost of defending against even a frivolous AG action exceeds the entire annual budget of most open-source projects. You do not need to swing a cudgel to get compliance. You just need to hold it where people can see it.

    Ageless Linux exists because someone should hold it back.

    Well done! 💪👏

    We must stand united, stand our ground, protest, react, and turn the tables. The fuckers making these shitty hidden-purpose laws must be reminded that “democracy” means, literally, “the people rule”. The people: we.

  • Schwim Dandy@piefed.zipEnglish
    12·
    2 days ago

    I appreciate the informative nature of their website but I would just use Debian and skip the impotent fuck you aimed at the corpos.

    • hendrik@palaver.p3x.deEnglish
      13·
      2 days ago

      I think it’s a fuck you aimed at the attorney general and whoever phrased these laws. They go into detail in the FAQ at the bottom. (What is the point of all of this? / What if the AG actually fines you?) Using it isn’t the really the point.

      • ulterno@programming.devEnglish
        1·
        9 hours ago

        Now I am thinking…
        If a kit in California were to make a YouTube video using this OS and AG ends up not fining anyone for it, can that be used as a precedent?

        • hendrik@palaver.p3x.deEnglish
          1·
          1 hour ago

          I think the way unclear / ambiguous law works is: It’s almost always used against you. It’s probably up to the attorney general to use it as precedent for what they want to do. Less so for the person at the receiving end of it.