The latest changes implemented in the Systemd repo, related to or prompted by age-verification laws, have made many people unhappy (I suppose links about this aren’t necessary). This has led to a surge in Systemd forks during the last days (“surge” because there have always been plenty of forks). Here are some forks that explicitly mention those changes as their reason for forking (rough time ordering taken from the fork page):
-
paramazo/systemd “The systemd System and Service Manager without age verification”
-
ganitam/systemd “Systemd fork just before the Age Verification addition. Hoping more capable developers and maintainers do same…”
-
GSYT-Productions/systemd-fork “The systemd System and Service Manager, without the stupid Age Verification”
-
speedythesnail/unret arded-systemd “The systemd System and Service Manager, without the ret arded age-verification commits”
-
ta13579/systemd “The systemd System and Service Manager WITHOUT THE FUCKING AGE CHECKS”
-
r4shsec/systemd-no-age-verification “This is systemd but without the age verification made via pull request https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/40978”
-
Pingasmaster/fightthesystemd “Systemd without the nonsense: no age verification, no lighthouse built-in.”
-
Jeffrey-Sardina/system “Liberated systemd – no surveillance. Ever.”
-
HaplessIdiot/systemd-saneagecheck “The systemd System and Service Manager with age verification bypass and polling rate options for said feature”
-
Queer-Coded-LGBTQ/systemd-fuck-california “The systemd System and Service Manager, but without age bs added in.”
-
Codiak540/unshitted-systemd “A fork of systemd aiming to strip the Age verification. Sue me california.”
Hopefully the energy of this reaction won’t be scattered among too many alternatives, although some amount of scattering is always good.
Good. Have it banned in the one state that probably relies on it the absolute most. Silicon Valley would start to implode and the law would be changed very quickly.
They will not ban it on Servers or for Corporate use, but ban it in youth Centers, in schools, in public libraries, and everywhere else where kids could have access to Computers. This will create another generation of people who only know close source Systems, most likely from Microsoft, who will have no issues with making their Systems compliant to the bindig laws.
That’s the thing, the law doesn’t differentiate.
as far as I read the law, but i am neither a lawyer or even american, are those Option only needed for Systems with users and a user, as defined by the same law, is
(i) “User” means a child that is the primary user of the device.
The law says nothing about Systems that don’t have such a “user”, or at least i could not find anything.
So, there could be a valid argument that the law does differentiate.
Systems have to be ready and in place when the law becomes bindig and active, it is to late to beginn with the work then.