• TrickDacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    Why would they exactly? Adding an age field would not likely have any impact on a bootloader. Also I’m not really sure what you reactionaries are thinking will happen. That laws will get passed but Linux as a whole will just refuse to follow the laws? It’s a very incomplete thought process you all are stuck in. If the laws get passed, the entire Linux community is not just going to be able to ignore them.

    • BladeFederation@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      I agree with you that there have been a lot of reactionary takes to this news. But I do think that many if not all Linux distributions can choose to ignore it, yes. I think it’s inherently unenforceable. How is California supposed to have say over a random guy in the Netherlands who makes a distro? Even a distros based in California should be able to put a disclaimer that this OS is not to be used in the state of California. Maybe make a California version with age verification at worst. And then everyone will proceed to use the non age verification version because what is the government going to do? Kick in every door and manually check if your computer OS is in compliance? Even if they went to that extent (they won’t), what is the criteria for criminally charging someone? What if you are just visiting California, do you have to reinstall your OS for a few days?

      • paraplu@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I agree that a disclaimer might be the simplest path, but may not always be an option. I recall reading that for at least one distro their license didn’t allow for geographic disclaimers.

        Having a date field that defaults to 1/1/1970 or having the API needing to be toggled on (with a notice that California users may required to turn it on) could both be privacy respecting options.

        Adding these features in a way that’s intentionally unhelpful isn’t necessarily rolling over, but may shield against lawsuits (IANAL).

    • Clay_pidgin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      13 hours ago

      I don’t like the idea on general, but I agree with the developer whose thread I read that suggested systemd was a good place to store the data so we don’t end up with several layers from kernel to distro publisher to DE trying to roll their own.