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.
As long as it's offline I don't see a problem of implementing this. It's a nieche use case, but why not? No program has to use the interface. It does what's on the can: If I have a kid with a user not in wheel, it can install stuff on user level but might be "safe" from programs it is not supposed to use. Are people saying this is a slippery slope?
Yes, thin end of the wedge. Authoritarianism happens little by little, then all at once. It must be furiously resisted by those of us who care about freedom and privacy.
I don't see any difference with a law saying that you must have a camera installed in your house to potentially check what you do (or what your child does). It's my house, I decide whether I want a camera installed.
If someone tells me they're going to put a camera but it's innocuous because it's off, or because I can decide whether to turn it on, or because I can point it in any direction I like (toward the wall), well they completely miss the point: it's my house, if I don't want a camera in there, then no camera goes in there. That's my basic right as a human being, and any individual or entity or government that tries to force something like this, automatically loses its legitimacy. Its "laws" are immoral and therefore void. I don't care being then branded as "anarchist" or as "criminal". Welcome are all "criminals" from the past that fought and broke unjust laws in order to fight for human rights. I'm not a Russian, bowing my head and complying. Better dead. My grandchildren should not grow up in such conditions.
Likewise, my personal laptop is mine and I decide what does go and what doesn't go in it.
@pglpm @Paulemeister And your phone?
Absolutely touché! My Android is dying and I look forward to switching to GrapheneOS.