this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2026
619 points (97.1% liked)

Technology

83251 readers
4726 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 252 points 1 month ago (11 children)

Simple solution. From now on Linux distros should ship with a big message "NOT FOR USE IN CALIFORNIA".

You want to force age verification? No server in all of California will run. Period.

[–] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 70 points 1 month ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world 32 points 1 month ago (2 children)

"My name is Microsoft, and I approved this message."

[–] Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 month ago (11 children)

Microsoft's own servers run Linux. An in-house build IIRC named Azure Linux.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 101 points 1 month ago (8 children)

How will this affect embedded os like freertos or vxworks? There are lightbulbs that have operating systems these days, am I going to have to show ID to turn on my light?

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] ZoDoneRightNow@kbin.earth 93 points 1 month ago (3 children)

uhhh. So would I need to get everyone who uses the household pc to verify age? Whats stopping a child from using the family pc that was age verified by an adult?

[–] loie@lemmy.world 80 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Believe it or not, straight to jail

[–] jjfolken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Underage 👇🏼, Overage 👆🏼... Jail.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] orange_narange@lemmy.org 33 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Clearly the point is not tl verify the age. They want your data.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 89 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Despite signing it, Newsom issued a statement urging the legislature to amend the law before its effective date, citing concerns from streaming services and game developers about "complexities such as multi-user accounts shared by a family member and user profiles utilized across multiple devices."

Then why the fuck did you sign it if it wasn't ready and needed amendments? Is this what you're going to do as president too?

Rhetorical, of course. Note how he doesn't say he disagrees with the bill, just that it needed to consider family devices.

If this is who wins the primary, we are done. We're basically already done, for sure, but him winning the primary would be the final nail in the coffin.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 85 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (2 children)

Our president is fucking children, and you're telling me I gotta verify my date of birth to run Linux, in the name of "Protecting the Children"?

Get the fuck outta here.

[–] dellish@lemmy.world 21 points 4 weeks ago

They've gotta know if you're fuckable.

[–] Paranoidfactoid@lemmy.world 19 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

You're antifa if you run Linux anyway.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 68 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Why not parents responsible for their own goddamn kids? Stop interfering with the rest of our privacy for this bullshit. Parental controls have existed for decades. Fucking use them.

[–] btsax@reddthat.com 50 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Because this isn't about parenting or children, it's about a creeping surveillance state

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 67 points 1 month ago (17 children)

Wow California leading the way to fascism, who woulda thunk?

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 61 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Colorado Dems pushing a similar law rn.

Fucking idiots.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
[–] StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.org 65 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Enforcement against Linux distributions, however, is likely to be problematic. Distros like Arch, Ubuntu, Debian, and Gentoo have no centralized account infrastructure, with users downloading ISOs from mirrors worldwide, and can modify source code freely. These small distros lack legal teams or resources to implement the required API, so a more realistic outcome for non-compliant distros is a disclaimer that the software is not intended for use in California.

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 40 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's what MidnightBSD did.

California residents are not authorized to use MidnightBSD for desktop use in the state of California effective January 1, 2027. California law CA AB1043 requires a complex age verification system implemented for operating systems with no exceptions for small open source projects. At this time, we don't have development time or a plan in place for this.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 64 points 4 weeks ago (13 children)

You guys are asking the wrong questions.

How is Linux going to do this? There's no server for the os to send the information to report the age of its users, no way of forcing its user base to comply and no single person or entity to fine, arrest or otherwise force into compliance.

They made a law they cannot enforce.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] GreenShimada@lemmy.world 60 points 1 month ago

For everyone trying to figure out how this would be enforced, it's not about being proactively enforced. (and data collection is 99% of it)

It's about adding a double-tap "Well, these people also violated our age verification law, so they have to pay a fine," added to any incident where it's convenient to add this in. If a minor sends another minor a snap that would trigger CP laws, and one of the phones isn't age verified correctly, fine to the parents and hands up in the air "We tried!" A minor is involved in torrenting movies? "Look, kids using illegal OS! Fine to the parents!"

This is how laws work across a lot of corrupt developing countries. There's laws for everything, but they only get applied selectively as authorities find they fit the situation. It's hard to actually be 100% above board and do everything legally because of a few little things meant to be impossible to actually do bureaucratically. So in every situation, any set of authorities start in with the endemic leverage of "Well, we have suspicion of you selling ketamine out of your apartment. Did you do age verification on your laptop? No? Then we can seize that as a crime and see what's on there. OR you can give up your supplier."

[–] noxypaws@pawb.social 54 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Despite signing it, Newsom issued a statement urging the legislature to amend the law before its effective date, citing concerns from streaming services and game developers about "complexities such as multi-user accounts shared by a family member and user profiles utilized across multiple devices."

then why did you fucking sign it in the first place??

words cannot describe the depths of my seething hatred for the complete, museum grade, massive piece of shit that is Gavin Newsom

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 47 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Considering the massive number of servers running Linux used in the industry, this sounds like a good way to kill the Tech Industry in California.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 44 points 1 month ago (23 children)

This is a gift to Microsoft.

This law only applies to computers used by children. The law explicitly defines "users" as minors. It does not apply to machines used solely/primarily by adults. It does not apply to servers, or other machines with no local users. It won't affect the tech industry directly.

This law effectively prohibits your children from (legally) using anything but Microsoft/Google products until they are 18.

With this law, Linux cannot be installed on a school computer. With a FOSS OS, the local systems administrator would be considered the OS provider, and would be liable under this idiot law.

load more comments (23 replies)
[–] wuffah@lemmy.world 45 points 4 weeks ago (16 children)

The law does not require photo ID uploads or facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age, setting AB 1043 apart from similar laws passed in Texas and Utah that require "commercially reasonable" verification methods, such as government-issued ID checks.

What even is the point of this then? To make shitty parents feel better?

It's so next year when they expand the requirements the infrastructure is already in place.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] baller_w@lemmy.zip 43 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

The law does not require photo ID uploadsor facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age, setting AB 1043 apart from similar laws passed in Texas and Utah that require "commercially reasonable" verification methods, such as government-issued ID checks.

Seems toothless. Good.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Reygle@lemmy.world 39 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

OK Newsom, you've lost me. I enjoyed your chaotic responses to the drumpf but you've officially lost me.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 40 points 4 weeks ago (12 children)

Realize, this has always been him. He is NOT a liberal. He is a conservative who calls himself a democrat.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sol6_vi@lemmy.makearmy.io 37 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Did you guys know I was born January 1st 1901?

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 19 points 1 month ago (6 children)

I was born in January 1st 1970, more credible and symbolic.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Exeous@lemmy.world 36 points 1 month ago

What if no internet? How set up?

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 34 points 1 month ago (1 children)

User age required to be entered. There is no verification.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sbbq@lemmy.zip 33 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Are children not allowed to use computers now?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Inucune@lemmy.world 31 points 1 month ago

No way this is enforceable

[–] BioDriver@lemmy.world 30 points 4 weeks ago (5 children)

How the hell are they going to enforce this?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] StarryPhoenix97@lemmy.world 27 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (2 children)
[–] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 23 points 4 weeks ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] super_user_do@feddit.it 23 points 4 weeks ago (9 children)

This is a whole new level for system level fingerprinting

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Gork@sopuli.xyz 22 points 1 month ago

I've always input my age as 1900-01-01 and I can't change that now because that'll show an inconsistency and we can't have that now can we.

[–] Fokeu@lemmy.zip 20 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

Luckily this dogshit is completely unenforceable. It doesn't excuse the people who introduced this law, of course.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] pkjqpg1h@lemmy.zip 20 points 1 month ago

Why lawmakers are so stupid at understanding technology

[–] carpelbridgesyndrome@sh.itjust.works 20 points 4 weeks ago (4 children)

Since people aren't reading the article and the headline is misleading. The law requires:

  • The OS ask the user their date of birth on account creation (kinda like the Steam date of birth prompts)
  • The OS provide an API that returns which of four age brackets the user fits in
  • Companies notified by the OS that the user is under age may be liable

It was explicitly written by the authors not to mandate ID or facial recognition checks. You can lie about your date of birth. This basically creates a standard set of parental controls for parents configuring kids devices.

I think that this might actually help with the whole discord facial recognition issue in places other than the UK by allowing them to offload the issue to parents setting up devices rather than collecting kids biometrics.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 19 points 4 weeks ago

No biggie. I got ready for this in minutes after hearing about it.

#!/usr/bin/env fish
read -P "Are you old enough?  (yes/no)  " input
if test "$input" = "yes" -o "$input" = "Yes"
echo "Proceeding..."
else
echo "You are not old enough.  Exiting." 
exit 1
end

... What? ... Why are you all looking at me like that?

[–] arc99@lemmy.world 18 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

That would be a completely unworkable law since devices may not even have internet connectivity, or a user interface. And even if they did, it would have a chilling effect on software development in California.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] redsand 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This is religious repression of TempleOS

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›