Is there an OpenSUSE announcement regarding the age verification bills?

English Open Chat
21

I think the more interesting question would be how operating systems guarantee that users and admins can enter correct ages only :wink:
Those demanding such rules did not really think, or they just wanted to get more precious privacy data for free.

22

Everybody who clutches their pearls about this topic, should have a basic read. This law is a paper tiger.

The law does not require photo ID uploads or facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age,

And for everybody who is capable of reading the law itself:

23

That’s not true, and it’s also rather naive.
It says that the operating system has to pass the data on to the app developers.
This means the user can be tracked. And not just young users, but everyone!

1 Like
24

You may want to read the linked law, before claiming it is not true.

It even explains that collecting more data or submitting it to third parties is not allowed.

But yeah, it is hard to discuss technical topics when emotions are involved…

25

It’s right there in the introduction of the first linked article.
The belief that nothing else will be handed over is very, very naive.
Ban. Never trust it.
See the EU’s scrapped chat monitoring.
The big three continue to scan away diligently. There is no intervention from politicians. Because that is actually what they want.
That is why I say NO – absolutely, 1000%, without restrictions and without the slightest concession – to the surveillance regulations and fantasies.

1 Like
26

It’s linux. First, if the company does not exist in the place where the law is, it is not required to enforce the age verification. They can simply have a disclaimer that the OS is not for use in those states. Also, using a recovery boot disk, you will be able to hack into the userdb and put all “***'s” in the field. You will also be able to set the userdb file to read only by root and set the stick bit so it’s perms can’t be changed even by root ( I have been bit by that before so I know it works). Like a previous post said, any distro that enforces this will no longer be used. There is also the possibility of a ‘legal challenge’. for example, it a minor uses it they would be using a machine where the default birthday is for an adult. That kind of loop hole will probably invalidate the law. It will be interesting to watch though

27

How on earth do you know all that?
And even if you did, sorry, your view and beliefs are very naive.
Once you start, no matter how small the change, Pandora’s box is opened.
That’s why. 1000% NO to everything!

28

There are users which can read a really short piece of law and understand it. And than there are „1000% NO to everything“ users :roll_eyes:

It‘s sad that some ppl do not even think a little bit ahead. Age verification (the verification is even missing in this law) is an absolute standard in daily life. Movies, bank accounts, games, nearly everything in life needs an age verification…but for some ppl this seems like devils work and restriction of their rights… :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

1 Like
29

dismissing peoples’ concerns about mandatory data collection is not the way to go about this. surveillance fears are not unjustified. even if the current laws allow you to put whatever you want into the fields, once they become standard it would not take much to make photo id mandatory, and later clear name enforcement on the internet, things like that. And what’s stopping other states from going further than the laws in california?
people have had their houses searched for lesser offenses than lying about their identity on the internet.
Opposition at an early stage is certainly the right way to go about it, I just wish people were more reasonable towards devs, maintainers and admins. lawmakers should bear the brunt of complaints.

3 Likes
30

Since you’re attacking me here without any justification, I suppose I’m allowed to say that there are also people who are extremely naive, who can’t see beyond their own noses and can only parrot what they’re told.
Without the ability to combine ideas, think beyond A to B, and form their own opinions independently of others.
If you now feel attacked and delete this comment, then I ask you to delete your comment in its entirety as well.

31

Going to ask that everyone bring the temperature down a bit here.

If y’all can’t do that, then we’ll close the topic.

32

I don‘t feel attacked. And i didn‘t attack you. But yelling „1000% against everything“ is kind of useless. It misses all technical background or base. It‘s only FUD.

33

But it is precisely the legislature that sets out these surveillance fantasies and requirements.
And not just far away, but right here in the EU and its member states. So you don’t have to look far.

1 Like
39

We can argue all day about the (admittedly very real) potential for mass surveillance and legislative creep, but two issues stand out to me:

  1. The California law does not require anything from the user beyond typing a number (to be stored locally) when installing an OS

  2. Failure to comply means no Linux for the people of California (or Colorado, or Illinois, who are passing copycat laws)

As a resident of Illinois, I’m willing to type a number upon installation if the alternative is no Linux for me. I would rather not have to do that, but the Illinois General Assembly is leaving me no alternatives.

Save your vitriol for Apple, Google, Microsoft, and your legislators.

1 Like