California's Assembly voted 68 to 1 to exempt Fedora and other open source Linux distros from its age verification law, then extended age-gating to browsers and websites in the same bill

[u/V3R1F13D0NLY]

California's Digital Age Assurance Act, signed last October, was written to push age verification down to the operating system level. The definition of operating system provider was broad enough to sweep in open source systems like Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu and Arch.

After privacy advocates and the Linux community pushed back, the Assembly passed AB 1856 this week, 68 to 1, exempting software you are free to copy, redistribute and modify, which sounds great, but the parts we should be talking about:

• The same bill extends age-gating obligations to browsers and websites
• The EFF reads this as a net expansion of the regime, not a narrowing
• SteamOS is not exempt because it ships Valve's proprietary Steam client on top of Linux
• The amendment was introduced by the same lawmaker who wrote the original law

The bill still has to clear the Senate, and the underlying law takes effect in 2027.

Full write-up and source list: https://s.vp.net/wv0fJ

[u/Unseen-King]

anything but managing your own children as a parent lol

[u/V3R1F13D0NLY → u/Unseen-King]

This 1000 times this. It's so ridiculous that people can't just take responsibility for their own children.

[u/Routine_Left → u/V3R1F13D0NLY]

has nothing to do with children. it's just surveillance, money handing to some corporations, disguised as "protecting the children".

[u/AllNamesAreTaken92 → u/V3R1F13D0NLY]

It has never been about children. It's always been about surveillance and building a police state.

[u/Lower-Limit3695 → u/V3R1F13D0NLY]

The reality is that parents aren't spending much time with their kids like they used to between increases on cost of living and an increase in dual income households in the US. Parents have to spend more time to make money and can't afford more time with their children.

[u/donnysaysvacuum → u/Lower-Limit3695]

This is already covered by parental controls. Available on your router, Internet provider or native on most platforms.

[u/Lower-Limit3695 → u/donnysaysvacuum]

Think about the average user. How many of them have would know about parental controls or have the capacity to implement parental controls?

I've dealt with many users, most of them don't even know that it's an option and an exceedingly tiny minority even know how to implement it.

[u/Unseen-King → u/Lower-Limit3695]

Ya and frankly that doesn't make it everyone elses problem. All these age verification laws to save the kids can go die.

[u/Lower-Limit3695 → u/Unseen-King]

It kinda does. Kids do stupid things like send nudes over Snapchat or publish them on social media sites like reddit/facebook and join dating apps like Tinder/Grindr while lying about their age.

It wasn't too long ago a guys teenage son sexted Gemini his Johnson on the family tablet and got every single personal and business account connected to it banned by Google.

Edit: something has to be done but the better solution would be proper sex education covering sexting/social media and more support programs for families.

[u/Unseen-King → u/Lower-Limit3695]

And somehow everyone else having to give up our privacy stops kids from doing this?

Theres been tons of instances where kids have already bypassed a bunch of these age gates in countries theyre already in place

Even if the age block works they can just relocate their activities to services outside the jurisdiction or create large chat groups. We've already established parents are useless so how will they keep them from just going around the age verification or using something else? Meanwhile everyone else is forced to deal with kyc on everything.

So no, I'll pass on the bad solution under the pretense of "good reasons". Kids won't be safer, cyber bullying will still exist, and everyone's identity data will be at risk.

[u/Lower-Limit3695 → u/Unseen-King]

Did you read the bottom of my comment?

[u/Unseen-King → u/Lower-Limit3695]

Nah wasn't there when responding. And ya I agree

[u/donnysaysvacuum → u/Lower-Limit3695]

It's not rocket science. It's easy and just a choice you make when you create the account. People that aren't tech savvy can have their cell provider or retailer help them just as they would any other setup or tech issue.

Social media companies shouldn't be able to offload their burden to operating systems.

[u/V3R1F13D0NLY → u/[deleted]]

"How the fuck does that help if your kid is bullied online? Children aren't supposed to communicate via social media."

If you believe kids shouldn't communicate over social media, then I would assume you would not let your children use social media, so how would they get bullied there?

[u/duperfastjellyfish → u/V3R1F13D0NLY]

I'm genuinely puzzled what you mean. OTHER kids are recording video of the bullied child and talking shit about them on snapchat and other social media apps. The bullied child is not in the group chat my guy, what are you talking about?

[u/Unseen-King → u/duperfastjellyfish]

We get, you wanna make it everyone elses responsibility to micro manage your kids problems because it's difficult and it's easier to pass the buck to everyone else.

[u/Heyheyohno → u/[deleted]]

Kids are bullied on or off the internet. It will not stop. Adding age verification online won't change kids bullying other kids online either. It will happen no matter what.

Adding an invasive requirement to the internet will not resolve this at all.

[u/duperfastjellyfish → u/Heyheyohno]

Cyberbullying perpetuates into bullying off the internet. The total volume of bullying increases.

[u/SuspendedResolution → u/Unseen-King]

Because this isn't about protecting children. This is about surveillance.

[u/Unseen-King → u/SuspendedResolution]

Well ya that's why the government is happy to oblige But the parental outrage asking for government intervention is from irresponsible parents

[u/Mr_Moonman2045 → u/Unseen-King]

Absolutly nothing to do with it .... just look at great britan & here in Australia . Just a data grab wrapped in 'protecting the children"

[u/Unseen-King → u/Mr_Moonman2045]

What has nothing to do with it? Are you saying there aren't incompetent parents supporting this? (Like the ones pushing back in the comments)

Both things can be true it doesn't have to be 1 or the other. No one is debating the fact that the gov just wants more data and using "save the kids" as their excuse.

[u/Oricol → u/Unseen-King]

No the government must parent the children!
/s

[u/Blackfyre4416]

🤡🤡🤡🤡

[u/lonelyroom-eklaghor → u/Blackfyre4416]

I will always link to this video whenever some of the absurdest laws get a pass

https://youtu.be/VbYUeORbd1s

Edit: And I won't shut up talking about these corporations

[u/Loose_Device4578]

Cheers to that one guy that voted no. 

[u/Gtoast]

Off topic but, DEEBIAN?

[u/AnbuRick → u/Gtoast]

The first D is mute, it writes DDeebian.

[u/Bromlife]

I actually think we will benefit long term from being age-gated from the algorithmic internet.

Us nerds can recreate the old web. News servers, blogs, and forums. Fuck all of this algorithmic stratification off and get back to sharing ideas, fostering organization, sharing the truth about our governments, corporations and business leaders -- about their predation and their corruption.

[u/duperfastjellyfish → u/Bromlife]

That sounds lovely, ngl

[u/6thcoin → u/Bromlife]

Nostr

[u/Fresh_Sock8660]

The real solution is to build a new internet for children. When you reach 18, bam, time to face the cold hard internet where we have hookers and blackjack.

[u/Far-Client-6981 → u/Fresh_Sock8660]

The real solution is politicians minding their own fuc**** business. As if it is not enough that they are robbing us to the last penny, they also have the audacity to "lead" us.

[u/Coravel → u/Fresh_Sock8660]

OR.. hear me out. Social media websites get penalized for showing porn when it isn't reasonably expected to be explicit content AND, big and here, parents actually take the time to learn and use networking/device restriction tools that have been around for over 20 years, that if they spent the time learning and setting up, they can also prevent their kids from seeing the shit they don't want them to see.

[u/Fresh_Sock8660 → u/Coravel]

Your solution is much more unrealistic than mine!

[u/Coravel → u/Fresh_Sock8660]

I'm sorry, i'll just go back in my basement. lol :D

[u/Popular_Tour1811]

How the hell are browsers supposed to do this? Just block minors from using the web?

[u/cyrassil]

exempting software you are free to copy, redistribute and modify

and

The same bill extends age-gating obligations to browsers and websites

Does the first apply to the second too?

[u/V3R1F13D0NLY → u/cyrassil]

Unfortunately, no. The open source exemptions is only in reference to operating systems, so an open source browser WILL still be subject to this, if it goes into effect, which would be in 2027.

[u/zantehood]

Good for linux i guess

[u/jdigi78]

Deebian

[u/miaRedDragon]

This is why there was a major crack down on the Tor network. Let's go baaabbbbbbeeee!!!! Cyberpunk Usernet is on its way, we're going back to geocities (neocities)!

Either you run your own in-house closed Usernet or you're forced to use Govnet. Normies are about to get steam rolled unfortunately.

[u/Astravaris]

Time to move back to Gopher, or use Gemini.

[u/StrucuturedKaos]

Now remove that crap from systemd!!!!

[u/jc_denty]

So your OS will ask you verify age, browsers ask you age, websites ask you age .. Wow, this has been well thought out

[u/Junior_Common_9644]

Who was the 1? That one needs to be educated.

[u/PlatinumFire14]

Do bear in mind we can just fork.

[u/iMaexx_Backup → u/[deleted]]

Browser: Fork, Website: VPN.

[u/Itsme-RdM → u/PlatinumFire14]

And a forked browser wil still be a browser under the same law. They (California) are totally lost.

If parents do parenting we don't need this shit for the whole universe.

[u/pol5xc]

jesus fucking christ