Tbh, this is just a massive stack of misguidedness.
First, look at what the original law does:
OS needs to know the age.
OS itself doesn’t do anything with the age
OS needs to provide the age to apps and services asking for it
Apps and services need to block content based on the age provided with the OS
If the OS doesn’t provide an age, apps and services have to block as if the user was a toddler
Removing the requirement for the OS to provide an age doesn’t change anything at all, because someone running an OS that doesn’t provide an age will just be blocked everywhere. That’s not a solution, that’s a joke to appease idiots who don’t know what the law does.
This is just as misguided as the backlash against systemd who added an age field to the user account to allow people to be still able to access age-restricted content.
The actually relevant part that people should be combatting is the requirement for apps and services to do age verification using the OS-provided age. The OS age field doesn’t matter.
I wish people actually read the california law, it’s rather short, and covers a lot of the “gotchas” people are coming up with (e.g. No it doesn’t apply to servers).
I don’t like age verification laws (Especially since I live in a jurisdiction with one already in effect) but at least argue against the law itself rather than a strawman version people heard about via social media.
People argue against Bad Thing incredibly fucking badly. Just abysmal. They don’t understand why or how the Bad Thing happened. They didn’t read the document containing Bad Thing. They don’t know who or what is involved with Bad Thing or where. Nonetheless, they vehemently argue against Bad Thing, using only their imagination as source material.
Someone with more experience fighting Bad Thing shows up in the comments, tries to argue against the misinformation, only to inevitably be accused of defending the Bad Thing.
Tbh, this is just a massive stack of misguidedness.
First, look at what the original law does:
Removing the requirement for the OS to provide an age doesn’t change anything at all, because someone running an OS that doesn’t provide an age will just be blocked everywhere. That’s not a solution, that’s a joke to appease idiots who don’t know what the law does.
This is just as misguided as the backlash against systemd who added an age field to the user account to allow people to be still able to access age-restricted content.
The actually relevant part that people should be combatting is the requirement for apps and services to do age verification using the OS-provided age. The OS age field doesn’t matter.
I wish people actually read the california law, it’s rather short, and covers a lot of the “gotchas” people are coming up with (e.g. No it doesn’t apply to servers).
I don’t like age verification laws (Especially since I live in a jurisdiction with one already in effect) but at least argue against the law itself rather than a strawman version people heard about via social media.
This is so common online.
Bad Thing happens.
People argue against Bad Thing incredibly fucking badly. Just abysmal. They don’t understand why or how the Bad Thing happened. They didn’t read the document containing Bad Thing. They don’t know who or what is involved with Bad Thing or where. Nonetheless, they vehemently argue against Bad Thing, using only their imagination as source material.
Someone with more experience fighting Bad Thing shows up in the comments, tries to argue against the misinformation, only to inevitably be accused of defending the Bad Thing.