A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
Well, it's clear Linux is getting a lot of attention on the desktop side of things. So it's important that all organizations involved make the right decisions for the public interest and the environment of Linux.
That means a community level of compliance that matches Big Tech capacities.
Which values should I absolutely not manually write into the birthday field Json data, because they could break the DB on the other side when storing unsanitized input?
Asking for a friend?
Of all terrible proposals coming up in this period, I'm still more-or-less ok with this system because the administrator is still in full control to set whatever date they want, and the field is entirely optional.
They call it "age verification" in the aricle, but there's no 3rd party "verification" whatsoever. It's just a field for the user birth date saved in the user metadata. This is IMHO acceptable because it doesn't force anybody to provide IDs or personal information to some random shady company.
I think calling it "age verification" is a bit confusing and will make people unhappy by default, but might be a smart move to make it compliant with the new laws coming out in this period (the user age was "verified" by the system administrator, after all).
For me at least, it's less about the age field itself and more about the swift act of compliance with an absurd and overbearing demand
whereas I , out of pettiness, will switch an entire server to openRC to fuck over these assholes who only care about “line goes up”
A man of culture, I see. Every system I admin runs SysVInit or OpenRC. I do not need a 'dictator' like systemd.
Yep. Its honestly mild as hell.
Essentially legislation that says:
Its just a standardized system that should have been done ages ago, but was not a priority for standards orgs, so none stepped up - so legislation appeared.
I strongly argue that it should only apply to commercial OSes and app stores though - as they're the ones that primarily cause issues these laws intent to address.
Linux and FOSS have been caught in the crossfire in a privacy and personal data battle they were not involved in.
The legislation is entirely to allow Facebook to get away with harming minors, so I wouldn’t call it mild in any sense of the word.
The boiling pot goes up 1C, then another 1C
nope. slippery slope is basically “bad thing can happen, so it will happen” without evidence to support that outcome. here, we have a trajectory. there’s a pattern. it has momentum at this point. it hasn’t changed corse. it’s followed a predictable and proven pattern. It’s done so because the the pressures exerted on this particular system guide the outcome in predictable ways.
that is entirely different than the slippery slope dismissal
No, entirely incorrect. "bad thing can happen, so it will happen" is essentially a mangling of Murphy's Law.
In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is rejected [eg: this minor law] because the slippery slope advocate believes it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends [eg: loose claims of a pot getting hotter implying further details will be demanded next].
More "thin end of the wedge".
the lemmy doomers must scratch their suicidal itch
I disagree. While I totally understand that it is an optional feature that can enabled and enforced only by others, I am not happy that the developers of systemd rushed to include it into the JSON file with the user info. I would expect the developers to be a bit more resistant to requests by two US states and Brazil. Why are they making it so easy? I guess we will see a resurgence of systemd-free dirstros.
They can fuck off. Time to check out Artix.
Sorry, minor correction. Not all the systemd developers. One single dickhead wrote it and two chuds who work at microslop merged the PR made this happen. The git structure got hijacked. People are arguing over the validity and necessity of the PR while ignoring the broader goals this serves.
To be frank, I am so sick of this invasive nonsense. I have a son and you know how I'm going to manage access for him? Not fucking letting him have the damn computer before he knows how to use it safely. I grew up on Web 1 and web 2.0. They were much scarier places back in the day and easier to find.
Moreover, this also follows with the trend of sensationalizing threats to make the pearl clutchers feel this is a good choice. Its no different that how the news screams the US is unsafe with tons of violent crime to justify this kind of bullshit when violent crime has been declining on the whole.
This ginned up controversy serves one interest. Control access to knowledge so you never question the State again.
It also lets the Epstein class know who the minors are.
Can we have a rule that if you work for microslop then you are invalidated from working on any Linux project? Doesn't that sound reasonable?
I had problems with systemd before... but this capitulation to what is clearly an unconstitutional demand...
fuck systemd devs. fuck them all.
ohh now theyve gone and done it.
normies are gonna start hating on systremd for this. which will upset the og systemd haters for hating systemd for the wrong reasons, thereby frustrating the og systemd haters and helping them achieve new yet unmet levels of hate for systemd.
just a guess
Yes. I also hate feeling confused about where my hatred for SystemD firsts into the bigger picture
eh?
og systemd hater (ish) here, personally I'm hoping to team up with the new systemd haters. This is just yet Another reason to hate on it, haha. We can work together!
(granted we came to Linux (from Mac) lonnggg after systemd already got entrenched, but the reasons we hated systemd (before now) were the same sorts of "it's trying to take over everything" reasons that the og haters hate it for)
-- Frost
"normies" will not care at all
i mean sure, but ofc i meant normies in the context of linux
Whatever the old farts will come with their stupid laws, SURPRISE MOTHERFUCKERS, it's Linux. It's always a sudo away from doing (or not) exactly what you (don't) want. I know. This is beyond their comprehension. Adding a field here is ok to me. Because if it ends up being used:
The only thing that will hurt from this are companies in CA, CO and wherever.
The average Linux user will not give a single fuck. I know I don't.
So why not just remove the field then?
Because they are bootlicking and being complicit in shifting the Overton Window. Let's have guns everywhere, but the Internet is too dangerous.
I like the idea of a system add-on that randomizes all user age responses with a different date that equals like 25-99years old (assuming 25 years meets the highest age for the applicable standards).
Not too dissimilar from a random MAC address generating feature.
How to get age verification into linux? Easy, just tell Poettering that if he doesn't hurry up and do it first, some non-systemd approach might become the standard.
the operating systems job is to negotiate between software and hardware. its there to make sure “my red triangle program draws the same red triangle on anything running this environment regardless of the parts used to build the machine”. its not there to rat you out to a surveillance state or advertisers or meta.
The idea that this protects children is insane and nobody believes this for a second. Hormones happened and little timmy has discovered the wonders of nudity and friction. age attestation doesn’t stop that. it doesn’t stop horrible people from preying on that. it doesn’t teach timmy the difference between fantasy and what a healthy relationship really looks like. it doesn’t address any of those things.
it tracks people. that is all it does. that is all it is for. and considering literal nazis are in power, nobody wants this. it does not solve a problem.