goes on to provide an entire way to implement it
Yeah no, this guy is an absolute asshole
this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2026
114 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
83452 readers
3725 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
also, why shouldn't children have a computer?
They might use it to get support when their abusive parents send them to conversion therapy /s
I wouldn't even /s that
How does systemd having an optional birthDate field prevent children from having a computer?
It also has fields for 'Real Name' and 'Location' (and has since the 1960s).
load more comments
(8 replies)
load more comments
(7 replies)
I think a birthday field in Pam or passwd would be fine. It'd be cool to have a happy birthday motd on login.
But it doesn't belong in what should be an init system. Much of the scope of systemd beyond an init system is the real issue. Resolved for example. Fuck poettering.
resolved is not part of the init system.
The change was to systemd-userdb (and systemd-homed but that one most distros don't use) which is optional. You can use the init system without it. You onl yneed it if some apps want to use user records beyond the default NSS ones.
Don't like systemd-resolve? Fine. I get that plenty of implementation details are incomplete, suck or have caused friction with other software. On the other hand it's a really useful tool for dynamic split dns handling, which is why I like using it. You can disable it, I've done so on some workstations and servers, because of poor choices in internal domain names leading to mDNS issues, knock yourself out.
Don't think it should be part of an init system? It really isn't. I wouldn't call systemd just an init system to begin with, though that was the initial project goal. Most of its parts are reasonably well separated or at least highly configurable for a service layer. I genuinely think it's completely insane to have DNS resolution in libc, but people have gotten used to that. Systemd-resolved is completely inoffensive in comparison imho.
Don't like systemd as a whole? Use a distro without it. It really is that simple. Everything has been discussed - at length. Wars have been fought. At this point, change will only come if the complainers actually sit down, shut up and do some work towards their goals.
Sorry this turned into such a rant, most of this isn't even directed at you, this situation just annoys me. Especially this poor guy getting death threats on GitHub because someone riled up all the asshats in the community who have no idea how any of this works. Maybe they should focus their energy on the political forces pushing the California legislation that started this whole mess? I've been tired of this stupid debate for years now. I feel like it's mostly carried by people who have no idea what they are talking about these days.
I wouldn't call systemd just an init system to begin with, though that was the initial project goal.
Scope creep. You're describing scope creep.
Which goes against the do one thing and do it well philosophy that helps to keep things stable and secure.
load more comments
(1 replies)
We should push to switch to runit or something, and dnsmasq+Network Manager as the golden standards.
happy birthday motd
I would uninstall this immediately
Right now, we’re considering implementing something akin to the date pickers that were ubiquitous when signing up for internet services in the early 2000s where it’s just an honor system.
If you implement that, I switch to a fork that removes it.
Or even leverage the Ageless Linux OS project in protest
I love this so much
load more comments
(5 replies)
Lmao, did that fucker really think he'd just get away with people saying "oh no~"?
Yeah, what an idiot. To expect people to not behave like an angry mob and target him for harassment.
Such a dummy.
load more comments
(2 replies)
The only ID verification that works is when a legal entity that has liability for misuse verifies IDs. I want to live in a world where kids install linux on a pi and thus have root to set whatever settings they want. IF you need to verify ID for some reason, then you need to verify with something that the kids don't control - that everyone else can trust (good luck)
How about I'd there is no verification at all and it's just a local value?
Stop letting the fascists frame the narrative.
We don't need local values at all. Computer should not be broadcasting personal identifiable info to every single website and cookie out there, regardless if it lets you lie or not. That's fucking idiotic.
If you want to do what these things claim to be for, and protect children, you make websites contain a flag for content rating and local devices do the filtering.
Not the other way around, which is only useful for tracking. Most websites aren't going to bother to follow through on it, anyway, why make it even more difficult and unlikely they do so?
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(18 replies)
view more: next ›