Can anyone tell me exactly what these laws do? Is it just going to ask for a birthday when I run `adduser`?
What's the point? Is it meant for one admin account to restrict other user accounts?
What I got out of it was that an os has to provide an interface to applications so that if they make an age request(note that the law says nothing about when or what applications will make a age request) the os can provide something. and it has to provide an interface for the user to enter the information.
So when we map this requirement onto the mechanism of how the os provides information to applications. and how users set up the system. I have come to the conclusion that compliance on a unix-like platforms is as simple as
echo ${AGE_CATEGORY} > ~/.config/ca_ab_1043
Then the program can get the age category anytime it wants to. the user is able to put this information in at account setup just like the law asks using an accessible interface, the same interface everything else on a unix-like platform uses, the shell.
You’d need some script that updates the age category based on the user’s provided birthday (which is not shared with the applications) but otherwise yeah
The brackets are a few years wide, so it could take a bit of waiting. But yeah I’d consider setting a slightly different day/month for a child if I was paranoid.
I guess you could also make the bracket selectable instead of requiring the age
I believe the California law (which has passed) requires operating systems to collect the DoB or Age of the user when setting up a user account, and then expose an API that shares the users age range (not their actual age or birthdate) when requested by an application.
It does not require the OS to actually verify the age, collect government IDs, or any other data.
The intention, I think, is to put the responsibility for communicating the users age on the OS, instead of having each application or service do their own age verification (by scanning IDs, requesting user data, etc). Since it’s set on the machine, a parent can set it once for their kid when setting up the device.
Or I guess the kid can set it if they're smart enough to reinstall the OS or spawn a VM. I'm sure there will be online resources to help them that kids know how to share
Yeah if you have admin access to your device and know what you’re doing it’s basically a non-issue. I’m guessing a savvy high schooler can change their age bracket easily.
If you want to give a young child a laptop or computer though, it maybe helps keep them away from objectionable content.
The California law says nothing about verification or immutability, what if someone made a mistake when putting in their age? Why do we need to hide it? Better to just let the user change this at will.
Yeah the most likely thing (for the California law, at least) is that compliant OS's expose a form at account creation where you input a birthdate or age, and have either a CLI/file/setting where you can change the birthdate or age with admin permissions. No verification is needed
The short answer is that a lot of states now require KYC by service providers under the guise of adult content prohibition, "protecting the children", or mass surveillance. So the service providers like Facebook are trying to foist off the responsibility to the operating system. The pesky details of storing and managing PII becomes Somebody Else's Problem, and if the operating system implements an easily bypassed KYC e.g. a simple check box and then the kid get radicalized or get exposed to problematic content, the service provider can just shrug and point the finger at the OS. In other words it shifts the responsibility to the lowest level instead of the platform companies.
You can frame it nefariously, but honestly, it just makes way more sense to me. I want as little of my personal info as possible in the hands of random services, and that includes the stuff needed for KYC checks.
In the original article there are some blue underlined words. “California” is one of them. If you click it, you will get a nifty video answer to your question.
Depends on the law. Some of them say that the age range must be provided to all applications through an API, and all apps and “app stores” must filter content based on this value. Others say that this isn’t enough and you actually have to verify the age based on some commercial scheme like CC or ID verification. Some say you have to send the age to websites. Many of these laws seem to be in direct conflict about what is allowed and not allowed.
In all cases, at least in the US, these laws violate the first amendment (as code is a form of speech), and freedom respecting users and devs need to resist them until they can be defeated in court.
Honestly the laws don’t consider open source operating systems at all. They’re meant for the overwhelming majority who are using commercial operating systems. They imagine something like android or iOS or windows where yeah they ask the question during user creation and then handle the age gating in their app stores, anything outside that model isn’t something they’re going to spend any time thinking about, because why would they?
What to Submit
On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.
If the story was about a German national then yes, I would still say this is political and doesn't gratify my intellectual curiosity.
I'm still on Xmonad mainly because I've only tried hyprland and it couldn't handle the master/slave stack the way xmonad does. On River, when I create a new window will it be inserted above the current selected window even if the current window is the master?
Also, when it was split up what did he call his window manager? Looks like the River repo is just for his display server/compositor
ask a historian... my guess is no, but sleeping with a girl is better than porn if you get that option. we also don't know what 'exotic dancing' opportunities the 'common man' got.
No one is going to take you seriously if your argument is the tired, long debunked, wage gap argument. Women make less than men because they choose to. In recent years when you compare single working men to single working women, women are out-earning men. They're graduating college at higher rates.
There are countless other statistics that paint a clear picture that men are struggling. At what point will you actually care?
No one is going to take you seriously if your argument is the very reductive "because they choose to" (being tongue-in-cheek here, don't take it seriously)
It is very clear that public image has a huge impact on what people choose. For example, people who consider themselves introvert choose, in majority, to avoid fields that have a strong extrovert vibe. Similarly, people will tend to not choose fields if the field "gives a vibe" they don't feel they belong to. So, if there is an initial bias toward men, the fact that some people don't choose the field is in no way a proof that there is no bias.
I agree that the 10% number is not the best, but the "corrected" number where you take the samples in same job and position does the same mistake. In fact, there are arguments that in these cases, you have a selection bias (some of the men in the field are seeing this field as their calling, but some of the men are just doing it as a job without being overly passionated, while the women that are not overly passionated just don't choose this job) and that using this methodology, women should overperform because there is a gap. The "real" number is probably in between.
