▲ 223 ▼ An upcoming California law requires operating system providers to enforce basic mandatory age verification (www.pcgamer.com) submitted 6 months ago by cm0002@infosec.pub to c/linux@programming.dev 56 comments fedilink hide all child comments Apparently this will include Linux...
[–] curiousaur@reddthat.com 44 points 6 months ago (6 children) Anything but holding parents responsible. permalink fedilink source hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] altphoto@lemmy.today 7 points 6 months ago Anything but giving parents/users responsibility. Sudo su root! Sudo su root now! I'm giving root to my kids if and when I feel like they can handle it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JakenVeina@midwest.social 1 point 6 months ago This literally IS putting the responsibility on parents. The law requires that part of "account setup" includes asking the user's age bracket, and then allowing apps installed via "stores" to retrieve that value from the OS. The entire burden of trust in this implementation is placed on the owner of the hardware, exactly where it should be. permalink fedilink source parent [–] artyom@piefed.social -1 points 6 months ago (3 children) For real. Let's repeal all the laws around age, and make parents responsible. Drinking, smoking, driving, body art, firearms, etc. Let parents decide! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] curiousaur@reddthat.com 2 points 6 months ago (2 children) No, let's hold parents responsible if their child breaks any laws. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 3 points 6 months ago (1 child) What laws? As far as I know it's not illegal for children to view pornography. Are you suggesting it should be? And you would have their parents charged with a crime if they were to do it? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 6 months ago Children have been in their neighbor's dad's nude mags since the beginning of time. Maybe if they don't get molested and perps go free we could make progress there. " We can't arrest anyone for Epstein files, but we need to track you so we can 'protect children'." It's outrageous. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 7 points 6 months ago Anything but giving parents/users responsibility. Sudo su root! Sudo su root now! I'm giving root to my kids if and when I feel like they can handle it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JakenVeina@midwest.social 1 point 6 months ago This literally IS putting the responsibility on parents. The law requires that part of "account setup" includes asking the user's age bracket, and then allowing apps installed via "stores" to retrieve that value from the OS. The entire burden of trust in this implementation is placed on the owner of the hardware, exactly where it should be. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] artyom@piefed.social -1 points 6 months ago (3 children) For real. Let's repeal all the laws around age, and make parents responsible. Drinking, smoking, driving, body art, firearms, etc. Let parents decide! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] curiousaur@reddthat.com 2 points 6 months ago (2 children) No, let's hold parents responsible if their child breaks any laws. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 3 points 6 months ago (1 child) What laws? As far as I know it's not illegal for children to view pornography. Are you suggesting it should be? And you would have their parents charged with a crime if they were to do it? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 6 months ago Children have been in their neighbor's dad's nude mags since the beginning of time. Maybe if they don't get molested and perps go free we could make progress there. " We can't arrest anyone for Epstein files, but we need to track you so we can 'protect children'." It's outrageous. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] curiousaur@reddthat.com 2 points 6 months ago (2 children) No, let's hold parents responsible if their child breaks any laws. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 3 points 6 months ago (1 child) What laws? As far as I know it's not illegal for children to view pornography. Are you suggesting it should be? And you would have their parents charged with a crime if they were to do it? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 6 months ago Children have been in their neighbor's dad's nude mags since the beginning of time. Maybe if they don't get molested and perps go free we could make progress there. " We can't arrest anyone for Epstein files, but we need to track you so we can 'protect children'." It's outrageous. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] artyom@piefed.social 3 points 6 months ago (1 child) What laws? As far as I know it's not illegal for children to view pornography. Are you suggesting it should be? And you would have their parents charged with a crime if they were to do it? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 6 months ago Children have been in their neighbor's dad's nude mags since the beginning of time. Maybe if they don't get molested and perps go free we could make progress there. " We can't arrest anyone for Epstein files, but we need to track you so we can 'protect children'." It's outrageous. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 6 months ago Children have been in their neighbor's dad's nude mags since the beginning of time. Maybe if they don't get molested and perps go free we could make progress there. " We can't arrest anyone for Epstein files, but we need to track you so we can 'protect children'." It's outrageous. permalink fedilink source parent