148
Ageless Linux - Software for Humans of Indeterminate Age (agelesslinux.org)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 15 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 34 points 6 months ago (1 child)

cool malicious compliance xD

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 13 points 6 months ago

    First time Ive heard about Milk-V Duo S. Interesting. Looks very cheap!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 7 points 6 months ago*

    For the record - it's not a complaint, just a remark - i'm 95% sure the website text is written by Claude. Nothing wrong with that but some people may be annoyed by that, and I don't see a disclaimer about it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    I just realised according to this law since Linux users have full control we're all technically operating system providers!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [+] -32 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (9 children)

    This just seems like an attempt to get sued to challenge the law.

    Funny the amount of work that people are putting into such a nothing burger of a law.

    Edit: also interesting to see the critical meltdown our community has over a law that doesn't even require ID verification.

    Edit 2: also I will be honest I did not read the entire home page. It is like 5 or 6 times longer than the law that it is complaining about.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 29 points 6 months ago* (5 children)

    It's like, why do you care if a cop searches your car or your apartment, if you got nothing to hide!

    Edit: /s in case you thought I was as dumb as that comment lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [+] -13 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    The law does not require giving the government any access to your system or even sending them any information. This is just false equivalency.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    The New York version does require verification but for some reason nobody seems to be mentioning that

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    That is accurate and should absolutely be fought to the end. But the one that this "new" "distro" talks about is specifically the California one.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 24 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    It's the first law that I'm aware of that legally requires an automated system that you own and operate to snitch on you at any time, to anyone who asks, without asking your permission.

    For the moment, it only has to report a piece of data that you are free to lie about. For the moment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -10 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    But you do give it permission. The data is only shared when you either install or open an application. Both things that you need to initiate. Nothing in the law requires that the data be sent off device. Ideally all of this checking would happen on device. And for those apps that don't meet that standard, don't use them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •