cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/65555474

Fork time? Maybe all the anti-systemd zealots were right all along...

Edit: To address whether it is likely that this change will affect users: Gnome is planning a stronger dependence on userdb, the part of systemd where this change is being implemented. https://blogs.gnome.org/adrianvovk/2025/06/10/gnome-systemd-dependencies/

Final edit: The PR has been merged into main.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 116 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Wow, who knew all systemd users were born on 01/01/1970? What a coincidence!

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 5 months ago

    Imagine if using a dataset containing the same birthdate for everyone results in AIs predicting an upcoming mass extinction due to the entire worlds population being above a certain age. We could call it the epochalypse.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 57 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    Why does systemd need to verify age?

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    Because Meta's lobbying to kill the free and open internet, and personal computing as a concept. Also, MS, Apple, and Google are probably lobbying to kill their competition before it gets too great.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    I wonder if they have received directly some donations from that lobbying or signed some contract

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 5 months ago (1 child)
  • [+] 18 points 5 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 18 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    And yet those laws are definitely going to go to court and haven’t been passed yet even, so why the eagerness to comply???

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    They have been passed and will be enforced in like 2 years. They may be challenged, but it's not a guarantee that a court would oppose it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Ada preparing to drop systemd

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 5 months ago

    I'm really disappointed that someone hasn't just made a standalone userspace addon to implement the feature, shoved in down California's throat, and told them to come back with complaints once they can find where BSD came from.

    Adding this type of "support" is just giving legitimacy to crappy legislation. I would not bother even creating the underlying system so some underpaid google intern can make his age verification app 2% faster.

    This entire fiasco could have been a bash script that uses a new file in /etc to store birthdays.

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 5 months ago

    Another patch should be added to rename "Systemd" to "Surveillanced".

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 5 months ago

    Emmanuel Goldstein 123-45-6789 1-1-1970

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    GNU Shepherd: Oh, oh, oh! Me, me, me! Pick me! 🖐️🖐️🖐️

    https://shepherding.services/

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    @skyline2@lemmy.dbzer0.com @linux@lemmy.world

    Brazilian here. I'm neither a lawyer nor a specialist, just someone who has read the Portuguese text from the Brazilian flavor of the ongoing worldwide age check set of laws.

    I must note that the Brazilian age check law (Lei 15.211/2025) specifies "vedada a autodeclaração" (English: "self-declaring is forbidden"). This means that this kind of implementation, where age or birthday is an user input, wouldn't be compliant to Lei 15.211/2025, because it requires the age information to be assessed independently from the user whose age is being assessed. This means face biometrics, government-issued ID (in our case, CPF, CNH, Passaporte and similar) or "behaviorial analysis"... Anything but a "yes I'm 18" or "I was born in day month year", for those are self-declared and the Law says it's "not enough".

    Someone should warn the systemd maintainers of this "Brazilian jabuticaba".

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    OK. Fair point, but hear me out, his is this different than say user1 is admin who then verifies user2 by looking at id and says verified. sudo moduser user2 birthDate 'yyyy/mm/dd'

    And how is that different than I'm user1 and user2 and perform the operation myself.

    I guess what I'm trying to say is that this is stupid. I'm also a bit offended about the flatpak comment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    @dis_honestfamiliar@lemmy.sdf.org @linux@lemmy.world

    How is this different than say user1 is admin who then verifies user2 by looking at id and says verified.

    As far as I understood (because the law is annoyingly and purposefully vague-worded), it wouldn't be the user1 the one verifying user2 precisely because both are users (despite their different system privileges). The law requires the "fornecedor de produtos e serviços de tecnologia da informação" (IT products and services supplier) to check the users's age, not the users themselves.

    In the end, it feels like the lawmakers are wishing for something akin to Windows or MacOS: the user must link to an online account, which is bound to the corporation, which is then the one who will do the KYC (know your customer) shenanigans, often by relying on third-party services (such as Persona and au10tix) to achieve this.

    To me, this is part of why MidnightBSD and Arch Linux 32-bits (and more to come) went nuclear and geoblocked Brazil: there's no way this can be feasible for distros not Ubuntu, Red Hat, that Amazon distro whose name I forgot, or similar distros underneath the umbrella of a fairly large corp.

    I guess what I’m trying to say is that this is stupid.

    Yeah, I agree with you. This age check thing is stupid and, to be honest, extremely depressing as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago

    Void Linux with runit, here I come!

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    If this shitstorm keeps up, I will just build my own OS at some point

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    It is optional field and can be unset and set to arbitrary value by the administrator. If you can build your own OS, isn't it easier to just unset this value?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Age verification is fucking scaremongering for this.

    It literally adds a field to record user ages. It doesn't verify anything.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 8 points 5 months ago
    [–] 7 points 5 months ago
    [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    So are we jumping ships ? Where to I go, where do I go?

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    Artix chads rise up

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›