The coordinated effort worked. When lawmakers finalized Colorado SB26-051, they added Section 6-30-105(e) to the text. This specific clause waives compliance for operating systems and applications distributed under licenses that allow copying, modifying, and redistributing without platform-imposed technical restrictions. Why the Section 6-30-105(e) Exemption Protects Decentralized Tech

This exemption establishes a formal legislative precedent for the tech industry. It legally shields free and open-source operating systems from hardware-level age attestation laws that closed ecosystems like iOS and Windows will soon have to follow.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 149 points 3 months ago (4 children)

It's unenforceable on Linux. A Linux user can simply remove or modify any code running on their machine. Fedora, Debian, and Arch can't make a user verify their age any more than they can force you to use Gnome. It's kinda the whole point of FOSS.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    There is a very easy way to force linux users to enforce this. However, I won't give it away here, because as far as I can tell the current law makers are clueless.

    And I don't want to give them clues.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    I'm already seeing that in a year or two, we're getting blocked on websites or electron applications because of age verification just like in android with Google Play Services. Like use age verification software or get blocked for 99% the internet.

    They don't even need to turn it into law.

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

    Honestly the faster they try to lock us out of the web the sooner we can get a second, freer web with card games and prostitution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    "Like putting too much air in a balloon!"

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

    Whatever device based verification those websites or electron apps were communicating with can be spoofed in a system where you have complete control.

    Games are cracked in weeks at most, don't you think that whatever secure communication is established won't be cracked lightning fast by the whole FOSS community? Once the "secure communication" between local apps is broken, a third package can mitm that shit easily. It's a local environment.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I'm going to argue that you share it because one thing you can count on is very determined nerds to defeat it.

    Every time legislators tried to enforce some sort of dystopian thing, developers saw it as damage and routed around it.

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

    You're not wrong, security through obscurity eventually fails. In this case however, time counts, the longer it can be cut off, the more chance of some sanity returning, of backlash building politically. The time to route around is after a law is made, preferably as flawed a law as possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 78 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    How some Linux developers defeated (for now) the new OS age-verification laws. Long live those Linux developers, who "heavily criticized the mandates", made public statements, and contacted the legislators.

    Because other Linux developers, instead, immediately bent over backwards to start implementing changes towards accommodating those laws; for sure they didn't heavily criticize the mandates, nor make public statements, nor contact the legislators.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    The first thing on the post you linked is the systemd change which adds a new number field in a completely user controlled local environment where they can write anything they want.

    Oh nooooo... ಠ_ಠ

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

    From the linked System76 blog:

    New York’s proposed Senate Bill S8102A requires adults to prove they’re adults to use a computer, exercise bike, smart watch, or car if the device is internet enabled with app ecosystems. The bill explicitly forbids self-reporting and leaves the allowed methods to regulations written by the Attorney General. Practical methods for a bill of such extreme breadth would require, in many instances, providing private information to a third-party just to use a computer at all. Privacy disappears.

    That's appalling, and NY won't be the only government trying it. This is going to be one of those battles we need to fight again and again.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Too bad this is moot. Google wants to deploy QR codes to prove you are human and not AI. The QR code is for your phone to prove you are real. Oops, your phone has a uuid and phone number and there goes your privacy.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    Can you give a source for this?

    I'm presuming the QR uses the advertiser ID, which can be changed.

    Phone number would be GDPR, so I don't think that can be used.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    If you're providing it "voluntarily" it won't fall foul of GDPR.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    There is something like that but I'm not sure it really has the force we all wanted it to. I don't know if it's been tested in court yet, but the optimistic people thought it would ban any kind of "be tracked or else you have to pay", but I believe a lot of services are operating exactly this way.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 3 months ago

    While I don't like age verification, I do have to give the System76 guys some credit for pushing for an exception

  • source
  • [–] 29 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    is there a similar contingency in the California law?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Not yet, but I’ve spoken with Wicks staffers responsible for writing the bill. They are very aware of the open source issues and working on getting changes implemented during the current legislative session.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago

    They are very aware of the open source issues and working on getting changes implemented during the current legislative session.

    There is no 'open source issues'.

    There is an absurd law issue that cannot be solved through 'exemptions' (which can always be removed later on) but by completely getting rid of the law itself. These are bad laws that aim to kill online privacy, with or without exemptions for our dear open source/Libre software.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    You know ... now that open source is officially a legal loophole, I could see this making it more popular.

    New reason to use Linux: You're 13 and you want to look at boobs on the internet, but other operating systems won't let you.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 24 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I must admit pessimism here, once this crap has the 99% (OK 95% or less for non-phones) accepting it, they'll come for linux (or the ISPs). When they came for the gays I didn't speak out... It's the thin end of the wedge (OK, extremely thick end). Colorado is not the world. The laws will be flawed, but continue to be amended, perfected, worldwide, because politicians as a class hate free speech, and anonymity protects free speech. The technically able will keep finding loopholes, but the vast majority will be left behind.

    Probably there will be an exception made for corporations, after all, they have more need for privacy than the populace. /s

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    i just don't want to live on this shitty planet anymore :/

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

    Its so sad, I would have really loved to move to colorado

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›