this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2026
654 points (97.3% liked)

Technology

technology@lemmy.world
82227 readers
4510 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
654
California introduces age verification law for all operating systems, including Linux and SteamOS — user age verified during OS account setup (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 3 days ago by Amoxtli@thelemmy.club to c/technology@lemmy.world
385 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (19 children)

Many people here are going off on wild tangents over this. You should just read the law, it's only a couple thousand words of quite plain English.

Many here have taken completely incorrect assumptions from the title. This law is for developers, not users.

Summary:

  1. Requires OS devs ask for DOB, age, or both at account creation time.
  2. Requires an API that allows app store devs to request this age data for the account. At minimum this API must signal that the account is a member of one of these categories: 'user under 13, user over 13 and under 16, user is over 16 and under 18, user is over 18'.
  3. Explicitly bars OS devs from sending more data than explicitly necessary to meet 1 (hint: photo ID, facial recognition).
  4. Explicitly bars app devs recieving the data from requesting more data from the OS nor the App store.
  5. Bars app stores from using the data for any other reason and specifically calls out anticompetitive practices.
  6. Bars app store and OS devs from sharing this data with any third party for any other reason than to comply with this law.
  7. Has injunctions and civil penalties of $2500 (max per user) affected by negligent violations (eg a child account is served adult content), and $7500 (max per user) affected by intentional violations.

The only problem I have with this is that it should only apply to commercial software (app stores and OS). Libre/FOS software should not have to police ages on their app stores, due to their far reduced budgets (often zero), developer time, and the nature of the software being generally anti-centralized and anti-surveillance-capitalism. Though I'd be fine with it for FOSS software distributed via commercial app stores, as long as they gave a longer lead time to implement (EG a couple of years).

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 47 points 2 days ago (2 children)

The only problem have with this is that it should only apply to commercial software (app stores and 0S). Libre/FOS software should not have to police ages on their app stores,

It's a bit like saying the only problem with the Titanic is the water inside.

The law is bad, whether it can be worse or not is just tangential. But still, this law as is applies to computers, phones... And nas, some routers, watches, advance calculators... As they all have OS and can install apps. As per app stores, guess what, thats the GNOME app store, but also flatpak, jellyfin (can install apps as plugins), pip, docker, git... And what about plain executables? Githut should ask for your age too to download artifacts?

Porn started with only age verification by the user as a prompt, and we see where that is going now.

[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 1 point 2 days ago (1 child)

Just read the law. It is barely 1000 words.

But still, this law as is applies to computers, phones... And nas, some routers, watches, advance calculators... As they all have OS and can install apps.

No. It specifically only applies to general purpose computing devices which means all of the items you listed after computers and phones are not affected. Can you hook up a monitor to your NAS without involving a soldering board and some additional hardware? Your router? Then it's not general purpose computing. They both require additional computers to interface with them to be used. 'General purpose computing device' has been referred in prior legal documents to mean:

"means any general purpose computing device (e.g. server product, personal computer, desktop, laptop, netbook, slate or tablet), including any device that is designed as, marketed as, or capable (through docking or otherwise) of performing the functions of, such general purpose computing devices, and any replacement for any of the foregoing."

(c) “Application” means a software application that may be run or directed by a user on a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device that can access a covered application store or download an application.

(e) (1) “Covered application store” means a publicly available internet website, software application, online service, or platform that distributes and facilitates the download of applications from third-party developers to users of a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing that can access a covered application store or can download an application.

You then go on to complain about it affecting FOSS stores? That's exactly my complaint. Who are you convincing here?

Jellyfin, Docker, git??

(2) “Covered application store” does not mean an online service or platform that distributes extensions, plug-ins, add-ons, or other software applications that run exclusively within a separate host application.

No.

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 1 point 2 days ago

'General purpose computing device' has been referred in prior legal documents to mean: "means any general purpose computing device

Great, general computing device means general computing device. Brilliant.

Then you come with the requirement of a monitor.... Why? That's not on the definition. And isn't a router a server product? Servers generally don't need a monitor

Docker or git are not distributing extensions, and on Linux docker doesn't run on a separate host application, unless you bend the meaning of containers to the point of nonsense. I'm curious about the reasoning for git.

From what you said, only jellifin is excluded in my example.

I'm not trying to convince anybody, just explain the current and potential future issues.

load more comments (16 replies)