this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2026
653 points (97.1% liked)

Technology

82285 readers
4522 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
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] GreenShimada@lemmy.world 63 points 3 days ago

For everyone trying to figure out how this would be enforced, it's not about being proactively enforced. (and data collection is 99% of it)

It's about adding a double-tap "Well, these people also violated our age verification law, so they have to pay a fine," added to any incident where it's convenient to add this in. If a minor sends another minor a snap that would trigger CP laws, and one of the phones isn't age verified correctly, fine to the parents and hands up in the air "We tried!" A minor is involved in torrenting movies? "Look, kids using illegal OS! Fine to the parents!"

This is how laws work across a lot of corrupt developing countries. There's laws for everything, but they only get applied selectively as authorities find they fit the situation. It's hard to actually be 100% above board and do everything legally because of a few little things meant to be impossible to actually do bureaucratically. So in every situation, any set of authorities start in with the endemic leverage of "Well, we have suspicion of you selling ketamine out of your apartment. Did you do age verification on your laptop? No? Then we can seize that as a crime and see what's on there. OR you can give up your supplier."

[–] StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.org 68 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Enforcement against Linux distributions, however, is likely to be problematic. Distros like Arch, Ubuntu, Debian, and Gentoo have no centralized account infrastructure, with users downloading ISOs from mirrors worldwide, and can modify source code freely. These small distros lack legal teams or resources to implement the required API, so a more realistic outcome for non-compliant distros is a disclaimer that the software is not intended for use in California.

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 42 points 3 days ago (1 child)

That's what MidnightBSD did.

California residents are not authorized to use MidnightBSD for desktop use in the state of California effective January 1, 2027. California law CA AB1043 requires a complex age verification system implemented for operating systems with no exceptions for small open source projects. At this time, we don't have development time or a plan in place for this.

load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[–] pkjqpg1h@lemmy.zip 24 points 3 days ago

Why lawmakers are so stupid at understanding technology

[–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 71 points 3 days ago (17 children)

Wow California leading the way to fascism, who woulda thunk?

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 66 points 3 days ago (1 child)

Colorado Dems pushing a similar law rn.

Fucking idiots.

load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (16 replies)
[–] sbbq@lemmy.zip 36 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Are children not allowed to use computers now?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] _haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 days ago

What the fuck? This is ridiculous and it won't actually solve anything at all.

[–] Fokeu@lemmy.zip 22 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (5 children)

Luckily this dogshit is completely unenforceable. It doesn't excuse the people who introduced this law, of course.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] baller_w@lemmy.zip 44 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (5 children)

The law does not require photo ID uploadsor facial recognition, with users instead simply self-reporting their age, setting AB 1043 apart from similar laws passed in Texas and Utah that require "commercially reasonable" verification methods, such as government-issued ID checks.

Seems toothless. Good.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] redsand@infosec.pub 19 points 3 days ago (1 child)

This is religious repression of TempleOS

load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›