tbf one is just to use your own computer and the other is to use a site where one could do a lot of nefarious things, getting them into trouble
Those folks are mad about the idea of a drop-down box in Linux distros, but that isn't what was really proposed.
The systemd-homed merge was specifically to get the bdays to comply with these laws.
The project leader from Fedora said that these signals do not comply with the laws. No one asked him why

If you read the law, it is clear that they rely on online user accounts. In their world, getting a new device and setting up an account involves a 3rd party such as Google, Apple or M$.
The signal is also supposed to follow you across devices by the law. That is to say, if you get a new device and login with that user account, then the signal from the operating system PROVIDER or covered application store (these stores are already tied to the OS provider so no need for separate process to set up the account. it just carries over) will be the same on the new or borrowed device.
They don't even think about local accounts.
They are the lynch pin of the entire operation.
That's what the community should be up in arms about.
There is no way 99% of the distros could comply even if they wanted to.
These online accounts will need an email at minimum to be able to confirm the account and to be able to communicate with the account. Usually, these accounts get more info like phone numbers, contacts, calendar events, gps data and more. Of course, that much data isn't necessary, but people willingly give that to Google for the most part. Some needs to be disabled by the user.

If the letter of the law, the statement from Fedora, and what I've said so far isn't enough, then look at what the people who debated and voted on the law said. The CA Senate Judiciary Committee said only the device manufacturer gets that information. They later changed manufacturer to operating system provider or covered application store so the onus wouldn't be on, let's say, Samsung.
Google was against these laws, then the language changed and now they support them. It's basically enshrining a duopoly in the smartphone market as if their grip wasn't tight enough. It's why they've made it so hard to side load and why Windows is phasing out the local accounts

One can also look to the statements of distros like Puppy Linux, who mention the lack of central user accounts as their reason to "ban" CA

The corporate backed/adjacent distros know this but aren't saying it straight out. The fedora project leader came the closest. He knows for a fact they do not satisfy the law, but decided to sit on why that is.

Jan 1, 2027 will be here sooner than it seems, and expect to see users of mainstream products having to deal with it by Nov. That's about when I expect the truth to have to be openly discussed

The law in IL specifically calls out non-profit operating system providers to not get an exception.

They're literally banning linux and no one but the folks who spoke to attorneys sees it coming. Those folks have corporate backing. I don't want to speculate tho. I'd like to think we're all in this together, but someone should have said something to us by now about what these lawyers are telling them. It's been 6 weeks already since they started announcing they were going to do that.

sorry, this went on a lot longer than I had planned