A New Bill proposes Federal Age Verification on any Operating Systems in entire U.S

[-]

sihtotnidaertnod@reddit

Part of the problem is that I still don’t understand why this is problematic despite having just read several comments ITT. I’m fairly tech savvy, and extremely savvy compared to the average person in the US. This is a losing battle because no one is explaining how this is problematic in an accessible, succinct way.

[-]

arkham1010@reddit

why the hell do they need age verification for operating systems in the first place? What problem are they trying to solve?

[-]

Yeuph@reddit

It's a mix of well-meaning idiots and less-well-meaning intelligent people

They want different things but they're both pushing for it

[-]

Will_and_Worried@reddit

NONE of these people are well-meaning. They couldn't be anymore thankful that you believe them to be morons rather than the scheming monsters they really are.

[-]

SutekhThrowingSuckIt@reddit

Meta is actively lobbying for it because of their trial regarding how they targeted kids and caused them psychological harm on purpose for engagement. They want to force Apple, Microsoft and Google to be responsible for age restrictions rather than taking responsibility. They don’t give a fuck about user freedom, privacy, etc. or desktop linux existing.

[-]

akio3@reddit

Per other threads I've read: big tech and social media want to pass the buck on age verification. If the OS has to verify age, then it's no longer their problem if they advertise to kids, let underage kids open up accounts, etc: they're just acting on what the OS told them. I've read that Meta is a huge sponsor/lobbyist behind these bills.

[-]

PeeOnAPeanut@reddit

The OS should do it though. If the world has to have age identification (and it seems like it does fine most countries are going this way), Proving age to the OS (one entity) is FAR better than proving age to multiple entities (Discord, Facebook, WhatsApp, TikTok etc).

Would you trust your ID with one entity, or with several? Lesser of two evils.

[-]

Initial-Return8802@reddit

But who's going to store it? A hobbyist Linux distro is not going to want the headache of storing/verifying ages

[-]

MBILC@reddit

3rd parties, they will use like Persona, or some other one, which has had data breaches already..

[-]

MBILC@reddit

The issue is who will they use to verify your age? You can bet it will be a 3rd party, like Persona, which will likely feed your data into Palantir, or get leaked from a breach, as several verification companies have had massive breaches lately.

So now to use an OS, not even to surf the web, I have to provide my age and have it verified? Hell no..

How will this work in enterprise settings? Is this only end user systems? What about server OS's? or kiosk terminals where you have multiple people accessing a system?

[-]

HateHumansLoveDogs@reddit

It will be palantir

[-]

MBILC@reddit

Persona is the system used for verification, but it does likely feed into Palantir, as it is the same co-owner for both.

And you are right, why trump wanted to get all the departments into Palantir, since it already is used around the globe..

[-]

Nelrene@reddit

None of those sites should have age identification either. Parents should be doing their jobs and at least somewhat watch their kids and teach them about good internet use.

[-]

HateHumansLoveDogs@reddit

Amen this is ridiculous, my parents gave me a dumb flip phone till i was 18. Our pc was in the family room. They monitored what we did, and you know what we turned out better for it. Parents do your freaking job, its not anyone else's responsibility. Dont want to bother raising kids then dont have them!

[-]

yo_99@reddit

If the world has to have age identification

Fuck this shit. I would sooner migrate to I2P.

[-]

xternal7@reddit

Would you trust your ID with one entity, or with several?

The OS should, at most, give you a date picker, without actual verification.

Zuck wants to vacuum up childrens' data without worrying about silly things like "COPPA" or "CSAM", so he's trying to get stupid age verification levels put into the OS so that everyone will just click "I'm over 18" and he can wash his hands of any wrongdoing.

Rest assured, the fact that the laws do not require any kind of actual verification, simply some user input, is a feature and not a but. He wants children to lie about their age, and then still use his platforms, all while the OS tells Facebook the user is over 18.

[-]

FriendlyNeighbor345@reddit

To steal your information and monitor you.

[-]

themirrazzunhacked@reddit

Liability and spying

[-]

basicseamstress@reddit

verify users for ad money. and for surveillance.

[-]

wooq@reddit

Corporations don't have enough data tied to personal demographics, and the government doesn't have enough data tying your online activity to your personally identifying information. It makes it hard to surveil you and market products to you. So that when they change the law to make something illegal that wasn't before (for example, some things that the current US conservative political movement wants to outlaw and has already started passing laws against in some states or enacted through shadow policy: looking for or posting information about LGBTQ+ issues, criticizing party politicians, criticizing Israel, watching pornography, participating in discussions about anti-government protests, not worshipping the right god, etc)

They say it's to protect the kids or something, but that's a lie. It's to open the door to the dismantling of democratic rights, while they still have control of all three branches of government.

These bills are being pushed by billionaire CEOs of tech corporations whose business is surveillance and data mining. There are theories about the end goal, none of which involve freedoms for people who aren't part of the would-be ruling class.

https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rmhxk1/i_pulled_the_actual_bill_text_from_5_state_age/

https://thedailyeconomy.org/article/californias-age-verification-law-is-a-civil-liberties-test/

[-]

Legitimate-Draw-2235@reddit

yeah it's ridiculous. If Tinder or Pornhub or whatever other app/website is making money from adult content, then they are the ones who should be responsible for verifying the age of their customers.

That mistake has already been made 200,000,000 times

The issue is the OS will likely use some 3rd party provider as well, which several have been breached already. Or Persona will push to be the solution, which feeds into Palantir likely...

I should not have to provide ID to use my OS, period. And I do not use any sites that require me to upload ID either as there are always alternatives.

[-]

meltbox@reddit

It’s also going to be a method which unintentionally identifies children online via a flag. There’s a serious problem right there with that.

Part of this push is also to de-anonymize the internet. The rich and powerful hate that we can criticize them without any fear of consequences here, and after occupy wallstreet they started trying to make sure that can never happen again.

[-]

EmbarrassedHelp@reddit

Meta is pushing for it alongside OpenAI, Age Verification Industry lobbyists, lawmakers from the United Kingdom, the Australian eSafety Commissioner, and "child safety" organizations.

[-]

newaccountzuerich@reddit

Saves them some 50bn in fines for knowingly allowing kids use adult services

[-]

Actual__Wizard@reddit

Makes sense, push their costs off to somebody else, while they maintain the same software.

[-]

Randolph__@reddit

This is the best way to do age verification. You do it once per device and websites call an API for verification.

To be clear I am against age verification. This is just the best way to do it.

[-]

HateHumansLoveDogs@reddit

I just want to know wtf are parents doing? Its not societies job to raise your freaking kids! Take away their smartphones watch what they do on the computer is that so freaking hard?

[-]

Q-Ball7@reddit

if they have age inappropriate content

This concept is incoherent in the face of the Right to Read.

The main problem with forcing terminals to do attestation is that the way it's implemented on them denies me that right.

By requiring it be service-by-service (though why this is something that lawmakers believe can survive a 1A challenge, I don't know) I still have a choice not to use those services.

By contrast, I don't have a choice not to use an OS, which means with the inevitable future remote attestation that will be demanded should this be allowed to stand will destroy my ability to even use a computer privately.

[-]

Actual__Wizard@reddit

destroy my ability to even use a computer privately.

You’ve given literally no evidence

You are legitimately being rude. This conversation is over.

[-]

Q-Ball7@reddit

we don't have a right to privacy

You misunderstand: it's not this directly, it's specifically the freedom to write that's under attack.

Compare "you must register yourself with the government to be permitted to use a printing press"; it's an obvious case of compelled speech.

[-]

Actual__Wizard@reddit

Oh, that works actually!

[-]

It’s late in the session, and attendance issues are ramping up. It’s not very likely to pass.

[-]

WarlockKnave@reddit

Until after mid terms...or a last second ram through. It has a better than 0% chance in either case

[-]

Isliterally1984@reddit

I mean, they would have to introduce it all over again after midterms. And a ram through might not work if there’s not enough people there.

The OS-level age verifications are pushed primarily by Democrats. It was the adult site-level ones that were being pushed by the more conservative states, and also the British, which idk what they are right now.

I'm from NYS, you'd have a better chance of NYC becoming its own state than voting out Steffanik. She's got a ton of support and her district routinely votes for her by insanely large margins. She's so comfortable in her district that she's willing to belittle voters who disagree with her views.

Which I believe is one of the things they want to accomplish. In addition to removing small devs from the game, and having everyone rely on government-owned/approved, big tech platforms/apps/websites/etc. Ofc on government approved OSes, preferably phones because those generate the most data about users.

Mandatory mic/camera 24/7 streaming to big tech/government/police by 2028. Ofc to preventatively protect children

[-]

trickman01@reddit

Honestly that's still too far.

[-]

xternal7@reddit

However, if it's a birth date input field:

you can opt out by design
parental controls leave quite a bit to be desired in terms of granularity

RedSquirrelFtw@reddit

Well there's still some options to at least get SOME level of privacy. You can separate your "IRL" accounts from online accounts by using different names, email addresses, even proxy or VPN. Use ad blockers, and other security extensions etc.

But once they roll out age verification now you are 100% exposed as that will require linking your actual identity with each website and it's also extra burden for website operators to have to track and store all this info.

I'd deleted my Facebook when they'd opened it to general email accounts and it started turning into a new MySpace.

Almost bought an Oculus, but then FB bought it.

Haven't touched any of their other shit.

[-]

HateHumansLoveDogs@reddit

Its not just META, you heard of Jeff Bezos right? and Bill Gates? not to mention the people that run Apple.

[-]

computer-machine@reddit

Yeah, fuck Amazon. And I've never touched Apple willingly, and deleted Windows eighteen years ago.

[-]

JOHNNY6644@reddit

this Democrat is a dumb fucker this will backfire if passed an wont help protect shit

honestly i wouldn't mind paying 100$ one time or once every 10 years for a fresh copy of Ubuntu or Kde as ther defiantly more worth it then windows

an a 10$ min fee to install a existing copy of the of adult version on a new or other device that would require another possible one (as in not constant monitoring) over 21 id check as long as the cash went direct to the Linux os companies

tabrizzi@reddit

Sponsored by a Democratic Rep from NJ and co-sponsored by a Republican Rep from NY.

[-]

Parties usually pick something crazy but not really that crucially important and do a fight show about it. But even that is untouched once party at power changes. Trump is small exception of this rule and in a bad way anyway - nothing better happened for people since long time despite party changes at helm.

And as I mentioned, its not onlu US, many other places are like that.

[-]

WalkingEars@reddit

Many Democrats are bought and paid for by corporations, so their "left wing" reforms are gutted from the start so as not to alienate their CEO donors. There are meaningful differences between the party platforms that do matter, but there's also a reason for democrat spinelessness and it goes beyond individual-level timidness.

[-]

dvtyrsnp@reddit

no, these people genuinely think they're protecting children. they truly do not understand the effects of the legislation they're proposing.

that's why it is important that people keep hammering the people proposing these bills with the factual adverse effects of legislation like this.

[-]

Kelvin62@reddit

I disagree. They are using child safety as an excuse for restricting personal freedom.

[-]

dvtyrsnp@reddit

This comment represents a fundamental misunderstanding of what's going on here.

There are two groups that are getting lumped together. There are the entities like Meta that are doing as you say, but there is another group that correctly identifies that there is a pretty severe problem with children, social media, and gambling that is going on. This second group just isn't really informed on why these proposed age verification laws are a problem.

We should be appealing to and informing the second group in order to reach a real solution. Conflating the two and labelling this as a simple "fighting for freedoms" argument is actually damaging for us.

[-]

RunLikeHell@reddit

You are right about who to appeal to but if they are so ignorant of the technology then whom do you think is pushing for this?

[-]

Sinaaaa@reddit

Conflating the two and labelling this as a simple "fighting for freedoms" argument is actually damaging for us.

No. I am demanding competency.

Running a government isn't a game. And neither are constitutional rights - right won with blood.

[-]

dvtyrsnp@reddit

You're right to demand competency. This thread has just assumed incompetency from the start.

[-]

dvtyrsnp@reddit

The linux subs have been a bit annoying lately because you seem significantly more interested in trying to feel oppressed than you do actually doing something.

[-]

newaccountzuerich@reddit

Annoyance is far better than acquiescence.

Go bother your congresscritter, hopefully usefully.

[-]

dvtyrsnp@reddit

The implication that these are somehow opposites really cements the idiocy, doesn't it?

[-]

The plan never changed, just the narrative: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/national-id

[-]

Perfect_Purple_5705@reddit

These people dont give two shits about children. Source = The response to the epstein files

[-]

notenglishwobbly@reddit

no, these people genuinely think they're protecting children. they truly do not understand the effects of the legislation they're proposing.

No.

At some point, just no.

They have thousands if not more people telling them this is the wrong way to go. People who are recognised experts. Yet, they persist.

At some point the "they don't know any better" just doesn't work. They do know better. If they really don't, then they aren't "conscious" enough to be part of a normal society and they should not be in any position of power whatsoever. There is a level of stupid where the state just takes over for you for your own sake because you're genuinely so dumb you might end up harming yourself and others in major ways. When you're doing this badly, you do not get to keep your position of power, you can't even function.

[-]

rarsamx@reddit

They barely understand anything that happens in the intertubes. There are lobbyist lining their pockets and convincing them that it's a good thing.

[-]

Linuksoid@reddit

Its 2026

People still believe in "Constiutional rights"

lol

[-]

PastryAssassinDeux@reddit

The one thing they can agree on is controlling a population unconstitutionally.

Well their loyalty to Israel over America is something else they agree on..

[-]

grathontolarsdatarod@reddit

Could also start bugging new room directors too.

There should be investigative reporting on these issues.

[-]

ChrizzyDT@reddit

Both sides are In bed together bringing the NWO

[-]

ZVyhVrtsfgzfs@reddit

Good, someone sees the truth.

But instead by design we keep screaming at each other over, while behind our backs freedom evaporates.

[-]

BrothelWaffles@reddit

To be fair, Josh Gottheimer is a gigantic piece of shit that should probably just switch parties like Van Drew at this point. He's also swimming in AIPAC money.

[-]

Rok-SFG@reddit

And paid for by meta, google, etc.

[-]

aliendude5300@reddit

The guy who introduced the bill made a press release: https://www.youtube.com/live/21Ao9ExQaAA

[-]

natermer@reddit

This is the way almost all bills are introduced.

Also most bills don't go anywhere. Write your representative a physical letter expressing your disapproval.

All you have to do is read the bill.

Chat gpt is a thing.

Plenty of websites that are mandated to make users verify their age.in my jurisdiction just...don't

The percentage of the internet that would become unavailable (without a vpn ) would be rather low

[-]

SummerOftime@reddit

Unfortunately you are right

[-]

PracticalPersonality@reddit

You'll also need to stop using (if you ever have) any sites or applications that require age gating, because if your OS doesn't send the age signal, the site/app will block your access under this law.

So from what you're saying, this whole AWS thing - it sounds like a child safety hazard. We have to ban it at once!

[-]

DoubleOwl7777@reddit

to add to that, its a field in homed. something which not every distro even has installed.

[-]

thaynem@reddit

The law in utah only applies to commercial app stores on mobile devices. Still not great, but it isn't as broad in scope as the California law

[-]

SanityInAnarchy@reddit

It doesn't say "commercial" app stores, and it defines "app stores" broadly enough to include basically any method of software distribution that can get software onto a mobile device, likely including Linux distro repositories, source code repos (Github), or even just any website with a download link -- mozilla.org is arguably an app store under this law.

It also defines "mobile device" vaguely enough that a 2-in-1 laptop might count. It's unclear whether a distro running inside a VM counts -- if so, any distro that supports ARM, even if it was intended for (say) a RaspberryPi, or maybe an AWS Graviton server, it still might count if it can be made to run inside of Android's new Linux VMs.

It is obviously intended to target only commercial app stores -- basically, Google and Apple. We can hope that courts interpret it that way -- software people often forget that the law isn't software and that human judgment is deliberately part of how the law is evaluated. But just reading the text, it seems like it can be applied every bit as broadly as the California law, only it requires actual verification, while the California law just requires you to enter a birthdate.

[-]

tdammers@reddit

even if it was intended for (say) a RaspberryPi

An RPi running on a battery is technically also a "mobile device", isn't it?

[-]

SanityInAnarchy@reddit

Ah, no, that's the one thing they specified at least a bit. From the law:

(13)"Mobile device" means a phone or general purpose tablet that:
(a)provides cellular or wireless connectivity;
(b)is capable of connecting to the Internet;
(c)runs a mobile operating system; and
(d)is capable of running apps through the mobile operating system.

A pi isn't a phone, and at least the traditional headless ones aren't tablets. They don't go so far as to define "phone" or "tablet", but I doubt a Pi is sufficient by itself. Though, again, if you built something like this, suddenly whatever you run on that is a "mobile operating system."

And that's the actual problem, the definitions of "mobile app store" and "mobile operating system" are overly broad:

(14)"Mobile operating system" means software that:
(a)manages mobile device hardware resources;
(b)provides common services for mobile device programs;
(c)controls memory allocation; and
(d)provides interfaces for applications to access device functionality.

This is pretty much the textbook definition of an operating system, they just threw "mobile device" in there. But it's hard not to read this as: Any operating system that you can run on a "mobile device" is a "mobile operating system". Debian is the default OS for Android's new Linux VMs, therefore Debian is a mobile operating system. That Pi-powered eBook reader presumably runs Raspbian, so that's a mobile operating system.

And "app store" is similarly broad:

(5)"App store" means a publicly available website, software application, or electronic service that allows users to download apps from third-party developers onto a mobile device.

And that's how mozilla.org becomes a mobile app store provider.

[-]

thaynem@reddit

Yes, it defined app store broadly enough it would probably apply to, say, f-droid. However, the requirement to verify the age is "at the time an individual who is located in the state creates an account with the app store provider".

And for open source "app stores" you don't ever create an account with the provider, so they aren't required to verify your age. And AFAICT there is no requirement that an app store requires you to create an account. At least, that is my reading of it. But IANAL, and the lawmakers may not even be aware there are app stores that don't require creating an account, so I'm not sure that would hold up in court.

I was probably incorrect to say "commercial", but commercial app stores typically require you to create an account, and non-commercial ones typically don't.

[-]

SanityInAnarchy@reddit

And AFAICT there is no requirement that an app store requires you to create an account.

Well, there is a requirement that an app have a way to find out the (verified) age bracket of the user by talking to the app store. So this could be read to imply that all users must have an account, otherwise there'd be no way to satisfy this other legal requirement.

[-]

aliendude5300@reddit

Nothing different. Fuck this bill, but systemd itself is fine, just don't populate that field. The systemd change isn't problematic. Keep an eye out for ACTUAL ID VERIFICATION being proposed. Then you'll have a reason to panic.

[-]

Ill_Net_8807@reddit

"for other purposes" = squashing dissent. its a mystery to me why people keep voting for people like these. as a democrat, i would not vote for a democrat like this, even under these trying times.

[-]

MBILC@reddit

But think of the children!

[-]

Tsukikira@reddit

Not really. You can just lie to the OS. They cannot force you to tell the truth. It's not fucking rocket science. Rolling this out will provoke lawsuits, plural, because the government mandating truth on OS entry forms is actually not something they can mandate. It's already failed and been rejected in court at the state level.

[-]

DystopianElf@reddit

Maybe I should start prepping with AI generated humans.

[-]

EU is immune to this bullshit for now

[-]

lerpalerpanen@reddit

https://www.reuters.com/world/eu-age-verification-app-ready-europe-moves-curb-childrens-social-media-access-2026-04-15/

For how long?

[-]

SlitScan@reddit

the GOP wants to be sure its a 14yo girl and not the FBI

[-]

mxmissile@reddit

yea meanwhile pride community is allowing the pedo community to fly the colors cause... "alt-sex", yes very much GOP lol, this isnt a party problem, its a power problem

[-]

Rico-No-Charge@reddit

Would you rather send your daughter to Epstein Island with Donald Trump or to a pride parade?

[-]

Do people not realize whats going on? I mean we have Thiel ffs whos company was told they would be able to collect dossiers on every citizen.

[-]

Sensitive_Box_@reddit

Unfortunately, technically, they already have dossiers on every citizen. Been like that since 2001.

The issue will be more of how many sites and services will eventually require that age verification field or data to be transmitted before you can access the site...

This is the first step, get the required fields and checks into the OS, step 2. now require all companies that want to do service to the U.S, MUST check said field and validate, otherwise deny access to said resources..

Banking, email, social media, homedepot site..you name it..

[-]

No-Assumption-4468@reddit

You can’t really legislate open source software like that thought. Just sudo rm the age verification package. Right?

If they bake age verification into the kernel, someone will fork it. Swapping kernels is trivial on many Linux distros. Just download with a package manager and choose the kernel when you boot.

If they put it in your favorite distro, a simple popular script could disable it.

Id be more concerned about hardware based age verification because firmware swapping is a bit more involved and risky.

[-]

HateHumansLoveDogs@reddit

I bet they will have the ISP you use shut down your connection if you dont comply

[-]

MBILC@reddit

The issue will be more of how many sites and services will eventually require that age verification field or data to be transmitted before you can access the site...

This is the first step, get the required fields and checks into the OS, step 2. now require all companies that want to do service to the U.S, MUST check said field and validate, otherwise deny access to said resources..

DizzyCardiologist213@reddit

They know they like contributions from Meta and trading favors with lobbyists who are in that scene.

HateHumansLoveDogs@reddit

So vote them all out and vote in people that will reverse it.

[-]

aliendude5300@reddit

Go pay them a visit and explain why this law is bad

[-]

HateHumansLoveDogs@reddit

I will say what i posted in the privacy sub...You vote out every one who endorses this, if we dont start using our vote powers at every level, we will have a complete big brother surveillance state

[-]

Chance_End_4684@reddit

I bet this proposed bill the Republicans drafted if passes in the Senate will mean Trump will sign it into law. I bet all OS's will then have a specified number of days to comply with this federal law and any OS not in compliance with this federal law will have X number of days to comply or else be banned which can mean anyone using a banned OS will eventually be fined.

Bah, it's getting to a point now when GNU/Linux's freedom is no longer completely free anymore.

To be completely honest with you all, I really don't believe such an Age Verification law will actually be enforceable because that not only means implementing some sort of service berried deep within our chosen operating systems that's actively running, but I'm guessing all websites will need at least some modification to incorporate this as well but I really don't see that happening anytime soon.

[-]

MidsouthMystic@reddit

I am so tired of this. I will not give anyone my ID or verify my age to use the internet.

[-]

cazzipropri@reddit

Still annoying, but notably, it's binding only for providers of operating systems.

If you build your OS and install it on your machine, there's no provider.

And if the law characterized me as a provider, good fucking luck enforcing it on me as I run my code on my silicon.

[-]

Randolph__@reddit

[-]

MBILC@reddit

And even if you try to do something, like reach out to your local rep's, lobbying in the U.S means who ever has the bigger wallet always wins...same as the legal system....

[-]

zambizzi@reddit

This bill needs to die a screaming death, with resounding pushback and public rejection, or this push will continue, relentlessly. This is public/private economic fascism at its worst, sacrificing privacy for profit, flying directly in the face of what the people actually want.

Write these scum politicians and tell them what you think. Make phone calls to their offices. If we, the geeks, don’t take the lead in killing this, the internet you know and love, is lost.

[-]

MBILC@reddit

sadly state level bills doing the same are already law in some states and more are pushing for it now also...

[-]

aliendude5300@reddit

Those bills should also get pushback

[-]

MBILC@reddit

Should, but some states, are already law. Reality is, the majority of users wont even care, think Mobile users who already have an Apple account and provided their information, or a Google account and provided real info when setting up their devices.

phobug@reddit

The age of self-hosting is upon us. Lets all install the pirate os and browse the internet with freedom in our hearts. :D

[-]

kansetsupanikku@reddit

We need non-US operating systems ready for yesterday. Linux could be a great base, but mainline Linux dependence on the US is too problematic, a politically free fork should get maintenance and a very deep audit.

Operating systems from the USA are no better choice than from China, Russia or North Korea. We shouldn't submit to laws of such regimes, we should ostracize them instead.

And submitting to the US regulations and domestic patents is doing enough damage already. Availability of codecs, patented HDMI, distributing results of reverse engineering - should never be an issue had it not been for the corrupted US law. Open source projects should stay away from that, benefit from freedom from that legal system, and let the US block them if that's what they wish for. Their democracy crisis is for the US citizens to solve, and pretending it doesn't exist isn't helpful to anyone.

[-]

Rincepticus@reddit

What do you mean we need non-US operating system? What is Linux? Debian for example is decentralized open source OS developed by many people in many different countries. Like pretty much all Linux distros (not all but pretty much all). And for those that are not SUSE is from Germany and Ubuntu for Britain.

[-]

kansetsupanikku@reddit

They all maintain Linux patches rather than their own branch where they would cherry-pick updates to Linux. The distinction wouldn't matter technically, but it's about the amount of effort and resources towards working on that code. No distribution follows the whole Linux code.

And Linus, Linux Foundation, and most of the subsystem maintainers are in the US, subject to that law (and unlawful governance). It doesn't even take introducing backdoors - bugs that appear organically and remain purposefully unnoticed can be enough. And we have zero reason to trust that the USA doesn't use this opportunity. Simply too much of the kernel work is covered under the same regime to consider it international, much less trustworthy.

And finding or making a non-US operating system in that sense is difficult - which is a result of some pretty aggressive market practices. The most prominent alternative would be OpenBSD.

[-]

jmcunx@reddit

And Linus, Linux Foundation, and most of the subsystem maintainers are in the US

Linux is just a kernel, I really doubt the law will apply to Linux it self. But it will apply to all distros if passed.

From other articles I saw, a distro maintaining age verification could cost up to 100,000 USD per year. The cost depends upon the bill itself.

I hate to say this, knowing Congress, this will probably kill all small US Based Distros, maybe leaving only RHEL.

[-]

kansetsupanikku@reddit

I believe age verification to be the last call to cut ties with the US requirements. Even if there is no connection of this specific law with the kernel itself: the US dependence is broken, and it's time to leave.

Mind you, Linux distros don't follow every law of every country already. China, North Korea, and some Islamic states maintain their own distros. The USA is on its way to prove it's not different.

And the only reason for potentially different treatment is that some projects, down to the kernel, are US-based. Windows, macOS, Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD - that's an alarming monopoly. And I believe that external auditing, alternatives, or at least - hard forks with other management, are severely needed. Based on Linux (the widest adaptation among open source options) or OpenBSD (from Canada, which might be already a better option).

[-]

Rincepticus@reddit

It is hard for me to argue because I am fairly new to Linux and don't know the technical "ins and outs". But I would say your claim is fairly unrealistic. Linux Foundarion provides kernel. But kernel is not OS. It is what powers the OS from what I understand.

So far what I have seen the age verification laws usually target operating systems or softwares. Not what is behind them. It's like saying we need non-US coding language because "The Python Software Foundation" is US based and would be hit by age verification laws. Discord was hit by age verification laws not because the foundation, Python in whic it (or atleast part of it) was codes, is US based. But because it is an software company based in US.

[-]

mrlinkwii@reddit

Discord was hit by age verification laws not because the foundation, Python in whic it (or atleast part of it) was codes, is US based. But because it is an software company based in US.

nope , discord got hist because they provide a sevice in the UK , remember discord in complying to UK law not US law , and for easier mantance and for other laws coming into the EU they enabled it worldwide

[-]

Rincepticus@reddit

Wait UK is on this age verification thing too? Well I guess the same principal still is true but boy we are screwed when everyone jumps on the band wagon with that.

[-]

MBILC@reddit

Other countries are doing the same thing.....this is not a U.S only thing....

These types of laws will work for 99% of the population because most people do not care, won't think twice and actually believe it will protect the children, because that is what the media will be forced to sell and shove down everyone's throats.

We are the outliers, the 0.000000001% of people who know the real reason for this and the few who may be able to find ways around it.

They will implement this first at a high level, then work to pass other laws to start blocking access to resources from systems that are not verified...it will happen slowly over years and years until the point is finally reached that those who just accept it go "How did this happen! i didn't approve of this". Well, too little too late now...

Contact Info:

[-]

MBILC@reddit

These types of laws will work for 99% of the population because most people do not care, won't think twice and actually believe it will protect the children, because that is what the media will be forced to sell and shove down everyone's throats.

We are the outliers, the 0.000000001% of people who know the real reason for this and the few who may be able to find ways around it.

They will implement this first at a high level, then work to pass other laws to start blocking access to resources from systems that are not verified...it will happen slowly over years and years until the point is finally reached that those who just accept it go "How did this happen! i didn't approve of this". Well, too little too late now...

No Red Hat-related (Fedora, RHEL, CentOS, Rocky Linux), no Ubuntu-based (Canonical will follow USA rules).

Artix (they rejected), maybe Arch (silent) and derivatives, OpenMandriva/Mageia, Pop!_OS.

https://agelesslinux.org/distros.html

[-]

aliendude5300@reddit

Canonical is a UK company. They might only follow US rules for "US installs". Let's see what happens.

[-]

aliendude5300@reddit

Linux Mint is based in Ireland.

[-]

Tar-eruntalion@reddit

The problem is that European countries are pushing for this as well with the DSA on EU level and each country introducing its own version of these bullshit laws.

We are utterly fucked cause the entire western status quo had enough of us doing and saying whatever we want on the internet, so anonymity is on the chopping block everywhere.

[-]

rannox@reddit

Anyone who is a part of this bill should be forcibly retired. They obviously don't know enough about how shit works.

[-]

MBILC@reddit

They do not care how it works, they just want their lobbying money from big tech.

[-]

Pleasant-Shallot-707@reddit

All member Congress over the age of 45, probably

[-]

DuskGideon@reddit

This is pretty dumb. Any user with a device in which they don't want to access adult content with is doing extra invasive steps right?

Talking about getting rid of the US dollar is dangerous. Look at lybia and Iraq. Yea they were ran by shitty leaders but the straw that broke the camera back was trying to move away from the dollar.

I wish it could be solved with code but I don't have the vision to see that happen.

[-]

Bubbly_Extreme4986@reddit

I said that the tech is in its infancy. Right now it would be premature however as it matures and development gets increasingly popular due to the creation of the Orwellian state, it is conceivable in our time.

[-]

Shopping_General@reddit

BuT wHaT aBoUt ThE cHiLdReN???

Fucking Josh. I hate my rep...

I might take the day off work to go bother him at his office.

[-]

aliendude5300@reddit

Please do so

[-]

misterglassman@reddit

Ask either of these two representatives who are floating this bill to define operating system.

Age verification for your refrigerator, thermostat and automobile? That sounds feasible. /s

[-]

aliendude5300@reddit

They are clearly thinking phones are a short-sighted

[-]

Max_minutia@reddit

So…. Then linux parses out what is and isn’t an operating system. Removes the files that make it an operating system. Then you’re directed to seek a linker file which they do not provide. The linker file only contains those individual files not a operating system. They are systematically put together by the linker file into an operating system.

[-]

nazgand@reddit

Does the bill propose a way to supply cryptographic evidence of a user's adulthood without revealing the user's identity, similar to how https://www.phreeli.com/ separates identity from payment? Probably not. Boo!
Does the bill disallow all ways to supply cryptographic evidence of a user's adulthood without revealing the user's identity? Probably not. Hooray!

[-]

aliendude5300@reddit

I imagine there will be one version of each distro and it'll ask you country on install

[-]

Apprehensive_Milk520@reddit

Woluldn't that alienate users in countries where age verification is not a thing? Why should they have to have data collected on where they live?

Seriously, big brother at work here, no joke, the real deal, just another mark of the beast...

[-]

aliendude5300@reddit

I don't know if it'll be collected per se, just used to curate the installation; there are LOTS of regional differences - keyboard, language and, yes, regulations.

[-]

South_Leek_5730@reddit

Just think of all those sexy fully verified demographics for ads. This is like fetish territory for google, meta and microsoft too.

Thinking about this there is a little teeny tiny problem they haven't considered. What if someone installs their OS without internet? You may say they can disable that but I can think of many reasons a system would never ever be connected to the internet even just for install. How will this even work in the corporate world where the PC doesn't have an owner?

I think I can safely say this is fucking dumb.

[-]

meltbox@reddit

Well everyone in Congress is like 500 years old so they’re too fucking old to know how these things work other than “I pay Verizon for the WiFi”.

[-]

rebellioninmypants@reddit

Next step: Make Verizon require age verified operating systems to provide working WiFi.

In a nutshell, it's pretty much impossible to do this in a way that actually prevents children from faking their age brackets while at the same time protecting legit users' privacy.

The closest thing to that pipe dream would be a government-controlled authentication system, using government-issued electronic identification devices (similar to Yubikeys or something like that, possibly built into ID documents - EU has already rolled out the technology, though it's not used for this kind of thing, at least not yet), but even that isn't foolproof: all it takes is for a kid to "borrow" daddy's driving license, and if you want to prevent that, you need some kind of biometrics check, which requires that the user give up control of their camera etc. And even then, the whole system is just begging to be attacked, and because no information system is 100% secure, someone is going to compromise that thing eventually, and then all sorts of highly sensitive personal data is up for sale, all that because people can't be bothered to raise their children responsibly and take the time to actually supervise their online activity.

And none of that is going to happen here anyway. Realistically, the options are:

A system like the above, but the tech is provided and controlled by private entities, most likely ones that have strong incentives to abuse the information they can gather through such a system. Gains are marginal at best, privacy is dead, but it's a nice way for said corporations to further line their pockets.
An honor system, basically just making it mandatory to self-report your age when using... well... basically any electronic device. Solves absolutely no problem whatsoever, still hurts privacy, but the effect on corporations and pocket-lining is just as strong, if not stronger.

its vital people write to their congresspersons ASAP.

Here is essentially what i am telling my congressperson

H.R. 8250 claims to protect children online, but in reality it creates a dangerous system of mandatory identity verification for anyone using a phone or computer. This is not a narrow safety measure—it is a sweeping requirement that forces all Americans to submit sensitive personal information just to access essential technology.

This raises serious constitutional concerns:

Fourth Amendment: It enables broad data collection—similar to a digital “general search”—by requiring everyone to verify their identity without probable cause.
First Amendment: It undermines anonymous speech and will chill lawful expression, especially on sensitive or controversial topics.
Privacy & Due Process: It conditions access to modern life on identity checks, risking arbitrary exclusion and overreach.
Equal Protection: It disproportionately impacts people without ID, including low-income and vulnerable populations.

Beyond the constitutional issues, this bill does not actually solve the problem it claims to address. Determined minors can bypass restrictions, while bad actors will ignore them. Instead, it creates a false sense of security.

At its core, this proposal looks less like a child safety measure and more like a framework for mass surveillance—centralizing sensitive personal data and expanding the potential for tracking and misuse.

We can and should protect children online—but not by sacrificing the fundamental rights and freedoms of every American.

[-]

meltbox@reddit

I don’t know how to edit this to include it but by forcing adults to identify themselves we are also creating a signal which can be used to identify kids. Of course this will create an environment where bad actors can use this signal to select for kids online and target them!

Do not get this twisted. This is not about safety, it's about the biggest companies in the world wanting more data. Meta is lobbying for this. See; https://tboteproject.com/

What they need to do is incorporate into the OS the ability for a parent to set the device as belonging to a minor. We can passcode our TVs to limit the type of content, why can't the same thing be done with PCs, phones & tablets?

No IDs or face scans required. The parent creates a password & activates the feature. On the other end, sites have a check for the "minor" setting. If it's on, the site doesn't load, if it's off, the site operates as normal.