Colorado Open Source Exemption Could Save Linux From Age Verification Rules

[-]

Akari202@reddit

The fact we need this in the first place is insane

[-]

lilly-lizard@reddit

isn't facebook one of the key lobbyists behind this? they want to offload their accountability to reduce public pressure regarding the mental health effects of social media.

[-]

FlyingBishop@reddit

No, that's not a serious problem they have. They want to make it legally required for OS vendors to provide them with your age bracket so they can use it for advertising.

[-]

No, Meta (and Elon Musk and a few other social media companies) are pushing these bills in response to stuff like the recent New Mexico case where they were fined 375 million USD for misleading users about child safety on their apps.

The idea is that by shifting age verification to the OS level (where naturally users will bypass it), they'll be able to shrug apathetically and go "age verification is an OS problem not ours, we're just naively accepting the OS's age signal and we can't be held accountable for the endangerment of users that were representing themselves as older than they are".

Well, that plus the whole scheme won't actually work to protect kids, and the spent political capital to establish it (and potentially repeal it) will also undermine future efforts to put forward actual solutions to the dangers that social media sites present.

[-]

FlyingBishop@reddit

This bill won't protect them against those lawsuits, and I don't think they're actually that scared of a $375M fine now and again.

[-]

BeeInABlanket@reddit

They're not scared of a $375 million fine, no. But they've also only spent $23 million nationwide so far to get these bills pushed (it's really depressing how affordable it is for the wealthy to do this). It's much cheaper for them to change the law than to eat future fines.

[-]

BatemansChainsaw@reddit

meta is indeed behind it all

[-]

SiteRelEnby@reddit

We don't need it. It is purely to protect rich paedophiles.

[-]

RephRayne@reddit

The majority of issues stem from social media companies not moderating their content sufficiently due to costs. If adequate moderation would bankrupt your company then it's not a feasible business.
The reason social media companies aren't being targeted directly is because they're useful to those in charge.

[-]

Journeyj012@reddit

so would this be a bill specifically for MacOS, Windows, Android, IoT devices, and iOS?

[-]

Ok-Winner-6589@reddit

This is weird because Android is open source...

[-]

ezoe@reddit

While the kernel of Android is Linux, many proprietary drivers and firmware binary blog are not.

If Android is considered Open Source, so is the macOS.

Then we have so many proprietary embedded OSes that powers various devices...

[-]

Ok-Winner-6589@reddit

No?

MacOS is based on open source components but Apple does not release them.

It's like Chrome, it's closed source but forked over Chromium, which is open source.

Android's userland utilities and kernel are open source, check the AOSP, which is a functional android OS. Each vendedor includes extra software needed.

BTW your Linux Machine relies on propietary firmware and propietary CPU microcode.

[-]

ezoe@reddit

Darwin, the kernel of macOS is licensed by Apple Public Source License.

https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/distribution-macOS

Entire macOS itself is considered proprietary software but kernel is mostly open source.

If you think Android is open source, so is the macOS. I don't think so.

[-]

Ok-Winner-6589@reddit

Darwin doesn't include the drivers needed to run the kernel on the hardware so it's useless unless you do reverse engineering

Which means that, as I said, Its closed source build over open source technologies

If you think Android is open source, so is the macOS. I don't think so.

No because, again, the source isn't there at all. You have some of the software being open.

Are the libraries to run It open source?

Can you compile MacOS and run It on Apple's hardware?

Android is being developed by the Android Open Source Project (AOSP) which maintains an OS, called Android, which is fully open source. You can get the Code, compile It and run It under any of the supported architectures

What you mean isn't Android but the Google certified ROMs. Which includes propietary libraries, Google services and some components developed by the device vendors.

There is a reason for why Mac ROMs don't exist but Android ROMs do exist. And that that AOSP provides a functional OS

[-]

ezoe@reddit

Darwin doesn't include the drivers needed to run the kernel on the hardware so it's useless unless you do reverse engineering

So is the Android for many of the hardware.

But you can run Darwin on VM or some hardware that's same with Android situation.

[-]

Ok-Winner-6589@reddit

AOSP is a functional OS, with drivers AMD everything needed but firmware. Standar Linux has the same issue as AOSP when It comes to open source

[-]

Ill_Scientist_2239@reddit

Android is a free and open source project, but almost all devices come with vendor customised versions of the os, which are not open source, unlike macOS, which is closed source.

[-]

ezoe@reddit

Darwin, the kernel of macOS is licensed by Apple Public Source License.

https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/distribution-macOS

So the situation is same with Android.

[-]

Ill_Scientist_2239@reddit

You can get a foss version of android up and running, unlike macos, which is open source kernel only.

[-]

Albos_Mum@reddit

You can very easily see the differences by comparing AOSP and PureDarwin: The PD team has to do a lot more than the AOSP team to even get a booting OS.

[-]

kumliaowongg@reddit

Only if you use AOSS (Lineage, etc), not if you use vendor customized Android (Samsung, Xiaomi, etc).

It needs to be made clear that having some parts be OSS does not exclude the whole system.

Defining those parts is somewhat hard.

Closed bootloader/init system?

Not OSS.

[-]

dnu-pdjdjdidndjs@reddit

good luck defining bootloader

[-]

yawara25@reddit

Software that loads a kernel into memory and executes it?

[-]

Makuslaw@reddit

So is Linux a bootloader, because it has the kexec syscall?

[-]

MasterYehuda816@reddit

yeah actually it can act as a bootloader. that's what unified kernel images are

[-]

Ok-Winner-6589@reddit

Linux can work as a bootloader.

It's like saying that virtualization can not be defined because the kernel has KVM. Once thing doesn't invalidate the other...

[-]

quinnr@reddit

I think it is OK if they make it clear that having some parts be OSS excludes the whole system, too.

[-]

AppleSky@reddit

Building on that (how much open source is enough to qualify for an exemption), I believe Apple’s kernel (Darwin) used for macOS, iOS, etc. is also open source. I’m not sure if or how someone could make a case to exclude vendor customized Android and not also Apple.

[-]

Existing-Tough-6517@reddit

It is incredibly easy. You should actually simply regulate operating systems sold as part of computers this would cover 100% of consumer device including ones with open source.

It means systrem76 would be required to ship a version of Ubuntu that has this but 17 random Ubuntu forks wouldn't be required to include this on an iso that provide a torrent for.

[-]

sudogaeshi@reddit

but the momentum for this exemption is being led by Carl Richell of System76 because he thinks it's wrong and doesn't want to ship it

[-]

skuterpikk@reddit

Darwin is open source, yes, but the graphics system, user interface, api, well.. everything that makes MacOS an actual useable OS is not

[-]

Ok-Winner-6589@reddit

The problem is that, if everything has to be open source, Linux is kinda fucked

[-]

SmileyBMM@reddit

I'm sure the FSF would be thrilled though.

[-]

FlyingBishop@reddit

I mean a big issue with the bill is the conflation of operating system with package manager. Play Store vs. Debian repos vs. F-Droid.

But also if we're going to be mandating OSes collect age info, selling that data and targeting ads based on it should be illegal.

[-]

Journeyj012@reddit

Wait, I didn't even think about that.

[-]

schultzter@reddit

It's specifically for the parents who provide a device to their child that can access an app store or install an app covered by the law.

Your FreeDOS or AROS machine, smart coffee machine, smart blinds, router, etc won't be required to check your age before brewing a cup of coffee!

(Note, I've never tried AROS so I might be wrong)

It worries me more that 1. They think hobbyist volunteers working on open source projects are going to hire lawyers to explain the implications of every state's and every country's age-verification law on their little project; 2. They think hobbyists are actually going to spend their passion project time implementing this stuff instead of the other cool thing they had in mind; and 3. The think it makes sense to have so many different laws when software is used around the world!

[-]

Mother-Pride-Fest@reddit

Even if that is what is intended, the text of the law is extremely broad such that it could apply to any operating system. That is why we are worried.

[-]

schultzter@reddit

any operating system

The bill explicitly says general computing device so I imagine even if your Mr. Coffee ran Windows (god forbid) it wouldn't have to verify your age.

[-]

monocasa@reddit

Ok, I host a mirror of exopc/xok, one of the exokernel OSes for historical purposes. It's designed as a general purpose OS, and the exokernel folks would say it's more general purpose than most general purpose OSes.

Do I have to take down my mirror?

[-]

Mother-Pride-Fest@reddit

A desktop PC is a general computing device, and a desktop can run Windows, Linux, etc.

To your coffee example, if it had a computer capable of running Windows, what is stopping someone from just using that for their general computing? I'd say that hellspawn of a coffee machine is a general computing device that happens to also make coffee so it would be covered under that wording.

[-]

schultzter@reddit

I don't know about your coffee machine but mine lacks HDMI, USB, audio, though it does RJ11 for some reason!

[-]

SiteRelEnby@reddit

General purpose, at its logical extent, would mean Turing-complete.

[-]

SuAlfons@reddit

Your error lies within thinking someone gave thought about small developers' software (free or not) at all.

[-]

schultzter@reddit

Specifically I'm talking about that guy in Nebraska, the whole global internet depends on him implementing age-verification or not!

https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/dependency.png

[-]

spyingwind@reddit

UEFI isn't OSS, CPU microcode isn't OSS, AMD PSP/Intel ME isn't OSS. Does this mean that Linux can't be excluded?

[-]

stylist-trend@reddit

I would argue those aren't part of a linux distro.

The closest you might get to that is CPU microcode, as that tends to be distributed as a package, but it's also not required since it's just the "up to date" microcode - the CPU itself still has microcode, albeit potentially outdated.

[-]

Titdirt69420@reddit

If this gets integrated into national law as well (there's an age verification bill at national level) then this could actually be a great thinklg for open source.

It would encourage people to develop and use open source software as you have real freedom with it.

Kudos to system76 guy or whomever lobbied to get this in there.

[-]

AdLimp8574@reddit

How, California doesnt care about Colorados laws. In the same way people from Canada dont have to abide by the U.S. laws. I guess if you mean that __MAYBE__ you could get California, Brazil, and the U.K to restructure its age verification law around Colorados. This isn't saving shit. Most of these laws dont even require you to actually verify what age you are. Its just another are you 18+ screen where you can click yes and it goes away. Don't get me wrong this is absolutely just a way to shift blame off of facebook's preditory practices but its such nothing burgers for the consumers other than Facebook keeps getting to track us all to death to get an extra penny on their ad revenue.

[-]

Autotunize@reddit

Man, why :sob:

[-]

Davoomer@reddit

It’s a step, an open to fight against it, so follow this up until you can rise your voice against this BS laws.

[-]

siodhe@reddit

You're a little late to this with a national version with no exemptions already in bill form.

The CO/CA versions are such puerile, pathetic drivel that there is an exemption for the "delivery of or use of a physical device", and since all computers are physical devices, or a sim running inside of one, logically the CA/CO travesties would be void from the beginning.

I got a reply back from the CO bill's sponsor, a fool, having no idea whatsoever just what kind of sprawl these have or that the Meta and the Heritage Foundation are the main sources. Meta just wants to cover its own *ss by shifting all the cost and liability to absolutely everyone except themselves. Like many politicians, he's trivially swayed by donations and "Save the Children!" sentiment that has literally nothing to do with the truth of the bill. The Colorado vote is 28 idiots versus 7 more cautious types as of this writing, and all of them were emailed with an extensive breakdown of how badly their bill breaks the universe.

[-]

Mother-Pride-Fest@reddit

The exemption isn't in the bill yet. While this is important, we can't celebrate yet. We also need to prevent the Governments Decide Act on the federal level.

[-]

SanityInAnarchy@reddit

Colorado was one of the milder ones anyway, where the law already allowed you to just lie. Of the state-level bills, it's the Utah/Alabama version that we need an exemption from.

[-]

Gugalcrom123@reddit

And New York.

[-]

BatemansChainsaw@reddit

We're thankfully ahead of the Bill making its way through NY. Hopefully we can end it before it gets started.

[-]

redundant78@reddit

yeah the headline is way too optimistic for where things actually stand. even if colorado gets this exemption through, it doesn't matter much if similar bills pass at the federal level or in other states without one. this is a whack-a-mole situation right now.

[-]

lKrauzer@reddit

What happens if applications/websites start to require this, instead of the OS itself though?

[-]

throwaway234f32423df@reddit

then you mod your OS to always report age 99

[-]

DoubleOwl7777@reddit

no, random age over 18 (or 21, or whatever you prefer). dont make it report the same age every time.

[-]

BashfulMelon@reddit

Being the one of the few IDs in the database with a constantly shifting age is a great way to get yourself fingerprinted.

Luckily the California and Colorado bills specify brackets, and everybody blends in.

[-]

laffer1@reddit

They do if they are adults. The brackets help Epstein types find the young victims just as easily.

[-]

SiteRelEnby@reddit

The best in terms of fingerprinting resistance would be for everyone to agree one the same one (01-01-1970 would make the most sense), because exposing RNG characteristics is still a fingerprintable surface, just less of one than a fixed value.

[-]

pseudonym-161@reddit

It should be on the website not your hardware and OS that you own. If websites require it I’ll simply go elsewhere. The indie web needs to make a comeback anyhow.

[-]

leonredhorse@reddit

The whole point is big websites don’t want to be on the hook for identity verification and policing their platform. Some adult content sites in certain states already require identity verification and they block that state and people use VPNs to move around it.

[-]

wyn10@reddit

I'm already using a forked systemd I'll just keep moving stuff over to a fork with a backbone.

[-]

gplusplus314@reddit

While not Linux, FreeBSD is a friend, let’s say. What’s interesting about it is that the FreeBSD Foundation (the entity that drives funding) is incorporated in Colorado.

Another friend of Linux is OpenBSD. The OpenBSD Foundation is incorporated in Canada.

Things are about to get very interesting. I appreciate the BSDs, even though I prefer Linux overall for most situations, but the BSDs do have influence.

[-]

Samiassa@reddit

I don’t want an exception I just don’t want this to happen

[-]

Raunien@reddit

Why does this article read like it was written by AI?

[-]

wRAR_@reddit

It's blogspam.

Note how the OP filled the analytics values, even one specifically noting the subreddit this is posted to.

[-]