They ask for it to store a date today, ask for IDs the next. Heck they already want 3d printers to somehow identify if they’re printing parts that can be used in guns, but 3d printers don’t have that kind of computing power nor should they need that so odds are most companies will require an internet connection and upload to a central server to be analyzed. And thus privacy goes away unintentionally.
It’s just a stupid “slippery slope” fear mongering. “Then Linux will require a child sacrifice to even boot and will not connect to the internet unless you recite the entire Pledge of Allegiance”.
It’s just a stupid “slippery slope” fear mongering
Do you want me to point to the last 25 years?
I could go back further.
The slippery slope fallacy has to do with ignoring the fact that restraint is possible.
I am gonna ask you to look at the last 25 years and show me where there’s been an ounce of restraint to privacy in the US. An ounce of restraint placed upon surveillance.
The slippery slope fallacy requires that the expected escalation be unlikely.
There already exists places where third party age verification is required, so it’s not an unreasonable expectation that a government already pushing for age verification “for the children” would also try a similar kind of legislation.
Yes, please point me to all the instances of open source projects implementing some mandatory ID checks. You know what? Just name one.
Given that open source wasn’t a hard criteria until you just added it to try and support your argument , why would proof of a position nobody has taken help anyone?
Perhaps you meant point you at the instances of legislative creep around privacy and age verification in the last 25 years, as was suggested.
In which case you can just search for it, it’s easily findable.
If you need help with search terms, try “Age verification UK”
Nobody is claiming all(or any) open source projects will comply, the argument is that this is a step towards laws/legislation that make not complying illegal.
You could argue against that, but i don’t think you’d have much of an argument, which you probably know, because you would have done that already if it was a valid point.
What they are pointing at is that systemd has potentially done something to pre-capitulate and voicing their concern.
Nobody is pushing this single field change in isolation is a full age verification system, to pretend they are is disingenuous and reeks of bad faith.
Given that open source wasn’t a hard criteria until you just added it
Dude, we’re talking about systemd. It being open source is the single most important factor here. If you don’t understand this you have no idea what is being discussed.
Bringing up age verification in UK is like saying iptables supports internet censorship because great firewall of China exists.
Dude, we’re talking about systemd. It being open source is the single most important factor here.
Says who? I’d argue that the perceived pre-capitulation is the most important part.
Moving goalposts to align with your notion of the most important part doesn’t mean the goalposts weren’t moved.
If you don’t understand this you have no idea what is being discussed.
Says someone who’s whole argument relies on claiming that people think a single db field is full age verification.
The person you are replying to mentioned 3d printers as well as privacy in general , if you want to move the goalposts that’s on you.
Bringing up age verification in UK is like saying iptables supports internet censorship because great firewall of China exists.
My stated position was that escalation happens and the UK is an example, at no point did i equate the single field here to the measures in the uk.
If you want to go with false equivalence try and be a bit more subtle about it at least.
I’ll make it easy, respond to the following statement without moving any goalposts.
This field is a pre-capitulation to a law, is states this in the PR:
This field is not age verification on it’s own.
In the past 25 years there are provable instances of governments enacting mandatory third party age verification using laws and legislation.
Mandatory third party age verification exists already in some places.
Of the following options, how likely do you think it is that the current US government or some part thereof will try and pass a law or add legislation to mandate OS level age verification in some form greater than the current Californian proposal.
Of the following options, how likely do you think it is that the current US government or some part thereof will try and pass a law or add legislation to mandate OS level age verification in some form greater than the current Californian proposal.
This questions shows you’re completely missing the point here. Let’s say the answer is “Guaranteed”, in 5 years age verification on OS level will be mandated by law in US. Will it become mandatory on all Linux installations? Of course not. Anyone willing will just download Linux distro for any other country and use it. Let’s say age verification will become mandatory in the whole fucking world and all official Linux distros will adopt it. Anyone willing will download “illegal” Linux distro and use it. The source code is there, making a version of Linux without age verification is and always will be easy. The changes done by systemd are meaningless because they do no bring us any closer to real enforcement. Police knocking on people’s doors and checking their computers will bring real enforcement and what systemd does or doesn’t do has nothing to do with it. Getting mad at systemd for adding this field only shows people don’t understand what the real danger is. You’re conflating political issues with completely irrelevant technical changes. This is very simple. I really don’t know how people are confused by it. It’s like you are trying to distract us from the real problems on purpose.
To not comply while superficially pretending to, I suspect, from studying that PR. See my other comment above, where I run my mouth a little longer about this.
This hasn’t been needed until just now, coincidentally when dipshit one-foot-in-the-grave out of touch sociopaths try to make it a law? It’s just a fluke that the timing is the same?
Of what?
They ask for it to store a date today, ask for IDs the next. Heck they already want 3d printers to somehow identify if they’re printing parts that can be used in guns, but 3d printers don’t have that kind of computing power nor should they need that so odds are most companies will require an internet connection and upload to a central server to be analyzed. And thus privacy goes away unintentionally.
Who? How?
It’s just a stupid “slippery slope” fear mongering. “Then Linux will require a child sacrifice to even boot and will not connect to the internet unless you recite the entire Pledge of Allegiance”.
Do you want me to point to the last 25 years?
I could go back further.
The slippery slope fallacy has to do with ignoring the fact that restraint is possible.
I am gonna ask you to look at the last 25 years and show me where there’s been an ounce of restraint to privacy in the US. An ounce of restraint placed upon surveillance.
Yes, please point me to all the instances of open source projects implementing some mandatory ID checks. You know what? Just name one.
The slippery slope fallacy requires that the expected escalation be unlikely.
There already exists places where third party age verification is required, so it’s not an unreasonable expectation that a government already pushing for age verification “for the children” would also try a similar kind of legislation.
Given that open source wasn’t a hard criteria until you just added it to try and support your argument , why would proof of a position nobody has taken help anyone?
Perhaps you meant point you at the instances of legislative creep around privacy and age verification in the last 25 years, as was suggested.
In which case you can just search for it, it’s easily findable.
If you need help with search terms, try “Age verification UK”
Nobody is claiming all(or any) open source projects will comply, the argument is that this is a step towards laws/legislation that make not complying illegal.
You could argue against that, but i don’t think you’d have much of an argument, which you probably know, because you would have done that already if it was a valid point.
What they are pointing at is that systemd has potentially done something to pre-capitulate and voicing their concern.
Nobody is pushing this single field change in isolation is a full age verification system, to pretend they are is disingenuous and reeks of bad faith.
Dude, we’re talking about systemd. It being open source is the single most important factor here. If you don’t understand this you have no idea what is being discussed.
Bringing up age verification in UK is like saying iptables supports internet censorship because great firewall of China exists.
Says who? I’d argue that the perceived pre-capitulation is the most important part.
Moving goalposts to align with your notion of the most important part doesn’t mean the goalposts weren’t moved.
Says someone who’s whole argument relies on claiming that people think a single db field is full age verification.
The person you are replying to mentioned 3d printers as well as privacy in general , if you want to move the goalposts that’s on you.
My stated position was that escalation happens and the UK is an example, at no point did i equate the single field here to the measures in the uk.
If you want to go with false equivalence try and be a bit more subtle about it at least.
I’ll make it easy, respond to the following statement without moving any goalposts.
Of the following options, how likely do you think it is that the current US government or some part thereof will try and pass a law or add legislation to mandate OS level age verification in some form greater than the current Californian proposal.
This questions shows you’re completely missing the point here. Let’s say the answer is “Guaranteed”, in 5 years age verification on OS level will be mandated by law in US. Will it become mandatory on all Linux installations? Of course not. Anyone willing will just download Linux distro for any other country and use it. Let’s say age verification will become mandatory in the whole fucking world and all official Linux distros will adopt it. Anyone willing will download “illegal” Linux distro and use it. The source code is there, making a version of Linux without age verification is and always will be easy. The changes done by systemd are meaningless because they do no bring us any closer to real enforcement. Police knocking on people’s doors and checking their computers will bring real enforcement and what systemd does or doesn’t do has nothing to do with it. Getting mad at systemd for adding this field only shows people don’t understand what the real danger is. You’re conflating political issues with completely irrelevant technical changes. This is very simple. I really don’t know how people are confused by it. It’s like you are trying to distract us from the real problems on purpose.
They aren’t “asking for a date”
The PR in question just adds a way to store a birth date. That’s it
In order to comply with the specific Californian law. It’s referenced in the PR. If you could read (to quote your meme) you’d be very upset.
In before there’s a fork that automatically sets the age to April 1st, 1984.
But why are they?
To comply
To not comply while superficially pretending to, I suspect, from studying that PR. See my other comment above, where I run my mouth a little longer about this.
This hasn’t been needed until just now, coincidentally when dipshit one-foot-in-the-grave out of touch sociopaths try to make it a law? It’s just a fluke that the timing is the same?