Debian Project Leader Andreas Tille has addressed the ongoing debate over age-verification laws and their potential impact on free software operating systems. Long story short: he clarified that Debian has not adopted a position and is awaiting legal analysis.
In his latest “Bits from the DPL” message, Tille stated that the main question is whether operating systems and package distribution mechanisms might be required to provide age-related information to applications.
He noted that Debian and other projects are discussing the issue, and that Software in the Public Interest, a non-profit corporation founded to act as a fiscal sponsor for organizations that develop open-source software and hardware, has begun seeking legal guidance.
Will drop debian like that if they capitulate a single inch
FYI : a place where some of these PRs have been created , and unfortunately, one already merged into Systemd
https://lemmy.world/post/44679693
-
In Systemd, already merged.
-
In xdg.desktop.portal (a portal frontend service for Flatpak and other desktop containment frameworks), still open.
-
In Arch Linux, still open.
-
In Freedesktop.org, still open.
Minor clarification: your Arch Linux link is for archinstall, the easier install script, not Arch Linux itself. IIRC it’s not even the officially recommended way to install Arch.
it’s still trying to be jammed in where it doesn’t belong
-
I read that as “new-age” verification. LOL
We gotta inspect your Chakra dude.
Now that’s a policy I would support.
Meditate with your verification crystal to access the hidden knowledge.
We didn’t recognize your verification crystal. Please enter your recovery mantra
I’m against these laws, strongly, but I think sending vitriol at systemd and distrust is not constructive.
The battle is legal and pretending it isn’t and fighting our maintainers who realistically can’t afford to be sued over good, is not helping the cause.
It’s humans at the end of the pipe. Thoughtful and vulnerable humans.
There is one small benefit to this speedbump on our road to freedom:
Governor Gavin Newsom, Democrat of California? Has been acting like he wants to run for President in 2028. He signed this into law for his state.
Make this an albatross on his neck. Sink him. Let him know that this crushed his dreams of ever being President. Publicly. Loudly. Don’t be satisfied until he quits twitter and retires from public life altogether, not just politics.
And for anyone in New Jersey? Get loud at your state reps phonelines now, they’re trying to pass the same in your state.
I don’t know how anyone can pretend to care about gay, trans, or black people and support this law.
It’s going to be used to ban “critical race theory” and lgbtq topics first.
I don’t see how the Dems can defend this
Hating Dylan Taylor is not however
Hating a Dev? Broke.
Hating Governor Newsom? That’s on the money.
I can hate both
Hate the politician louder.
I’d say it’s less a legal fight than it is a fight for control , using the law this time.
Pretending that what people are upset about is the field rather than the pre-capitulation is not helping the cause.
Most of the hate isn’t for the technical implementation of a field, though some FOSS people are upset at that as well.
You can sidestep the legal fight by not serving the places where it is illegal.
That’s doesn’t necessarily align with the goals of whatever project, but it is possible.
Every entity that bends over backwards to support US hegemony is deserving of all the criticism it gets.
The dude literally added an optional birthday field next to an optional full name field and an optional adress field
Then he got death threats
If you think that is an appropriate response you are a litteral child, mentally speaking.
Figurative, unless you’re actually proposing a real, measurable, testable large scale mental deficit.
but yeah, death threat are stupid.
unless you’re actually proposing a real, measurable, testable large scale mental deficit.
I do if you think death threats are appropriate
That seems like a stretch…but you do you i suppose.
So you think there is a world where death threats are warranted for a… Pull request?
That seems like a stretch… But you do you i suppose.
I’ll assume you pulled that mental gymnastic routine out of the same place you store how you think the word literally is supposed to work.
At no point was “pull requests deserve death threats” even hinted at.
Semi-reasonable takes wrapped in logically dubious arguments is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Doubling down with a retort that only requires you to read 5 lines to see it isn’t true is wandering in the fields of free and easy victory and choosing to drown yourself in the 2 inch puddle of defeat.
I don’t think you can include death threats under criticism
Yet here we are
I’m telling you that you did not understand what the guy you replied to really meant
Oh I know what he meant
I just think he relativizes how the discussion was going.
Constructive critizism is of course fine But this whole thing was the exact opposite
It’s not so simple as that, the dude provided a framework for privacy abusers to use to force us into their bullshit. If that framework did not exist they wouldn’t be able to do that so easily. There is absolutely zero reason for there to be a centralized location on an operating system that just hands out your demographic information to whoever asks for it and yes, that includes the fields that already existed. None of it should be in there. This is not something we should be compromising on. There are enough invasions into our privacy as it is.
Doesn’t deserve death threats but he does deserve hate.
Death threats are stupid and indicate severe mental problems. This does not change the fact that the author explicitly mentioned that the aim was compliance with possible age verification laws. Just because he received death threats from some idiot man child does not mean he is right or what he did is inconsequential. It is a statement that they are willing to accept possible future identity verification laws without any legal fight and resistance.
There is no law that governs Linux development related to this, enywhere else. There is only a law in CA that requires this functionality (which would break any and all software infrastructure). Why would any maintainer of any Linux distribution, not actively dependent on following an untested law (from a legal PoV), even consider implementing it? This got a lot of headlines, because it’s absurd and stupid.
If maintainers wanted to comply, what the fuck would it actually entail? 99% of operating system doesn’t have any specific human users to identify. The only reasonable approach is to ignore it. If data centers in CA for Azure, AWS, GCP, or any other, wants to comply with this (which is impossible), either spend some of that tax free revenue to combat Meta’s suspected 2 billion USD effort in getting these online ID laws pushed through.
“Fuck off” is the only appropriate answer.
Aim it at the right people - but say it loud and clear.
This is why I stick with Debian. Adults make decisions over there.
They voted to switch to systemd so yeah, no problem there.
Can you verify this? Maybe we should require Debian contributors to prove they are adults. /s
I think the position to adopt is very clear:
- You stand upright facing the nearest government building.
- You extend your right arm horizontally in front of you.
- You rest your left hand, palm down, on top of your right arm, next to your antecubital fossa (the opposite side of the elbow).
- You make a fist with your right hand.
- Without opening your fist, you extend your right hand’s middle finger straight up.
- You decisively bend your right arm at the elbow, standing your forearm, fist, and middle finger straight up.
Thus you achieve the only reasonable position towards this nonsense.
deleted by creator
Just fucking block Brasil and California from using debian
That does nothing to address the issue. What happens when the requirement is adopted elsewhere? Just keep excluding territories?
It seems like a simple fix, but this would play right into the hands of the corporate overlords. And California is not some tiny state.
If California were an independent nation, it would rank as the fourth largest economy in the world in nominal terms, behind Germany and ahead of Japan.
Slap a label on it that it’s not legal to use in those areas and move on while they fight it out legally. It’s distributed via p2p anyway so if people in those places still want to use it they can. Absolutely no reason to bend on this.
I agree that that solves some problems, 100%. But I’ve seen the downward slide of society take hard-fought civil rights away for several decades now. It’s never a sudden process, it always starts small and then slowly grows.
This is just the beginning, and it should be fought against with tooth and nail now, not just postponed so that we have to deal with this issue once the fascists already have some momentum.
Which is why I included the bit about fighting it out legally.
But I’ve seen the downward slide of society take hard-fought civil rights away for several decades now. It’s never a sudden process, it always starts small and then slowly grows.
That’s what happens by adding features that comply with these stupid laws. Step one is NOT doing that. People can still use the software even if it doesn’t comply. What is the government going to do break into everyone’s home and look at their computers?
The CA one, at least from what I remember, doesn’t even place any expectations on a user. Even if a user did use an OS that was noncompliant, they would not be violating any laws for doing so, from what I understand.
What happens to the California economy if they can’t use Debian? Could it survive that?
Debian can’t survive without California.
There are plenty of dumb laws nobody applies anyway
I’m curious, what’s an example?
https://www.california.com/strange-laws-california/
Edit: My favorite.
“8. In Blythe, you are only permitted to wear cowboy boots if you own at least two cows”.
Just keep excluding territories?
Yes.
Dont they just have to put a disclaimer saying that usage of the OS isnt legal in those places? That works for all sorts of other stuff so why not here?
Imagine having to verify your age for every docker container spun up by GitHub/forgejo actions.
Only restricted material will require an age verification.
So, what about an operating system is restricted material? That’s what this law requires.
Edit: wow, you’re all over the place here. Are you paid (perhaps run?) by Meta?
time to switch all my LXCs to alpine, i guess. if they’ll even still work. they’re all debian 12/13 right now.
Right now the only Debian system I have is on Oldstable. If Debian decides to implement age verification/attestation, do you think it’s going to be backported to that version? 🤔
You could just rip out the age verification bits, you have root access, it shouldnt be that hard. If it ever happens
Tille suggested that, if such obligations arise, they would likely affect redistributors or commercial entities building on Debian, rather than the Debian project itself.
if my edgerouter 4 adds age verification i’m going to burn everything to the ground
No that’s total garbage.
The law doesn’t mention commerciality or vendors, only operating systems.
EdgeOS is a fork of Vyatta, which is itself based on Debian.
This reminds me, I actually installed OpenWRT on an ER-X. I need to go poke around on it and see how it works.
I have openwrt on my ER-X too, poor thing is relegated to glorified managed switch duties nowadays though
Choosing not to decide is a choice for age verification…
Choosing to claim a niche where the law doesn’t apply is… A choice in favor of the law, instead of a circumvention method?
You’re thinking like a voter instead of a hacker. Stop that.
Cool, still not using Debian. 👍
Never give up without a fight.
He also noted that, from a non-lawyer perspective, it remains uncertain how these regulations would apply to a non-commercial, volunteer-driven project like Debian, which does not sell software and distributes it in a decentralized manner.
FUCKING THANK YOU.
My coffee maker has an operating system… Okay well actually i use an electric kettle but some of them do.
This law is impossibleOur office coffee machine runs Android. Every time I wonder why…
Easier to turn into ewaste so you need to buy another one this way.
