Top
Best
New

Posted by WalterSobchak 9 hours ago

A new California law says all operating systems need to have age verification(www.pcgamer.com)
188 points | 195 commentspage 2
k310 4 hours ago|
Sounds to me that this is how kids learn to spin their own operating systems (a la LFS, Gentoo)and apps.

This is how people bought personal computers when the mainframe priesthood banned them.

It appears that very soon, young people will "de facto" need to have this level of competence in order to survive and thrive in a world of "in loco parentis" operating systems and apps.

The latin reveals my age, but one thing about my age:

People my age did exactly that. We built our own hardware when there was none. We compiled (or copied) operating systems and apps. A couple of my friends wrote an operating system and a C compiler.

"My generation" created this entire internet thingy, installed and web-based apps.

Indeed, dumb-asses are going to level up young people.

nancyminusone 3 hours ago||
Maybe kids won't be doing this because they won't know of a world where this isn't the case.
pessimizer 43 minutes ago|||
Meanwhile, all available hardware will only allow attested operating systems that conform to regulations. All hardware that does not conform will be illegal.

Before they do this, it will be easy to lock the internet to only allow attested operating systems online.

kgwxd 3 hours ago|||
It wasn't illegal when we did it. They're working on that too.
bitwize 3 hours ago||
I'm sure Xers and millennials are totally going to be okay with a visit from the school cop when their little one is caught with an illegal operating system and looking at charges that could ruin their college and job prospects.
throw03172019 6 hours ago||
Are lawmakers bored? Who is asking for this? Not the tax paying citizens.
arjie 32 minutes ago||
The way people ask for things like this is "Young people shouldn't be allowed to do X" and "Websites shouldn't be allowed to collect user data to determine if the people are underage" and so on. The intersection of all the things that "tax paying citizens" want is usually something patently absurd.
SoftTalker 2 hours ago|||
Parents who are fed up with social media and tech companies taking no social responsibility.

These companies have fewer ethics than a minimum-wage liquor store clerk when it comes to caring about the age of their users.

sunaookami 2 hours ago|||
Parents are lazy and don't want to do what parents should do and cry to the state that they should do it.
wredcoll 1 minute ago||
Yeah, those parents whose kids died from tainted milk products sure were lazy. How dare they cry that the state should do something?
outime 2 hours ago||||
Will those parents get fed up of themselves not taking parenting responsibility?
gtsop 2 hours ago|||
[dead]
tonymet 3 hours ago||
Lobbyists for intelligence agencies. It’s part of de-anonymization so you can be punished for speech online. See UK , Germany and Australia
NitpickLawyer 3 hours ago|||
> Lobbyists for intelligence agencies.

I think it's one peg below intel agencies. It's the local gov agencies that want that power. The 3 letter peeps can already tell who writes what, both at scale and targeted.

tonymet 2 hours ago||
I mean the entire public and private industry . And you’re right this will empower local law enforcement
goalieblocksv1 2 hours ago||
[dead]
tzs 2 hours ago|||
Interesting theory considering that this California approach does not de-anonymize you, and the approach Germany is working on, as part of an EU wide effort, also does not de-anonymize you.
tonymet 1 hour ago||
baby steps
egorfine 6 hours ago||
Ah, so this is what Lennart Poettering has been cooking? [1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46784572

CWuestefeld 2 hours ago||
It's not stated here, but is it implied that app platforms that, themselves, have an "app store", would be required to read this datum and pass it to their app store?

For example, I've got a map application on my phone that lets me download maps, widgets, POI lists, etc. from their app store. It seems like enabling that age signal through this exchange is exactly what the politicians are looking for.

wasmainiac 8 hours ago||
Does not require verification, no biggie, this is essentially a parental control system.
jmholla 7 hours ago||
As others have pointed out, this is just a foot in the door. There's also a part of the law this article doesn't cover that requires EVERY application to query this information on every launch, regardless of whether or not the application has any age related limitations.
davorak 5 hours ago||
The language I found was:

> when the application is downloaded and launched

So it looks like the law only requires it on first launch. Which makes sense if the application can only be run from that one account. Apps that can be launched from multiple accounts are not singled out in the law, but the spirt of the law would have you checking what account is launching the app and are they in the correct age range.

jmholla 4 hours ago||
That's not a guarantee. It's up to how the courts interpret that and. Given that this law is meant to handle a moving target like age, I fully expect them to interpret it as its disjunctive form.
avaer 8 hours ago|||
Keep in mind this forced parental control system in the OS is supposedly because of app stores.

So we're already pretty deep in the law deciding what shape of computing you're allowed to do. What makes you think it will stop here?

gustavus 8 hours ago|||
No but then the next step is "well we need a way to enforce it because people are just lying about their age".

I guess let me show a slope I found over here, just past the boiling frogs, watch your footing though, it's recently been greased and is quite steep.

kgwxd 2 hours ago|||
I was just at some .gov site from another HN post. It asked are you Over 18, I clicked No out of curiosity. Showed Access Denied, but the buttons stayed. I clicked Yes, and got in. I don't attribute to stupidity that which is clear malice. They'd don't actually give a flying fuck about what "kids" can get to, they only care about controlling everyone, of every age, as much as they possibly can.
wasmainiac 8 hours ago|||
I agree, I don’t like it as much as you do. I’m just saying nothing short of a mandated TPM will actually enforce this. I think they know that.

I think this is mostly for show to stay relevant wrt. What is happening in the courts. This is the Same play as it always been for registration “are you over the age of 13?”

Mountain_Skies 6 hours ago|||
Which begs the question if Microsoft's stubborn insistence on TPM 2.0 for Windows 11 to operate was something planned out in advance of this law being proposed.
gizmo686 6 hours ago|||
How does a TPM stop people from lying about their age?
varispeed 8 hours ago||
Overton window.

Wedge.

lioeters 5 hours ago||
Then ratchet.
Animats 2 hours ago||
It's not clear that this applies where the "operating system provider" does not have "accounts". Linux should be OK, but "Ubuntu One" might have problems.

It's a good reason not to put cloud dependencies into things.

aspbee555 2 hours ago||
this is why I am building a communications software that has no concept of accounts, devices can connect and keys are generated on device and blind to relaying/directing server/network. people can only connect directly with other people/devices. there is no concept of lists of people/devices to connect to, you need to know someone/have access to the device to connect.

no accounts to compromise. no passwords to remember. end point devices control their connectivity. no vpn needed to connect, no intermediary to see all traffic and peer traffic is specifically what is needed/allowed/requested, not a wide open network connection/accounts to be compromised

singron 2 hours ago||
The bill doesn't define "accounts", so it's entirely possible local users that a human signs into would count.

The saving grace is that obviously they have no idea what a Linux distribution is, and only the Attorney General can bring action, so there isn't much risk of the AG suing Debian.

Brian_K_White 2 hours ago||
Maybe this is just an unsuspectedly astute way to get Microsoft to reenable local accounts?
cm2187 2 hours ago||
so my smart microwave will require some age verification?
ceayo 1 hour ago|
Of course! Think of the dangers of an unsupervised child... (SHOCK WARNING) cooking... A gasp MEAL!
dpoloncsak 8 hours ago|
I'm under the impression anyone doing nefarious things online are probably more-than tech savvy enough to not install an OS that rats them out...right?

Isnt that literally one of the first rules of the DNM Bible?

taraindara 8 hours ago||
Will kids raised on it not know anything different? Seems a path to reduce computer literacy. Then again, being blocked from doing something I wanted is what lead me to find ways around said block. But I already had unrestricted access to the system to bend it to my will. Seems like these kinds of systems won’t allow for the user to learn how to works at all. It’s a mystery box.
hnav 6 hours ago|||
One thing that's happening is that attestation is being plumbed into the web itself. CloudFlare and Apple have a collab where Safari will inject tokens that let CF know that the request is coming from a blessed device. In a world where all websites are being crushed by bot traffic, expect that Goog pushes on their own integrity initiative in Chrome in the next year or two.
Muromec 2 hours ago||
I guess, if you can install the OS yourself, that's adult enough to see whatever adults are doing online.
More comments...