this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2026
891 points (99.8% liked)

Linux

15013 readers
832 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 228 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

This is awesome to hear. But the fact that they had to do this after the fact tells you all you need to know about how stupid and poorly thought out to these laws are.

[–] Daxter101@lemmy.blahaj.zone 73 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Good, one more reason to slowly push people out of Microsoft's clutches.

[–] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 44 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

Yeah but today’s exemption is tomorrow’s loophole to be closed.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 6 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

New reason to use Linux: You're seventeen years old and want to watch porn.

[–] SillyDude@lemmy.zip 9 points 3 weeks ago

I remember installing Ubuntu when I was like 14 because my parents had so much shit on the xp partition they used. This was on dial-up and Ubuntu 3 or 4 or something.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 7 points 3 weeks ago

U can also just go to yandex.com and use the image search or any other site not beholden to U.S. laws

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

To be fair our situation is unprecedented. Children with access to social media (for some reason) interacting endlessly with AI slop.

Research indicates we’ve already wiped out 30 years of literacy progress.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 86 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Surely systemd is going to roll back Dylan's change, right?

[–] Eggymatrix@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Can you explain in detail, what exactly that change did?

[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 51 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

They added a voluntary field for date of birth. Very controversial. Not at all like the address field that had been there for years or realname. Those are completely uncontroversial somehow. Unfortunately it got added during all this uncertainty with all the user I'd government overreach. And people lost their everloving minds claiming it was some sinister forced Id check. It was not. But all the craze around it launched tens of already dead systemD forks.

[–] Danitos@reddthat.com 24 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

Worth mentioning that California's and Brazil's age verification laws were cited as a motivating factor in the pull request, the pull request ~~author~~ merger works for Microsoft and the author also did similar pull requests in other open source projects.

Edit: it was the PR merger that works for Microsoft, not the PR author.

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

the pull request author works for Microsoft and he also did similar pull requests in a other open source projects.

So he made several mistakes as part of a co-ordinated jumping the gun on boot throating, AND he's getting paid to make open source software worse?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mobyduck648@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Probably doesn't help there's also the existing fault line of 'an init system shouldn't be doing x', systemd was always a magnet for partisanship.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 6 points 3 weeks ago

Well, yeah, because they added it because of the law. That's not speculation, they said that's why they did. I agree, if it was there before it wouldn't have been out of place, I totally get you, but they said that it's something they should add because it might be required by law in the future.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 65 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (9 children)

This is fucking BAD you guys. Like, we’re being dog walked into a fucking wall here.

Major Big Tech companies (and their Fortune 500 partners, and the smaller businesses they support) are ALL going to be asking for age verification for all their SaaS “cloud” offerings and be required to do so by law.

If Linux is exempt from these laws then these services which we may all still be dependent on in some form or another will not work with Linux, since it doesn’t verify age.

You won’t be able to bank or watch Netflix on Linux anymore and it will destroy adoption just as it’s going mainstream.

[–] antianarchist@sopuli.xyz 7 points 3 weeks ago

I think you are confusing something. A tech company running proprietary code can and will ask for age verification. It does not matter if the user runs Windows, Linux, iOS, GrapheneOS.

The law here makes sure that services, which are basically also open source, are not required to do the age verification check.

So, you install Windows? Age check. You install Linux? No age check. Before even opening a browser. Then on Linux you open Netflix? Age check.

So I fundamentally saw this actually as a good news.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] username_1@discuss.tchncs.de 51 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Why? That law was stupid in the first place but now it is completely idiotic. It isn't coherent even with its original sick logic.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 weeks ago

My guess is they figure it will make little difference due to network effects, and by making this exception they can remove a meaningful source of political resistance to the change. If the vast majority of users are running operating systems that declare underage status, then websites and apps will be able to use those signals to sidestep legal liability for actually doing anything meaningful to protect underage users, and new laws can be passed that assume the use of those signals is possible. That it isn't 100% doesn't change that very much.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 46 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

This makes literally zero sense.

Why would the software license determine this? Just rollback the shit law.

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 18 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Cause they don't want to have to force corpos to get age verification on the ludicrous number of IoT devices that run Linux, but cover their ass in making it not seem that way.

Oh sorry. I mean... cause they're, like, open-source and how could you even enforce that?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago

Obviously our lawmakers are communist and this is a ploy to undermine the very capable and responsible software maker called Microsoft /s

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 43 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This is still bad, rollback the law

[–] zane@infosec.pub 9 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

But if lawmakers didnt constantly push out completely ineffective laws that cause problems, then what else would they do with their time? Effectively govern? Fucking nonsense.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] BigTrout75@lemmy.world 43 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

I'm trying to understand the logic. I guess they think the kids are too dumb to use Linux.

So what if you're running Linux on Windows? Does that qualify?

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 61 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

The logic is none of these distros would do shit to comply with this, and enforcement is almost impossible. This is just saving face.

[–] Matty_r@programming.dev 20 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

There were some people practically tripping over themselves to add all the prerequisites needed to support age verification. Instead of waiting to see how things played out, they just rushed through changes for things like systemd.

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 19 points 3 weeks ago

Adding a nullable "date of birth" field on a json doesn't seem like "rushed". The whole thing was massively overblown, considering it already had a field for the user real name (also optional).

https://systemd.io/USER_RECORD

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 weeks ago

I'd imagine most kids using Linux are either being actively taught computers by a parent who's paying close attention, or so smart that nobody is stopping them from doing anything.

[–] JTode@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

I don't know what the Cali gov was thinking

But it makes sense to me, based on the commercial incentive. It's not that FreeBSD doesn't form the basis of products that will need to comply with the law (whatever Apple calls their desktop OS for instance), but FreeBSD itself is only for the leet.

No, you don't have to be a genius to use it, but you do need to be very weird, in that you want to use your own actual brain to solve problems, and you want to fully understand what the thing is doing, from bootup to shutdown. If that's you, you're a very odd person, according to many.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nao@sh.itjust.works 32 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

are they going to keep the exception if everyone installs linux now

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 37 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Yes, but they'll rule that using free open-source software is terrorism.

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 16 points 3 weeks ago

No they’ll just rule that services need to verify age; and since Linux doesn’t do that now it’s incompatible with the services people rely on.

This exemption is no better than the Winona councilman who interviewed with CNN and heavily implied that all they had to do was wait until the people moved on from caring about flock cameras and then “it wouldn’t be a problem anymore”.

They don’t give a fuck what we want, they want to implement verification as a stepping stone to real user ID and they will let Linux fall into irrelevance if it doesn’t comply. They think you will all calm down now since they appeased you with their “exemption”.

[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Underrated comment.

What I want to know is what about Haiku? BSD? AROS?

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Apparently, if they're distributed under GPL, MIT, BSD, or Apache license, they're exempt

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 23 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

How does that make any sense? How is the license for a piece of software relevant to verifying age? If I make a site that is objectively harmful to minors, I can just make it open-source and I'm exempt? Or, if I make a completely innocuous site that doesn't actually do anything but is closed source, I would have to comply?

But really, nothing should be doing strong identity verification outside of stuff like government (e.g. passports), or anything that commonly exploits identity for crime (e.g. major financial operations).

[–] aspirate2959@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

First off, we're talking about operating systems and not websites.

Second, if it's open source, the users can just edit out the age verification, no matter how it's implemented. And if it's open source, you simply can't prevent that behavior.

In theory, the closed source systems make that more complicated, to the point where we can "rely" on those safeguards.

There's a logic here, even if I totally disagree with the premise of the OS needing anything to do with the user's age. Parents need to parent and we've had solid enough parental controls for a long time now that make this type of monitoring and control easy.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

So android doesn't need verification?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] minorkeys@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

We need to divest from big tech. We can't have our lives leveraged by companies for more concessions from us. What is even left to concede?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] peetabix@sh.itjust.works 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

So it has always been about collecting data about kids all along?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip 12 points 3 weeks ago

I guess its better than the exemption not being there. Best would be no age verification though.

[–] Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 3 weeks ago

It's not all good news, and unfortunately this bill expands the censorship regime to web browsers and websites too.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/05/one-step-forward-two-steps-back-cas-ab-1856-exempts-open-source-expands-age-gating

load more comments
view more: next ›