Age Verification in SystemD
- Anmelden oder Registrieren um Kommentare zu schreiben
Hi everyone is there's plan to remove/or not to remove Age verification in SystemD on Trisquel GNU/Linux~libre?
More importantly, is it possible to... and isn't this a sign that it might not be developed by people with good motives?
I mean if redhat really is putting age verification into systemd... that seems like a sign of what some have been saying all along...
IE, you cannot trust redhat's linux frameworks.
Time will tell though I suppose.
I am a translator!
From https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/40954, systemd added birthdate in the userdb service (not age verification) 2 days ago. The next Ubuntu version (which could be used for Trisquel 13) is announced soon, it may or may not have this. Anyway, the whole Ubuntu needs a review to make Trisquel, and I guess this is one thing among others to consider.
systemd added birthdate in the userdb service (not age verification)
Indeed:
* systemd's birthDate field is a data source, not an age verification mechanism. The actual verification logic lives in consuming software (e.g., the proposed xdg-desktop-portal age verification portal). systemd just stores the date in the user record, the same way it stores realName or emailAddress.
(...)
* Both birthDate and a hypothetical ageGroup are self-reported and stored locally. Neither constitutes "age verification" in the legal sense on its own — that's the responsibility of the application layer. The user record is just the local data store that applications can query.
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/40974#issuecomment-4012220685
If age verification comes to Trisquel, then I'm going to identify as a 1-year old. Since I don't try to access any "adult" things and being a 1-year-old shouldn't limit my software use in any way, might as well throw a bit of chaotic data into the mix and stir it up.
I think it needs to be studied in depth to avoid hearsay. Now I'm not a lawyer (INAL) and I know only so much about what's moving but here some details that might come into play.
AFAIK, the Age Verification is based primarily on a state law in California, US.
It affects services and distributors based / doing business in California or to California citizens.
- Red Hat Inc, is based on North Carolina state.
- IBM, owner of Red Hat Inc., is based on New York State.
While, AFAICT, they are outside the jurisdiction I can only imagine that they added the changes mainly because they have strong business relationships in California, and need to comply with the law or otherwise will get sued.
Now, from here I'm speculating, again "INAL", but if you don't have serves in California, nor are based on California, or the US for that matter. I suppose you could modify the software and go on with your life. If you as a California citizen start using a "product" by yourself not containing age verification, with no "distributor" in the state or state enforcing the same law, then it might be the case that you might be fined for it if anyone files a complain(?).
I wonder if Canonical will backport this change to all previous LTS releases. Then we'll have the ball in our side of the field rather soon when/if that happens.
Things to ponder about.
Regards
Also new york is trying this BS too.
If anyone knows of any petitions for any of this crap, let me know.