this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2026
423 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

83449 readers
3971 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Senate Bill 26-051 reflects that pattern. The bill does not directly regulate individual websites that publish adult or otherwise restricted content. Instead, it shifts responsibility to operating system providers and app distribution infrastructure.

Under the bill, an operating system provider would be required to collect a user’s date of birth or age information when an account is established. The provider would then generate an age bracket signal and make that signal available to developers through an application programming interface when an app is downloaded or accessed through a covered application store.

App developers, in turn, would be required to request and use that age bracket signal.

Rather than mandating that every website perform its own age verification check, the bill attempts to embed age attestation within the operating system account layer and have that classification flow through app store ecosystems.

The measure represents the latest iteration in a series of Colorado efforts that have struggled to balance child safety, privacy, feasibility and constitutional limits.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Darkcoffee@sh.itjust.works 214 points 1 month ago (10 children)

This is getting ridiculous.

Linux is the only reasonable choice anymore.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 129 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (10 children)

Linux won't be legal in Colorado if they pass this. You'll need an account with some age-policing, ID-reporting corporation to be able to use a computing device.

How do they imagine they could enforce this though? Presumably quite selectively, based on the user's political leanings.

[–] DFX4509B@lemmy.wtf 32 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Are they going to check people's PCs at the state borders as they move in then?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (7 children)

Presumably quite selectively, based on the user’s political leanings.

Not defend Democrats too much here, but they clearly have far less of a habit of doling out enforcement based on political leanings than the Republicans, even if they do enforce things quite selectively when it comes to actual leftists while letting Nazis run around with seeming impunity.

Colorado has been a solidly Blue state since the end of the W. Bush years, and even then, it was pretty split down the middle with just over half of the votes going to Bush. It's honestly been mostly-Blue-dominated since 1992. (Lauren Boebert notwithstanding)

Further, the two main sponsors of the bill are both Democrats. This genuinely seems to me to be another example of "heart in the right place but don't know what the fuck they're actually doing" which seems common for the tech illiterate and often for Democrats in general.

Once again, not saying Democrats aren't guilty of selective enforcement, just pointing out that they're far less likely to do so (or at least less likely to do so against conservatives, for genuine leftists it seems up for debate).

Now, that also means nothing in context to how other politicians can use this kind of legislation negatively, even if the writers and sponsors truly have the best of intentions. Democrats had the best intentions when it came to the PATRIOT Act and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security as well, and way back then folks like me were saying "this seems pretty dangerous, especially if we ever have a despot take control of the country and the levers for these tools" which clearly has come to pass.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] mech@feddit.org 104 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Under the bill, an operating system provider would be required to collect a user’s date of birth or age information when an account is established.

It's so fucking obvious the people who wrote this have no idea other operating systems than iOS, Windows and Android exist.

[–] ISOmorph@feddit.org 12 points 1 month ago

What are you on about? If they get 95% of the population with this it's still a huge win for them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 84 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"OPERATING SYSTEM PROVIDER" MEANS A PERSON THAT DEVELOPS, LICENSES, OR CONTROLS THE OPERATING SYSTEM SOFTWARE ON A DEVICE.

great, for my devices then, that would be me

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 79 points 1 month ago

I fully expect this to become a move to hamper linux, or any non-windows desktop usage, because "we can't trust a user who has full access to their OS" or some other bullshit.

[–] black_flag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 58 points 1 month ago

Age verification is identity verification.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 56 points 1 month ago (6 children)

It's already laughably easy to parent these days. Parental controls are on every device and require so little effort. You dont even have to pay that much attentjo - the software literally analyzes use and reports notification. It's so stupidly easy and still people can't do it. Literally ask any of supporters of this what parental control system they use and most are dumbfounded and just change the topic.

It's never about protecting kids.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 48 points 1 month ago

Now instead of asking to verify age, make the parents input the age bracket and you reinvented parental controls. The correct way to protect children.

[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 45 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] maplesaga@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Only for privacy and anonymity, companies like Google and Microsoft will do fabulously however. Who donates to him I wonder.

[–] hector@lemmy.today 43 points 1 month ago (9 children)

Colorodo democrats have always been lousy. Here they are following texas and montana and tennessee, locking down the internet with dishonest arguments. No one in reality thinks this is about protecting kids, and it's not the state's place to do so, it's the parents, it's a violation of the 1st amendment to make adults expose their identities to people recording everything they do online and using it against them, and selling it to the government.

We need to repeal these bills, and we need a popular open source of model legislation to counter-act ALEC, that writes these bills and state lawmakers just fill in the blanks, after the united corporations give them a plausible excuse to and pay them off

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] parzival@lemmy.org 42 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Account is created? Who said were making accounts for our operating systems

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 40 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Moving the responsibility to anyone but the parents.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] riskable@programming.dev 38 points 1 month ago (10 children)

Just think: Without legislation like this, kids will be able to see people having sex! Thus, ending their lives. Not so different from staring into the eyes of Medusa!

The amount of children exposed to sex that have died—or suffered worse consequences like early onset conservatism—may have been zero so far but the dangers are clear! We must skip right over parental involvement in child rearing and go straight to the source of the problem: Computers.

Computers have been giving everyone access to too much information for too long! We must restrict it! The first step is to get an implementation that actually works to censor information—to save the children (wink wink)—then later, we will have the tools necessary to censor whatever we want!

When glorious dictator decides that information about trans-genic mice must be erased from the Internet, we shall have the power to do so!

[–] mrmaplebar@fedia.io 31 points 1 month ago

We must protect little Billy from seeing tits, so he can keep laser focus on preparing for the next school shooting.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Hear, hear. When I was young my friends and I wanted to see the naked boobies but because the internet had not been invented we just couldn't. It was impossible! Its not the kind of thing you find lying around!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] redwattlebird@lemmings.world 33 points 1 month ago (2 children)

At this point, it's probably cheaper and more effective to have proper sex education in schools...

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth 33 points 1 month ago (1 children)

For fuck's sake.

What are parental controls?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DFX4509B@lemmy.wtf 29 points 1 month ago

Goodbye tech ownership in Colorado if this passes. We're moving one step closer to the government issuing out thin clients that only they control.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 27 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Not the OS.

The OS "provider"

Linus Torvalds ain't gonna check my ID. And i don't want him to, either.

[–] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 41 points 1 month ago

Everyone was born at 00:00:00 UTC on 1 January 1970

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] texture@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago

HOLY HELL

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

[–] baronvonj@piefed.social 22 points 1 month ago (4 children)

This goes in a better direction than web sites doing it themselves, I think. The government put out an open source tool that runs locally and the browser just gets a yay/nay return code from it.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)
  1. How do they secure age data? Age is most likely two characters, with a max of three characters. If there are penalties for sharing the age data when they aren't supposed to, how do they secure this? Even with cryptography a two character number with only 70-ish reasonable and expected variations is going to be difficult to secure.

  2. How do they ensure no one who is a different age ever uses the device? "Use mom's iPad" is univseral. Does mom get in trouble for letting her child use her device, does the parent end up with the fine?

However, if a developer has clear and convincing information that a user's age is different than the age indicated by an age signal, the developer shall use that information as the primary indicator of the user's age range.

  1. How do they determine age other than self-reporting with anything other than wholesale spying on user habits? What other way could they possibly glean "clear and convincing information that a user's age is different than the age indicated by an age signal" other than spying on a user's device use? This also implies remote-control of the OS if the operating system vendor can change the age-gate remotely based on user habits.
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] tynansdtm@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

On paper, I like this solution better than every app/site developer having to hack together (or outsource) their own age verification system. But I'm sure it opens up a ton of potential problems. And if it's open source, someone could just fork it and make a version that always says "yes" so unfortunately it'll never be FOSS.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] abbiistabbii@piefed.blahaj.zone 16 points 1 month ago
[–] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

They are coming for android first.

[–] tonytins@pawb.social 15 points 1 month ago
[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

These people are idiots

[–] Traister101@lemmy.today 14 points 1 month ago

If I could trust that the people in government know how computers work I'd be down but well I can't

[–] mrnngglry@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 month ago

Why can’t we just have better parental controls? I’m a parent and I do want to protect my kids but I will not upload a photo or anything else.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 month ago

Fucking idiots don't know how operating systems work or what they're for.

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago (2 children)

What would be the point of that? If the check was done locally it would be trivial to spoof.

Technically, this can't work. It's a bad idea.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Another aspect beyond making Linux legally dubious is this: How do they actually secure the age-data?

Age is generally two characters with a limited character set [0-9] even with an extremely well hashed and salted you're looking at only less than 70 combinations being very likely.

There are penalties for sharing with a third party, but what if it's trivial for a third party to exfiltrate this data?

[–] khanh@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 month ago (5 children)

It's aight. We have Linux anyways, who cares about Windows?

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›