this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2026
407 points (98.6% liked)

Linux

63358 readers
869 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Apparently this will include Linux...

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jjlinux@lemmy.zip 2 points 39 minutes ago

I guess Linux distros are about to be banned in Cali.

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 7 points 6 hours ago

I, and many others, will be born on 1/1/2000 at 0:00 'clock.

[–] kepix@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

what are they they gonna do against it?

[–] spicehoarder@lemmy.zip 10 points 7 hours ago

Good fucking thing Linux is kernel

[–] Einhornyordle@feddit.org 21 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

I'll just copy my comment from a similar bill in colorado, I will leave the link to the colorado bill in, but here is the california bill as well if you want to read it yourself.

The title is very misleading. This is the actual bill that they are trying to pass. The link already includes a summary, so I will just give you an even simpler explanation and some practical examples why this is actually really neat.

First of all, this is not age verification. No IDs have to be submitted, no selfies or videos will be submitted to any age estimation AIs, so put your pitchforks away (for now, until they decide to expand the bill to include these measures as well, then it's time to burn it down). The name of the bill already tells you what it is: Age Attestation. Aka what every piece of software already does before it shows you explicit content.

With the bill in place, every "operating system provider" has to ask you for your age or date of birth during OS setup, which will then be made available to other software via an API. So instead of having to fill in your date of birth or checking "Are you 18+/21+?" boxes, software will use the new API to check instead, saving you the trouble of doing it manually every time for every application that is not made for all ages.

What makes it even better is that the OS does not have to provide your actual age or birth date, the bill has a minimum requirement of just disclosing age-bracket data. So it could work just like age ratings, which also rely on age groups rather than specific years. Also, the bill explicitly forbids asking for more than your age, sharing more than that via the new API and using the entered age data for anything else than the described purpose, like sending it to a server for tracking purposes.

And finally, as mentioned in the beginning, no IDs or anything else as it is with age verification necessary. You can still lie, just enter 1.1.2000 or whatever you want. Nothing changes, except that you will only have to do it once every time you reinstall/reset your OS or buy a new device.

[–] Abyssian@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Sure. But this is step 1. Things never stop at step 1.

[–] Einhornyordle@feddit.org 1 points 1 hour ago

Of course, and I will fight the next steps with pleasure, but I welcome a qol feature anytime, even one enforced by law.

[–] Archr@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

Thanks for putting this here. Kinda getting sick of people that only read the headlines or have only seen the Lunduke journal video that has so many clear inaccuracies.

The laws aren't perfect but they do have some nice protections for the users as you mention.

The only thing that I think is missing is that developers are restricted from collecting additional information but the OS providers are not, at least as far as I understand from reading the California law. At the very least, they still have the restriction on using the information in other places or sending it to third parties.

I posted this in another thread but I'll repeat it here. I think it is shortsighted that some linux distros are taking the kneejerk reaction of leaving/banning California residents. We need to band together and figure out a solution.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 13 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

What the absolute fuck are these people doing!? An OS does not require age verification for anything but totalitarian intents. Fuck this timeline.

[–] vortexal@lemmy.ml 15 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (9 children)

I saw the developers of MidnightBSD state that they are going to block users in California when this law gets put into place. I hope that more OSs do the same. Especially Windows, it could be devastating to California's economy and make them, along with other states and countries, reconsider their decisions on age verification.

I don't live in California but I'm interested in seeing if there are any other OSs that will be blocking California users. I'm probably fine to just continue using Linux Mint but I'm open to trying other distros/OSs in order to participate in this protest if Linux Mint doesn't.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] KulunkelBoom@lemmus.org 7 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

"...operating system providers...", what the fuck does that mean.?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] sleepmode@lemmy.world 5 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

They uh do realize busybox and BSD underpins nearly everyfuckingthing right? Including network stacks. So fucking stupid.

[–] RamenEater@sh.itjust.works 2 points 12 hours ago

This shit law was written by people who probably don't even know the difference between software and hardware.

[–] Macaroni_ninja@lemmy.world 15 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

Please explain to a complete doofus how can someone enforce this?

Cant they just download any linux distro from millions of different places and install them on any machine, even offline?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] osanna@lemmy.vg 2 points 11 hours ago

Holy fuck. The stupidity. It burns. It buuuuuurns

[–] criss_cross@lemmy.world 21 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

In essence, while the bill doesn't seem to require the most egregious forms of age verification (face scans or similar), it does require OS providers to collect age verification of some form at the account/user creation stage—and to be able to pass a segmented version of that information to outside developers upon request.

So you just fake a date and call it a day… thank you Cali…

For real though I can’t imagine the sysadmin and docker nightmares that arise from having to completely overhaul your account orchestration scripts to input a garbage birthday.

I don’t think anyone thought of the fact that an account on an OS doesn’t always correspond to a human.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] yelling_at_cloud@programming.dev 17 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Gotta love it when people who have no understanding of how Linux works writes laws about how Linux should work...

[–] wer2@lemmy.zip 16 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

It goes way beyond Linux. Think any device that could download something at some point. Gas station pump, calculator, FreeDos, VxWorks, etc.

There is a lot of language like "or can download an application", so if you can download something, then that thing could be an application, and thus that device and it's OS is covered.

[–] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 6 points 15 hours ago

And every point of sale system everywhere

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Archr@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago

Can you add a link to the actual text of the bill to the post?

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB1043

Might help people to actually be able to read it, and it is a very short read (<15 minutes).

[–] mub@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 hours ago

So, to deploy a new server they'll want the tech to do a face ID check first? Maybe it needs the CEO's face as they are technically the owner.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 85 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Doesn't even make sense. Virtually all Linux distros can function completely offline. How do you do age verification completely offline? Classic politician who doesn't understand tech trying to look like they're doing something to save the kids.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] socsa@piefed.social 1 points 11 hours ago

If this passes, I will start an age verification project called this_bullshit.

sudo modprobe -r this_bullshit

Problem solved

[–] someone@lemmy.today 16 points 22 hours ago

I don't care if there is a package called gnome-age-verification distributed in my linux distro and would prefer it if it means fewer sites with facial biometric tests. If I have concerns about the age verification, then I should be able to type:

sudo dnf remove gnome-age-verification

California probably wants it in linux distros so that linux can't be a justification for big tech still demanding Orwellian stuff in every website (ie "but what about the children who use linux? we need to protect them with Persona too!")

But where would it stop? The hell version of this would be kernel-level-approved-AI-agent-checks, with an OS required to have an approved AI agent with a validated third party key that reports to the government with required telemetry and the kernel makes sure the OS won't run without the approved AI and then makes illegal any scripts for unapproved kernel code modification. And post-Tornado cash, we know code is unfortunately not protected US speech.

load more comments
view more: next ›