Official position on these new age verification laws.

Hairyplotter · Today 01:20:49

Since my prior post was deleted (probably because it was in the wrong forum), I am going to ask again.

What is the official Arch position on these new laws being passed that require every OS to implement age verification?

Personally, I am 100% against this because once a govt. imposed train is in motion, it never stops.
Eventually, our computers will want information like names of all users, address, ISP name ect..

V1del · Today 01:29:38

It was well detailed why it was deleted, there's no stance (neither for nor against at the current point in time): https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 0#p2292040

Previous threads have shown that preemptive speculation will spiral out of control and not lead to fruitful discourse, as you will notice there have been lots of threads on this already, official stances will be announced when they've been made. (and most of the actual decision makers do not frequent this board -- this will not be the place were any "official" announcement is made)

Last edited by V1del (Today 01:33:46)

Hairyplotter · Today 01:33:53

I followed the link you posted and it took me to the dustbin.
Why would I think to look there for a topic I posted in another forum, but thank you for the explanation.

I am not speculating, I am trying to ascertain if there is an official position on the part of the distribution I use daily, to laws that I find very concerning.

Thank you again for your reply, I will check back frequently.

seth · Today 07:37:18

If there's a decision it will probably be announced in the news section of the home page.
Nobody has any official position because nobody - and I mean NOBODY - knows how to apply these laws in this context.
They were likely written by 15 lawyers and 2 "very concerned" mothers by looking at their kids smartphones and without bothering to consult anyone with even remote understanding of the matter.

Assuming the goal was

…you know… morons!¹ wrote:

I setup my kids account and enter its age to it can download free to play scams from the appstore, but not the facebook app, because I know that social media is bad from personally being completely addicted to this outrage machine, and then my kid can safely use its phone because FTP multiplayer games are a safe space and even without enforcing a whitelist, there's no way my kid will encounter bad things on the internet

the two relevant aspects on a more common archlinux setup would be steam and flatpak, so a reasonable course of action would be for them to be able to query a common interface for the users age (bracket) from a source that can (is) write-only for UID0 as ONE SINGLE ASPECT in wider https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Parental_control - but that requires a shared protocol in that effort, not some ridiculous law that talks in very generic terms about how very particular systems work and is utterly inapplicable elsewhere.

Succulent of your garden · Today 11:53:50

not moron Egyptian god wrote:

posted gif

From which movie/series is that ? I

Besides from my humble opinion, one of aspects of why Arch LInux had been a very successful distribution is because anything apart of the packages comes from a very meditated decisions. So no quick decisions over here.

But you should be consider this: Computer engineers are not lawyers, but the good ones also know something about it and how really this works, because they need to create systems that provides services, in which must comply to regulations. If you are like a project manager or a guy like creating cloud/hybrid infrastructure you must have the laws in mind, you need to create resilient systems according to the needs of your employers and also the country [or state] in which you are in. This is not a script kiddie distribution, is made by professional guys, who voluntary make contributions to it.

Also this is not an issue of only engineers, also most probably lawyers are kinda seeing how the laws are gonna apply, because one thing is the law but also another thing is the application of it, most in the US. Over here [I'm not from the US] you can scale a case into basically the supreme court if you have good lawyers and also the evidence that your case is similar to another one and the law has been applied different. Case Law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_law or Jurisprudencia in spanish, which I think works better as a concept that case law since it uses day to day words, is probably one of the main core components of at least, of every roman based law system. Basically as said before: Judges applies laws but this laws are govern basically from the record of cases in which they are applied. Of course criminal law or derecho penal in spanish [which again uses better word in my opinion, not day to day ones to explain legal concepts] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_law type of cases have a very clear and almost predictable resolution, because they are very common cases and you have the record. Basically if for example someone murder someone because he is insane basically, then there is not too much to do in court, because you had the background similar cases. Nevertheless the lawyer can try to change the penalty if the person basically clearly have serious mental issue and "really" the intentions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intention_(criminal_law) to do it, in spanish again we use a better concept from Latin which is dolo. Find what dolo is, basically lawyers in this cases discuss if the case was made with dolo, but if was made with the all the cognitive faculties of the person or not.

MIDDLE EDIT:

Actually my country have a very particular case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jackal_of_Nahueltoro
Basically murder that came from very low income resources with negative IQ basically in long story short [almost none basically economical income, totally dysfunctional person] murder persons, but in the process of the case, get the chances to level up IQ basically, understand really what he does, and regrets everything. In the end it was sentence to be shoot over here. This causes the whole discussion of if Nahueltoro was really in his mental cognitive capabilities were he made the murder [Not making it with dolo basically] and after some time he really understood what he do. Basically this is like if a 5 months old mental person with the body of an adult kills somebody. There are video records of this and also I'm mostly sure the please forgive me video exists, or at least this case is very well documented.

END OF MIDDLE EDIT.

But this case of the birthday is different, because you don't have the background record of cases in which the law has been applied. In simple words: A great portion of the internet is treating this as criminal law, which is totally wrong. The most important thing in this matter is not the law, is the first cases in which the law is applied, that unleash the record for "jurisprudencia or case law" which unable to treat others differently by judges. So if just one single case of FOSS or OSS have the pass of: Okey you don't need to put the age thing, then therefore by the history case records, all other similar cases should be treated equally. So basically watching how the cases develops in the court is the most important thing to be honest. And probably whatever decent and competent engineer knows this and is waiting the first resolutions. TLDR: Application of the law can differs from the law itself in practice, that's why lawyers exists basically and can save the asses of good or bad people for money exchange

So I don't see any incompetent engineers working on arch, at least of what I know

Last edited by Succulent of your garden (Today 12:53:26)

Allan · Today 12:45:56

Succulent of your garden wrote:

not moron Egyptian god wrote:
posted gif
From which movie/series is that ? I

Blazing Saddles. Movie from 1974.

SimonJ · Today 12:48:44

Allan wrote:

Blazing Saddles. Movie from 1974.

Oh dear, now I feel old! :-(

seth · Today 13:11:38

Is it better to feel or better to be old?

@potplant, you can thank us later

Succulent of your garden · Today 13:27:44

Allan wrote:

Blazing Saddles. Movie from 1974.

seth wrote:

@potplant, you can thank us later smile

Thanks guys. Just saw Mel Brooks movie and Willy Wonka actor and it had been added to the mandatory things to watch someday when I have the time , saw a part and the trailer and yep, 100% gonna watch this someday, not soon because I'm full of stuff to do.

But really appreciated ^^

Arch Linux

#1 Today 01:20:49

Official position on these new age verification laws.

#2 Today 01:29:38

Re: Official position on these new age verification laws.

#3 Today 01:33:53

Re: Official position on these new age verification laws.

#4 Today 07:37:18

Re: Official position on these new age verification laws.

#5 Today 11:53:50

Re: Official position on these new age verification laws.

#6 Today 12:45:56

Re: Official position on these new age verification laws.

#7 Today 12:48:44

Re: Official position on these new age verification laws.

#8 Today 13:11:38

Re: Official position on these new age verification laws.

#9 Today 13:27:44

Re: Official position on these new age verification laws.

Board footer