Apparently this will include Linux…

  • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    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.

    • DFX4509B@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      The only platforms for now where this might work are Windows, macOS, iOS, and stock Android, however as Muta hypothesized, if this extends to hardware-level, a law could just mandate SecureBoot and lock out the ability to implement custom keys, and then only allow a short list of state-approved OSes to boot on the hardware, which no doubt Windows would be on that short list.

      Similarly, all non-Apple mobile devices as an extension to that could be locked exclusively to stock Android, eliminating custom ROMs like LineageOS or GrapheneOS as an option entirely, let alone mobile Linux distros.

  • SayCyberOnceMore@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Define “Operating System”…

    I guess my washing machine & car are also going to be “not for use in California.”

    Those Cisco switches & Broadcom DSLAMs would be tricky too … I guess the internet’s “not for use in California.”

    And the air-gapped power station control system? “not for use in California.”

    It is annoying that these laws come in (I’m also including magical thinking about encryprion backdoors for “the good guys”) without any form of real-world, practical assessment. Complete waste of tax payers money and undue stress for everyone.

    FFS.

    • Archr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      The law only specifies “computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device.”

      Which is extremely vague. It appears that the intention was to just affect end user devices. Not specific purpose systems.

  • Macaroni_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    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?

    • ArmchairAce1944@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      And literally no one is doing shit to stop this. It is almost like personal property rights, privacy, and everything else are now dirty words that will make you look like a criminal.

  • amorangi@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    So define Operating System. Are embedded systems Operating Systems? Coz that’s going to cast a rather wide net.

    • ArmchairAce1944@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Selective enforcement. Basically if they want to do shit to you they will prosecute you, otherwise they won’t bother.

  • Eiri@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Linux distributions should react by asking users to confirm they’re not in California. They’ll backpedal fast.

    • osanna@lemmy.vg
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Linux is like 3% if steam users. Linux doesn’t control enough market share for it to have any effect

      • Eiri@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Linux is the most widely used OS in the world, if you include servers.

        If servers’ OSes can’t be legally used in California anymore, that would be funny.