Debian Project Leader Andreas Tille has addressed the ongoing debate over age-verification laws and their potential impact on free software operating systems. Long story short: he clarified that Debian has not adopted a position and is awaiting legal analysis.
In his latest “Bits from the DPL” message, Tille stated that the main question is whether operating systems and package distribution mechanisms might be required to provide age-related information to applications.
He noted that Debian and other projects are discussing the issue, and that Software in the Public Interest, a non-profit corporation founded to act as a fiscal sponsor for organizations that develop open-source software and hardware, has begun seeking legal guidance.
Software in the Public Interest is a US- based non-profit organization that legally represents and handles donations for Debian, Arch, LibreOffice, systemd and a lot of other projects. And if they’re in violation of US law, they can unfortunately be sued into oblivion. So they’re right to check with their legal team before making an informed decision.
And fortunately they can just change their fiscal host. That’s one thing the lawyers will tell them, if needed
Not providing an age signal is not illegal, you just won’t be able to access restricted material like social media.
Are you a lawyer?
He also noted that, from a non-lawyer perspective, it remains uncertain how these regulations would apply to a non-commercial, volunteer-driven project like Debian, which does not sell software and distributes it in a decentralized manner.
FUCKING THANK YOU.
My coffee maker has an operating system… Okay well actually i use an electric kettle but some of them do.
This law is impossibleOur office coffee machine runs Android. Every time I wonder why…
Easier to turn into ewaste so you need to buy another one this way.
lmao send it to Bringus so he can install Steam on it
That should buy them deniability.
This is why I stick with Debian. Adults make decisions over there.
Can you verify this? Maybe we should require Debian contributors to prove they are adults. /s
They voted to switch to systemd so yeah, no problem there.
I’m against these laws, strongly, but I think sending vitriol at systemd and distrust is not constructive.
The battle is legal and pretending it isn’t and fighting our maintainers who realistically can’t afford to be sued over good, is not helping the cause.
It’s humans at the end of the pipe. Thoughtful and vulnerable humans.
I’d say it’s less a legal fight than it is a fight for control , using the law this time.
Pretending that what people are upset about is the field rather than the pre-capitulation is not helping the cause.
Most of the hate isn’t for the technical implementation of a field, though some FOSS people are upset at that as well.
You can sidestep the legal fight by not serving the places where it is illegal.
That’s doesn’t necessarily align with the goals of whatever project, but it is possible.
There is one small benefit to this speedbump on our road to freedom:
Governor Gavin Newsom, Democrat of California? Has been acting like he wants to run for President in 2028. He signed this into law for his state.
Make this an albatross on his neck. Sink him. Let him know that this crushed his dreams of ever being President. Publicly. Loudly. Don’t be satisfied until he quits twitter and retires from public life altogether, not just politics.
And for anyone in New Jersey? Get loud at your state reps phonelines now, they’re trying to pass the same in your state.
I don’t know how anyone can pretend to care about gay, trans, or black people and support this law.
It’s going to be used to ban “critical race theory” and lgbtq topics first.
I don’t see how the Dems can defend this
Well, Newsom doesn’t even pretend to care about trans people, so we can start there.
It’s going to be used to ban “critical race theory” and lgbtq topics first.
How would the CA law allow that? It’s not KOSPA but a dropdown selection.
I read that as “new-age” verification. LOL
We gotta inspect your Chakra dude.
Now that’s a policy I would support.
Meditate with your verification crystal to access the hidden knowledge.
We didn’t recognize your verification crystal. Please enter your recovery mantra
I think the position to adopt is very clear:
- You stand upright facing the nearest government building.
- You extend your right arm horizontally in front of you.
- You rest your left hand, palm down, on top of your right arm, next to your antecubital fossa (the opposite side of the elbow).
- You make a fist with your right hand.
- Without opening your fist, you extend your right hand’s middle finger straight up.
- You decisively bend your right arm at the elbow, standing your forearm, fist, and middle finger straight up.
Thus you achieve the only reasonable position towards this nonsense.
You extend your right arm horizontally in front of you.
Uh oh…
You rest your left hand, palm down, on top of your right arm, next to your antecubital fossa (the opposite side of the elbow).
Oh, phew! I thought this was going to get dark for a second.
The problem isn’t the specific nature of the rule: having an api call in the background that can broadcast a user’s age range (if it isn’t a clearly identifiable marker) makes sense.
The problem is that if the government is able to tell open source developers “YOU MUST INSERT THIS CODE OR ELSE!!!” then what’s next?
Will in 5 years they require Persona in order to install an Operating System to combat terrorism?
Will in 7 years they require a closed source module created by the government to be running at all times and the kernel must check to make sure if the closed source module is running?
Part of open source software is creativity, freedom, and freedom of speech. Some software is created because developers like creating things.
I hope Debian fights back against this on first amendment grounds. Great code is not that different from a great work of art, there is unique creativity in something elegantly coded that functions well, and telling developers they can’t code how they want is the path toward totalitarianism.
It’s one thing to force this into Microslop and Android and iOS because those are large profitable companies who don’t actually care as long as they make money. It’s another thing to force FOSS developers who develop for free because of the love of software and great code that they must change their code in a certain way.
The problem is that if the government is able to tell open source developers “YOU MUST INSERT THIS CODE OR ELSE!!!” then what’s next?
What’s next is that code gets a build flag that’s turned off in the makefile, and maintainers have to explicitly turn it on for that code to compile in. Distros maintain patches that add this sort of thing all the time, even if upstream refuses to do so.
And Debian is saying that, as a non-profit, all volunteer org? This bullshit doesn’t apply to them. They are building a legal basis for the makefile solution I’m describing above, and its default-off state in their repositories.
All of your catastrophising can be addressed this way. We need devs like you who can help make sure this solution is implemented exactly as described.
Debian repos are great - we can even blacklist official repos and replace them with bare, sketchy IP addresses if we like, and share binaries through them.
You cannot stop the signal. Quit thinking like a voter trapped in a Fascist hellscape, and start thinking like a hacker that the state cannot outmaneuver.
What else would you expect after FOSS was forced to deplatform and steal code developed by Russian contributors.
I sadly don’t know what this means! Oh, you mean Debian blacklisted Russian contributors but didn’t rebuild the code and kept using it?
Yes because that’s how governments work.
“Fuck off” is the only appropriate answer.
Aim it at the right people - but say it loud and clear.
FYI : a place where some of these PRs have been created , and unfortunately, one already merged into Systemd
https://lemmy.world/post/44679693
-
In Systemd, already merged.
-
In xdg.desktop.portal (a portal frontend service for Flatpak and other desktop containment frameworks), still open.
-
In Arch Linux, still open.
-
In Freedesktop.org, still open.
Minor clarification: your Arch Linux link is for archinstall, the easier install script, not Arch Linux itself. IIRC it’s not even the officially recommended way to install Arch.
it’s still trying to be jammed in where it doesn’t belong
It is, just not in Arch Linux itself, which is what your comment is saying.
-
Tille suggested that, if such obligations arise, they would likely affect redistributors or commercial entities building on Debian, rather than the Debian project itself.
if my edgerouter 4 adds age verification i’m going to burn everything to the ground
This reminds me, I actually installed OpenWRT on an ER-X. I need to go poke around on it and see how it works.
I have openwrt on my ER-X too, poor thing is relegated to glorified managed switch duties nowadays though
I think I tried it out once, but I wasn’t able to figure out how to to make this cake-autorotate thing work, was gonna use it on my starlink connection. Didn’t really get past that lol. I’m getting fiber on wednesday so it’s not really a concern anymore.
No that’s total garbage.
The law doesn’t mention commerciality or vendors, only operating systems.
EdgeOS is a fork of Vyatta, which is itself based on Debian.
Imagine having to verify your age for every docker container spun up by GitHub/forgejo actions.
then it would be time to switch all my LXCs to alpine, i guess. if they’ll even still work. they’re all debian 12/13 right now.
Only restricted material will require an age verification.
So, what about an operating system is restricted material? That’s what this law requires.
Edit: wow, you’re all over the place here. Are you paid (perhaps run?) by Meta?
There is no law that governs Linux development related to this, enywhere else. There is only a law in CA that requires this functionality (which would break any and all software infrastructure). Why would any maintainer of any Linux distribution, not actively dependent on following an untested law (from a legal PoV), even consider implementing it? This got a lot of headlines, because it’s absurd and stupid.
If maintainers wanted to comply, what the fuck would it actually entail? 99% of operating system doesn’t have any specific human users to identify. The only reasonable approach is to ignore it. If data centers in CA for Azure, AWS, GCP, or any other, wants to comply with this (which is impossible), either spend some of that tax free revenue to combat Meta’s suspected 2 billion USD effort in getting these online ID laws pushed through.
Choosing not to decide is a choice for age verification…
Choosing to claim a niche where the law doesn’t apply is… A choice in favor of the law, instead of a circumvention method?
You’re thinking like a voter instead of a hacker. Stop that.
Cool, still not using Debian. 👍
is this a Rush reference?
