Breaking Down the New Stupid Ageist Californian Law that Requires Age Verification at OS account setup

This is the first part of the law that should be illegal.

“… require a developer to request a signal with respect to a particular user from an operating system provider or a covered application store when the application is downloaded and launched. “.

And if I buy a toaster do I also need to tell toaster.com when I press the toast lever and what kind of bread I like? What the fuck assholes!

My computer is mine and mine alone.

This is a terrible take. This law is not “age verification” at all, there’s no ID checks or face scans. This is the exact equivalent of entering 1900 January 1 for websites that ask for your birthday.

Aegist?

I mean I guess, but its not what that word typically means.

Its just fascist.

Maybe we’ll be able to set up a system level user account that was “born yesterday” so it will be automatically illegal to track or advertise to minors. So dumb.

I’ve read the law and can’t find anything in it that requires verification of the age, only that an age must be provided.

Maybe this guy has a good argument but the site is down right now.

Finally someone who actually read the text, and didn’t just go with Lunduke’s undercomplex opinion on it.

Ah yes, enforcing the protection of minors — that old staple of “ageism”. Seems the author’s issue is really with legal age as a concept.

Do I think it’s dumb that state authorities need to pressure big tech to ensure legal protections, and do so at an OS level? Yes, and yes. But framing this as ageist is a weird choice.

This is one of the worst web pages I’ve ever seen. The article is nearly unreadable because of it.

@schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de

'Age verification' is a thin pretext for the real purpose: mandating an API that allows remote access and control of the operating system.