Attached: 1 image
WHAT the FUCK mastodon?!?!?!?!
do NOT do the fucking age verification bullshit what the fuck is wrong with you
https://blog.joinmastodon.org/2026/02/connecting-the-world-through-thriving-online-communities/
#AgeVerification #mastodon #MastoAdmin #FediAdmin #fediverse
You may want to look into what the legal requirements actually are, and how it changes who is liable. It is outright draconian.
Essentially, it requires the OS to find out the age of the user, and then inform ALL software that is run by API. Any software that theoretically could use the data, and still allows a child to see something they should not have, will be liable.
You claimed that the US was the least likely to do this sort of thing…
Instead, despite the incompetence, they are clearly spearheading this globally along with the UK. Making it most decidedly the first place that will have to deal with this crap.
Yes, but if the OS was not designed in California and you are not based in California (you’re not Windows, basically) - I fail to see how they can meaningfully compel anyone to follow this. Moreover, even if an OS somehow could know the users age - that doesn’t automatically mean all other software that exists automatically reads it and responds to it as necessary.
Does the law compel anyone making software to recognise this?
Windows, and any other OS will be illegal in California unless it implements this.
Apple, for one, is headquartered in California.
So, the OS wont work until the user verifies their age somehow.
Moreover, even if an OS somehow could know the users age - that doesn’t automatically mean all other software that exists automatically reads it and responds to it as necessary. Does the law compel anyone making software to recognise this?
Did you not read my comment? Anyone writing software for an OS that implements this, can be sued (in California) if their application ignores the API signals from the OS and allows access to age-restricted content.
Or is your argument really “this won’t affect linux, so it doesn’t matter” ? At the very least, FOSS development by anyone in California will be a problem, as the law quite literally names “persons” as potentially liable.
The reality remains, the US is the most thirsty for this kind of thing. Not the least.
Windows, and any other OS will be illegal in California unless it implements this.
Right, as I said - I just don’t see how this is meaningfully enforceable. It’s a complete farce. It’s on the level of the Online Safety Act it being enforceable.
Apple, for one, is headquartered in California.
Oh, I forgot Apple. Sure.
But there are many other OS. How on earth can they credibly enforce this?
Did you not read my comment? Anyone writing software for an OS that implements this, can be sued (in California) if it ignores the API signals from the OS and allows access to age-restricted content.
Yeah, this is just not meaningfully enforceable. Big companies will follow, but it would mostly be ignored by everyone else.
Is your argument really “this won’t affect linux, so it doesn’t matter” ? At the very least, FOSS development by anyone in California will be a problem, as the law quite literally names “persons” as potentially liable.
The reality remains, the US is the most thirsty for this kind of thing. Not the least.
And they are already working on an even more overreaching version that will close loopholes in the current legalese.
Is your argument really “this won’t affect linux, so it doesn’t matter” ? At the very least, FOSS development by anyone in California will be a problem, as the law quite literally names “persons” as potentially liable.
I’m taking the position that this is largely unenforceable at a software and OS level beyond larger players that come from California or specifically do a lot of trade in California.
The reality remains, the US is the most thirsty for this kind of thing. Not the least.
This specifically is quite different to most other efforts. Not sure if it might get constitutionally tested.
Yes? USA is the least likely to do this. Porn laws in various states don’t apply to social media.
Other attempts have been stuck in legislative hell, been unenforced or have court cases challenging their legality (Mississipi)
Not even two weeks later, California is making OS level age verification a thing.
I’m not even sure how that is remotely enforceable, although this also is a somewhat different thing to what this thread is about.
You may want to look into what the legal requirements actually are, and how it changes who is liable. It is outright draconian.
Essentially, it requires the OS to find out the age of the user, and then inform ALL software that is run by API. Any software that theoretically could use the data, and still allows a child to see something they should not have, will be liable.
You claimed that the US was the least likely to do this sort of thing…
Instead, despite the incompetence, they are clearly spearheading this globally along with the UK. Making it most decidedly the first place that will have to deal with this crap.
Not the last.
Yes, but if the OS was not designed in California and you are not based in California (you’re not Windows, basically) - I fail to see how they can meaningfully compel anyone to follow this. Moreover, even if an OS somehow could know the users age - that doesn’t automatically mean all other software that exists automatically reads it and responds to it as necessary.
Does the law compel anyone making software to recognise this?
Windows, and any other OS will be illegal in California unless it implements this.
Apple, for one, is headquartered in California.
So, the OS wont work until the user verifies their age somehow.
Did you not read my comment? Anyone writing software for an OS that implements this, can be sued (in California) if their application ignores the API signals from the OS and allows access to age-restricted content.
Or is your argument really “this won’t affect linux, so it doesn’t matter” ? At the very least, FOSS development by anyone in California will be a problem, as the law quite literally names “persons” as potentially liable.
The reality remains, the US is the most thirsty for this kind of thing. Not the least.
Right, as I said - I just don’t see how this is meaningfully enforceable. It’s a complete farce. It’s on the level of the Online Safety Act it being enforceable.
Oh, I forgot Apple. Sure.
But there are many other OS. How on earth can they credibly enforce this?
Yeah, this is just not meaningfully enforceable. Big companies will follow, but it would mostly be ignored by everyone else.
Is your argument really “this won’t affect linux, so it doesn’t matter” ? At the very least, FOSS development by anyone in California will be a problem, as the law quite literally names “persons” as potentially liable.
The reality remains, the US is the most thirsty for this kind of thing. Not the least.
And they are already working on an even more overreaching version that will close loopholes in the current legalese.
I’m taking the position that this is largely unenforceable at a software and OS level beyond larger players that come from California or specifically do a lot of trade in California.
This specifically is quite different to most other efforts. Not sure if it might get constitutionally tested.
US Tech firms profit the most from it, the verification data lands on some palantir server - as the recent discord fiasco implied.
Whether they do so optionally is a different thing entirely, to be fair.